The simple jobs of the deep state

I am truly deeply pained by the fact that depth is attributed to an illegal institutionalization that drips with shallowness from every side.

Somehow, due to the concept of depth, one enters into an expectation of positivity and standard. As the entity we call the state becomes sacralized and elevated, we relegate it to the depths. In fact, the depth of the state and the majesty of the state increase symmetrically or proportionally. The more sacred the state is—that is, the more sublime it is—the deeper it is.

This is, I suppose, one of the biggest tricks that Hegel played on people in the modern world, or that those acting in the name of the state played using Hegel. Hegel's philosophy was one that suggested understanding even the simplest acts of the state as the manifestation of a deep and sublime intellect. In this way, the state ceased to be something whose actions were questioned and held accountable, and became a divine disclosure to be reflected upon and understood for its reason of state (raison d'état). As long as the state proceeds along routine paths that everyone can understand most clearly, there remains nothing to interpret. Therefore, to make the depth of the state felt, it must turn to mind-boggling, "extra-routine" affairs.

This probably explains a bit better where the depth obsession of those acting on behalf of the state originates. A situation arises involving not being content with the quite human, mundane boundaries of being a state, but fixing one's sights on a more sublime, more heavenly rank. It becomes necessary to add a little mystery to state affairs. Otherwise, it becomes too commonplace.

Because the routine, open, and transparent affairs of the state do not grant privileges to anyone. They leave no justification for anyone to consider their own authority qualitatively superior to another's.

The will of the deep state is a kind of desire for deification.

No matter how secular the state may be, as the sanctities attempted to be attached to the state try to make it fly upwards, they also attempt to give it depth.

Every movement attempting to grant divinity and depth to the state—which is essentially human and secular in all its dimensions—yields no result other than simplifying the state even further. The desire for deification or the will to become a god on the part of a person or an institution is nothing but baseness. Its counterpart in Islam is shirk (polytheism/associating partners with God). And shirk is the greatest injustice. Because what suits humans best is humanity.

As the deep state becomes deified, its enigmatic, "extra-routine", mystery-filled actions must be interpreted every day. For the deep state does not speak clearly or unequivocally. Moreover, not just anyone can understand and interpret its behavior and actions. Authorized and licensed individuals decide what is required for the subjects from the ambiguous messages revealed by the deep state.

Someone known to speak with this authority recently defined the deep state as the "will not to lose land." Thus, we have obtained another definition that whitewashes all the "extra-routine" acts that have emerged so far in the name of the deep state. But more importantly, this definition "makes it a duty to remind" that the greatest danger we face today regarding the land issue stems precisely from these simple acts of the deep state.

Mümtaz'er Türköne minces no words and calls these "extra-routine acts," which I politely call "simple acts," as "banditry." "The deep state is literally the enemy of the state itself. Why? Because a state cannot be governed by banditry, nor can state interests be protected by it... The deep state—that is, state officials using bandit methods—destroys the law that brings the state into existence and renders it as disreputable and worthless as a banana republic. Therefore, the closest and greatest threat to the existence of a state is the 'deep state'."

Looking at the sum of the acts attributed to the deep state so far, we can say that Turkey has no enemy other than the deep state. Because of these simple acts of the deep state, perhaps we did not lose territory, nor was our country geographically divided, but we reached a society whose elements—such as Alevi-Sunni, Turk-Kurd, secular-anti-secular, nationalist-expansionist—hate each other and have fallen emotionally distant in entirely separate geographies.

The state apparatus becomes simpler as it deepens, and as it simplifies, it assumes a divisive and destructive state. Its feet must not leave the ground. Bringing the state down from the heavens to the earth and grounding it in law is the only way forward for the survival of our state as much as for all of us.