From Enlightenment Capitalism to Star Trek, From … Capitalism to Star Wars

I found this site while searching an article about Teresa Marggolles Sierra and Gabriel Orozco. After spending some time and discovering and reading various other articles, i came across to this article written by Süreyya Algül for Birikim Magazine. Its not something that you can read in ten minutes pay attention and read it carefully,in the end you'll be amazed.

Encontre este sitio cuando estaba buscando un articulo sobre unos artistas mexicanos : Teresa Margolles Sierra y Gabriel Orozco. Este sitio creado por la gente que escribe y discute sobre el arte. Y puede encontrar un monton de articulos escrito por artistas, escritores de todo el mundo. Por eso encontrar un articulo que escrito por una escritora Turca no es tan sorprendente.Leelo lentamente por que sin prestar atencion no es un articulo facil de entender.Es demasiado largo y tiene un monton de referencias.
Disfrutalo!



From Enlightenment Capitalism to Star Trek, From … Capitalism to Star Wars

Süreyya Algül



It will be a cliché introduction, but all US Second World War veteran Gene Roddenberry really wanted was to make a science fiction series “full of hope.” And after a few unsuccessful attempts, he did, too. When the filming of Star Trek, translated into Turkish as Uzay Yolu, began for NBC in 1966, probably no one, including Roddenberry, was aware that a cult science fiction production was born.


The conditions were ripe to make a science fiction film brimming with hope. Although not valid for all geographical spheres, the time was, at least for the developed West, the period coined “the golden age of capitalism” by historians like Eric Hobsbawm, and this meant incredible economic growth, developing democracies and of course, huge progress in science and technology. From where the defenders of capitalism sat, despite two great wars and a few small accidents on the way, there appeared to be no reason left not to believe that Voltaire’s intellect coupled with his commercial ability and Rousseau’s social contract and ideal of public sovereignty, Voltaire’s contemporary and the man he hugely disliked, had finally united and came into existence on this geographical field. It was as if Enlightenment itself had become reality. As the free market provided economic growth, the democracies arising on this economic regime were closer than they had ever been to realize the maxim, equality, fraternity and liberty within the mentality of the social state. Taking into account the advances in science and technology and especially the vertiginous potential of change in space research, there was no reason left for humanity, which was breaking free of superstitions and false convictions, not to finally turn its face to the universe and enlighten that great darkness, too. It was true of course that the voices of certain groups opposed to capitalism and certain thinkers who occupied themselves with concepts such as exploitation, power, hegemony and the lot, sometimes became unbearably loud and created discord. However, this was common in democracies and those who made this noise could even be regarded as a richness of humanity walking towards its future. Besides, on the outside, the rival Soviet bloc had also declared it was “ready to live together in peace,” albeit in cold war conditions. If it was even possible to build relations with the great enemy under the atmosphere of a “détente,” there was no ground to get held up in conflicts which could create pessimism. After all, it was time to be optimistic, to look to the future with optimism, and besides, the time to design the future with optimism.



For the film and television industry, placed perhaps at the top of the list of industries bearing, producing and disseminating the specific notion of the period, setting out to work on the production of a science fiction series facing the future with an optimistic spirit, meant perpetuating this mission and therefore, making a profit. By giving Roddenberry a chance, NBC undersigned maybe not the first, but probably the best known production of the US film and television industry which displayed this spirit.



The topic of Star Trek was the space adventure of Enterprise, a starship of the “Starfleet” of the “United Federation of Planets.” The “full of hope” adventure of Starship Enterprise in the foreground was supported by a political utopia in the background. No doubt, the United Federation of Planets had been founded under the leadership of Earth and Earth was the centre of the federation. The civil administration of the federation was based in Paris. It is not known whether Paris was chosen to send a message of compromise to the France of De Gaulle who had come to the forefront as the defender of a “European Europe,” produced its own atom bomb and had withdrawn from the military wing of NATO in 1966 following friction with the USA, or because this country was seen as one of the most significant centres of Enlightenment. However, what can be known for sure is that San Francisco, chosen as the central Starfleet Headquarters, the acting executive authority, was also the city where the United Nations Agreement had been signed. Would it be, one way or another, seeking ulterior motives to suggest that the executive organ which expressed power itself was deliberately established on American soil? Franz Joseph, who carried out one of the first important studies published on the “Universe of Star Trek,” writes that the Constitution of the Federation, the legal platform of the Federation, owed its existence to the Constitution of the United Nations which it copied almost article for article. Seeking a blemish in San Francisco being the executive centre of this world, stemmed from, if not ulterior motives, then from being poisoned by the political and social atmosphere of the world of the 20th century, or in other words, lagging behind and in the past. The world wasn’t the same old world anymore. It was now known as the “United Nations, Planet Earth” in the Constitution of the Federation, a title again reminiscent of a political utopia. However, Earth had become a utopia not only politically, but in the full sense of the word; issues such as poverty and hunger were alien to the planet and citizens lived in peace, tranquillity and justice as equal individuals. Robots called replicators supplied all industrial and technological requirements in addition to the entire food requirement. Environmental pollution had long been eradicated and biological diversity had been secured. In brief, the planet of the humans, just like post-1945 America in its own history, had more than deserved to be the centre as one of the most developed members of the Federation. In which case there could be nothing more natural than the constitution of the Federation being a copy of the United Nations Agreement. Since it had preserved its vitality to inspire the establishment of the Federation, the transformation which had made the world a utopia must have been secured with this agreement which had brought post-1945 order. Since the centre was perfect now, the main task of the periphery was probably to harmonize itself with the revolutionary principles of the constitution based on the same agreement and the order it had brought, so that it could approach the centre. But finally, these are inferences made not from the real topic of the series, the space adventure of Starship Enterprise, but from the construction of the Federation which enabled these travels.



The main task of Enterprise in travelling to the depths of space was to discover new life forms, carry out scientific research and reconnaissance, therefore Enterprise was not a military starship. It is true that all staff in the command room, including most importantly “Captain Kirk” himself, the commander of the ship, were military officers and the ship and the staff were armed so that they could defend themselves if necessary. However, this was presented as a necessary precaution against bad surprises they could encounter during the realization of their real task. Besides, even in the event of such a surprise, the handheld version of these weapons called Phasers designed for personal security, had a “stun” setting, and in the event of a clash where the crew had to use them, this “stun” setting would be preferred. But the real factor which ensured that not only the officers of the Enterprise, but all starship officers abstained from the use of violence as much as possible –far more significantly than the possibilities presented by the hardware of the weapons they owned- was the legal principles they were liable to comply with. The first of these rules, known as the “General Orders” which were binding for all “Starfleet officers” including the Enterprise crew, prevented all manner of interference with the normal development of other cultures. Considering the Spanish Hernan Cortes who confronted the Aztecs with a force of seven thousand in the process of the discovery of the New World, and went on to kill Montezuma II, the Aztec emperor, and pillaged the entire Aztec country for a year, or the Christian missionaries of Columbus who, twenty five years before Cortes tried to spread their religion using cruel methods on the natives, one could claim that the starfleet officers of Enterprise had, in the aftermath of the bloody history of their forefathers, finally reached Enlightenment modernism’s line of “civilization”, despite the weapons they carry. And also despite Enlightenment modernism’s own history of “implementing civilization by force”…



Since Enterprise was a scientific research ship and its task was to discover new life forms and carry out scientific research, science would be its beacon when performing its task. The series actually came to life with the mediation of surprises brought on by scientific, logical and sometimes even philosophical issues in the context of a journey within the attractive obscurity of space and again, with their discussion in the light of science. Science had such a central importance for the series that this centrality was not deemed to be sufficient to let it be felt within the flow of subjects and events, and Mr. Spock, one of the two main characters of the film, had almost become the flesh-and-blood manifestation of this scientific paradigm. Spock was, with Captain Kirk, the best known character of the series, and probably the most striking, with his pointed ears and his ice-cold stance. However, his appearance was not his only striking aspect. His personality was in fact more worthy of attention; even in the most dramatic moments when there was a danger of ruin and everyone around him, including Kirk, showed their feelings to some extent, he always remained imperturbable, and serious to the extent that seriousness appeared to have relinquished its place to indifference and blankness, and he occupied himself with continuing his activity of scientific examination, research and analysis in silence and loyalty and this occupation eventually played an extremely significant part in USS Enterprise solving the problems and continuing to perform its mission. This justified Spock’s attitude which was not metaphorically but genuinely unemotional and would enable his attitude in the face of the reactions of McCoy, the medical officer of the starship, to be perceived as the admirable indifference of a scientist rather than arrogance. After all, he was the science officer of the starship. However, Spock’s existence composed of reason and logic, emphasized even more with the absence of emotions, did not belong to Earth and humanity. He was an individual from a different planet called Vulcan and in Vulcan culture, reason was considered superior to all emotions as the foundation of existence. Emotions were a sign of primitiveness and weakness. This enabled the Vulcan Spock to secure the sovereign ideological discourse of the period as a perfect citizen candidate proving on one hand the ancient universality of human science and reason which surpassed even the human being and on the other hand the multiculturality of the Federation. It is true that one could also speak of multiculturality considering the presence of the helmsman Sulu with almond shaped eyes and the black communications officer Uhura. However, in view of these two offices, the command room of the Enterprise would have resembled and stood out as the multicultural composition of the USA, an old country from the history of the world, rather than that of the Federation. Spock existed as a character who clouded this composition in favour of the Federation.



In contrast to Spock, Sulu and Uhura had no doubt been appointed to their positions on the starship, like all other staff, on merit. For those who wanted to secure assignments in the dangerous adventure in space, merit was a precondition which could not be sacrificed to multiculturality, but at the same time it was the guarantee of multiculturality. The message was clear; everyone, whatever their race, religion, language or gender, could gain the chance to go on board a starship on merit. The question whether equal conditions and means were provided in the race to earn merit was as meaningless for the Enterprise, the starship of the utopia of the United Nations Planet Earth as a question belonging to the 20th century, as it must have been meaningless and unpalatable for the sovereign ideology of the same century when this utopia had been dreamed up. As to Mr. Spock’s position as the science officer; his appointment to this position stemmed from a privilege which could not only be explained by merit, from being half-Vulcan and therefore, from the a priori value attributed to rational reflection. Of course, concepts such as education and experience which implied ways of earning merit had a counterpart in Vulcan culture. But still, this counterpart corresponded to efforts aiming to develop high level rational thought, which they already possessed and aptitude towards scientific work.



Despite Spock’s important place in Star Trek and its ideology, the value attributed to Spock and therefore Spock’s knowledge also had a limit. In the final analysis, this limit arose due to the fact that he was the other. Spock provided great advantages as the other who proved the universality of reason and science and the multiculturalism of the Federation, but he would remain forever deficient as an other devoid of humanism because he did not possess human ethics, belief, pleasure and emotions. His deficiency was everlasting, since it was a deficiency which could not be remedied with training and experience, which could not be compensated by merit; it was caused by him not being human and therefore not understanding certain problems peculiar to humans, and this was unacceptable for space travel. A right-minded, humanist and strong man was needed who could benefit from Spock’s superior faculties to command the Enterprise; and this person was of course no other than Captain Kirk. Thus, although this meant that Spock found himself, in accordance with the cliché of adventure films, in the position of the short, overweight, spectacle-wearing genius boy standing behind the leading man despite his great importance in the series, he continued to realize his mission as the other who emphasized human uniqueness both with his advantages and disadvantages. There was nothing that could be done for him. After all, he starred in a man-made science-fiction and a leading role could not be given to a non-human in the dreams (ideologies) of these people who created this science fiction, their humanism was an obstacle first and foremost. Therefore, he would probably never be able to understand what was being done to him. Despite all its efforts and a discourse oriented towards multiculturalism, he was stuck at the threshold where citizens who manage to come to extremely important positions but are still not considered among the original “white”s, and can not become number one no matter what they do. With a single difference; he was experiencing all this in a Utopia.



We will never know if it would be of any consolation to Spock, but perhaps the only reason he could not become captain was not because he was not human. The problem could also be that science was seen as an administrative issue of such importance that it could not be abandoned to the curiosities of pure scientists. Scientific thinking was perhaps a different task from using scientific knowledge and commanding the science ship…



But Star Trek, the one known as the original series on official and related Internet sites, shot from 1966 to 1969 and shown on NBC, was a television series which, despite all its inadequacies, faults and many further criticisms which could be mentioned here, had scientific curiosity as its motivation, tried to understand and shed light on the subject of space through this motivation, asked questions and had its own set of problems it tried to deal with. Above all, despite the occasional scenes of violence, it took place in an age of utopias where peace had been achieved and the enemies confronted in the violent scenes were not demonized –judged for being primitive etc. at the most- but an attempt was made to understand them. And all this was done for the dream of a future where things could change for the better. No doubt, despite the effort to construct Star Trek on a utopia within this dream, the repetition of capitalism’s progressivist and optimist rhetoric of the era and the failure to see its shortcomings, it was inevitable that Star Trek would be handicapped by the ideological faults of the system. Ultimately one could not hear, for example, neither the intellectual voice of dissent in Foucault’s History of Madness or The Birth of The Clinic, nor the political and social voice of dissent of the 68 movement and Vietnam, and not even the artistic voice of dissent of Kubrick’s 2001 Space Odyssey in the Star Trek utopia. The voice heard in Star Trek was not of dissent, but to recall the example Eric Hobsbawm uses to describe the period, it resounded the tone of Harold Macmillan’s government in Britain, who ‘won the 1959 elections by proclaiming “You’ve never had it so good,”’ as if to provide a reference to a UN report dated 1972 maintaining that “fundamental growth trends would continue as in the 1960s.”



Towards the end of the golden age the times were pregnant with developments which would make one yearn even for the echo of this sentiment. The world was heading for the 1980s and as is known, the deterioration arising with recessions in capitalist nation-state economies had finally begun to create crises. Economic growth had in many countries been replaced by shrinkage. Neo-liberal governments, led by Reagan and Thatcher who had, in the meantime, come to power in the USA and Britain respectively, placed the burden of all the responsibility on the shoulders of the welfare state and began to cut social security spending, increase tax on low-income and wage earners, venture into rapid privatisations and effectuate neo-liberal policies based on many similar implementations. In this environment where the capitalist market place was fetishized and profitability was king, unemployment increased rapidly, and as years passed new recruits were added to the ranks of the unemployed millions. As Hobsbawm says, “(in the 1980s), even many of the richest and most developed countries found themselves once more getting used to the sight of beggars on the streets and of the homeless sheltering in doorways or cardboard boxes, (as long as they were not removed from their spots.)” However, in time, such scenes in cities, the symbols of modern life, were almost internalized by the inhabitants as a natural part of the scenery, and on the other hand, wealthy upper class inhabitants, as they had become accustomed to, began to establish their “holy homes” within private and secure housing complex surrounded by high and thick walls, built with the financial and social means of the class they belong to. As city centres and suburbs increasingly turned into crime centres, neo-liberal governments, which implemented policies that destroyed the welfare state and left wider social masses at the mercy of international capitalism, as a requirement of their conservative ideologies on social and political issues and with disregard to the fact that the vast majority of criminals belong to the oppressed, scorned or ignored classes and/or sub-cultural and ethnic groups, sought to legitimize their anti-democratic implementations based on a discourse of “the requirement of both internal and external security.” Due to the increasing share they received from revenues and their life styles mentioned above, the upper classes probably do have a higher need for security, and both to sustain their life styles and to further increase their shares in wealth, they were only too glad to provide neo-liberal governments with the legitimacy they needed. After all, neo-liberalism existed first and foremost for them. Images of crime and violence in the media of the new order, allocated continuous screen time with no apparent reason, were sufficiently convincing not only for them, but for wider masses of society made to believe they needed order and regulation. Under such circumstances, it was the concepts of the welfare state and democracy whose legitimacy was increasingly questioned. Seemingly, the problem was not the new form of capitalism and the discourses of its new apologists. Liberty, equality and fraternity certainly did not fill stomachs anymore. This was the problem and everything had to be rearranged. By all means, it was unnecessary to oppose neither liberty, nor equality and fraternity as long as they remained mere slogans. After all, this type of slogan always carried a magical power to allure the masses for propaganda and advertising gurus who marketed them. Besides, for the presentation of the same slogans from a neo-liberal perspective, it was possible to provide material from the vast knowledge of liberal economy based on many years of experience. For example, yes, the neo-liberals did believe in equality. In fact, they were the original defenders of equality. It was workers’ unions who damaged equality in the first place. Although the unions appeared to secure high wages for workers with their struggle, they were actually creating a monopoly on labour in the long term, which led to the degeneration of the labour market, resulting in low wages for non-union workers. First and foremost, this was unacceptable in terms of equality! Besides, union workers were also made to suffer later on. Who valued liberty more than them?! Was it not libertarian to demand the rescue of the enterprising spirit of the free market from all control mechanisms devised for the public good? Therefore, in order to let freedom, equality and fraternity find their real match, it was primarily necessary to bring formulations which would reshape the state and society.



No doubt the outside was included in all that was to be regulated and post-80s developments accelerated by neo-liberal policies also provided suitable conditions for the construction of the new order on an international level. Relationships with the Soviet bloc had deteriorated because of new security policies; issues like Afghanistan had been added to existing problems to seriously increase the tension. Reagan often likened the Soviet Union to the devil’s empire, and on the other hand had placed the “star wars project” on the agenda, which would force the Soviets, whose economic condition was already not too bright, to an arms race. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the replacement of the “balance of fear” with the “fear of instability,” the same policies could be sustained against new and unknown, therefore allegedly more dangerous, enemies. Besides, probably because they were left unrivalled after the 80s, neo-liberal governments felt very little need to adhere to post-1945 international legal norms when they carried out operations against these new enemies.



In brief, whatever the reason may be, the spell had been broken. The promises of the 1960s about a future of better days both at home and abroad had been replaced by demands preaching that more sacrifices had to be made to return to the good old days. Now was the time for the new representatives of the bourgeoisie to once again “create a new world in their own image.” Now was the time not for peace but for conflict, not for utopias but dystopias, not for thinking, understanding, learning and making science but for struggle, sacrifice and do as one is told without questioning. Under these conditions science fiction productions like Star Trek were too well-intentioned, naïve and did not really fit reality, even as science fiction. It is true that films which had foreseen that things might not always go well had been made in the period of Star Trek. For example, films had focused on subjects such as trouble brought on by robots produced by the hand of man, or the end of mankind as a result of its own evolution. But even these films had not made the grade, compared to the lived experience of reality. This was now a period in which more radical films would prove popular and the films in vogue in this era did not contain order, or a positive view of the future. In contrast, films emphasizing chaos and a negative imagination of the future, highlighting heroes who destroyed the bad guys to end the chaos and established order at all costs, were gaining box-office success and a positive future came to life only after this noble struggle. The clash between the good and the bad in these films was often depicted almost as a scene of Armageddon and as stated before, the box-office indicated that the young masses of the new era adored these images of Armageddon.



George Lucas’s Star Wars was the first and most important film which gained cult status and the recipient of an admiration from a fan base which could compete with the cult of the previous era, Star Trek. Star Wars was the name of the first series of six films Lucas shot the first of in 1977 and the same would later be widely used for Reagan’s project mentioned above.



The theme of Star Wars is the downfall from within of the greatest state in the universe, known as the Galactic Republic, perpetuated by its evil enemies, its transformation into the Galactic Empire followed by the destruction of the Empire, which then became the source of evil, by the Rebel Alliance, the symbol of good. Therefore, in contrast to Star Trek, there is no space-research to be carried out, or to be studied. Everything looks to have been already researched and studied. The universe was the stage for the great war between enemy “dark” forces and the good guys resisting them. It was no longer the language of peace and the scientist that was spoken, but the language of war, and therefore, the military officer. Since this language contained a coding oriented not towards understanding differences, but destroying and equalizing them, it could be defined not by the differences of various cultures, but the uncompromising differences of opposed parties, friends and enemies, the good and the bad. Lucas’s series used this coding to relate the implacable struggle between the good and the bad. Difference in terms of cultural variety was called upon only in order to point to the universality of the struggle.



As it has no doubt been understood, Star Wars had a far more political content than Star Trek. In contrast to the heroes of Star Trek who had dedicated themselves entirely to science as representatives of a civilization which has solved its political problems, the heroes of Star Wars were exceedingly political personalities. However, the said politics emphasized, as stated above, not a civilian but a military attitude towards politics. As an effective depolitization process reigned over younger generations on the left in the post-1980 period, the huge popularity among especially younger generations of a film based on military politics, and therefore war, the enemy, strategy, power and destruction, must have been satisfying for right-wing governments of the new order, and especially Reagan, busy designing his own star wars.



The first episode of the series filmed in 1977 carries the title “A New Hope,” because it tells a “the-day-after” story. The Galactic Republic has become history, the forces of evil have consolidated their power by reinstating the Galactic Empire in place of the destroyed Republic. However, a group of pro-Republic “rebels” who refuse to bow to the dominion of evil continue to fight against the Empire. The reason the episode has this name is, rather than rebels’ struggle, the emergence of the hero who will bring an end to evil. Upon the huge interest the first film received, Lucas had set about making sequels and also numbered this film the IV. of the series and deemed this name suitable for it. In a sense, this name also represented a new hope for Lucas’s career, who had suffered huge difficulties in financing and screening the first film and who had had to go from one production company to another. Still, with the script unity provided with the sequels, the IV. Film really did correspond to a new hope. Within this unity, the IV., V., and VI. Films, released in 1977, 1980 and 1983 respectively, related the destruction of the Empire, whereas the I., II. and III. Films were a parade of the past which led to the events in these films, and related the abolition of the Republic. That is to say, the releases in 1999, 2002 and 2005 respectively saw Star Wars fans flock to the cinemas knowing beforehand how the story ends. Yes, the invincibility of good emerged clearly in the end. However, the devil was apparently hidden in the detail. What exactly had taken place to transform the great and proud Galactic Republic of good in to the Galactic Empire of the devil? It is true that in the first trilogy a clue is given to indicate that treason plays an important part in this transformation. It was made clear that Darth Vader, the infamous villain of the series and the right hand man of the Emperor, had once been on the light side but for an undisclosed reason had entered in to the service of evil and this preference had contributed considerably to the commencement of the dark period. However, until the release of the second trilogy, everything had remained in the dark. Therefore, the aim of the second trilogy was clear, the truth left in the dark would be revealed, that is to say, history would be illuminated.



Once the aim was set as the illumination of history, Lucas also captured the chance of adding a moral to the story with a history “lesson” while relating history. He would selectively use real cultures and exemplary historical events to use this chance, and attain his objective by enabling the viewer to easily draw parallels between fiction and reality. In fact, Lucas’s selectiveness had revealed itself as early as the first film, number IV in the series. Besides, the concept of the “Force,” the most important example of this selective attitude for the series, was defined in the IV. Film. Obi Wan Kenobi, one of the main protagonists of the series, tells Luke Skywalker, another protagonist who is unaware of being the chosen one who will bring an end to the Empire, that, “The Force is an energy field, created by all living things, that surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together.” As a concept deeply believed in and respected by both sides which determined their nature, and in a sense, uniting the two parties of uncompromising enemies, the force adds meaning to both sides and their struggle, and outlines the ideology of the series. The basis of this ideology was belief and faith, whatever side one was on, because the Force was not a fact proven and determined by scientific research, but by religion. The knowledge of the Force could be attained not by scientific and mental thought, but by intuition. And faith and belief were essential for this attainment. As Yoda, the master of good, says in the V. film when training Luke Skywalker, first to “clear your mind of questions. Do not think, believe.” The more one believes and has faith the more one approaches the Force, feels its presence and more importantly, the power to eliminate the enemy is obtained. In the IV. Film, before striking the killer blow to the enemy ship, guided by the voice of Obi Wan, Luke Skywalker shuts off the high-technology targeting computer of his own ship, feels and believes in the Force, refreshes his faith and then fires the shot which destroys the huge enemy ship called the Death Star. It is true that there were some characters in the IV. Film who did not believe in this religion on both sides. For example, an officer of the empire describes the Force as a “decrepit religion.” But these people were not in administrative positions in the war and were not fully aware of the extent of it. For those in charge of the war, doubt regarding the existence of the Force was not a question, they believed in the Force, because first and foremost, they owed their existence to it and received their powers from it. As a matter of fact, Lord Vader would not waste time in punishing the officer who pronounces these remarks. In brief, the religion of the Force was presented as truth itself. The Force itself was pure and neutral, but it had two sides surrounding good and evil. Evil was described as the dark side and good, as the light side. In this way, the good and evil of the Force were elevated to a status which could only find an equivalent in religious works and films related to religion within a science fiction film; they represented pure and absolute good and evil, they possessed this possibility of representation because they were part of the Force. Therefore the struggle of good assumed an exceedingly legitimate and more holy and otherworldly form than all other struggles. Lucas had borrowed the Force from Far Eastern religions, and mostly from Buddhism and Zoroastrianism, but had adapted to fit the warrior spirit of the series and used as the legitimate basis of war. For both sides the Force was both the purpose and the tool; it was the purpose, because everything was done to attract its potential energy and to attain absolute and pure power. It was a tool, because the sides used their powers deriving from it to destroy one another. Therefore, ultimately, the Force was everything for both sides and the Force as pure energy and the force used to destroy the opposition were not that different from each other. But the definition of the Force itself as a pure and neutral field of energy served to protect it from all manners of normative criticism. After all, the Force was an ontological fact, it existed in itself and therefore had to be accepted as such. In a sense, it was religion of a destructive violence immune to all criticism, sanctified with the truth, it forced one to submit. But of course, the relationship of the good with power, namely, its violence, was presented as legitimate and holy.



When the struggle is so holy and the good and the villains carrying out the struggle so extraordinary, Lucas, probably having thought that the perpetrators of this struggle –in contrast to the regular creatures who are the foot soldiers of total war- must possess special qualities, and again using a selective method, carried titles such as knighthood, lordship and earldom from the Middle Ages to the future. The main weapon the two sides use in their war against each other had also come forth from ancient times; it was the sword as we know it, but in accordance with latest technology, it had been renamed the “lightsaber.” The sabre served at times to cut arms, and at times bodies in two. That is to say, scenes of violence, unimaginable in Star Trek, appeared on the silver screen in shocking detail in line with the spirit of Star Wars. As this was the case, and while Jedis used weapons other than the lightsaber as well, it is ironic that in the IV. Film, the elderly Jedi Obi Wan, on the losing Republican side, tells young Luke, as he gifts him with his lightsaber that this weapon belongs to a more civilized age.



As can easily be guessed, the good warriors are knights; to give their full name they are Jedi knights… Not everyone could become a Jedi knight. Above all, it was not a matter of merit or training. It was emphasized clearly in the I. film that it was not so when the child Anakin Skywalker –who was to turn to the dark side and take the name Lord (Darth) Vader- was taken from his mother to be raised as a Jedi. When Qui Gon, Obi Wan’s master, realizing Anakin’s fighting spirit on a planet they landed when their ship broke down, immediately took a blood sample, and his high midi-chlorian count (which determines a person’s sensitivity to the Force) led him to believe that Anakin could become a Jedi. The midi-chlorian count of other Jedis was also significantly higher than common mortals. But Anakin was not only a Jedi. His midi-chlorian count was so high that, according to Qui Gon’s intuitions, he was the chosen Jedi who would end chaos in the struggle between good and evil, bring balance to the Force and re-establish the order of good. He thought that his encounter with Anakin was not coincidence. The Force had wanted this. Qui Gon’s intuitions aside, the existence of a prophecy to this effect was mentioned in the I. film. Prophecy and the chosenness, the subject of this prophecy, were among the most important elements reflecting the religious character of Star Wars. Among chosen Jedis, Anakin was, in a sense, the most chosen, because both He and his son Luke Skywalker would determine the outcome of the war. However, Qui Gon had been mistaken about Anakin, because Anakin would later turn to the evil side. Nevertheless the prophecy would be fulfilled, though not by Anakin himself, but by his son Luke, with the help of his penitent father. His blood proved that Anakin was chosen, suggesting that genetic nobility was far more important than education and merit. However, the following dialogue between Qui Gon and Anakin’s mother laid bare a further quality of this nobility stemming from the intensity of midi-chlorians in the blood: Qui Gon; “The force is unusually strong with him, that much is clear. Who is his father?” His mother; “There was no father that I know of… I carried him, I gave him birth… I can’t explain what happened.” As it easily becomes clear, the story of Anakin’s mother overlaps entirely with the birth of the Christian Jesus. Qui Gon first asked Anakin’s mother about his father, he did not presume that His mother, a woman, could have played a role in Anakin’s gene structure. After all, (although one of the Jedis killed in the III. Film looked like a woman) Jedis were male, there were no female Jedis. So Jedi Knightship was a male profession and the talents of the Jedi were inherited from their fathers. However, even in Christian belief –albeit because God had chosen her as the mother to give birth to the prophet- Mary was considered a holy figure. Yet Anakin’s mother was described as a simple slave and would be kidnapped as a simple slave by a group of looters and die. It is true that his mother’s tragic end would open deep wounds in Anakin’s soul and would, albeit indirectly, influence his corruption to the dark side. From this perspective, the events were in line with the script and one could not say that Anakin’s mother was entirely insignificant. But this was exactly the issue, because a woman who had no share in the superior talents of her son, could only play a role in his downfall. The love he felt for his mother, along with the love he felt for another woman, his wife Padme, would bring disaster to Anakin. Anakin’s mother’s fate, despite its difference from Mary’s, was actually Lucas’s contribution to the position taken up by monotheistic religions such as Christianity for the male dominant discourse which provided meaning to both the Force and the nobility of Jedis. However, in the first trilogy, Luke Skywalker’s sister Princess Leia not only was not the reason of disaster as one of the fearless rebels fighting the Empire, but she also stood out as one of the important characters of the film as the substitute hero to be pushed to the front by Yoda as the sibling of Luke, in the event of his failure. Looking at this example, one may suggest that one should not be unjust to Lucas. However, after seeing the entire trilogy, it was revealed that Leia’s role was actually being the lover of Han Solo, the adventurous character of the same trilogy, rather than being an exceptional warrior. The insignificance of Leia in terms of the subject matter of the series was clear from the relationship she built, or rather, could not build with her father. Leia’s father Anakin, otherwise known as Darth Vader, who had turned to the dark side intercepts their ship in the film. Despite having never seen neither his daughter nor so, Vader feels the presence of his son. He also feels there is a connection between them, although he does not fully comprehend the nature of this connection. This all happens although he is outside the ship and never comes face to face with his son, and what’s more, his son responds to him. Yet he does not understand that Leia is his daughter even when he catches and tortures her, and Leia, who obviously had known of Vader’s existence for a long time judging by their hateful dialogue, does not deem it possible that the person she is insulting is her father. Vader only understands that he has a daughter too when he encounters Luke and reads his mind. In other words, he senses the existence of his daughter only through the mediation of his son. The only relationship between Vader and his daughter Leia would remain the knowledge of each other’s existence through Luke. Not only Vader, but the Emperor, too, senses Luke’s presence, and he tells Vader that this person is his son. The Force was in a sense their father, and the male nobles were not in a state to “sense” anyone other than their father and each other, both on the light and dark side. Leia, together with her lover Solo, were almost the representatives of the adventure-love-comedy cliché of Hollywood in the trilogy. In contrast to the second trilogy which reflected the heavy religious air of the struggle more and appeared to invite the first trilogy to solemnity, the adventure-love-comedy cliché –although never a central element- was used as a flavour in the first trilogy. Yet Leia was a woman by the side of her man, even as part of this flavour. Another character which resembles Leia appears a few years later. The Indiana Jones series, directed by Steven Spielberg and co-scripted by Lucas, features the Indiana Jones character played by Harrison Ford, a role which is almost identical to his part as Han Solo in Star Wars. And Marion, his lover in the Indiana Jones series, occupies the same position as Leia in Star Wars.



The religious set-up of Star Wars was not only formed by the religion of the Force or the devotion of the Jedi and their enemies to this religion, their nobility and the struggle between them. The struggle which revolves around the transformation of the state into a semi-autocracy with the Jedis’ position in the Galactic Republic and the acquisition of the state, religion gained space by surrounding the Galactic Republic and in a sense, was connected to life and made complete. The religious and the otherworldy thus reached out to the worldly, came into being and was also universalised.



The position of the Jedis which influenced the nature of the state stemmed from the administrative state organ called the “Jedi Council.” The Council was one of the most important administrative offices of the Galactic Republic. This council, formed of masters of the Jedi Knights and the peacekeeping force of the Republic (the most important master was Yoda, one of the main characters of the series), was like the general staff of the republic due to its defensive function. But it was by no means only this. It also acted as a spiritual council of wise men. In any event, the centre of the council was not called a headquarters but a temple, and the Council, under the leadership of Yoda, “sensed” the changes in the Force and tried to take decisions by foreseeing potential dangers. The council alluded to a structure combining the military with wisdom. There were no problems between weapons and wisdom; on the contrary, they were brothers. The members of the council were both well respected wise men and the best warriors of the Republic, besides; they were concerned with all internal and external matters regarding the government of the Republic. In a sense, the “fresh forces” and the wise men had become one.



Another important state organ, alongside the Jedi Council, was the Senate. The Senate was composed of Senators representing planets tied to the Galactic Republic. The Council was autonomously bound to the Senate, and the Senate was the legislative office of the Republic and its president, as also the president of the Higher Council which had the powers of the cabinet, was known as the Chancellor. It was not for nothing that Lucas had used this particular title. The evil character symbolized by Palpatine (Lord Sidious) who holds this title has a very important role in finding the answer to the question as to how the Republic evolved into the Empire and the title of chancellery was the key in terms of Lucas’s selectiveness to build a parallel between this evilness and its correspondent in actual history. Chancellor Palpatine corresponded to Chancellor Hitler in actual history. As a dictator with an irrefutably evil heritage in the eyes of everyone apart from neo-Nazis and anti-Semites, Hitler was a fitting preference by Lucas and must have been preferred not only for his evilness but also for the method he used to establish his power. First and foremost, chancellery meant for Palpatine what it meant for Hitler; a status with indisputable legitimacy on the road to power, gained to use the means of the already weakened Republic to destroy it… Besides, exactly like Hitler, Palpatine never refrained from using all manners of violence and conspiracy both before becoming chancellor and after.



It was made clear in the final film of the series that Palpatine was actually a Sith Lord. According to the storyline, Siths, the evil on the dark side of the Force had been destroyed by the Jedis a thousand years ago and had disappeared from the stage of history, but not only had Palpatine (Lord Sidious) managed to disguise his identity, he had also managed to infiltrate the state and rise to the position of Supreme Council Chancellery. He had put his terrifying plan into practice after assuming office. Palpatine began work by making sure Naboo, a planet tied to the Republic, was invaded by the Trade Federation, another member of the Republic. His reason in provoking the invasion was to benefit from chaos ensuing due to this event in the Senate, which had been in disarray for a long time anyway. This confusion was preventing any sanctions being passed against the invading Federation, and this was the exact point where Palpatine’s evil genius entered the picture. Padme, the queen of invaded Naboo, came to the Senate to have the invasion removed, and with the orientation of Palpatine, who was also Naboo’s representative in the Senate, called for a vote of no confidence in the Senate leadership of current chancellor Volorum. The election following the approval of the vote was won by Palpatine and he became head of State as the new chancellor. The rest was simple and easy for Palpatine. On one hand, he would provoke new insurrections within the Republic to cause chaos, and on the other hand he would have himself granted extraordinary emergency powers for the reestablishment of order. The restricted number of Jedis were inadequate in the face of increasing insurrections, and Palpatine made sure that the Senate had to call upon the help of the battle droid army he had had produced secretly, and after reinforcing the position of the droid army with a few victories against false enemies, he had all Jedis other than Obi Wan and Yoda destroyed with a secret order he put out. And using as an excuse the unsuccessful operation of the Jedis, who had by now found out he was a Sith Lord, he gained emperorship, not unlike Caesar, with a speech he made in front of the Senate.



Palpatine’s rise to emperorship was for many people including Lucas, evidence that Star Wars had an oppositional, anti-war stance. And it was really possible to think from Palpatine’s story, that Star Wars was a criticism of politicians who profited from wars and suffocated democracy using chaos as an excuse. Anyway, there was no reason to think otherwise hearing Lucas saying that he was influenced by the outcome of the Vietnam War when he set out to write the first film and that he was saddened to see that nothing had changed when he looked at what his country had done in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the story does not end here. Yes, Palpatine was obviously evil, one had to be alert against politicians who had similar aims, but the real problem was not the evil Palpatine but the missionaries of the good side. Palpatine was ultimately evil, and as a villain on a par with Hitler, his deeds were not that surprising. In which case, it was not He who would determine how opposed to or supporting of the system Star Wars was, but the heroes, who responded to what must be done to stop evil and thus far more clearly revealed the ideological discourse of the series. Previous criticism of the series aside, it was impossible to say the series was oppositional. As a Sith who wanted to become emperor, Palpatine obviously did not believe in the Republic. It became clear in the III. Film that the Jedis, presented as the sole guardians of the Republic, may have believed in the Republic and the state, but they certainly did not believe in democracy. As a response to Palpatine’s plan, they were calculating a coup to disperse the Senate and gain administration in order to drive the Chancellor out. Their justification, of course, was that the Senate could not arbitrate properly because it was under Palpatine’s hold. In any event, the Senate was portrayed as a pointless institution of diplomacy which only recalled intricacy and a controlled regime which prevented the final showdown. Padme, the Senator of Naboo (and former queen of Naboo) is the only character in the film who appears to believe in democracy and says that more debate and diplomacy should be preferred over war; and she is described as a naïve democrat who is deceived by Palpatine and paves the way for his Chancellorship. What’s more, the same Padme was shown as indirectly responsible of Annakin’s corruption to the dark side and the victory of the villains because she had married him and become his weakness, although Jedis were not permitted to marry. Anakin, who constantly dreamed of Padme’s death in his nightmares (dreams are like a reflection of the future within the series) and had to bear the burden of the guilt of failing to prevent the death of his mother, had turned to the dark side believing Palpatine’s promise that he could save the woman he loved if he turned to the dark side.



The moment of Anakin’s turn to the dark side actually reveals that the Jedis’ perception of not only democracy but also human rights was not much different from Palpatine’s. After Jedi master Windu learns from Anakin that Palpatine is a Sith Lord, despite going to his post to arrest him and successfully overcoming him in battle, he tries to kill him, although Jedi rules require him being taken captive, because Windu believed he was too dangerous to be allowed to live. In the same film, before his identity is deciphered, Palpatine demands Anakin kill the man he has taken captive, despite this being in breach of the same rules, and when Anakin complies, he is sure that he will turn to the ranks of evil. Judging by Master Windu’s preference, there was nothing wrong in following the methods of evil to defeat evil, let alone breaching Jedi rules, if victory was to be attained in this great war.



Interestingly, Anakin thinks that for Padme to live, Palpatine should not die, but be tried, and when he interferes to prevent Windu, he causes Palpatine to kill him with a sudden blow, and thus passes to the dark side. But his turn to the dark side will not prevent Padme’s death and as repeated constantly in the series, Anakin “will not escape his fate.” Anyhow, Yoda, when Qui Gon brought in Anakin as a small child, had opposed him entering Jedi apprenticeship and as a child recently separated from his mother, saw little Anakin’s fear of losing his mother as a sign that he may turn to the dark side.



According to Yoda’s wisdom, there was an automatic process where, “fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering,” and suffering meant entering the path to the dark side. In Anakin’s changing sides, as a Jedi who had displayed humane emotions since his childhood, and in addition to him remaining under the influence of the weakness created by the love he felt towards Padme and his mother, his insufficient obedience towards his masters had also been a determining cause. Obedience was one of the most fundamental qualities of Jedi nobility and Anakin had failed to become sufficiently obedient due to his dismay towards his masters who did not understand him at all and wanted him to only act in accordance with the requirements of the holy war. After all, he was not a democrat like his wife Padme, and believed even more than his masters in short cut solutions for the redemption of the Republic from chaos, but the reason for his disobedience was not this belief but his will to keep Padme alive.



Ultimately, however sincere George Lucas’s political views may be, and, in fact, despite the influence of these sincere views leading to Anakin uttering the post-9/11 words of Bush to Obi Wan (the same was valid for Obi Wan), “if you’re not with me, then you’re my enemy,” Star Wars was not opposed to the system, but embraced it. These words were, if anything, evidence to the fact that Star Wars was the new type of science fiction for the new order and this was probably why they did not stand out within the spirit of the film. Star Wars did not only water down science fiction within a dualism of good guys-bad guys, it participated in the new order’s language of security and violence to reproduce it, despite Lucas’s words to the contrary. Besides, its huge box-office success would soon trigger a host of similar productions. Regrettably, this also included film and television versions of the so-called new generation of Star Trek. Most products of this new generation, with the exception of a few films, had no similarity to the spirit of the original series, and what is more, spoke the same language as Star Wars.

*****

While Lucas had released his first two films and was shooting the third, Cüneyt Arkın, the dauntless representative of Turkish nationalism in film in Turkey, was busy meeting his viewers with the 1982-film Dünyayı Kurtaran Adam/The Man Who Saved The World, whose script he wrote himself and was directed by Çetin İnanç. As is known, Arkın had been extremely inspired by Star Wars and this combined with the artistic brilliance of the film, would lead to the film becoming a cult product of popular culture years later, and the film would be re-screened especially in student’s clubs at universities. But there was something curious about this, because in these re-screening years, the students preferred to categorize the film not as science fiction but as comedy.

However, when Dünyayı Kurtaran Adam/The Man Who Saved The World was first screened, not many people, apart from the ruling class, could laugh, and the film conveyed messages which one would never see in a comedy. However absurd the style of the messages, the spirit of Star Wars and the new order of 1980s Turkey had been captured. As its name states, the film was about the struggle of two Turkish pilots against aliens and how they save the world and it achieved this without any logical or aesthetic concern or an attempt at narrative continuity. But still, it was not for nothing that Hüseyin Peyda, starring as the sage of the film, says melancholically in the mausoleum in space that the word had been struck by disaster because people had deserted religion and deviated, and that Islam is the saviour of the world. Because, when Peyda spoke these words, the 12 September military junta which had crushed the left, had taken action in order to prevent the country going back to pre-12 September times by raising patriots trained in the ideology of the Turkish-Islamic synthesis and who had heightened immunity to the left; and within the scope of this project had also made religion lessons mandatory in schools by constitutional decree. Cüneyt Arkın, who took the leading role in tens of films about the Byzantine Empire and belittled the entire Byzantine Empire as a raider who had even back then succeeded to become a Turkish nationalist and who accused those who made fun of these films of “preventing the raising of youth with awareness,” had, needless to say, not neglected his mission.

Luckily, Dünyayı Kurtaran Adam/The Man Who Saved The World was not the only science fiction film of the post-1980 period. Another film would be screened in 2004, but in contrast to Dünyayı Kurtaran Adam/The Man Who Saved the World, this film would be presented as a comedy film of its own accord. Gora, written by Cem Yılmaz who also took the leading role, had, in a sense, followed Sadri Alışık’s route, because it revolved around the adventures of a Turk on the spaceship of the aliens. Cem Yılmaz himself had voiced his admiration of Sadri Alışık, and had stated he had generously drawn upon his work.

Yet however similar the topic was, and however in awe of Sadri Alışık Cem Yılmaz may be, Gora was quite different from Sadri Alışık’s Turist Ömer Uzayda/Tourist Ömer in Space. Above all, Alışık’s Tourist Ömer was, as stated before, a modest, morally upright, penniless but generous hearted hero. But Cem Yılmaz’s Arif was a real entrepreneur with a strong ego who did not refrain from trying to sell carpets to the aliens who abducted him. Tourist Ömer was shy when he made fun of the heroes of Star Trek, but Arif did not hold back from constantly belittling the aliens as a man confident in himself and his culture. And since Logar, the commander of the aliens who abducted him, was, in contrast with the heroes of Star Trek, and more an enemy in the vein of Lord Vader who wants to capture the world, he amply deserved Arif’s insults, who spoke to him in the language he understood. In the meantime, Arif was not so wrong in having confidence in his culture, since even the alien leading girl in love with Arif had learned about love from the Turkish melodramas she watched. In a sense, Gora’s Arif was a hero created by the post-1980 neo-liberal transformation, and in comparison with this hero, it was highly likely that Tourist Ömer would be seen as naïve rather than funny by the customers of comedy in this period. Just like the heroes of Star Trek being left devoid of their reality in comparison with the heroes of Star Wars, he, too, appeared too naïve to be laughed at anymore.

*****

Science-fiction is important. It must be taken into consideration as a way of searching for the future and a different life. When science fiction productions dream of the future or other worlds, they undoubtedly bear, to a large extent, the traces of the economic, political, cultural circumstances of the social structure they emerge from. But at the same time, by realizing the dreams they construct in the present of the societies they emerge from, they carry potential to claim a share, albeit small, in the founding of the present (and therefore, the future). This potential should not be underestimated. Beside many elements which could drive one to despair on the way to building a better future, the existence of young generations whose minds and imaginations have been atrophied by works of science fiction shaped with the logic of violence and war, will only serve to further destroy dreams. In this sense, the existence of masses, believed to number tens of thousands, who claim allegiance to the Jedi religion and organize as Jedi communities in various countries, should not be read as insignificant consequences of popular culture.



Ultimately, the fading and disappearance of the Star Trek of 1960s, surrendering its popularity to Star Wars in the 1980s, cannot be explained with a simple change from the old to the new one can make light of. Since change is also the result of a certain series of things, it could be said that it is a must to try to understand, on the route to establish a better world, the reasons which prepared this result. In this context, it should be meaningful to seek the answer of, at least, the following question: In a sense, it was Enlightenment capitalism which had created Star Wars, and Star Trek was the product of the artistic back drop of Enlightenment capitalism extending to the masses. But then, which capitalism had Star Wars been created by; Star Wars continues to affect the masses, but as a product, to which type of capitalism’s background does it belong to?



Star Trek also represents golden times, for many people over thirty in Turkey, too. It represented the opportunity to imagine other, better worlds if only for approximately half an hour, for people who strove to continue their lives within the vicious circle of violence, terror and poverty for many years, at a period, the 1970s, when the concept of space only managed to evoke Tübitak (The Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey), even to people most interested in the topic. In fact, the Turkish public had even found the opportunity to experience a space adventure of its own disposition on Enterprise in the person of Sadri Alışık, who played the leading role in the 1973-film Turist Ömer Uzayda/Tourist Ömer in Space. If the chance was given, a warmer film from Turkey, departing from the penniless yet generous at heart and morally upright Tourist Ömer, who made fun of Spock’s seriousness and the stuffy human relationships of Star Trek, could have been made. However, the post-12 September period would not allow this.








Appendix
Translated from the Turkish by Nazim Dikbas.

CLARIN

Hala ekime girdiğimize inanamıyorum iki ay sonra masterımın ilk senesi bitiyor olucak iki gün önce hüsne geldi , hüsnenin gelişi demek tatil demek , buralardan biraz olsun uzaklaşmak demek , ilk gezimizi tesadüf eseri ev sahibimin tekne kiralaması üzerine uruguay'a yapmaya karar verdik ,bunca saçma sapan eve kapandığım günden sonra bir de tekneye kapanıp üç gün denizde olma fikri mükemmel gelmeli dimi ? Hayır başta kabus gibi geldi işin içine hüsne, adrian juan pablo girince sonra tamam çekilebilir üç gün denizde bu insanlar cennet gbi gelebilir diyip son anda karar değiştirip ani bir mailla tekne gezisine tamam dedim . Ama geziye hala bir hafta var bu bir hafta yine bir türlü geçmicek tez için hala deliler gibi kaynak taraması yapıyorum. hala fikrimi düzgün bir şekilde yazıp adam gibi hocaların önüne sunamadım , bu arada aşırı bir ilgi söz konusu mükemmel bir tez danışmanım var kendisi bana haftada bir mail atıp tezimle ilgili makaleleri yolluyor pazartesileri de buluşup yeni neler yapmışım diye bakıyoruz. Ama gelin görünki konum çokta sağlam bir konu değil sağlamdan kastım karşılaştırdığım iki plandan biri yani plan mexico ve karşılaştırma yaparken odaklanıcağım konularla ilgili cok fazla hukuki belgeye ulaşamıyorum en azından meksika parlamentosunda bu planla ilgili olan dokümanlar daha elimde değil bu da tabi ilerlememi bir türlü mümkün kılmıyor. Bir yandan aldığım diğer dersler ve onlara hazırlamak zorunda olduğum bazen hiç zevk almayarak yaptığım sunumlar ve ödevler tezi bir kenara bırakmama neden oluyor ,herneyse sonuç olarak istediğim hızda ilerleyemiyorum . Kısacası bunalıma girdim. Ve Arjantin siyasi atmosferide sinirlerimi bozuyor ,beni şu an tek mutlu eden hüsnenin gelmiş oluşu. Arjantin siyasi atmosferinin beni sinir etmesi biraz abuk tabi , ama ediyor çünkü insanların bu kadar cahil cehalet ( bunu burda bi yabancı olarak söyleme hakkım olduğuna aslında çok inanmıyorum ama yine de politically incorrect olma adına herşeyi yapıyorum bu sıralar) hareket etmeleri fikirlerini paylaşmaları beni çılgına çeviriyor. Bu aralar Arjantin yayın organlarıyla ilgili çıkan ve ilk oylama da geçen yeni kanun tasarısının ne olduğunu bir türlü anlamamanın verdiği huzursuzluka her gün çalkalanıyor. Öğlen yemeğe gidiyorum çok mutluyum , gittiğim yerdeki yan masada öğle arasında yemek yiyen bankacı ekip büyük bir hararetle bu konuyu tartışıyor. Sabah okula geç kalıyorum takside uyanmaya çalışırken taksici ( taksicilerin çoğu hep aynı radyo istasyonunu dinliyor burda bu bi efsane değil gerçek ) radyodaki adamı dinleyip hükümete küfrediyor bana bir şeyler anlatmaya çalışıyor baktıki hiç oralı olmayıp okula geç kaldığım için derste bayılmıyım diye ağzıma tıkadığım muffinle meşgulum susuyor , sonra gazeteleri akşam yatmadan okuduğumda genel olarak hepsinin hükümetin bu yeni yasayı muhalefetteki Pino Solanas gibi mainstream sosyalist vekillerin desteğiyle kabul ettiriyor oluşunu eleştiriyor olmaları beni çileden çıkarıyor. Ben tabiki de herşeyin en doğrusunu en gerçeğini bilmiyorum ama en azından hocalar ,okuduğum mirada del sur' ve pagina 12 ,le monde sayesinde burada çok sevdiğim ve siyasi fikirlerine saygı gösterdiğim bütün insanların mesela Marcel'in Paloma'nın Adrian'nın bana anlattıklarından sonra bu yasanın zaten değişmesi gerektiğine ve hükümetin doğru bir şey yaptığına karar kıldım. Olan şu düşününki çok düşünmenize hayal gücünüzü çok kullanmanıza gerek yok Türkiye'deki Doğan Grubunu düşünün burada da böyle bir grup var CLARIN , sahibi Bayan Noble ve şirketin CEO'su Hector Magnetto ve bir kaç küçük hisseye sahip ortak. Ernestina Herrera Noble yani bayan Noble'nin kocası Bay Noble sıfırdan başlayarak Clarin'i ülkenin tirajı en yüksek gazetesi yapıyor.Ve ölümünden sonra karısı ve başyardımcısı Magnetto'nun kirli işleri sayesinde Clarin yazılı basında bir dev olmanın yanısıra kablolu tv ve radyo da sahip olduğu kanallar sayesinde gitgide büyüyerek bir medya devi haline getiriyor. 1976'da soykırımlarıyla Arjantin halkına zulum yaşatan askeri diktatorlukle Bayan Noble ve Magnetto oldukça iyi ilişkiler kuruyor.Böylece Clarin ülkenin en önemli papeleriasına sahip oluyor diğer bütün gazetelere oranla tonajına çok daha düşük fiyat ödeyerek temin ettiği kağıtla üretim masraflarını azaltarak daha da güçleniyor ama karşılığında da askeriyenin yaptığı işkencelere sessiz kalarak yönetim karşıtı haber yapmamaya sürdürüyor. Böylece hükümetin desteklediği ayakta kalan tek gazete oluyor. Sonra darbe bitiyor, demokratik ilk seçimlerde Alfonsin başa geliyor o tek bir şirketin onlarca tv ,radyo kanalını elinde tutmasının basın özgürlüğü açısından sakıncalı buluyor ve yasada değişiklik yapmak istiyor ve tabiki de fark ediyor ki ülkedeki kendisini destekleyen kesimleri karşısına alıp başkanlığını tehlikeye atmaya değmez. Peki,nasıl Clarin grubunu durdurmak bu kadar imkansız bugüne kadar neden bir türlü durdulamıyorlar neden her hükümet Clarin'le iyi geçinmek zorunda? Çünkü Clarin Arjantin'in bağımsızlığını ilan edişinden itibaren Arjantin ekonomisinde en güçlü grup olan büyük toprak sahiplerinin çıkarlarına uygun bir çizgide haber yapmaya dikkat ediyor ve böylece büyük amcaları kızdırmayarak ilerlemeyi başarabiliyor. 2000'lerde yaşanan kriz sonrası başa geçen Nestor Kirschner hükümeti başta diğer bütün hükümetlerin yaptığı gibi Clarin grubuyla iyi geçinmeye çalışıyor hatta Clarin'nin Menem döneminde (1 dolar=1 peso olduğu dönem) yabancı sermayeyle yaptığı anlaşmalarda dolar cinsinden çok büyük meblalarda borçlanması üzerine özel şirketlerin yabancı sermayeye yüzdesini azaltmayı hedefleyen bir yasa taslağını parlementoda büyük bir çoğunlukla geçirmeyi başararak Clarin grubunu borç batağından kurtarıyor. Fakat ilerleyen senelerde büyük toprak sahipleriyle Kirschner hükümetlerinin Nestor - Christina arası açılınca Clarin her zamanki gibi büyük toprak sahiplerinin yanında yer alarak hükümet karşı toprak sahiplerinin çıkarlarını korumak amacıyla, sahip olduğu gazeteler, tv ve radyo kanallarıyla hükümeti yoğun bir eleştiri bombardımanına tutuyor. Adeta büyük toprak sahiplerini sanki tarlalarında çalışan ve ürünlerini uygun bir fiyata satmaktan başka dertleri olmayan yalnız işçilermiş gibi göstermeyi başarıyor. Ve nitekim ben burdayken her Clarin'ini alışımda daha olaylardan bihaberken vah vah yazık bu soya üreticilerine hükümet ne rezalet , ne kadar büyük bir haksızlık bu yapılanlar diye düşündüğüm olmuştu ne yazık ki bu kadar etkililer... Sonuç olarak olaylar böyle devam ederken,üniversitedeki gruplar sendikalar, gazeteciler Clarin grubunun medyada böyle bir monopoli kurmuş olmasına karşı bir kampanya başlatıyorlar. Christina Kirschner hükümeti de muhalefetteki Pino gibi sosyalist vekillerle de çalışarak oldukça eski olan ve basın yayında monopoliye göz yuman bu yasayı değiştirmek için ellerinden geleni yapıyorlar. Clarin grubu geçen hafta son hükümet toplanlantılarına dinleyici olarak katılıp yasanın geçmemesi için elinden geleni yaptı örgütlediği vekiller yasanın ilk oylanışı sırasında oylamayı protesto etme amaçlı toplantılara katılmadılar. Sonuç gelecek hafta cuma günü yasa çok büyük bir ihtimalle değişicek. Yasanın en çok tartışılan maddesi 161 madde. Hükümet bu maddeyle Amerikan Hükümetinin Microsoft'a tanıdığı bir senelik süreyi örnek alarak Clarin grubuna da sahip olduğu kanalları satması için ve yine geri kalanlarında üniversite ve sendikallarla ortak çalışmaya başlaması için sadece bir sene veriyor , Clarin grubu ise bu geçiş süresinin en az 3 yıl olması gerektiğini savunuyor. Bayan Nobel ise bu günlerde 1976 darbesi sırasında güya tesadüf eseri kapısının önünde bulduğu iki bebeği evlat edinmesi ( Felipe ve Marcela Noble)ve bu bebeklerin çok büyük bir ihtimalle oldukça tanıdık bir senaryo aslında- hamileyken işkenceye uğrayarak ölen solcu bir aktivistin (montenerocular) çocukları olduğu spekülasyonlarına karşı sessiz kalmaya devam ediyor. Bir yandan da darbe sırasında generallerle kadeh tokuşturan fotoğrafları bağımsız gazetelerin manşetlerini süslüyor. Clarin grubunu ne olursa olsun bu yasanın geçmesiyle itibaren iyi günler beklemiyor. Fakat bu yasa şu an sadece Arjantin'de tartışılıyor. Bugün Latin Amerika'nın bir çok ülkesi darbeci ve özel sermayeyi destekleyen basın ve yayında monopoliye izin veren yasaları göz ardı etmeye devam ediyor. Venezuella'daki durum ise tam tersi Chavez hükümeti basın ve yayını adeta kontrolü altına almış durumda. Kısacası kıtanın geneline baktığımızda basın ve yayın organlarının daha özgür ve bağımsız hale gelmesi için kıtadaki diğer ülkelerin Arjantin'inde yaşananları oldukça dikkatli izlemesi lazım.

*foto - bayan Noble ve askeri cunta ekibi .