And these people do know their history better than a Pole who consider Atatürk equal to Hitler . 

Who did you ask or force you to pretend to accept him as saviour of TR?  But do not worry millions of Turkish people see him as saviour and respect what he did for the people of TR, I guess no one forced them. And these people do know their history better than a Pole who consider Atatürk equal to Hitler . Maybe they have heard or learned from their ancestors. Now a simple gift for you about history to enhance your knowledge about the difference between Atatürk and Hitler dear .  As far as I know like millions of other Turks, Atatürk was fighting against tyrants who occupied his country, killing his countrymen, raping their wives and daughters, he was defencing, was not attacking to other countries to exploit. Were we decieved for a century? Were we lied for years? What a pity, just learned them from Pole 100 years later...

I think your anger at a Pole trying to discuss Ataturk objectively prevents you from seeing my point Are you trying to say Ataturk is not responsible for thousands of deaths? That his reform was peaceful and joyful? That people changed their lifestyle just because he said it´s a good idea? You´d have to be very naive to think so I wonder how you cannot see the parallel between ALL people who transformed the system in their countries (and both Ataturk and Hitler were ones). The changes have never been a display of love and human rights

And what you´re saying about him being considered saviour by millions of Turks only proves my point - you´re brainwashed from the early age to consider him the ultimate hero. It is impossible to criticise him because you grow defensive. What if he was an alcoholic? What if, despite giving women voting rights, he was a tyrant at home? Would that change his being one of the most important people in Turkey´s history? I don´t think so...

You may argue that since I am not Turkish I cannot know anything about him, but it works both waysl; if your governments want to make you believe he was perfect, then maybe you need a foreigner´s eyes to see things from a perspective.

During communism some people actually believed in the system, in Stalin, just like during the 3rd reich millions of people believed in Hitler. They would not admit being brainwashed, just like Turks can´t admit it either.

See, even in an online exchange of thoughts, you cannot bear to acknowledge somebody might be indifferent to whom you concern a great leader, you accuse me of obsessing of being an outsider etc when I only share my point of view. And, to be honest, i think it´s more objective than yours - I understand some islamists would be against Ataturk, Turks would be ready to die for the image created for him, and I am quite indifferent. He´s just a human being exactly the same like all other revolutionaries, an accidental person with his good and bad sides, who was in a given place in a given time. If it hadn´t been him, you might be worshipping a different Mustafa now. If he had failed, you would be cursing his name and praising a religious leader...that´s history and facts that always occur this way or another. Well, I can only guess you wouldn´t have access to youtube anyway

i remember when I was on a guided tour of Turkey, the guide had a lot of spot-on comments about Turks. The longer I know Turks, the more right I see he was You need icons, gods, religion´s importance was reduced by bloodshed so you needed a new god. And you have been taught to love him, which you never fail to do You are taught not to question Ataturk´s way, as it´s been made the only right way. The love for him is being incited by threats: you´re afraid of increased religious influence, and afraid there are evil Brits & co who want to undo your beloved hero´s efforts and take over your wonderful country. You still have no problem with Kurds or Armenians or Christians...neither did Ataturk, right?

Look, I just want to make something clear, what I am interested in is the propaganda mechanism and the brainwashing, the social consequences of the persona cult, not history. Glorifying Ataturk, you´re teaching your children it´s ok to kill people who disagree with you, it´s ok to be a tyrant just to get the idea you want. Turkish history is full of examples of their love for being controlled by the army, which, instead of serving people, defends ideas from the last century. As if it were not the living people in a modern world  who count but a dead leader in a marble tomb.

Oh, and I have a question. In school, where the cult of Ataturk is blossoming, can you say you don´t find him heroic? That you disagree with what he did to Turkey? Can you do that and not have to face any consequences?

If you don´t know anything about Ataturk, so how can we apply your perspective? Hide your deformed ideas in yourself about the people who you know NOTHING about!

I think your anger at a Pole trying to discuss Ataturk objectively prevents you from seeing my point

Why am I need to angry with you? I was just laughing your comment considering him equal to Stalin or Hitler.

Are you trying to say Ataturk is not responsible for thousands of deaths?

Yes I am saying that. With your thinking there had not been an Atatürk if lands of Turks was not occupied.

That his reform was peaceful and joyful?

I can say it was the most peaceful one comparing to previous ones.

That people changed their lifestyle just because he said it´s a good idea?

That people even did not know the lifestyle of their Sultan and how they were easily sold out and suffered for years. Have you ever checked the lifestyle of family of Sultans? Be sure none of the women was covered, seen quite modern, living in a wealth. But they chose Atatürk because he is from inside of them and offered them free country and people followed him. Is it clear? 

And what you´re saying about him being considered saviour by millions of Turks only proves my point - you´re brainwashed from the early age to consider him the ultimate hero. It is impossible to criticise him because you grow defensive. What if he was an alcoholic? What if, despite giving women voting rights, he was a tyrant at home? Would that change his being one of the most important people in Turkey´s history? I don´t think so...

You are claiming I am brainwashed, how funny, nothing prevents me to say that me not but you are brainwashed that Atatürk was a tyrant.

You may argue that since I am not Turkish I cannot know anything about him, but it works both waysl; if your governments want to make you believe he was perfect, then maybe you need a foreigner´s eyes to see things from a perspective.

No one made people to believe he is perfect. If you can percieve, let me repeat again, this dead guy is the founder of Turkish Republic, a leader that Turks followed him and trusted in him, and they saved their future from occupiers together, and we are the descedants of them. And this is our history. So a foreigner eye does not make sense in this situation. Moreover I do not know many historians who consider Atatürk equal to Hitler unfortunately.

During communism some people actually believed in the system, in Stalin, just like during the 3rd reich millions of people believed in Hitler. They would not admit being brainwashed, just like Turks can´t admit it either.

Irrelevant! I think you could not understand the situation of Turkey after WW1, sure it is because you said Atatürk´s job was easy. After WW1 as you may know the whole Anatolia was parted between imperialists, Turkish people became united around Atatürk to kick these tyrants off from their lands. And they together established a new state called Turkish Republic. Sorry it does not look like any of scenarios you mentioned. Regarding the reforms, as i said before I can say it was the less bloody one according to previous one, I always thinked what if it was much more bloody. Have you ever seen a new state established without reforms? According to you the all revolutionists and founders of states are tyrant and killed innocent people. Did Hitler and Stalin established a new state?

And, to be honest, i think it´s more objective than yours - I understand some islamists would be against Ataturk, Turks would be ready to die for the image created for him, and I am quite indifferent. He´s just a human being exactly the same like all other revolutionaries, an accidental person with his good and bad sides, who was in a given place in a given time. If it hadn´t been him, you might be worshipping a different Mustafa now. If he had failed, you would be cursing his name and praising a religious leader...that´s history and facts that always occur this way or another. Well, I can only guess you wouldn´t have access to youtube anyway

Be sure no Turk would die for Atatürk but many of them can die for their country just like in the war of independence, of course you cannot understand this since you are brainwashed with the ideas of individualism by imperialists, like your absurd question "Do Turks worship God or Atatürk?" , go and make a poll maybe you find interesting answers . Such a simple thinking you have like " if it had not been him, if he had failed bla bla", some Turks answered your question in a simple way like you do "If he had failed, now you were not able to know your father." Who knows? 

i remember when I was on a guided tour of Turkey, the guide had a lot of spot-on comments about Turks. The longer I know Turks, the more right I see he was You need icons, gods, religion´s importance was reduced by bloodshed so you needed a new god. And you have been taught to love him, which you never fail to do You are taught not to question Ataturk´s way, as it´s been made the only right way. The love for him is being incited by threats: you´re afraid of increased religious influence, and afraid there are evil Brits & co who want to undo your beloved hero´s efforts and take over your wonderful country. You still have no problem with Kurds or Armenians or Christians...neither did Ataturk, right?

Good observation. I know Turks worshipping Atatürk in mosques and churches and sinagogs etc. And that is how we like it, maybe it will change in future, that is the personal choice, is it not? You may argue again they are brainwashed . Why is an hardcore atheist being disturbed idolworshipper Turks? Turks accepted and will accept all the decisions of Turkish people even if it leads them to Islamic regime rather than idolworshipping democracy, so no need to afraid of anything as far as all the decision makers are Turkish people, if not Turks should criticize the decision makers that we usually fail to do, but in the end through the history Turks always found a way to get rid of after they had suffered a lot, who knows maybe we need to find a new Mustafa Mustafa in near future to worship...

Look, I just want to make something clear, what I am interested in is the propaganda mechanism and the brainwashing, the social consequences of the persona cult, not history. Glorifying Ataturk, you´re teaching your children it´s ok to kill people who disagree with you, it´s ok to be a tyrant just to get the idea you want. Turkish history is full of examples of their love for being controlled by the army, which, instead of serving people, defends ideas from the last century. As if it were not the living people in a modern world  who count but a dead leader in a marble tomb.

I am also interested in the mechanism how you brainwashed with the ideas like Turks teaching their children to kill people who disagree with them. It corresponds to a slander in our lexicon of course it can be different in the lexicons of imperialists. You read that one, we read ours.

Oh, and I have a question. In school, where the cult of Ataturk is blossoming, can you say you don´t find him heroic? That you disagree with what he did to Turkey? Can you do that and not have to face any consequences?

In school period children learn their history, and who founded their country under which circumstances like many other countries, Australians visit Gelibolu to learn their history, Japanese visit the places that atomic bombed to learn their history and not to forget etc. As for your question why do honourable and right minded Turks need to say he had not done something heroic when they grow up in the first place? 

After reading DD´s posts, I don´t see where she belittled or disrespected Ataturk in any way, I do see where she critized his mere mortal followers...

Hmmm, If calling him tyrant is not belittling, then describe belittling bitte...