Perceptions of Political Elites in Türkiye by University Students

  • Author: Ender Akyol
  • Institution: Inönü University
  • ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4715-0017
  • Year of publication: 2024
  • Source: Show
  • Pages: 204-238
  • DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/athena.2024.83.12
  • PDF: apsp/83/apsp8312.pdf

The aim of this study was to develop a Political Elite Perception (PEP) Questionnaire with an exploratory mixed research design and to determine university students’ perceptions of university of political elites. At the qualitative stage of the study, a qualitative questionnaire was applied among university students (n = 160). The analysis of the qualitative data revealed that university students’ perceptions of political elites were grouped in seven main categories (intellectual capacity, political values, democratic attitude, personal traits, talents, power/influence, and interaction with the public/public benefits), and the questionnaire items were determined based on these categories. At the quantitative stage of the research, statistical analyses were conducted on the questionnaire that was applied to 383 university students. The study findings demonstrated that, according to the university students, the personal traits of political elites included charisma, courage, and self-confidence, but they also emphasized that political elites were intellectually inadequate, impartial, uncriticizable, unempathetic and non-compromising, and described the political elites as non-democratic.

Postrzeganie elit politycznych w Turcji przez studentów uniwersytetów

Celem niniejszego badania było opracowanie Kwestionariusza Postrzegania Elit Politycznych (PEP) w układzie badań eksploracyjnych mieszanych oraz określenie poglądów studentów na temat elit politycznych. W etapie jakościowym badania ankietę przeprowadzono wśród studentów uczelni wyższych (n = 160). Analiza danych jakościowych ujawniła, że postrzeganie elit politycznych przez studentów uczelni wyższych pogrupowano w siedem głównych kategorii (zdolności intelektualne, wartości polityczne, postawa demokratyczna, cechy osobowe, talenty, władza/ wpływy oraz interakcja z interesami publicznymi/ pożytkami publicznymi) a pozycje kwestionariusza zostały określone w oparciu o te kategorie. W ilościowym etapie badań przeprowadzono analizy statystyczne na podstawie kwestionariusza ankiety, którym objęto 383 studentów uczelni. Wyniki badań wykazały, że zdaniem studentów do cech osobowych elit politycznych zaliczają się charyzma, odwaga i pewność siebie, podkreślali jednak także, że elity polityczne są nieadekwatne intelektualnie, bezstronne, niepodlegające krytyce, nieempatyczne i bezkompromisowe i określiły elity polityczne jako niedemokratyczne.

BIBLIOGRAFIA:

  • Açıkel, F. (2009). TBMM milletvekili veritabanı oluşturulması ve siyasal seçkin/milletvekilleri profili çalışması [Deputy/political elite database and profile study in The Grand National Assembly of Türkiye]. Ankara Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projesi Kesin Raporu. Ankara.
  • Adaman F., Çarkoğlu A., & Şenatalar B. (2005). Toplumun kamu yönetı̇mı̇ne, kamu hı̇zmetlerı̇ne ve reforma bakışı [People’s position to public governance, public services and public reform]. İstanbul: Tesev.
  • Adaman, F., & Çarkoğlu, A. (2000). Türkiye’de yerel ve merkezi yönetimlerde hizmetlerden tatmin, patronaj ilişkileri ve reform [Reform, patronage networks and satisfaction from public services at the local and central levels: The case of Türkiye]. İstanbul: Tesev.
  • Ahmad, F. (2008). Cumhuriyet Türkiye’sinde siyaset ve siyasi partiler [Politics and political parties in republican Türkiye]. In: R.  Kasaba (Eds.). Türkiye Tarihi 1839–2010, Modern Dünyada Türkiye [The Cambridge history of Türkiye], (pp. 229–274). İstanbul: Kitap.
  • Ağırdır, B. (2020, January 29). KONDA Genel müdürü Bekir Ağırdır: Gençlerin çoğunluğu ‘Bu siyasetçiler ve partilerle olmaz’ diyor [Bekir Ağırdır, Director of KONDA Research and Consultancy Company: The majority of young people say, ‘This cannot happen with politicians and parties’]. Retrieved from: https://t24.com.tr/video/konda-genel-muduru-bekir-agirdir-genclerin-cogunlugu-bu-siyasetcilerve-partilerle-olmaz-diyor,26042.
  • Akkerman A., Mudde C., & Zaslove A. (2014). How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies, 47(9), 1324–1353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0010414013512600.
  • Akkoyunlu, K., & Öktem K. (2016). Existential insecurity and the making of a weak authoritarian regime in Türkiye. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4): 505–27. DOI: doi:10.1080/ 14683857.2016.1253225.
  • Alemdaroğlu, A. (2021). Youth politics. In: J. Jongerden (Ed.). The Routledge handbook on contemporary Türkiye (pp. 205–218). Routledge.
  • Alkan, T. (1993). Siyasal ahlak ve siyasal ahlaksızlık [Political morality and political immorality]. Ankara: Bilgi.
  • Arat, Y. (2013). Violence, resistance, and Gezi Park. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 45(4), 807-809. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743813000962.
  • Artan, İ. E., Börü, D., İslamoğlu, G., Yurtkoru, S., Sipahi, B., Çalışkan, K., & Ergun, S. (2005). Üniversite gençliği değerleri: korkular ve umutlar [The values of university youth: fears and hopes]. İstanbul: Tesev.
  • Aydın-Düzgit, S., & Balta, E. (2017). Türkiye after the July 15th coup attempt: When elites polarize over polarization. Istanbul, Türkiye: Istanbul Policy Center.
  • Aytaç, S. E. & Öniş, Z. (2014). Varieties of populism in a changing global context: The divergent paths of Erdoğan and Kirchnerismo. Comparative Politics, 47(1), 41–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5129/001041514813623137.
  • Balta E. & Özel, S. (2018). Popülizm siyaseti: Küresel çağda iktidar ve protesto [The politics of populism: Power and protest in the global age]. In: M. Dragicevic Šešic & J. Vickery (Ed.). Kültür politikası yıllığı (pp.100-109). İstanbul: İletişim.
  • Balta, E., Kaltwasser, C. R., & Yagci, A. H. (2021). Populist attitudes and conspiratorial thinking. Party Politics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13540688211003304.
  • Barr, R. R. (2009). Populists, outsiders and anti-establishment politics. Party Politics, 15(1), 29–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068808097890.
  • Bashirov, G., & Lancaster, C. (2018). End of moderation: the radicalization of AKP in Türkiye. Democratization, 25(7), 1210-1230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1461208.
  • Bastedo, H. (2015). Not ‘one of us’: Understanding how non-engaged youth feel about politics and political leadership. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(5), 649–665. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2014.992309.
  • Bayhan, V. (2015). Türkiye’de gençlik sosyolojisi çalışmaları [Youth sociology studies in Türkiye]. Sosyoloji Konferansları, 52(2), 355-390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18368/IU/sk.66761.
  • Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. Sage Publications.
  • Bee C. (2021). The civic and political participation of young people in a context of heightened authoritarianism. The Case of Türkiye, Journal of Youth Studies, 24(1), 40–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2019.1683523.
  • Best, H., Cromwell, V., Hausmann, C., & Rush, M. (2001). The Transformation of legislative elites: the cases of Britain and Germany since the 1860s. Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(3), 65–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/714003883.
  • Binder, A., Heiss, R., Matthes, J., & Sander, D. (2021). Dealigned but mobilized? Insights from a citizen science study on youth political engagement. Journal of Youth Studies, 24(2), 232–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2020.1714567.
  • Bottomore, T. (2008). Seçkin kuramı [Elite theory]. In W.Outwaite (Ed.). Modern Toplumsal Düşünce Sözlüğü [The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought]. (pp. 646–8). İstanbul: İletişim.
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
  • British Council. (2018). Next Generation Türkiye: Gençlerin Sesini Dinlemek. Retrieved from: https://www.britishcouncil.org.tr/sites/default/files/h068_01_next_generation_Türkiye_report_final_tr.pdf.
  • Caprara, G. V., & Silvester, J. (2018). The personality attributes of political elites. In: H Best & J. Higley (Eds.). The Palgrave Handbook of Political Elites (pp. 467–87). Palgrave Macmillan. London.
  • Castanho Silva, B., Jungkunz, S., Helbling, M., & Littvay, L. (2020). An empirical comparison of seven populist attitudes scales. Political Research Quarterly, 73(2), 409–424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912919833176.
  • (2024). Öğrenci istatistikleri [Student statistics]. Retrieved from: https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr.
  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano-Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W., Fetters, M. D., & Ivankova, N. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.104.
  • Çarkoğlu, A., & Kalaycıoğlu, E. (2018). Türkiye’de ve dünya’da vatandaşlık [Citizenship in Türkiye and world]. Istanbul Policy Center. Istanbul.
  • Çarkoğlu, A., Elçi, E., Erol, F. ve Paksoy, C. (2022). Popülizm teorileri ışığında Türkiye’de popülizmin tarihsel gelişimi: Siyasi partiler üzerine bir inceleme [The historical development of populism in Türkiye in the light of populism theories: An analysis on political parties]. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(1), 323–348.
  • Dağı, İ. (2008). Türkiye’s AKP in power. Journal of Democracy, 19(3), 25–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0015.
  • Damlapınar, Z. & Balcı, Ş. (2005). Seçmenin zihnindeki aday imajını belirleyen etkenler: 28 Mart 2004 yerel seçimleri alan araştırması [Factors affecting the candidate image of the voter’s mind: a survey of the local elections of march 28, 2004]. Selçuk İletişim, 58–79.
  • Demiralp S. & Balta, E. (2021). Defeating Populists: The Case of 2019 Istanbul Elections. South European Society and Politics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2021.1923639.
  • Dewan, T. & Myatt D. P. (2007). The qualities of leadership: Direction, communication, and obfuscation. PSPE working papers, 01-2008. Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
  • Diamond, L. (2015). Facing up to the democratic recession. Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 141-155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2015.0009.
  • Erdoğan, E. (2009). Olasılıksızlığın kuramını aramak: Türk gençliği ve siyasal partilere katılım [In search of the theory of improbable: Turkish youth and participation to political parties]. In: C. Boyraz (Ed.). Gençler Tartışıyor: Siyasete Katılım, Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri [Debates among the Youth: Political Participation, Problems and Solution] (pp. 56–83). İstanbul: Türkiye Sosyal Ekonomik Siyasal Araştırmalar Vakfı.
  • Erdoğan, E. & Uyan-Semerci, P. (2017). Understanding young citizens’ political participation in Türkiye: Does ‘being young’ matter? Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 17(1), 57–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1235000.
  • Esen, B., & Gümüşçü, Ş. (2016). Rising competitive authoritarianism in Türkiye. Third World Quarterly, 37(9), 1581–1606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732.
  • Esen, B., & Gümüşçü, S. (2020). Why did Turkish democracy collapse? A political economy account of AKP’s authoritarianism. Party Politics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068820923722.
  • Esmer, Y. (2012). Türkiye değerler atlası 2012: Değişimin kültürel sınırları [Türkiye’s value atlas 2012]. Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi.
  • Farrall, S., Gray, E., Jones, P. M., & Hay, C. (2021). Losing the discursive battle but winning the ideological war: Who holds Thatcherite values now? Political Studies, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321720986701.
  • Frantz, E. (2017). How today’s populism dismantles democracy worldwide. SSN-Scholars Strategy Network: Basic Facts. Retrieved from: http://www.scholarsstrategynetwork.org/brief/how-todays-populism-dismantles-democracy-worldwide.
  • Fuchs, D. & Klingemann, H.D. (2019). Globalization, populism and legitimacy in contemporary democracy. In van Beek U. (Ed.) Democracy under Threat. Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89453-9_1.
  • Grasso, M. T., Farrall, S., Gray, E., Hay, C., & Jennings, W. (2019). Thatcher’s children, Blair’s babies, political socialization and trickle-down value change: An age, period and cohort analysis. British Journal of Political Science, 49(1), 17–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123416000375.
  • Grasso, M. T., Farrall, S., Gray, E., Hay, C., & Jennings, W. (2019a). Socialization and generational political trajectories: an age, period and cohort analysis of political participation in Britain. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 29(2), 199–221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2018.1476359.
  • Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Gümüş, P. (2017) Negotiating ‘the political’: a closer look at the components of young people’s politics emerging from the Gezi Protests, Turkish Studies, 18(1), 77–101, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2016.1274655.
  • Hart, J., & Henn, M. (2017). Neoliberalism and the unfolding patterns of young people’s political engagement and political participation in contemporary Britain. Societies, 7(4), 33. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/soc7040033.
  • Henn, M., & Foard, N. (2014). Social differentiation in young people’s political participation: the impact of social and educational factors on youth political engagement in Britain. Journal of Youth Studies, 17(3), 360–380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2013.830704.
  • Henn M. & Oldfield, B. (2016). Cajoling or coercing: would electoral engineering resolve the young citizen–state disconnect? Journal of Youth Studies, 19(9), 1259–1280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2016.1154935.
  • Heper, M. (1985). The state tradition in Türkiye. Eothen Press. Huntingdon
  • Higley, J. (2018). Continuities and discontinuities in elite theory. In. H. Best, J.Higley (Eds.). The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 25–39). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Hobolt, S.B., Anduiza, E., Çarkoğlu, A., Lutz, G., & Sauger, N. (2016). CSES Module 5: Democracy divided? People, politicians and the politics of populism. CSES Planning Committee Module 5 Final Report.
  • Hoffmann-Lange, U. (2018). Methods of elite identification. In: H. Best, J.Higley. (Eds.). The Palgrave handbook of political elites (pp. 79–92). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Huntington, S. (1996). Üçüncü dalga: yirminci yüzyıl sonlarında demokratlaşma [The third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century]. Ankara: Yetkin.
  • IstanPol (Istanbul Political Political Research Institute), (2020). Türkı̇ye’de gençlerı̇n güvencesı̇zlı̇ğı̇: Çalışma, geçı̇m ve yaşam algısı [Insecurity of young people in Türkiye: Perception of work, livelihood and life], Research Report.
  • Johnson, A. J., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed method research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133.
  • Kayaoğlu, A. (2017). Voting Behavior of the youth in Türkiye: What drives involvement in or alienation from conventional political participation?, Turkish Studies, 18(1), 32–55, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2016.1273776.
  • Kılıç, K. (2009). Kentsel gençlı̇k araştırması anketı̇ bağlamında: gençlerı̇n sı̇yasal eğı̇lı̇mlerı̇nı̇ etkı̇leyen faktörler [In the context of urban youth research survey: Affecting factors of the political tendencies of young people]. In: C. Boyraz (Ed.). Gençler Tartışıyor: Siyasete Katılım, Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri [Debates among the Youth: Political Participation, Problems and Solution]. İstanbul: Türkiye Sosyal Ekonomik Siyasal Araştırmalar Vakfı.
  • Kline, P. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd ed.). Routledge. London.
  • KONDA (2018). KONDA barometresi: Popülist tutum, negatif kimliklenme ve komploculuk [Populist attitudes, negative identification and conspiracy], Kasım, Survey Report.
  • Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the cold war, Cambridge University Press.
  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Lührmann, A. & Lindberg, S. (2019). A third wave of autocratization is here: what is new about it? Democratization, 26(7), 1095–1113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2019.1582029.
  • Lührmann, A., Maerz S. F., Grahn, S., Alizada, N., Gastaldi, L., Hellmeier, S., Hindle, G., & Lindberg, S. I. (2020). Autocratization surges – resistance grows. Democracy Report 2020. Varieties of Democracy Institute (V-Dem).
  • Lüküslü, D. (2009). Gençlerı̇n sı̇yaset algıları ve deneyı̇mlerı̇: yenı̇ bı̇r sı̇yaset ve örgütlenme modelı üzerı ̇ ne d ̇ üşünmek. [Young people’s perceptions and experiences of politics: thinking about a new model of politics and organization] In Gençler Tartışıyor: Siyasete Katılım, Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri [Debates among the Youth: Political Participation, Problems and Solution], ed. Cemil Boyraz. İstanbul: Türkiye Sosyal Ekonomik Siyasal Araştırmalar Vakfı.
  • Lüküslü, D. (2013). Necessary conformism: An art of living for young people in Türkiye. New Perspectives on Türkiye, 48, 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0896634600001898.
  • Lüküslü, D. (2016). Creating a pious generation: Youth and education policies of the AKP in Türkiye. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4), 637–649. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1243332.
  • Mair, P. 2013. Ruling the Void. London, New York: Verso.
  • McCoy, J., Rahman, T., & Somer, M. (2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0002764218759576.
  • Mills, C. W. (1956). The power elite. The Oxford University Press. New York, Oxford.
  • Mosca, G. (1969). The ruling class. Mc Graw-Hill. New York.
  • Mudde, C. (2004). The populist zeitgeist, Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x.
  • Mudde C., & Kaltwasser R.C. (2012). Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or corrective for democracy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Neundorf, A., Smets, K., (2017). Political socialization and the making of citizens, Oxford Handbooks Online in Political Science. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935307.013.98.
  • Öniş, Z. (2014). Monopolizing the center: The AKP and the uncertain path of Turkish democracy. The International Spectator: Italian Journal of International Affairs, 50(2), 22–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2015.1015335.
  • Özbudun, E. (2011). Otoriter rejimler, seçimsel demokrasiler ve Türkiye [Authoritarian regimes, electoral democracies and Türkiye]. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.
  • Özbudun, E. (2014). AKP at the crossroads: Erdoğan’s majoritarian drift. South European Society and Politics 19(2), 155–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2014.920571.
  • Özbudun, E. (2015). Türkiye’s judiciary and the drift toward competitive authoritarianism. The International Spectator: Italian Journal of International Affairs, 50(2), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2015.1020651.
  • Özen, H. (2020). Reproducing ‘hegemony’ thereafter? The long-term political effects of the Gezi protests in Türkiye. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 20(2), 245–264, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2020.1745417.
  • Pakulski, J. & Tranter B. (2015). The decline of political leadership in Australia? Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Pareto, V. (1991). The rise and fall of elites: An application of theoretical sociology, intro. by Hans L. Zetterberg, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2002).Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Phelps, E. 2012. Understanding electoral turnout among British young people: A review of the literature. Parliamentary Affairs, 65, 281–99.
  • Rooduijn, M. & Pauwels, T. (2011). Measuring populism: Comparing two methods of content analysis. West European Politics, 34(6), 1272-1283, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2011.616665.
  • Saraçoğlu, C. (2017). Sağ popülizm ve faşizm üzerine yöntemsel bir tartışma: Küresel örüntüler ve ulusal özgüllükleri birlikte anlamak [A methodological discussion on right-populism and fascism: Global patterns and national specificities]. Praksis Dergisi, 44-45, 1081-1104.
  • Sartori, G. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited. Chatham House Pub.
  • Schulz, A., Müller, P., Schemer, C., Wirz, D. S., Wettstein, M., & Wirth, W. (2018). Measuring populist attitudes on three dimensions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(2), 316-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw037.
  • Schumpeter, J. (1966). Kapitalizm, sosyalizm ve demokrasi [Capitalism, socialism and democracy]. İstanbul: Varlık.
  • (2016). Türkiye gençlik raporu: Gençliğin özellikleri, sorunları, kimlikleri ve beklentileri [Türkiye youth report: Youth’s characteristics, problems, identities and expectations]. Istanbul: Social, Cultural and Economic Research Center.
  • Selçuk, O. (2016). Strong presidents and weak institutions: Populism in Türkiye, Venezuela and Ecuador. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4), 571–589. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1242893.
  • Somer, M. (2016). Understanding Türkiye’s democratic breakdown: old vs. new and indigenous vs. global authoritarianism. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4), 481–503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1246548.
  • Sözen, Y. (2019). Competition in a populist authoritarian regime: The june 2018 dual elections in Türkiye. South European Society and Politics, 24(3), 287–315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2019.1688515.
  • Sözen, Y. (2019a). Populist peril to democracy: the sacralization and singularization of competitive elections. Political Studies Review, 17(3), 267–283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1478929918814613.
  • Taggart, P. (2000). Populism. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • (2022). İstatistiklerle Gençlik [Youth in Statistics]. Retrieved from: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Istatistiklerle-Genclik-2022-49670.
  • Turan, İ. (2014). Türkiye’de siyasal kültürün oluşumu [The Evolution of Political Culture in Türkiye], In: E.Kalaycıoğlu, A.Y.Sarıbay (Eds.). Türk Siyasal Hayatı, (pp. 479–512). Bursa: Sentez.
  • Turhan, M. (2000). Siyasal elitler [Political elites]. İstanbul: Gündoğan Yayınları.
  • Türk Gençliği 98: Suskun Kitle Büyüteç Altında, (1999) [Turkish Youth 98: The Silent Majority Highlighted]. Ankara: Konrad Adenauer Vakfı.
  • Vergin, N. (2003). Siyasetin sosyolojisi [Sociology of politcs]. İstanbul: Doğan Kitap.
  • Wasburn, P. C., & Covert, T. J. (2017). Making citizens political socialization research and beyond. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Wattenberg, M. (2012). Where have all the voters gone? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Weber, M. (2008). Sosyoloji yazıları [From Max Weber: Essays in sociology], İstanbul: Deniz Yayınları.
  • Weßels, B. (2018). Norms and orientations of political elites, In. H. Best, J.Higley. (Eds.). The Palgrave handbook of political elites. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 523–537.
  • Yıldırım, Y. (2017). Liberal demokrasinin krizi bağlamında Avrupa’da sağ-popülizm ve yükselen aşırı-sağ [The right-populism and the rising of far-right in Europe in the context of the crisis of liberal democracy]. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 50(2), 51–72.
  • Yılmaz, Z. (2017). The AKP and the spirit of the ‘New’ Türkiye: Imagined victim, reactionary mood and resentful sovereign. Turkish Studies, 18(3), 482–513. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2017.1314763.
  • Yılmaz, V. & Oy, B. (2014). Türkiye’de gençlik ve siyasi katılım: Sosyo-ekonomik statü fark yaratıyor mu? [Youth and political participation in Türkiye: Does socioeconomic status matter?] In Istanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Sebeke Gençleri Katılımı Projesi Kitapları, 5. Retrieved from: http://genclik.bilgi.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/sosyo_ekonomik_statu_gencler.pdf.
  • Yolcu, T. (2019). Türkiye de siyasal kültür ve siyasal liderlik anlayışının temelleri üzerine genel bir değerlendirme [An overall assessment on the foundations about political culture and political leadership concept in Türkiye]. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 12, 93–106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.440003.

eksploracyjny projekt mieszany exploratory mixed design political values wartości polityczne university students studenci demokracja młodzież youth democracy

Message to:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart