!áH€ ="justify">Perhaps in a decade from now, we will have a Turkey in which history is debated freely and a Europe in which historians will be jailed for thought crimes. One of the interesting themes that conservative and libertarian U.S. intellectuals have been emphasizing in the recent years is the growing gap of freedom in Europe. 

‘ckbones of the EU — there is a strong tendency towards protecting the welfare state at the expense of individual freedoms. Samuel Gregg of the Acton Institute (a libertarian think tank in Michigan) even argued that there are signs of a “soft-despotism” mindset in the continent, which was apparent in the now-defunct European Constitution. “[The EU Constitution] does not limit itself — as any sound constitution should — to outlining the origins, divisions, and limitations of state-power,” Gregg noted. “Instead, its 511 pages embrace a plethora of subjects ranging from fishing, humanitarian-aid, space policy, sport, tourism, to financial assistance to the former East Germany.” This was a mindset, according to Gregg, which gave the EU officials the right to “meddle in almost anything.”

Meddling in history:

  Apparently the areas that the EU officials wish to meddle in include history, too. The bizarre idea that governments have the right to define the true history of peoples and punish the dissidents who dare to disagree with their “offical truths” seems to be quite popular in Europe. Last year's “genocide bill” approved by the parliament of France — a country which has never been, after all, a great fan of freedom, and has created its own nation by suppressing the identities of its citizens — was a perfect example. By providing a one-year prison sentence and a 45,000 euro fine for those who deny the view that the tragic events of 1915 amounted to genocide, the French had simply issued a “thought crime,” which is, of course, the hallmark of all despotisms.

  What makes the matter worse is the steady growth of this “soft” — or not so soft — despotism. Germany's recent initiative to “combat racism and xenophobia” makes that all obvious. Of course there is no problem in combating racism and xenophobia. But as you might read in page 3 of the TDN today, what this draft framework does is also to penalize the denial of “genocide” and sentence the deniers (or, say, dissidents) to up to three year in prison. And who will decide which events constitute genocide or not? Parliamentarians like those of France, of course.

  In other words, political figures will decree official truth and heretics will be imprisoned. Welcome to illiberal Europe.

Remarks by Minister Çiçek:

  I spoke to Justice Minister and government spokesman Cemil Çiçek about this yesterday. He was quite critical of the German initiative and described it as an assault on the freedom of thought. He also emphasized that this bill gives the right to politicians and national courts to define history. “The crime of genocide has to be decreed by The Permanent Court of Arbitration (aka) Hague Tribunal,” he noted. “But with this bill, any local court will be able to make decisions on genocide and imprison people with alternative views.” He also noted the authoritarian nature of the draft framework: once the EU approved it, member countries would have to accept it. Then the whole continent would turn into a zone of unfree thought. 

  Minister Çiçek is right. So is the Turkish government, which has criticized and will continue to criticize these illiberal steps taken by EU leaders.

Not a Holocaust:

  Some could remind us of Holocaust denial; but it is not relevant. One should see the huge difference between the Jewish Holocaust and the so-called Armenian Genocide. The former is an undisputed fact. Its perpetrators have been tried and sentenced in an international court, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. Extermination camps and gas chambers are all there to see. It is true that are some Holocaust deniers, but these are marginal figures and there are good reasons to think that they are in fact Nazi sympathizers and thus look at history with that sort of bias. But in the Armenian case, there are many non-Turkish respected historians, such as Bernard Lewis and Guenter Lewy, who argue that the events of 1915 do not amount to genocide.

  Yet still, denying even the Jewish Holocaust is not a crime in the United States. Apparently “Old Europe” needs to get some lessons in free thought from the New World.   

 

Turkey goes liberal while Europe goes illiberal:

  The opposing tendencies in Europe and Turkey in this whole debate are striking. Of course it is no secret that European countries have broader freedoms than in Turkey in many areas, and that's one of the reasons why Turkey should join the EU. But as for the Armenian issue, Turkey has been liberalizing itself and has been creating space for free discussion. There are scholars and intellectuals in Turkey who think that there was an “Armenian genocide.” In the recent years they have been openly saying that, and they are not taken to court for his. However, the tendency in Europe is quite the opposite — towards less freedom, not more.

  Perhaps in a decade from now, we will have a Turkey in which history is debated freely and a Europe in which historians will be jailed for thought crimes. It is not a too unlikely scenario.