Social Policy Approaches of the Political Parties in Turkey

Yıl 2018, Sayı: 3, 53 - 62, 31.12.2018

Selçuk Gürçam

Öz

The political parties of Turkey have different attitudes towards some issues such as secularism, laicism, governmental system, constitution. Social policy has been a peripheral issue. However, the ideological stances of the parties should be crystallised through their stances regarding social policy. This paper pointed out the social policy orientations of the political parties represented in the parliament following the 2007 elections. The party programs and elections manifestos of the parties were the primary focus of attention in the study. The political dimension was central in the discussion of social policy since political parties are the major actors in its implementation. However, their ideological standpoints have been disregarded in the current debates, and only some practices are referred to. To overcome such a drawback, this study elaborated on the issue in a more comprehensive and theoretical manner.

Anahtar Kelimeler

political parties, social policy, welfare politics, Turkish politics, Turkey

Kaynakça

• AKP. (2002). Ak Parti Programı: KAlkınma ve Demokratikleşme Programı. Ankara: Ak Parti.
• AKP. (2007). Ak PArti 2007 Seçim Beyannamesi. Ankara: Ak Parti.
• Ayata, S. and Güneş-Ayata, A. (2001). Turkey’s Mainstream Political Parties on the Centre-Right and Centre-Left, In Turkey Since 1970, D. Lovatt (edt), New York: Palgrave.
• CHP. (2004). CHP Parti Programı: Yeni Hedefler Yeni Türkiye. Ankara: CHP.
• CHP. (1976). Parti Programı. Ankara: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi.
• CHP. (2007). 2007 Seçim Bildirgesi. Ankara: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi.
• DSP. (1985). DSP Programı. Ankara: Demokratik Sol Parti.
• DSP: (2004). DSP’nin Güncelleşen Programı. Ankara: Demokratik Sol Parti.
• DSP. (2007). Emek Kurultayı. Ankara: Demokratik Sol Parti.
• DTP. (2005). PArti Programı. Ankara: Demokratik Toplum Partisi.
• Goodwin, M. and Painter, J. (2000), Local Government After Fordism: A Regulationist Perspective. In G. Stoker (ed.). The New Politics of British Local Governance, (pp. 33-53). London: Macmillan Press.
• Jessop, B. (2000). Governance Failure. In G. Stoker (ed.). The New Politics of British Local Governance, (pp. 11-32). London: Macmillan Press.
• Konuralp, E. (2017). Sivil Toplum ve Türkiye’deki Muhasebeciler Özelinde Meslek Örgütleri. Lectio Socialis, 1(1), 62-71. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/lectio/issue/41445/500981
• MHP. (2009). PArti Programı. Ankara: MHP
• MHP. (2007). 2007 Seçim Beyannamesi. Ankara: MHP.
• Öniş, Z. (1997). The Political Economy of Islamic Resurgencein Turkey: the Rise of Welfare Party in Perspective, in Third World Quarterly, Vol 18, No 4, pp. 743-766.
• Öniş, Z. (1998). Tukey: Democratisation and Adjustment Prom Above, in State and Market, Z. Öniş (edt.). İstanbul: Boğaziçi University Printhouse.
• Stoker, G. (2000). Introduction. In G. Stoker (ed.). The New Politics of British Local Governance, (pp. 1-11). London: Macmillan Press.
• Zengin, F. (2017). Democratic Left: The Leading Discourse of the 1970s in Turkey. Iğdır İİBF Dergi. Issue 2.