An infernal road to walk

Is it important to an ordinary Turk whether there is parliamentary democratic governance or presidential governance in this country? Does an ordinary Turk understand the difference between the two or does he believe either of the two might make a difference in his life? The country has been covered with a very thick veil of fear. People no longer applaud others for what they write, say or think but rather caution of the consequences if any idea might be considered "freaky" by the dominant Sunni-Islamist political clan.

However, the country is at perhaps one of the most important junctures of its recent history and there is a need to talk and exchange opinions more than ever.

Presidential or parliamentary governance should indeed not be an issue that Turkey can afford to spend its precious time with, as the country's national and territorial integrity is facing an existential threat. If this country had managed to implement a parliamentary system with all its principles, there would not be a problem. Yet today there is a parliamentary system which indeed is nothing more than a "dukedom of party leaders" at the political party level and an "elected absolute ruler" at the government level. The problem is not constitutional or anything else but a crooked byproduct of crooked laws covering political party activities and elections. If a party leader is given the only and final say regarding the political existence of a politician, can there be anything abnormal in that politician becoming a serf of that leader? The end product is the country's parliament is composed of serfs committed to the well-being and satisfaction of their leaders. The only exception, I must underline, might be the pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP), which unlike others is...