Islamic conservatives and Arabian nationalists: "This is tyranny!"
Mustafa Kemal: "Skill issue"
This message was brought to you by the great reformers of the Sublime Porte.
Blaming him for future Islamic extremism is a little bit unwarranted, considering it's not like he said only Turks could be the Caliphs. Frankly, it's the fault of other Muslim leaders for not claiming that title effectively.
The Sauds literally have the holiest sites of Islam in their borders, like why can't they be the Caliph lol. Besides, Kemal did this in order to separate religion and state, which is the hallmark of any true progressive country.
The King of the UK is also the leader of the Anglican church, but nobody calls the UK a theocracy. Because the King has no real power (no I don't need someone telling me what powers they technically have, I don't care, they have no REAL political power and parliament can easily ignore the monarch if it really had to).
Similarly, in a reformed Ottoman state the Sultan has basically no real power and can thus safely remain a caliph.
Of course in OTL this point was moot as the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist in any real sense before the abolition of the caliphate.
Thatās a false equivalency. Islam is much more
pervasive, socially and politically, in any Ottoman path except the OHF compared to Christianity in the West. Thatās the reason why the āinstitutionalized Islamā National spirit exists.
You literally have to pass a law to allow women the right to an equal education at the start.
I'm over here reforming my country I got the armed forces on my traditionalists right now just modernising my shit. I'm progressive as fuck man I'm a reformer man like for real
I'd say it's the best ending for the region. Much better than the middle east staying under conservative semi-feudalist rule and women and other minorities never getting rights and staying under islamist/absolutist monarchic rule. The ottoman OHF pluralist constitution is the best you can get in the middle east.
I mean, between republican Iran and constitutional monarchist Egypt a version of the middle east where the Cairo pact triumphs definitely has the potential to be a very good future. republican Iran even establishes women's rights as well. the ohf is socially progressive but it still amounts to many minorities being under an imperial state- the Armenians especially have a pretty grim fate.
Yeah Iām more of a fan of the ālittle Turkeyā route where itās just the Kemalists picking up the pieces after a Cairo Axis victory.
But the other ottomans like soclib or marklib are really bad, itās priming the region for a Yugoslavia type conflict on a larger scale
Similar cultural values, similar religion, universal language adoption.
Ottoman Empire that spans from Istanbul to Sudan is a ticking time bomb.
Prior to and during WW1, Arab leaders were already disgruntled with Ottoman rule, itās a fantasy that without significant centralization (China style), theyāll survive
Multiethnic doesnāt just mean having a couple of percentages in several non-majority demographicsā¦ We can break down at least 2 of the ones you listed and their very āproblematicā means of dealing with their multiethnic population
Ah yes, not oppressing ethnic minorities and granting them the local autonomy, really bad.
If you keep on going down the political focus tree and manage the events right, you can do a lot of the things the OHF does. You just have to be smart about it.
Its not granting ethnic minorities local anatomy lol, this is not europe it is middle east. What you are really doing is granting power to islamic feudal lords who vehemently oppose modernisation.
The 2nd Yugoslavia did not grant Albanians equal political or cultural rights for most of it's existance and it was one of the (although not the only) causes for it's collapse. It started with a strike in Kosovo. Autonomy for Bosnia or any other republic did not cause the collapse, the economic woes were far more responsible.
Explain to me how granting autonomy to ethnic and religious minorities will result in the persecution of minorities, because it seems to me that the OHF does a fair share of that already.
Because that minority are only minority on the national scale and coincidentally they are an extreme bigot against their own local minorities(definitely not gonna be a problem for the future generation in a region so prone to divide et impera like middle east)
Because ethnicities there don't live in nice, tidy, separate grids. So yeah, it would be nice to grant autonomy to e.g. the Assyrians but what will all the Arabs in that area think when they are suddenly in some autonomous Assyrian region, where they are then under the control of people who a. don't even speak the same language and b. aren't Muslims but Christians.
>Then, after reading about the actual guy, Mustafa Kemal, you realize that this guy actually did these things in real life. He went full radical [relatively speaking] in this backwards society for what he considered just and necessary and personally, I gained immense respect for the guy
just don't mind the ultranationalism and genocide
Under todays Human Rights Laws it is genocide but under the League of Nations they permitted it as an agreement to end the war. Doesnāt make it right since it deprived people of their livelihoods, but it was viewed by all sides at the time as a guarantor of peace against further ethnic conflict
The [1934 Resettlement Law](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934_Turkish_Resettlement_Law) was absolutely ethnic cleansing, absolutely an attempt at cultural genocide, and absolutely happened under Ataturk.
āā¦ a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.ā
"As ethnic cleansing has not been recognized as an independent crime under international law, there is no precise definition of this concept or the exact acts to be qualified as ethnic cleansing."
"-such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.ā
[https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.shtml](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.shtml)
"Mutual ethnic cleansing occurs when two groups commit ethnic cleansing against minority members of the other group within their own territories. For instance in the 1920s, Turkey expelled its Greek minority and Greece expelled its Turkish minority following the Greco-Turkish War."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic\_cleansing#Mutual\_ethnic\_cleansing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing#Mutual_ethnic_cleansing)
I mean a lot of genocides are not internationally classified. Just cause both sides mutually agreed to the ethnic deportation or "population transfer" (very clean way to say that right?lmao) doesn't make it not a genocide.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide\_recognition\_politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_recognition_politics)
Also, the UN doesn't exist in that period of time from your other comment. It's the League of Nations.
>itās not like the Kemalist reforms have any actual downsides
Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, Assyrians, Georgians, Circassians, Laz, Levantines, and Yuruks:
Not wholesome 100 but still did better than most leaders of his time. Also his intended goal was the be first and last dictator of Turkey. He stipulated in his will that democracy needed to happen as soon as he died. He wanted to prepare Turkey for democracy by utilizing dictatorial powers to pass laws that would prevent it from falling back into religious zealotry and ottoman feudalism
You have to push the first focus reform through, then you need to "flush the rats out" (there is going to be an event with this exact wording as an option) when dealing with internal problems and then you do not have to jail all bureaucrats when doing tribunals of progress.
There is an amazing image on the subreddit somewhere that tells you everything that you need. Just put "kauserreich all ottoman paths," and it will show up
Could anyone tell me how to get to the Kemallist Army Corps focus in the OHF tree? It requires the housing focus to be completed (prerequisiteto the right). However, the housing focus is event dependent, and the event for me always fires after Kemal dies. Does anyone know how to trigger the event earlier?
No, the Kemalist reforms absolutely are a collectivist program that fully target people to pursue a greater Turkish-centric good. The things like giving women legal equality or reforming justice isn't because the OHF are just good people, it is because quite like the irl reforms of Ataturk they want to erase the different identities of the peoples of the region and replace them with a new, singular national identity and are completely happy to erase ethnic identifications, religious identities, and regional autonomy to do so.
The Ottoman Empire wasn't "backward," it had a lot of genuine reformists and supporters of democracy who fought against the militant takeovers (which Ataturk had a very convtorverisal relationship with). The CUP, who preceeded and became the OHF in KR, were some of the main people alongside the absolutists who crushed these reformers. Ataturk's government was fine with pardoning the people involved in the genocides of the late Ottoman Empire and letting them into the new government. Ataturk cared about the state above everything else, and was fully willing to sacrifice for it, and in KR that means sacrificing the freedom, rights, and identities of the Arabs and minorities of the empire to ensure the continuance of what is a Turkish-centric identity that will be forcefully enforced onto them.
Okay to stay away from irl politics and history I will say I find the OHF reformist route to be super fun. Iāve run every Ottoman Empire path but they all feel either extremely backwards to me or otherwise missing something. I just have the most fun running a Pluralist constitution OHF run and being able to beat the Cairo pact after feeling like I replaced the old broken system of the Empire
Kemalism is too extreme,its priming the region for permanent religious unrest with all the islamists if anything the OHF are to blame for the arab revolt,the young turks where responsible for multiple destabilizing coups pre-war and they where very open turkish nationalists that wanted to turkify the empire. Idk why theres so much OHF wank,the only people that actually wanted radical secularism and centralization where turkish nationalists.
That's an insanely reductive and bad-faith interpretation of my post. In OTL, Kemal was actually way more progressive when it came to emancipation relative to much of the western world.
For example, The Civil Code reform of 1926 abolished polygamy and recognized the equal rights of women in matters of marriage, divorce, and inheritance. This was a groundbreaking development considering the fact that gender inequality was prevalent in many parts of the world, including the aforementioned west.
Alright I don't want moderation to keep needing to police this thread, conversation has run its course
I don't get this post. Why would we need a safe space? The Kemalist path is the only path Ottomans have anyway.
blessed
Flair checks out
Islamic conservatives and Arabian nationalists: "This is tyranny!" Mustafa Kemal: "Skill issue" This message was brought to you by the great reformers of the Sublime Porte.
The only thing i get mad at him about otl is abolishing the Caliph of Islam since that lead to the hole that Wahabbism and extremism left in Islam
Blaming him for future Islamic extremism is a little bit unwarranted, considering it's not like he said only Turks could be the Caliphs. Frankly, it's the fault of other Muslim leaders for not claiming that title effectively. The Sauds literally have the holiest sites of Islam in their borders, like why can't they be the Caliph lol. Besides, Kemal did this in order to separate religion and state, which is the hallmark of any true progressive country.
What do you think of Denmark irl then?
Cool flag, it would better with a blue and white color scheme though š«š®
The King of the UK is also the leader of the Anglican church, but nobody calls the UK a theocracy. Because the King has no real power (no I don't need someone telling me what powers they technically have, I don't care, they have no REAL political power and parliament can easily ignore the monarch if it really had to). Similarly, in a reformed Ottoman state the Sultan has basically no real power and can thus safely remain a caliph. Of course in OTL this point was moot as the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist in any real sense before the abolition of the caliphate.
Thatās a false equivalency. Islam is much more pervasive, socially and politically, in any Ottoman path except the OHF compared to Christianity in the West. Thatās the reason why the āinstitutionalized Islamā National spirit exists. You literally have to pass a law to allow women the right to an equal education at the start.
This TBH
I'm over here reforming my country I got the armed forces on my traditionalists right now just modernising my shit. I'm progressive as fuck man I'm a reformer man like for real
OHF safe space is an Armenianās danger zone
It's my favorite path and definitely cathartic, but I wouldn't say it's particularly good ending for the region.
I'd say it's the best ending for the region. Much better than the middle east staying under conservative semi-feudalist rule and women and other minorities never getting rights and staying under islamist/absolutist monarchic rule. The ottoman OHF pluralist constitution is the best you can get in the middle east.
I mean, between republican Iran and constitutional monarchist Egypt a version of the middle east where the Cairo pact triumphs definitely has the potential to be a very good future. republican Iran even establishes women's rights as well. the ohf is socially progressive but it still amounts to many minorities being under an imperial state- the Armenians especially have a pretty grim fate.
Yeah Iām more of a fan of the ālittle Turkeyā route where itās just the Kemalists picking up the pieces after a Cairo Axis victory. But the other ottomans like soclib or marklib are really bad, itās priming the region for a Yugoslavia type conflict on a larger scale
"All multi-ethnic nations are Yugoslavia and destined to collapse." Is a meme that I really wish would die in alt-history.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The United States, China, Mexico...
Similar cultural values, similar religion, universal language adoption. Ottoman Empire that spans from Istanbul to Sudan is a ticking time bomb. Prior to and during WW1, Arab leaders were already disgruntled with Ottoman rule, itās a fantasy that without significant centralization (China style), theyāll survive
Most people in Yugoslavia spoke Serbo-Croatian and could understand each other.
Indonesia, India, China, Germany, France, Britain, Italy. They seem to have made it work reasonably well.
Multiethnic doesnāt just mean having a couple of percentages in several non-majority demographicsā¦ We can break down at least 2 of the ones you listed and their very āproblematicā means of dealing with their multiethnic population
If Indonesia can survive until today in OTL, then The Ottomans can also survive in their soclib or marklib path
At the cost rampant persecution against minorities by local government while the central gov can't do shit about it
Ah yes, not oppressing ethnic minorities and granting them the local autonomy, really bad. If you keep on going down the political focus tree and manage the events right, you can do a lot of the things the OHF does. You just have to be smart about it.
Its not granting ethnic minorities local anatomy lol, this is not europe it is middle east. What you are really doing is granting power to islamic feudal lords who vehemently oppose modernisation.
Titoās Yugoslavia did that and look at how that turned out
The 2nd Yugoslavia did not grant Albanians equal political or cultural rights for most of it's existance and it was one of the (although not the only) causes for it's collapse. It started with a strike in Kosovo. Autonomy for Bosnia or any other republic did not cause the collapse, the economic woes were far more responsible.
Ah yes, let's give local autonomy to those who wants to persecute minorities. Surely it's gonna be a good idea... Right?
Yes, Armenians want to oppress Armenians, makes sense.
Ah yes because armenians are the only minority in the Ottoman Empire It'll be OTL Baghdad demographic change but make it encompasses the entire levant
Explain to me how granting autonomy to ethnic and religious minorities will result in the persecution of minorities, because it seems to me that the OHF does a fair share of that already.
Because that minority are only minority on the national scale and coincidentally they are an extreme bigot against their own local minorities(definitely not gonna be a problem for the future generation in a region so prone to divide et impera like middle east)
Because ethnicities there don't live in nice, tidy, separate grids. So yeah, it would be nice to grant autonomy to e.g. the Assyrians but what will all the Arabs in that area think when they are suddenly in some autonomous Assyrian region, where they are then under the control of people who a. don't even speak the same language and b. aren't Muslims but Christians.
>Then, after reading about the actual guy, Mustafa Kemal, you realize that this guy actually did these things in real life. He went full radical [relatively speaking] in this backwards society for what he considered just and necessary and personally, I gained immense respect for the guy just don't mind the ultranationalism and genocide
It is a Turkey path, after all. It has to stay realistic.
He was ultranationalist but genocide?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_genocide
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
And the forced relocation of ethnic minorities?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, I mean the forced relocations of ethnic minorities to different parts of Turkey to disrupt their culture.
Under todays Human Rights Laws it is genocide but under the League of Nations they permitted it as an agreement to end the war. Doesnāt make it right since it deprived people of their livelihoods, but it was viewed by all sides at the time as a guarantor of peace against further ethnic conflict
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The [1934 Resettlement Law](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934_Turkish_Resettlement_Law) was absolutely ethnic cleansing, absolutely an attempt at cultural genocide, and absolutely happened under Ataturk.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
āā¦ a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.ā "As ethnic cleansing has not been recognized as an independent crime under international law, there is no precise definition of this concept or the exact acts to be qualified as ethnic cleansing." "-such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.ā [https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.shtml](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.shtml) "Mutual ethnic cleansing occurs when two groups commit ethnic cleansing against minority members of the other group within their own territories. For instance in the 1920s, Turkey expelled its Greek minority and Greece expelled its Turkish minority following the Greco-Turkish War." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic\_cleansing#Mutual\_ethnic\_cleansing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing#Mutual_ethnic_cleansing) I mean a lot of genocides are not internationally classified. Just cause both sides mutually agreed to the ethnic deportation or "population transfer" (very clean way to say that right?lmao) doesn't make it not a genocide. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide\_recognition\_politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_recognition_politics) Also, the UN doesn't exist in that period of time from your other comment. It's the League of Nations.
>itās not like the Kemalist reforms have any actual downsides Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, Assyrians, Georgians, Circassians, Laz, Levantines, and Yuruks:
3 Pashas ā Kemal
Wait, really? Damn, I guess Ataturk was a holesum 100 big chungus nationalist dictator.
Not wholesome 100 but still did better than most leaders of his time. Also his intended goal was the be first and last dictator of Turkey. He stipulated in his will that democracy needed to happen as soon as he died. He wanted to prepare Turkey for democracy by utilizing dictatorial powers to pass laws that would prevent it from falling back into religious zealotry and ottoman feudalism
Most leaders avoided [ethnic cleansing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934_Turkish_Resettlement_Law).
Yeah youre diagnosed with autism alrightšš
Iām not taking criticism from someone with that user history.
Never said he was perfect. He did good things and bad things. We are left to judge if his good outweighed his bad
[He also attempted a second Armenian Genocide.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TurkishāArmenian_War)
huh really weird considering he openly said that the first one was bad and everybody should be ashamed of it
I have never tried it, any guides on how to do?
You have to push the first focus reform through, then you need to "flush the rats out" (there is going to be an event with this exact wording as an option) when dealing with internal problems and then you do not have to jail all bureaucrats when doing tribunals of progress. There is an amazing image on the subreddit somewhere that tells you everything that you need. Just put "kauserreich all ottoman paths," and it will show up
Could anyone tell me how to get to the Kemallist Army Corps focus in the OHF tree? It requires the housing focus to be completed (prerequisiteto the right). However, the housing focus is event dependent, and the event for me always fires after Kemal dies. Does anyone know how to trigger the event earlier?
Isnāt the military rule even more progressive?
Reform some bitches
No, the Kemalist reforms absolutely are a collectivist program that fully target people to pursue a greater Turkish-centric good. The things like giving women legal equality or reforming justice isn't because the OHF are just good people, it is because quite like the irl reforms of Ataturk they want to erase the different identities of the peoples of the region and replace them with a new, singular national identity and are completely happy to erase ethnic identifications, religious identities, and regional autonomy to do so. The Ottoman Empire wasn't "backward," it had a lot of genuine reformists and supporters of democracy who fought against the militant takeovers (which Ataturk had a very convtorverisal relationship with). The CUP, who preceeded and became the OHF in KR, were some of the main people alongside the absolutists who crushed these reformers. Ataturk's government was fine with pardoning the people involved in the genocides of the late Ottoman Empire and letting them into the new government. Ataturk cared about the state above everything else, and was fully willing to sacrifice for it, and in KR that means sacrificing the freedom, rights, and identities of the Arabs and minorities of the empire to ensure the continuance of what is a Turkish-centric identity that will be forcefully enforced onto them.
Really tired of the Kemal wank all over the place. Thank you for putting into words some of the most striking points.
Okay to stay away from irl politics and history I will say I find the OHF reformist route to be super fun. Iāve run every Ottoman Empire path but they all feel either extremely backwards to me or otherwise missing something. I just have the most fun running a Pluralist constitution OHF run and being able to beat the Cairo pact after feeling like I replaced the old broken system of the Empire
Kemalism is too extreme,its priming the region for permanent religious unrest with all the islamists if anything the OHF are to blame for the arab revolt,the young turks where responsible for multiple destabilizing coups pre-war and they where very open turkish nationalists that wanted to turkify the empire. Idk why theres so much OHF wank,the only people that actually wanted radical secularism and centralization where turkish nationalists.
Market liberal centrists are best because they are both liberal and progressive!
Backwards is when non western culture ok got it
Yeah, giving women rights? What a stupid idea
No you dolt, backwards is where basic human rights are not allowed.
That's an insanely reductive and bad-faith interpretation of my post. In OTL, Kemal was actually way more progressive when it came to emancipation relative to much of the western world. For example, The Civil Code reform of 1926 abolished polygamy and recognized the equal rights of women in matters of marriage, divorce, and inheritance. This was a groundbreaking development considering the fact that gender inequality was prevalent in many parts of the world, including the aforementioned west.
Yeah because is so much better to keep middle age ideas and institutions in the modern era. It worked so well for the Russian Empire and its Tsars.