Full Text

Taksim Square, where Gezi Park is located, is Turkish society’s shatter-zone, par excellence. By shatter-zone in socio-political terms, we mean an area where different lifestyles meet and coexist; a space likened to the fissures of society where people take refuge to resist homogenizing processes. Indeed, Taksim is the main shatter-zone of Istanbul, where diverse lifestyles have taken refuge and have resisted against hegemonic ideologies. It is made up of artists, writers, actors, and others who pursue bohemian lifestyles and subscribe to unorthodox ideas. The many bars and cafes, and the people they attract, mark Taksim as the epicenter of anti-establishment gatherings. Keeping in mind the nature of Taksim’s constant social role in Turkey’s public sphere, it is important to note that the events, which took place between May 27 and June 12 in and around Taksim, were not of a political movement, and therefore not to be associated with a political ideology of any kind. Rather, the events were the materialization of Taksim’s long enduring social attitudes. In other words, the fissures engendered an outburst – insofar as it was a sudden, unrestrained, and violent expression of emotion – and series of disjointed social effects. Indeed, the Gezi events were explosions of indignation by those who had long felt excluded and marginalized, almost as a way of life. While the opposition parties felt a flare of delight from the demonstrations, the truth remains that the Taksim mentality has constantly been that of a shatter-zone, regardless of the political identity of the “establishment.” Therefore, the outburst failed to create a sustainable movement or establish an alternative political platform. On May 27, the protest started as a sit-in by a group of environmentalist youths to oppose a development project that involved the uprooting of trees in order to build a replica of a 19th century Ottoman era artillery barrack, Topcu Kışlası, that would house a hotel and a small shopping mall, along with several small meeting rooms. The next day, the police used pepper-spray to disperse the protesters. The demonstrators reacted by vandalizing property in the area, including shop-windows and cars. On May 29, a larger crowd came to establish a camp in the park. The significant difference in attitude and behavior between the campers and the demonstrators was noticeable, as only the latter were involved in confrontations with the police. As the media started to romanticize all protesters, be they campers or demonstrators, more young people joined them. In addition, a series of misinformation about the project began to dominate the social media, including the claim that Bülent Arınç’s son was partner to the project. It was presented as the government’s attempt to “destroy the green space and the park to build another shopping mall, known as AVM in Turkish (Alış-Veriş Merkezi), and a hotel.” Police were unable to dislodge the campers, and as their numbers grew, the police, under the direct order of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, organized a massive down operation and dispersed the protesters. The government held several meetings with the campers and demonstrators, and promised to wait for the court decision before continuing with plans for the park. On May 30, when they refused to empty the park, police intervened and dispersed the demonstrators and campers. The protesters used social media to share images of police brutality, which provoked anger among other anti-AK Party sectors of the population. Anti-government channels, such as Ulusal TV and Halk TV, provided live coverage.