Birilerine ne oluyor acaba? Sıkıntı nedir? Özgürlük… Hangi özgürlükten bahsediyorsun. O zaman tutuklanınca da şikayet etme. Özgürlük yoksa dışarda, farkı yok içerinin demek ki. Niye şikayet ediyorsun, demek ki var dışarda özgürlük. Demek ki dışarda bir özgürlük var, hem de öyle bir özgürlük ki “Ben bu memleketi bölmek istiyorum, özgürlük özerklik yetmez bilmemne-istan yapmak istiyorum” diyecek kadar. İnkar edemezsin. Tek inkar ettiğin şey, var olan özgürlükleri söylemeyi, kabul etmeyi inkar ediyorsun. Yaşadığın özgürlüğün varlığını söylemeye özgürlüğün yok çünkü kafan ipotekli, kalbin, düşüncen ipotekli. Onu söylemeye özgür değilsin.
Var olan sonuna kadar yaşadığın özgürlükleri, “var” diyecek özgürlüğün yok. Orada tutsaksın. Seni tutsak yapan, sana sanal, özgürlük yok dedirten o güçle de mücadele ediyoruz. Seni de, seni konuşturanı da yok ederek, seni de, senin yapını da, bölücüler ve uzantılarını da özgürleştirmeye çalışıyoruz. Yaptığımız iş bu. Çok derin, çok kapsamlı bir iş. Burası Edirne, orası Hakkari, orası Hatay, Sinop. Misak-ı Milli bunun adı.
İdris Naim Şahin
Recall a unique incident in 2011, when the Turkish Minister of the Interior Idris Naim Sahin made a speech worthy of a Chestertonian “philosophical policeman.” He claimed that the Turkish police were imprisoning thousands of pro-Kurdish BDP members without evidence and without trial, in order to convince them that they were indeed free prior to their imprisonment. In Sahin’s own words:
“Freedom … What freedom are you talking about when you complain about being imprisoned? If there’s no freedom outside the prison, then inside is no different. When you complain about being imprisoned, it means that there’s freedom outside. Outside, there’s even the freedom to say “I want to divide this country, freedom and autonomy does not suffice, I want to rebel” or whatever. You can’t deny this. The only thing you deny is the reality of freedom. You don’t accept it, so you deny yourself the freedom to speak about the freedom you enjoy, because your head, your heart, your thoughts are mortgaged … You don’t have the freedom to say that the freedoms you enjoy really exist. By destroying you, as well as those who make you talk like this, we are trying to make you free, to free you from the separatists and their extensions. This is what we are doing. It is a very deep, very sophisticated job.” [I owe this reference to Işık Barış Fidaner, Istanbul.]
The madness of this argument is indicative of the “mad” presuppositions of the legal order of power. Its first premise is a simple one: since you claim there is no freedom in our society, you cannot protest when you are deprived of your freedom, since you cannot be deprived of what you do not have. More interesting is the second premise: since the existing legal order is the order of freedom, those who rebel against it are effectively enslaved, unable to accept their freedom—they deprive themselves of the basic freedom to accept the social space of freedom. So, when police arrest you and “destroy” you, they are effectively making you free, freeing you from your self-imposed enslavement. Arresting suspected rebels and torturing them thus becomes “a very deep, very sophisticated job” endowed with metaphysical dignity.
Although this line of reasoning may appear to be based on a rather primitive sophism, it nonetheless contains a grain of truth. There is indeed no freedom outside the social order that, by limiting freedom, creates the space for it. But this grain of truth in fact provides the best argument against it: precisely because the institutional limit to our freedom is the very form of our freedom, it matters a great deal how this limit is structured, what concrete form it takes. The trick of those in power—exemplified by the Turkish philosophical policeman— is to present their form of the limit as the form of freedom as such, so that any struggle against them becomes struggle against society as such.
Slavoj Žižek 2012 The Year Of Dreaming Dangerously