Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

•Centre-Periphery Divide as a Key to Understand Electoral Choices in Istanbul

Journal Name:

  • European Journal of Economic and Political Studies

Publication Year:

  • 2009

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Based on a survey conducted in 2008 in two districts of Istanbul, this paper will argue that social cleavages are still a crucial factor in determining party alignment in Turkey. Despite the fact that society went through a rapid process of modernization and markedly improved its economic conditions in the last three decades, the great majority of voters’ choices appear to be mainly along two different cleavages: the religious and the regional one. In spite of the deep social and political transformation of Turkish society, these fractures among voters appear to be still determinant in the biggest urban area, which should represent the vanguard in the process of ‘Modernization.’
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-centre-periphery-divide-key-understand-electoral-choices-istanbul.pdf
  • 2
129-143
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Arman, A. (2008), ‘Tek erkek evlat olmanın psikolojisiyle büyüdüm’,
http://arama.hurriyet.com.tr/arsivnews.aspx?id=9298021 (accessed March 16,
2009).
Ben-Dor, G. (Ed.) (1975), Political Participation in Turkey Istanbul: Boğaziçi University.
Çaha, Ö. (ed.) (2008) Türkiye’de Seçmen Davranı ı ve Siyasi Partiler. stanbul: Orion.
Çarkoğlu, A. (2008) “Ideology or Economic Pragmatism?: Profiling Turkish Voters in
2007.” Turkish Studies 9.
Çarko lu, A. and Toprak, B. (2006) Türkiye’de Din, Toplum ve Siyaset. stanbul: TESEV.
Kalaycıoğlu, E. (1997) “The Logic of Contemporary Turkish Politics.” MERIA 1.
Kalaycıoğlu, E. (2005) Turkish Dynamics, Bridge Across Troubled Land. New York: Palgrave.
Kalaycıoğlu, E. (2008) “Attitudinal Orientation to Party Organizations in Turkey in the 2000s.”
Turkish Studies 9.
Lipset, S. M. (1963) Political Man: the Social Bases of Politics. New York: Anchor Books.
Mardin, . (1975) “Center-Periphery Relations: A Key to Turkish Politics,” In E.D. Akarlı
and
Murat, S. Ersöz, HY. ener, S. and Bayat, Y. (2006) Dünden Bugüne Sosyo-Ekonomik
Yönleriyle Üsküdar. stanbul: aret, Vol. 2.
Özcan, Y. Z. (2000) “Determinants of Political Behaviour in Istanbul, Turkey.” Party
Politics 6:505-518.
Sedat, M. (2006) Dünden Bugüne stanbul’un Nüfus ve Demografik Yapısı. stanbul: TO.
entürk, L. and Yazıcı, S. (1998) Diyanet slâm lmihali. Ankara: Diyanet leri Ba kanlı ı.
TÜ K (2009) Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi (ADNKS) Nüfus Sayımı Sonuçları
http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/adnksdagitimapp/adnks.zul (accessed March 16, 2009).
Yilmaz, I. (2002) ‘Secular Law and the Emergence of Unofficial Turkish Islamic Law’,
Middle East Journal, Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 113-131.
Yilmaz, I. (2005) ‘State, Law, Civil Society and Islam in Contemporary Turkey”, The
Muslim World, vol.55, 2005, pp. 385-411.
Yilmaz, I. (2009) ‘Muslim Democrats in Turkey and Egypt: Participatory Politics as a
Catalyst,’ Insight Turkey, Vol. 11, No.2, pp. 93-112.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com