How much of cruel dictator was he?

He didn't ban it dude where do you even get that from?

wtf are you talking about? People liked him, he modernize a shithole giving jobs, healthcare and free education.

Sorry! Iran actually banned the hijab and not Turkey. But he did close down all the Islamic schools and banned the hijab from the government sector.

Hijab is also an arab/persian thing, turkish women when they wear something like it should do it like pic related. The hijab is also a quite new thing that erdogan brought before him most women did it like the pic I sent especially in the anatolian villages where people are more conservative.

Instead he brought secular schools and secular institutions which were open to everyone.
The government afterall should represent everyone and not only the muslims and I say this as a muslim.

He banned the fez, as ridiculous as that sounds.

The hijab is not Persian. It's Arabic. Turks, before Ataturk's reforms, were the hijab like this. That is only a modern version.

Reza Shah of Iran also banned the Persian hat. well, in Iran it is actually called the ottoman hat.

Just like the sultan banned turbans during the tanzimat period and replaced it with the north african fez.

Not in anatolia, how do you think people like that would work at a farm and the women worked at the farm too. Also most of anatolia was still rural so a large part of the female population dressed like I posted..

He also gave the right for women to vote before Netherlands, Belgium, USA and other coutries did.

What this man achieved is a masterpiece in the modern history. He fought foreign enemies that wanted to destroy his nation, yet accepted that that the very same enemy - western world - was the future, so he westernized the country, so that it could countinue to exist and have some desent importance.
Meanwhile he fought the traitors, the religious pricks and those village Barons with 8+ wifes and 30+ children, who didn't want to change the system. He fought the Imams that used religion to push people into wars they didn't want to be part of.

Just read more about his work, you will be amazed. He also wrote a geometrical book, introduced the latin alphabet, created an industrial country (as much as possible).

In turkish its called a kalpak its a caucasian thing from the circassians and laz.

Azan in Turkish, banning of hijab in public institutions, severe clampdown on jamaats. Also, repression of communists is a valid critique, no matter if everyone did it or not.

Protip: This is obviously viewed through the lense of traditionalists, communists and ethnic minorities, or people who were oppressed. Viewing these issues through the lense of the oppressor will obviously make all of this ok.

That is a picture of an Anatolian female. I actually have seen in a documentary, about fall of the Ottoman empire, the city females would dress in all black hijab. It's also the same in Iran. Look up some vintage photos.

And don't forget that before him only 2% of the population was literate after him it was 20%.

What's so bad about him making the ezan or the kuran in turkish, it would only allow the people to actually understand their religion instead of following for the sake of it.
Also the cemaats were ofcourse favouring the old system he had to close them down to stop a counter revolution which could bring back the monarchy.
Generally he was also pretty lenient to minorities as long as they didn't rebel.

Maybe in the cities they were more strict so I'll give you that but the villages were more practical and most of anatolia was still very rural so a large part of the population was like this.

I mean, I wouldnt call turkifying them and destroying their original culture and languages particularly lenient, but whatever.

user there still are many minorities in turkey you only know about the kurds because they keep causing trouble. There are still many circassians and laz who speak their own language for example, the laz are even known to be one of the most patriotic people in turkey.

You are right. But the younger generation of them cant speak their own languages. Mostly its old and rural people.

Source: Ive known a ton of laz, circassian and kurdish people growing up. (Lots of black sea and kurds where i live)

Atatürk? You must say GHAZI MUSTAFA KEMAL ATATÜRK.

And boy, he is one of the greatest leaders of the 20.th century. Through his service in the Ottoman army he understood two things :
-Multiculturalism cant work. It will allways lead to separatism, to hate, and to inner conflicts. To unite all, you need ONE language, one culture, one identity, one leader.
-The Europeans are culturally superior to the people of the Middle East. If the people of the Middle East want to defend themself against European imperialism, and become as strong as them, they need to leave the fundemental Islamism, become realists, and put sience and logic higher than religion.

>-The Europeans are culturally superior to the people of the Middle East. If the people of the Middle East want to defend themself against European imperialism, and become as strong as them, they need to leave the fundemental Islamism, become realists, and put sience and logic higher than religion.
cuck

Pretty sure the fact that they resisted is the modern reason for Turks hating Kurds.

As he came to power after the Turkish War of Independence, Turkey had no infrastructure, no railways, no fabrics, 94% of the population could not read or write, and they never went to school (They had no school to visit), the population had no idea of its own history, of the world, of science, and the only thing they knew was religion.

With him in power, the Arabic alphabet, Sharia law, feudalism, aristocracy and the monarchy was abolished.
The Turkish civil code was written, a school system was founded, landlords had to give their land to the villagers, Islamic Sufi orders were closed, religious leaders had no political , or any sort of power anymore. Women rights were accepted, women became the rights to vote, to work, polygamy, forced marriage was abolished, it was banned to marry children. Every citizen of the state, no matter which ethnic or religious origin he/she had, became equal, and had the same rights. In his book "Medeni Bilgiler", Ghazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk wrote, that he rejects Communism and Fascism. "The Republic needs people who can think and feel freely...", and according to him, Communism and Fascism were against this kind of freedom.

He was not a real democrat, but no a dictator either. He could not be real democratic, because the people were to ignorant, and he knew, with a pure democracy the Islamist would win, and the War of Independence would be for nothing. But he never killed people for speaking against him, or ordered to arrest people who insulted him.

Hijab, or any sort of cover for females was never banned.

This is my retarded opinion saying this but he was the Baathist of his time, at least the Hafez of his time. Or better yet, he was the Nasser/Gaddafi of his time.

it's a fake quote
t. googled it

You are exaggerating it a bit. Turkey had extensive railway system. And Istanbul looked fairly modern and cosmopolitan during the rule of the young Turks. But you are right. He did advance turkey greatly.Nobody is doubting his great reforms. ut the question is that how willing were Turks for the reforms, and how much of it was forcefully implemented.

I feel disgusted that you compared Ataturk to Arab tinpot dictators. He was not corrupt. He developed a western democratic culture. He had no personal fortune. He only concentrated on developing his country. He was a military genius. Brave. Let's look at Sadam Hussien. He killed all the democratic intellectuals. There was a brain drain in Iraq under his rule. Invaded Iran when Iran had not military. Still couldn't conquer an inch of Iran's soli despite having the support of American and the Soviet Union. Never finished school and had no military training. Wasted the countries oil money on his military and couldn't even achieve anything with it. Never ever compare Ataturk to any Baathist. The only question is that how much of his reforms were forced down on the Turks. And how willing were the Turks to the change?

He was quite literally the opposite, in that he told the people to stop being fucking idiots and enter the modern age

He was literally a fascist

The Ottoman Empire has already entered the modern age under the Young Turks, Ataturk merelu finnished what they had started. Materialist and positivist philosophy has been quite popular in Turkey long before he came to power, which is why his reforms didn’t meet strong opposition among the population.

It was banned in government institutions until very recently

I love how butthurt some muslims are over Atatürk. Just look at this site: atajew.com

Are you done ranting there?

no! I can't believe how dumb some people on his are.

>being this triggered
I didn't even mention Saddam when it came to comparing Ataturk but some Kemalists in Turkey compare the Assad regime to Ataturk in the sense that the regime generally promotes a secular society despite being heavily aligned with the Iranians, Hezbollah, etc. Not my words. Also not all Baathists are Saddam. Hence why I brought up Hafez Al Assad. He was the Gaddafi of his time, deal with it faggot. Gaddafi was not your average tinpot dictator of the Middle East. At least Libya under Gaddafi had a decent standard of living and the livelihoods of Libyans went up despite it being a dictatorship. Gaddafi and Ataturk share some common similarities, in the sense that they brought their respective countries into a modernized society.

Hijab is not even an arab or persian ... it's wahhabist, from arabian peninsula. I can redpill you about hijab if you want ... like the only truth you need to know.

>hijab is Wahhabist

This is your brain on liberal Islam

Even Islamists in Turkey worship Ataturk

The only too videos of The Great War channel were the comments are disabled is the video n the Amernian Genocide and the one about Ataturk.
Really makes you think.

>I just can't understand how the females accepted to go out without hijab suddenly?

So, was he a muslim or not?

He was literally a jihadist

>He was literally a fascist

And we miss him. I get triggered whenever people call erdogan a islamo-fascist when he is nothing but a populist traitor.

Nobody knows for sure but the thing is that his mother sent him to a religious school in order to beocme an imam while his father wanted him to become a soldier. When his father passed away and his mother remarried he went to the military academy and became a soldier. Also you can see him praying in old photos but that could also be for propaganda purposes. Anyway nobody knows for certain, there are also some quotes from him that sounds fedora but then again nobody is sure he even said that because turkish atheists are trying to hijack Ataturk a little bit.

>He was literally a fascist

Define "Fascist".
Nothing what he did had to do with fascism. In his book "Medeni Bilgiler" he warns the youth about political and religious fascism.

"Turkey had extensive railway system."
You call this extensive? During Atatürks regime nearly every region got connected by the railways system.

For you to compare.

Atatürk delivered some speeches endorsing Islam during the first years of his government. After he settled down his power, however, he started giving no fucks:

>"It is no good for modern, progressive state. God's revelation! There is no God! These are only the chains by which the priests and bad rulers bound the people down. A ruler who needs religion is a weaklings. No weaklings should rule!"

>"Even before accepting the religion of the Arabs, the Turks were a great nation. After accepting the religion of the Arabs, this religion, didn't effect to combine the Arabs, the Persians and Egyptians with the Turks to constitute a nation. (This religion) rather, loosened the national nexus of Turkish nation, got national excitement numb. This was very natural. Because the purpose of the religion founded by Muhammad, over all nations, was to drag to an including Arab national politics."

Compare it to other middle eastern countries and eastern European. It was extensive.

I am ex Muslim, and my own mother would rather kill herself then remove her hijab.

Source for this?

Atatürk's biography by Andrew Mango.

Oh, and there's also this one, transcribed by a British army officer and included in another of his biographies:

>"Islam, this absurd theology of a immoral Bedouin, is a rotting corpse which poisons our lives."

Honestly I wouldn't trust foreigners saying stuff like this. Might be used to undermine Ataturk, I mean everybody knows that the turkish people is religious so making their hero look like an atheist might be a thing.

Fair enough, but this is only a particular quote. There are other anti-Islam/religion speeches said by Atatürk which are well documented.

>He was literally a fascist
Cool.

Such as?
I mean I know that he said that reason and science has to become important but that doesn't mean that he was against islam.

Such as the first two quotes posted, which were recorded by Turks themselves. A single Google search will give you more (first hand) sources. Like I said, once he was powerful enough, Atatürk stopped trying to please the religious masses.

The first quote seems to be only a thing in a french book which gets quoted by others.
If it was recorded by other turks the quote would have had a turkish source.

Like I said, the quotes are part of Mango's Atatürk biography, which is mostly based on Turkish documents (and I can attest it since I own the book). You can argue, of course, that these declarations were sensationalist fabrications of Turkish journalists, but the fact is, they were reported, and more than once.

Sure name a few of these turkish sources and I'll look them up.

Ataturk was very knowledgeable about Islam. He banned the Hijab from government and education institutions. He also banned religious schools. Don't to you thinks a person who hates Islam would have done these things. I know most Turks know basically nothing about Islam. But the Quran is very clear about the role of hijab in society. Why are you even surprised that he said things against Islam?

There are photos of him praying and his funeral was in Islamic way if I'm not wrong, maybe he was a self-hating muslim

You can see the quotes and the sources he used on the book itself. Here's a link for download: gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=CFE54C860528EB02B26B7FA49E90747E

Understanding that a secular government is better and more stable doesn't mean you hate islam.
He wanted religion to be a personal matter that's all, also if you look at turkish history you see that when religious leaders got enough power in the government that they would fight against reforms to keep their own power.
Hell it was even the same in europe with the catholic church.

Name me one western Christian country that has banned Christian schools, and the cross form government institution. Ataturk went further then westerners.

It was a PR stunt. Personally, he probably hated Islam.

Ever heard of the obscure country named france?
They have a law that forbids religious symbols from public buildings like schools.

Even they did not ban Christian schools.

You still have muslim foundations and schools in turkey though.
Fetullah Gulen is one of the big names behind such institutions and if you followed turkish news lately you'll see that he has a fucking cult of brainwashed people which have high positions everywhere in turkey, Ataturk wanted to limit things like this.

You compare France to Turkey. French secularism is based on Voltaire. He hated Christianity. Why would it be a stretch that Ataturk also hated Islam? Gulan's school did not exist during atutrks time, and yes there were underground Islamic schools, but it was banned.

If he hated islam he could have supressed it harder like the communists did in russia.

>But the Quran is very clear about the role of hijab in society.

No it isn’t

He didn't abolish sheik-ul Islam tho, he turned it into ministry of religion

you're thinking of Reza Shah

I wish...He should have did the same like Lenin or Stalin. Wipe does religious fundamentalists from the face of the earth.

>Compare it to other middle eastern
The Ottoman Empire was the Middle East. All other Middle Eastern countries who were not controlled by the Ottomans were controlled by the Europeans.

The Ottomans created an empire of sword and fire, just like all Turks before. They were good fighters, but bad rulers. Their leadership brought the Middle East nothing.

(Compare the Middle East under the Ottomans, to the Middle East under the Seljuqs/Abbasids)

He was too good for the t*rks.

Women in the US got the right to vote in 1920, although some Western states allowed women to vote as early as 1869. Ataturk wasn't president until 1923

He was pretty much the Turkish reincarnation of Napoleon (there are some surprising parallels between them), except this time around he decided to focus on his own country, instead of conquering others and declaring himself the new Khan or something.

Probably full tyrant, but I don't mind at all. Secularism is more important than democracy.

>Secularism is more important than democracy.

Democratization has a larger positive effect on economic growth and human development than secularization

given the amount of people he killed, the amount of time in which he did, and what means were available to him, he was a worse genocidal maniac than Hitler

Islam is a preposterous theology of an immoral Bedoin. It is a rotting corpse that poisons the world. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

Nice made up quote