Peculiarities of Turkish Revolutionary Ideology in the 1930s: TheÜlküVersion of Kemalism, 1933–1936

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes There is no consensus on the definition of Kemalism among social scientists. However, it can be argued that 'the set of ideas and ideals which together formed Kemalizm (Kemalism) or Atatürkçülük (Ataturkism) as it came to be called in the 1930s, evolved gradually… The basic principles of Kemalism were laid down in the party programme of 1931. They were: republicanism; secularism; nationalism; populism; statism; and revolutionism.' Eric J. Zürcher, Turkey, A Modern History (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 1997), p.189. For a detailed account of Turkish Revolutionary ideology see Şerif Mardin, 'Ideology and Religion in the Turkish Revolution', IJMES, Vol.2 (1971), pp.197–211; and Ergun Özbudun 'The Nature of the Kemalist Political Regime', Ali Kazancıgil and Ergun Özbudun (ed.), Atatürk: Founder of a Modern State (London: Hurst & Company, 1997), pp.79–102. In this article, movement, strand, representation, interpretation and variegation will also be used adjectivally to describe the different versions of Kemalism. Tekeli and İlkin also contended that Ülkü was issued by a specific political elite of the RPP to support the ideological pillars of the party to compete with other parallel attempts, namely the Kadro movement. See İlhan Tekeli and Selim İlkin, 'Türkiye'de Bir Aydın Hareketi: Kadro', Toplum ve Bilim, 24 (Winter, 1984), pp.35–67, p.40. This classification stems from Nazım İrem. See his 'Turkish Conservative Modernism: Birth of a Nationalist Quest for Cultural Renewal', International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol.34, No.1 (2002), pp.87–112. A group of the intellectual elite aspired to form the ideology of the revolution by founding a monthly journal, Kadro, in 1931. In a significantly short article, Şerif Mardin analysed the symbols used in the Ülkü journal in terms of content analysis. However, he was mainly concerned with the question whether content analysis would be an efficient tool in analysing the studies of the history of political thought. See, 'Siyasi Fikir Tarihi Çalışmalarında Muhteva Analizi', in Siyasal ve Sosyal Bilimler, Mümtaz'er Türköne and Tuncay Önder (ed.) (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1992), pp.9–24. While his study is not specifically on Ülkü, M. Asım Karaömerlioğlu has also studied the journal in terms of its approach to the issue of peasants and the peasant ideology. See his 'The People's Houses and the Cult of the Peasant in Turkey', Middle Eastern Studies, Vol.34, No.4 (1998), pp.67–91. For the general results of the world economic crisis see in particular Dietmar Rothermund, The Global Impact of the Great Depression (London: Routledge, 1996) and Charles P. Kindleberger, The World in Depression (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986). Kemal Karpat, Turkey's Politics: The Transition to a Multi-Party System (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1959), p.68. William Hale, 'Ideology and Economic Development in Turkey 1930–1945', Bulletin (British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies), Vol.7, No.2 (1980), p.101. Ibid., p.103. Joseph C. Grew, Turbulent Era: A Diplomatic Record of Forty Years, 1904–1945, Vol.II (London: Hammond, Hammond & Co. Ltd., 1953), p.869. Walter Weiker, Political Tutelage and Democracy in Turkey: The Free Party and its Aftermath (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973), p.5. Karpat, Turkey's Politics, p.65. Donald E. Webster, The Turkey of Atatürk (Philadelphia: The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1939), p.109. Fethi Okyar, in Osman Okyar and Mehmet Seyitdanlioğlu (eds), Fethi Okyar'ın Anıları: Atatürk, Okyar ve Çok Partili Türkiye, (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 1999), p.98. Karpat, Turkey's Politics, p.65. Tarık Z. Tunaya, Türkiyede Siyasi Partiler, 1859–1952 (Doğan Kardeş: İstanbul, 1952), p.622. Weiker, Political Tutelage, p.56 For the details of this tour see, Fethi Okyar in Cemal Kutay (ed.), Üç Devirde Bir Adam (İstanbul: Tercüman Yayınları, 1980), p.499; and (Feridun) Kandemir, Serbest Fırka Nasıl Kuruldu Nasıl Kapatıldı (İstanbul: Ekicigil Yayınları, 1955), p.90 Walter Weiker, Political Tutelage, p.112. For the success of the Free Party in charming the popular support see especially, Ahmet Ağaoğlu, Serbest Fırka Hatıraları (İstanbul: Baha Matbaası, 1969), Hilmi Uran, Hatıralarım (Ankara: Ayyıldız Matbaası, 1959), pp.224–31, Ahmet Hamdi Başar, Atatürk'le Üç Ay (İstanbul: Tan Matbaası, 1945), pp.30–54. Weiker, Political Tutelage, p.116. Kemal Karpat, Turkey's Politics, pp.66–7. Donald E. Webster, 'State Control of Social Change in Republican Turkey', American Sociological Review, Vol.4, No.2 (1939), pp.247–56, p.256. A group of dervishes of an outlawed religious order rebelled at Menemen near Izmir to protest against the anti-clerical policies of the RPP. During the rebellion, the rebels killed an army officer by the name of Kubilay. The rebellion's leaders were then executed by the government. Kemal Karpat, Turkey's Politics, p.278. Ibid., p.67. For a detailed account of the cultural transformation in Turkey in the 1930s, see in particular: Yılmaz Çolak, 'State and Nationalism in Turkey: The Making of Turkish Culture in the 1930s', Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, Vol.3, No.2 (2003). Kılıç Ali, Atatürk'ün Hususiyetleri (İstanbul: Sel Yayınları, 1955), p.58. Metin Heper, 'The Ottoman Legacy and Turkish Politics', Journal of International Affairs, Vol.54, No.1 (2000), p.64. For more details on the Turkish Hearths, see in particular: Füsun Üstel, İmparatorluktan Ulus-Devlete Türk Milliyetçiliği: Türk Ocakları, 1912–1931 (İstanbul: İletişim, 1997); Yusuf Bayraktutan, Türk Fikir Tarihinde Modernleşme, Milliyetçilik ve Türk Ocakları (Ankara: Kültür Bak. Yay., 1996). Mehmet Saffet, 'Kültür İnklabımız', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.5 (1933), p.351. Cited in Hasan Rıza Soyak, Atatürk'ten Hatıralar (İstanbul: Yapı ve Kredi Bankası Yayınları, 1973), pp.466–7. Nurettin Güz, Tek Parti İdeolojisinin Yayın Organları: Halkevleri Dergileri (Ankara: Bilge Yapım, 1995), p.14. Recep (Peker), 'Halkevleri Açılma Nutku', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.1 (1933), p.6. As a representative example of how the terms halk terbiyesi was conceived among the elite circle, see Hamit Zübeyir (Koşay), 'Halk Terbiyesi Vasıtaları', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.2 (1933), pp.152–9. Kemal H. Karpat, 'The People's Houses in Turkey, Establishment and Growth', The Middle East Journal, Vol.17, 1963, p.59. Feridun Aksın (ed.), Cumhuriyetin 75 Yılı 1923–1953, Vol.1 (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1999), p.62. Walter F. Weiker, Political Tutelage and Democracy in Turkey (Leiden: E. J. Brill: 1973), p.5. Ahmet Ağaoğlu, 'Vicdan Azabı Duymayanlara', Son Posta, 12 Jan. 1931. For the first time, the word 'Kemalism' began to be used in certain intellectual circles in 1930. Shortly after the 'Menemen' incident, an intellectual figure wrote an article stating that the party should accept Kemalism as its principal ideology as with fascism in Italy and communism in Russia. See, Ali Naci (Karacan), 'Rusya'da Nasıl Komünizm İtalya'da Nasıl Faşizm Varsa Bizde de Kemalizm Olmalıdır', İnkılap, (2 Dec. 1930). Nazım İrem, 'Kemalist Modernizm ve Türk Gelenekçi-Muhafazakarlığının Kökenleri', Toplum ve Bilim, Vol. 74 (1997), p.101. Nazım İrem, 'Turkish Conservative Modernism, p.88. Ibid, p.89. Ibid, pp.94–8. Ahmet Ağaoğlu, Devlet ve Fert (İstanbul: Sanayiinefise Matbaası, 1933), pp.56–7. Several leading intellectuals of the time, namely Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu, Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, Vedat Nedim Tör, Burhan Asaf Belge and İsmail Hüsrev Tökin decided to publish a journal that would formulate and develop the ideology of the revolution. Although Yakup Kadri came from a considerably different ideological background from the revolutionary Marxist backgrounds of the other members, he was in a central position for the movement in terms of establishing the link between the Kadro and Çankaya. From the outset, Yakup Kadri asked Atatürk to permit them to initiate a journal project that would attempt to form and disseminate the ideology of the Turkish Revolution. Atatürk did not hesitate to give them the permission to publish a journal for revolutionary purposes. In January 1932, they introduced the journal Kadro to the Turkish public. From then on, the authors of Kadro began to be identified as Kadrocus especially by their adversaries. For a detailed account of Kadro, see Temuçin Faik Ertan, Kadrocular ve Kadro Hareketi (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yay., 1994); Yakup Kadri, Zoraki Diplomat (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1998); Vedat Nedim Tör, Yıllar Böyle Geçti (İstanbul: Milliyet Yayınları, 1976); Doğan Avcıoğlu, Türkiye'nin Düzeni (Ankara: Bilgi Yayınları, 1968); Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, İnkılap ve Kadro (Ankara: Bilgi Yayınları, 1968); Çetin Yetkin, Tek Parti Yönetimi (İstanbul: Altın Kitaplar Yayınları, 1983). Kadro, Vol.1, No.1 (II. Kanun, 1932), p.3. Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, Atatürkçülüğün Ekonomik ve Sosyal Yönü Semineri (İstanbul: İstanbul İktisadi ve Ticari İlimler Akademisi, 1973), p.108. Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu, Atatürkçülüğün Ekonomik ve Sosyal Yönü Semineri (İstanbul: İstanbul İktisadi ve Ticari İlimler Akademisi, 1973), p.82. Ibid. Çetin Yetkin, Tek Parti Yönetimi, p.121. For the memories of Yakup Kadri on these matters, see in particular his Zoraki Diplomat (note 47). For the critiques by Ahmet Ağaoğlu see especially his Devlet ve Fert (İstanbul, 1933). It is important to note that almost all the authors of Kadro were engaged in communist activities in earlier phases of their lives. Because of that they were looked upon with suspicion from the beginning of their journalist life. In fact, they could not persuade the RPP elites that they had no longer any connection with communism and communistic activities. Temuçin Faik Ertan, Kadrocular ve Kadro Hareketi, p.67. Cited in William Hale, 'Ideology and Economic, pp.106–7. For this account see Temuçin Faik Ertan, Kadrocular, pp.65–73; Doğan Avcıoğlu, Türkiye'nin Düzeni; Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, İnkılap ve Kadro. Yakup Kadri meant the İnkılap Ders Notları by Recep Peker. Atatürkçülüğün Ekonomik ve Sosyal Yönü Semineri, p.83. The Deputy of Kütahya, Recep Peker had been appointed to the RPP's Secretary-General post as part of the 1931 reorganization of the party. His organizational skills and dynamic qualities brought him favour with Mustafa Kemal. As Weiker puts it, 'since assuming his post he had indeed been a leader in developing and interpreting Kemalist ideology, especially the doctrines of étatism and revolutionism, and he had acquired a reputation as an efficient, energetic, and uncompromising demander of rapid results in all fields of development. It is likely that many of the political education and indoctrination measures were originated by Peker.' Weiker, Political Tutelage, p.212. Deputy for Denizli between 1923–1938. He was also General Director of the People's Houses. Necip Ali was the famous Public Prosecutor (müddeiumumi) of the Independence Courts (İstiklal Mahkemeleri). He was known for his stern and radical attitude towards opposition. At the same time, he prepared the formal charges against the leaders of the Progressive Republican Party (Terakkiperver Cumhuriyet Fırkası) with the accusation that they instigated the sequence of events that finally culminated in the famous Izmir assassination (İzmir Suikastı). See Türk Parlamento Tarihi, TBMM-II. Dönem 1923–1927, Vol. II (Ankara: TBMM Vakfı Yayınları, 1996), p.585. The literal and figurative meaning of the word Ülkü is 'ideal' in English. Atatürk named the journal Ülkü. In the first issue of the journal, Atatürk sent his congratulations stating, 'I am expecting from Ülkü auspicious products in disseminating our genuine ideal (öz ülkümüzü).' It should be noted that Atatürk's adopted daughter's name was also Ülkü. Hasan Rıza Soyak, Atatürk'ten Hatıralar (İstanbul: Yapı ve Kredi Bankası Yayınları, 1973), pp.487–92. For the details of this merger see especially Hilmi Uran, Hatıralarım (Ankara: Ayyıldız Matbaası, 1959), pp.295–6. 'Ülkü' nün Yazı Bölümleri', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), pp.76–9. Recep (Peker), 'Ülkü Niçin Çıkıyor', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.1 (1933), pp.1–2. 'Ülkü İki Yaşına Girerken Okuyanlar ve Yazanlarla Konuşma', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), pp.74–5. Niyazi Berkes, in Ruşen Sezer (ed.), Unutulan Yıllar (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1997), pp.80–5. Ibid., p.74. Nusret Kemal, 'İnkılap İdeolojisinde Halkçılık', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), p.44. See Vedat Nedim Tör, Yıllar Böyle Geçti. For Paul Dumont, populism 'was a Turkish version of the solidarist ideas outlined by the French radical politician Léon Bourgeois and the sociologist Emile Durkheim'. 'The origins of Kemalist Ideology', in Ataturk and the Modernization of Turkey (Boulder: Westview Press, 1984), p.31. Solidarist line of thinking can be traced back to the Young Turk era populism and Gökalpian sociology. With the 1908 Revolution, positivist thinking developed as a reaction to scholastic philosophy during the second half of the nineteenth century brought about 'sociologism' (sosyolojizm), in other words, a set of viewpoints that based social philosophy on a trajectory of 'ilm-i içtima' (social sciences), to the Turkish lands. Afterwards, sociologism could appropriate to itself the nationalist objectives of the era. Zafer Toprak argues that solidarism, as a sub-category of sociologism, was likely to be the dominant ideology shortly after 1908 in Turkey. The prominent figures that carried solidarism and 'its state philosophy, populism', to the country were the Unionists like Ziya Gökalp, Tekin Alp, Necmettin Sadak and Yusuf Kemal. There were, for Toprak, several facets of populism in the Constitutional period: political, economic and social. The last, social populism or social solidarism, is important for the aims of this study. It subsequently spawned the germs of the Republican solidarist idea revealed itself in the Ülkü circle. Toprak defines social solidarism as the idea undertaking solidarity and harmony of interests as opposed to class struggle and, in doing so, it accepts cooperation between occupational groups instead of conflicting social classes. See, Zafer Toprak, 'II. Meşrutiyet'te Solidarist Düşünce: Halkçılık', Toplum ve Bilim (Spring, 1977), pp.92–101. Nusret Kemal, 'Bir Köycülük Projesi Tecrübesi', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.8 (1933), p.119. Ahmet Nesimi, 'İnanç ve Us', Ülkü, Vol.4, No.24 (1935), p.405. Ali Sami, 'Güzel Sanatları İnkılaba Nasıl Maledebiliriz', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.17 (1934), p.361. Kristin A. Sheradin, 'Reforming the Republic: Solidarism and the Making of the French Welfare System, 1871–1914' (Ph.D. thesis, University of Rochester, 2000), p.6. Karen Offen, 'Depopulation, Nationalism, and Feminism in Fin-de-Siècle France', The American Historical Review, Vol.89, No.3. (1984), p.664. Ibid. J.E.S. Hayward, 'The Official Social Philosophy of the French Third Republic: Léon Bourgeois and Solidarism', International Review of Social History, Vol.VI (1961), p.20. Léon Bourgeois, Solidarité, 3rd edn (Paris: Librairie Armand Colin, 1902), p.116. Léon Bourgeois thought that the idea of solidarity was developed to reinforce the unfinished project of French Revolutionary ideology. The famous three elements of the motto of the Revolution – equality, freedom and fraternity – were strengthened by the fourth – solidarité. He maintained that alongside 'the declaration of rights' of the Revolution, 'the declaration of duties' should now added. See, Léon Bourgeois and Alfred Croiset (eds.), Essai d'une Philosophie de la Solidarité, Conférences et Discussions (Paris: Félix Alcan, Éditeur, 1907), p.210. For endorsement of the solidarist ideas of duty and debt see in particular: Necip Ali (Küçüka), '19 Şubat', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.1 (1933), pp.4–5; Necip Ali, 'Halkevleri Yıldönümü Nutku', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), pp.5–15; 'Recep Peker'in Yeni Halkevlerini Açma Nutku', Ülkü, Vol.7, No.37 (1936), pp.1–5; Recep Peker, 'Recep Peker'in Partililerle Bir Konuşması', Ülkü, Vol.7, No.39 (1936), pp.161–2; Mehmet Saffet, 'Devlet ve Vatandaş' Ülkü, Vol.2, No.3, (1934) pp.181–4 ; Ahmet Nesimi, 'Fert ve Cemiyet', Vol.1, No.4 (1933), pp.264–7; Ahmet Nesimi, 'Fertçilik ve Cemiyetçilik', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.7 (1933), pp.1–7; Ahmed Nesimi, 'Mesuliyetin Hakiki Telakkileri', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.19 (1934), pp.3–8. In Ülkü, there are several references to the solidarist thinkers, namely Auguste Comte, Alfred Fouillée, Léon Bourgeois, Charles Gide, and Emile Durkheim, on various occasions. Although there is only one direct reference to the name, Léon Bourgeois (see Ahmet Nesimi, 'Islahatçı İçtimaiyat Bakımından Sosyalizm', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.16 (1934), p.241), the Ülkü authors, in general, were well aware of his theories. In one of the High School books, Sosyolojinin Unsurları translated from the French by an Ülkü author, Kazım Nami Duru, some parts of the famous work of Léon Bourgeois, Solidarité, were also translated under the heading, İnsan Cemiyete Borçlu Olarak Doğar. In this same book, translations of several studies by other solidarist philosophers were included. See, Kazım Nami Duru (tr. and ed.), Sosyolojinin Unsurları: Seçilmiş ve Sıralanmış Metinler, Lise Felsefe Dersleri Yardımcı Kitapları, No.11 (İstanbul: Devlet Basımevi, 1936). Geoffrey Walford and W.S.F. Pickering (eds.), Durkheim and Moral Education (London: Routledge, 1998), pp.6–7. Karen Offen, 'Depopulation, Nationalism, and Feminism', p.665. Linda L. Clark, 'Social Darwinism in France', The Journal of Modern History, Vol.58, No.1 (March, 1981), D1025–D1044 (On Demand Supplement), D1035. Joseph Charmont, 'Recent Phases of French Legal Philosophy', in Modern French Legal Philosophy (Modern Legal Philosophy Series, Vol.VII, Boston, 1916), pp.85–6. Léon Bourgeois, Solidarité, p.36 Joseph Charmont, 'Recent Phases of French Legal Philosophy', p.87. Alfred Fouillée, 'Hegemony of Science and Philosophy', International Journal of Ethics, Vol.6, No.2, (1896), p.150. Célestin Bouglé, cited in John A. Scott, Republican Ideas and the Liberal Tradition in France 1870–1914 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1951), 178. Nusret Kemal, 'Köycülük Programına Giriş', Ülkü, Vol.5, No.26 (1935), p.139. Necip Ali, 'İnkılap ve Türk Kanunu Medenisi', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.9 (1933), p.85. Ibid. Necmeddin Sadık, 'Layik Ne Demek', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.11 (1933), p.374. Ibid., p.373. Mehmet Saffet, 'Milliyetçiliğin Felsefi Esasları', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.12 (1934). Recep Peker, 'Uluslaşma-Devletleşme', Ülkü, Vol.7, No.40 (1936), p.III. Hamit Zübeyr, 'Halk Terbiyesi Vasıtaları', Vol.1, No.2 (1933), p.153. A. Rıza 'Akça Köy', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.7 (1933), p.65. Mehmet Saffet, 'Köycülük Nedir', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.6 (1933), p.424. See especially, Selim Sırrı, 'İtalya'da Halk ve Gençlik Teşkilatı', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.3 (1933), pp.241–3; R.Ş, 'Garp Memleketlerinde Halk Terbiyesi', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.4 (1933), pp.295–306, A.B., 'Hitler ve Fırkası', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.2 (1933), pp.160–5. Ahmed Nesimi, 'Kip ve Devrim', Ülkü, Vol.5, Is.29 (1935), pp.330–3. See for instance Hilmi A. Halik, 'Kışla ve Köy Terbiyesi' in Ülkü, Vol.1, No.3 (1933). Hilmi, 'Halk Neşriyatının Ehemmiyeti', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.7 (1933), 70–9, 70. Necip Ali, 'İnkılap ve Türk Kanunu Medenisi', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.9 (1933), 178–185, 178. Recep Peker, İnkılap Tarihi Ders Notları (Ankara, Ulus Basımevi, 1936), p.8. Nusret Köymen, 'Köy Seferberliğine Doğru', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.5 (1933), p.356. Mehmet Saffet, 'İnklap Terbiyesi' Ülkü, Vol.2, No.8 (1933), p.107. Ibid. Nusret Kemal, 'İnkılap İdeolojisinde Halkçılık', p.42. Necip Ali (Küçüka), 'Halkevleri Yıldönümü Nutku', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), p.5. Nusret Kemal, 'Halkçılık', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.3 (1933), p.190. Şakir Hazım Gökmen, 'Kanadlarımızın Büyük Utkusu', Ülkü, Vol.6, No.32 (1935), p.122. Necip Ali, 'Halkevleri Yıldönümünde Necip Ali Bey'in Nutku', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.2 (1933), p.104. Nafi Atuf, 'Lozan ve Milli Kültür', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.18, (1934), p.408. Hamit Zübeyr, 'Halk Terbiyesi Vasıtaları', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.2 (1933), p.152. Nusret Köymen, 'Köy Misyonerliği', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.7 (1933), p.150. Mehmet Saffet, 'Kültür İnklabımız', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.5, (1933), p.351. Nusret Kemal, 'Bizim Planımız', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), p.17. Kamuran Bozkır, 'Halkevleri', Ülkü, Vol.7, No.37 (1936), p.75. Nusret Kemal, 'Köycülük Programına Giriş', Ülkü, Vol.5, No.26 (1935), p.141. Nusret Köymen, 'Kemalizm İnkılabının Vol.7, (1936), Ülkü, Vol.6, (1936), Kazım Nami Duru, Bir Ülkü, Vol.6, (1936), C. Ülkü, Vol.6, No.32 (1935), Nusret Köymen, Ülkü, Vol.7, (1936), Ibid. Nusret Köymen, Ülkü, Vol.7, 1936), Nusret Köymen, 'Köycülük Ülkü, Vol.6, (1936), Recep Peker'in Ülkü, Vol.4, (1934), F. Ülkü, Vol.6, (1936), 'Köy ve Ülkü, Vol.6, (1936), Ülkü, Vol.4, (1935), Ibid. Mehmet Saffet, 'Köycülük Nedir', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.6 (1933), Ibid. Mehmet Saffet, 'İnkılap Terbiyesi', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.8 (1933), Nusret Kemal, 'Bir Köycülük Projesi Tecrübesi', Ülkü, Vol.2, No.8 (1933), L. The of Democracy 1952), Nusret Kemal, 'Bizim Planımız', Ülkü, Vol.3, No.13 (1934), p.17. Hamit Zübeyr, 'Halk Terbiyesi Vasıtaları', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.2 (1933), Yeni Peker'in Ülkü, Vol.5, (1935), Ülkü, Vol.1, No.3 (1933), Recep (Peker), 'Ülkü Niçin Çıkıyor', Ülkü, Vol.1, No.1 (1933), Nasıl by Kemal (Ankara, Nusret Kemal, 'Halk Ülkü, Vol.1, No.1 (1933), See in particular: Recep Peker, Ülkü, Vol.1, No.3 (1933),