> Then we end up with corruption. The party members milked us so much, yet the milk hasn’t run out yet. This is how rich Turkey is. So rich, with all the stealing, it’s still standing.
This statement is casually thrown around generally by those who find themselves belonging to the other side (politically speaking). But where is the evidence?
I’ve visited verifiably — as in the names of the leaders appear in all those leaks over the years — corrupt countries. The corruption shows in the disparities in societies. For example, access to tap water, heating, good roads, and other infrastructural types. For example, accessibility of education. For example, the purchasing power of the averaging citizen as measured in concrete terms (eg housing, food, etc) not in dollars.
In the corrupt countries the infrastructure is generally terrible. The citizens can barely afford food. There are no universities. In turkey it seems like non of this holds.
So, how is Erdogan corrupt? Is it just because OP is in dogmatic opposition to his ideals? IIRC the genesis of Erdogans political career is his management of Istanbul as mayor to improve the quality of life of all of its citizens. I believe that counts for something in a sense that he deserves the benefit of the doubt and the burden is on the accusers to show concrete evidence of corruption. Something like how Kushner received billions from the Saudis after the end of Trumps term.
Yeah I agree that is incorrect but I disagree to that reading.
Just use logic. If a nation is compromised by systemic corruption what do you think will happen? I believe corruption is like cancer in that it will seek to plunder anything in a non-discriminating manner. All the wealth of a state is up for grabs. What do you think will happen to money allocated for infrastructure and services for the average (weak) citizen? Roads, hospitals, services, etc? Do you think the corrupt ruler and the cronies that enable him will resist the temptation to rob these endeavors? If the cronies rob, do you think the ruling authority will a) look the other way or b) prosecute the crony and risk a backlash?
To an observer who has visited Turkey several times both before and after Erdogan, the difference in improvements is literally night and day. Simple example: before, one couldn't even receive proper medical attention (and it would literally bankrupt you if you did). After: health care is a free service and the country has way more hospitals than ever before.
This statement is casually thrown around generally by those who find themselves belonging to the other side (politically speaking). But where is the evidence?
I’ve visited verifiably — as in the names of the leaders appear in all those leaks over the years — corrupt countries. The corruption shows in the disparities in societies. For example, access to tap water, heating, good roads, and other infrastructural types. For example, accessibility of education. For example, the purchasing power of the averaging citizen as measured in concrete terms (eg housing, food, etc) not in dollars.
In the corrupt countries the infrastructure is generally terrible. The citizens can barely afford food. There are no universities. In turkey it seems like non of this holds.
So, how is Erdogan corrupt? Is it just because OP is in dogmatic opposition to his ideals? IIRC the genesis of Erdogans political career is his management of Istanbul as mayor to improve the quality of life of all of its citizens. I believe that counts for something in a sense that he deserves the benefit of the doubt and the burden is on the accusers to show concrete evidence of corruption. Something like how Kushner received billions from the Saudis after the end of Trumps term.