Abstract
ABSTRACT Debating Turkey’s membership around the question of whether Turkey would become a member or not—form of integration—is a non-debate given the history of relations that is characterized by ‘ups and downs’ in the last five decades. Embarking on Gramscian historical materialism, this research debates socio-economic content of ongoing integration. It questions whether there is a hegemonic pro-EU membership and whether there are any alternatives. The analyses rely on interviews conducted at two critical junctures in 2010 and 2017. I shall argue that pro-membership is hegemonic which is contested by two rival class strategies: Ha-vet and neo-mercantilism, none of which stands as an overall alternative. The future trajectory is uncertain. Despite negative tone of the political discourses especially in the post-15th July coup attempt, pro-membership is still hegemonic. Yet, it is becoming more difficult for capital groups to lead through ‘moral and intellectual leadership’ for an integration model relying on market liberalization (negative integration) without a perspective of membership—without a clear social dimension (positive integration).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.