Talk:Nihal Atsız

Comments

Shamanism

Can anyone verify this claim? Is this vandalism or authentic? freestylefrappe 00:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Atsiz never mentioned about his own religious belief in his books or articles but as i understand from his writings he is a deist who has a deep respect in ancient Turkic belief which we call Tengriism or in a more common way Shamanism. Orhanoglu 20:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I would dispute the political neutrality of this article: it is tendentious and endeavours to validate the discredited political philosophy of MHT and similar pan-Turkist views. 86.140.127.133 18:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I could not see any single sentence in this article which supports the political and sociological thoughts of Atsız. Article is totally neutral, if you have any discomfort about MHP (not MHT) then dispute it there. Although Atsız's writings were influential for a lot of MHP partisans, MHP's and Atsız's views are totally different. I want to ask you a couple of questions "Mr(s) Neutral"; From whom you have taken the right to evaluate pan-Turkism as "discredited" and does not this claim creates a contradiction with your blinding passion for neutrality ? Orhanoglu 22:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Death

12/11/1975 Is this 12 Nov or 11 Dec?

It's December 11th. Orhanoglu 20:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality

The article lacked it. I removed some unnecessary sentences.

This article is more neutral than most of wikipedia's articles. I think this web community is much more tolerant to terrorists like Ocalan than writers and philosophers like Atsız.

Article is not neutral, remarks such as "Atsiz wore a Nazi style haircut and sported a Hitler moustache while advocating racist doctrines" are unsubstantiated.

Needs more addition

Hüseyin Nihal Atsız is one of the best and most talented Turkish writers in the history. He is also the symbol of the Nationalism in Turkey. In my opinion, this article needs more addition. Turkish brothers, please enter the important datas that you know about Atsız. Deliogul 12:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Atsız was never a fascist. so fascism link is meaningless. so I removed it. I know he is in the Fascist list of wiki but every political figure, who somebody does not like, are on list anyway, regardless of their political beliefs.Isatay 04:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

He was Türkçü/ Turancı but not fascist. If you have good data in your hand about him, please use it in the article. See you, Deliogul 16:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

What utter rubbish. Atsis was a leading figure and inspiration of the Ulkucu movement who have been proven to be a fascist organisation even down to the old straight right arm salute. Just because their political wing the MHP have entered parliament time and time again does not prove that they are not a fascist organisation but rather that a large portion of the population of Turkey suppors fascism. His writings are pure hate preaching especially against minoities. He used the Muslim religion just as German and Italian fascists have used the Church and dismissed it when it was convenient.

None of the above comments posted are ballanced, proof of this is are the comments by Delioglu calling on his Turkish 'brothers' to contribute. It just stinks of more attempts by Turks to disrupt and desrtoy any opinion that differs from their own narrow view.

Kindly explain the difference between Turkism or Turanc and Fascism. Both seek domination at the expense of minorities (in the case of Turanci the Kurds, Arabs, Armeinans, Persians, Slavs, Georgians, Greeks, Circassians etc) Anyone only has to read the definition of Turanci and its goals to see it is clear fascism and Atsiz was a leading figure in the Turkish fascist movement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.29.234 (talk) 10:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he was against the Ülkücü Movement and he openly said that he doesn't like Alparslan Türkeş and his party. Also, Turkish people are my brothers and sisters. I share the same land with them so I didn't understand why you got problems about it. Deliogul 22:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

'Dalkavuklar Gecesi'

'Dalkavuklar Gecesi' was a parody of Ataturk's reign, not Inonu.

Need your opinion

I've reverted this edit[1], which, to me, appears to be nothing but an attempt to label this person as a racist. Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:45, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Removing the "ideologue of Turkish racism" caption seems wise - but if the rest of the material you reverted was an accurate translation of statements by Atsız then that could be legitimate content. Meowy 03:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the removal. Unless there are sources describing him as such we should let the facts speak for themselves.--Anothroskon (talk) 09:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I dropped the contributing editor a note here [2], in the hopes that we can find some English language sources (ideally) that clarify the situation. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

How about the following from a book that appeared recently with SUNY Press: "A third group [of pan-Turkists during WW2] was led by Nihal Atsız, who favored a Hitler style haircut and mustache, and advocated Nazi racist doctrines." [3] Hans Adler 14:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Columbia University press Apparently his trial was called the Racism-Turanism trial.--Anothroskon (talk) 14:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

This trial also had Alparslan Türkeş involved, which I have mentioned AND referenced using that book. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

It appears that this was a high-profile political trial. In Turkey. In 1945. Therefore I think it's much better to rely on what modern historians say explicitly about him than on the main theme or even the verdict of such a trial. I am sure we can find something better in the sources. By the way, currently parts of the article read like a hagiography: "Nihâl Atsiz is remembered by his grand daughter as a kind and gentle person with children, his free time he would always dedicate reading and educating his grand children." This clearly needs some cleaning up. Hans Adler 14:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you, for highlighting the problem but also for digging up those sources. So, it does seem there's probably some basis for having "racism" covered under that term in the article after all, do we agree on that? But Meowy's suggestion of removing the label from the image caption might still be a good idea. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and perhaps it would be better to hold further discussion on the article talk page. Anybody volunteer to copy the thread over there? Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, guys, for finding the sources. Excellent job. Kafka Liz (talk) 15:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)