The existence of objective and effective criticism is the fundamental assurance of an institution. However, if this institution is the state, in particular, the function of criticism becomes even more crucial. This crucial function is undertaken by opposition parties, media and civil society in a democratic country, and if that democracy is open to criticism, this increases its value further as effective and fair criticism positively changes the positions of disadvantaged sections of society. Those who benefit most from objective criticism are the minorities with little representation by the state. Therefore, the status of minorities determines the ultimate quality of democracy. Everything may seem to be on the rails in a country but it is enough to look at its approach to its minority communities in order to see the true color of that country.My topic of discussion is not minorities, but rather the main opposition party. In Turkey, democratization and solutions to problems are possible by making minorities equal citizens with the majority. The Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government, at least, does not use the words of Kurdish, Armenian or Roma to name its reforms in law texts, as they contrast with the general logic of democratization and might cause other troubles. The elites of the old regime constitute the Republican People's Party's (CHP) grassroots base. Throughout the past 12 years, the function of this group, which is dominated by the CHP and its media (two-third of Turkish media is still under the thumb of former Republican elites), has been hampering the reforms of equal citizenship. We can include workers, peasants and poor sections in this concept of minorities. Health care reform and wage reform have simplified bureaucratic reforms and relieved these disadvantaged groups considerably. The hostile state practices against Armenians and other minority communities have been removed by the AK Party. Moreover, confiscated goods and property of minority foundations are being returned. While the AK Party was enacting the foundations reform in Parliament in 2012, the CHP's parliamentarians reiterated their segregationist discourse and even said, "Why do you worry about Armenians' goods?"However, the failure of numerous coup attempts have required the CHP to break some of its routines, albeit rather superficially, over the past 12 years. The CHP still does not support the reconciliation process initiated by the AK Party to solve the Kurdish issue and reign in the PKK, which claimed the lives of more than 40,000 people in 30 years, as they think that this would harm their privileges. Curiously enough, however, more than 70 percent of the CHP's base is quite pleased with the fact that no soldiers or youngsters have died in clashes with the PKK over the past two years. Moreover, they have not posed an obstacle to the legal framework that has provided the reconciliation process with legitimate structure.Following the last two overwhelming electoral failures, the CHP convened its 18th extraordinary congress. Former CHP leader Deniz Baykal was toppled when a tape was leaked about his private life, and then it was predicted that Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who succeeded Baykal in May 2010, would easily be elected chairman. Kılıçdaroğlu was elected, but his rival Muharrem İnce received many more votes than expected. Some of the CHP members favored by Kılıçdaroğlu were not elected to the party assembly.İnce represents the neo-nationalists, i.e., Baykal's cult in the party. The neo-nationalist members of the CHP assert that Kılıçdaroğlu derails the party from its Kemalist line, and I wish it happened so. The fact that Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, who has a religious identity, believes in Western hegemony and was presented as their presidential candidate for the Aug. 10 election was enough to cause this fracture in the CHP. However, the CHP's problem is not with the names. No matter who becomes the party leader, the CHP cannot get out of the maze in which it is lost. Actually, neither Kılıçdaroğlu nor İnce has come up with a new discourse. Therefore, the recent CHP congress was not held to change the overall mentality of the CHP, but rather to determine a theme that will take the lead in its showcasing. The CHP has a structural and a fundamental problem of mentality: the party is a bureaucratic club and cannot embrace the public. This confines the party to elite sections who dislike the idea of equality with religionists or Kurds.