The social sciences instruct us to think, understand and analyze out of ideological cliché to avoid generalizing social phenomena. Generalizations that are available in political science are also weak and permit only tentative predictions about future developments. When it comes to political ideologies, that is, sets of basic beliefs about political affairs held by a majority of the people in a society, most of us have a tendency toward reductionism.

Imagine an academic who is a woman with a secularist family background. On the top of that, her father was the deputy chairman of the Republican's People Party (CHP) but she depicts Mustafa Kemal Atatürk as a totalitarian leader and even compares him to Hitler and Mussolini in one of her most popular books, "Nostalgia for the Modern." I am referring to the rather atypical real-life story of Dr. Esra Özyürek, who is an associate professor in Contemporary Turkish Studies at the European Institute of the London School of Economics. It might be shocking for most Turkish people to learn such a contradictory political ideology that is against any stereotyped political values.

In fact, we need to understand political ideologies free of any prejudices of values on the political spectrums. Should we just dismiss the roles of value conflicts in political ideologies? It would be expedient to discern what lies behind the image of Atatürk that the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) presents.

The AK Party, having focused on the cult of personality surrounding Atatürk, was one of the most debated issues in Turkish politics previous weeks. Some depicted it as a rather opportunistic move by the AK Party in order to win the hearts of secular members of society who refer to themselves as "Atatürkçü," or Atatürkists. Others suggested that it was a bona fide proposal by the AK Party to prevent the Republican People's Party (CHP) from using the image of Atatürk in campaigns for the 2019 general elections. According to social sciences, which are opposed to clichéd prejudices due to the fact that they are frequently the source of political misunderstanding, how can the AK Party's current politics on Atatürkism be explained? According to Dr. Yusuf Özkır, an academic at Medipol University's Faculty of Communication, since the foundation of the AK Party, a very similar philosophy regarding Atatürk and Atatürkism has been dominant in the party's politics.

Remember that the country's second president, "National Chief" İsmet İnönü, is the only person in President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's line of fire. Speaking to Daily Sabah, he said, "We should ask the question of which Atatürk the AK Party criticizes. It is the Atatürk who was invented after the 1960 and 1980 military coups, and this Atatürk is quite different from the main spirit of Atatürkism in real terms." It is conspicuous that the image of Atatürk that the AK Party polishes today is neither a post-coup purge nor a political motivator to attract more votes from different sections of society.The AK Party is based on very reasonable ground to burnish Atatürk's image in the eyes of its ardent supporters to eliminate any social polarization among different sections of society, believing the image of Atatürk is inclusive, but most of the times exclusionary when shaping the dominant discourses in Turkey's political landscape.

Commenting on the AK Party's image of Atatürk, Mahmut Övür, who is a columnist for the Sabah newspaper, said, "Our main objective should be saving Atatürk from the hands of ideological polarization to ward off any secular-anti-secular dichotomy specifically following the traumatic July 15 coup attempt." Taking elements from both the right and left of the political spectrum, the AK Party has sought to create a political identity wide enough to embrace different segments of Turkish society. Therefore, Övür warns about the handicaps of falling into the trap of cliché political ideologies. While the AK Party aims at compromising the traditional Islamic and Atatürkist national values in Turkey, the CHP frequently clings to Atatürk based on triumphant Kemalist ideology, specifically when nothing is going their way. Most recently, CHP Deputy Group Chairman Özgür Özel accused Erdoğan, in one of his speeches, of praising Atatürk only for election purposes. Let's jog our memory and turn the clock back to the CHP party meeting where former party Chairman Deniz Baykal pinned party pins on women wearing black chadors and welcomed them to the CHP. Nevertheless, such an initiative did not work and the CHP was unable to attract conservative voters from the AK Party base. Eventually, any adulation of Atatürk in the chasing of liberal, republican votes will not work while the apparent failure of the CHP's opening to covered women is there.

Having sparked a major debate over clichéd political ideologies, protecting Atatürk's legacy should not be an initiative for any one party. While the CHP accuses the AK Party of appropriating Atatürk in the chase for votes, it is once more appealing to a rather exclusionary discourse, as if the CHP maintains Atatürk's heritage better than any other party. The AK Party, as the party in power, is aware of its responsibility to protect Atatürk's legacy. AK Party representatives are also aware that any debates regarding Atatürk always wear out the party and therefore, they took a step to reign in the CHP's long monopolization of Atatürk's image.

The CHP is boiling over with rage because Erdoğan is trying to hinder the CHP from monopolizing Atatürk's image in its political rhetoric. Özkır highlighted a significant detail in his remarks to Daily Sabah regarding how the Atatürk cult of personality is being used in an attempt to be within the borders of some kind of a safe zone. He pointed to the declaration of the July 15 coup attempt, which included the same emphasis on Atatürk, saying, "Coup plotters, specific ultra-leftist groups and to some extent the CHP, are reproducing Atatürk to comply with their self-interests."

Taking into consideration the party's social background, the AK Party positioning itself close to Atatürk might be seen as unrealistic and surprising. However, this prudently motivated move is based on a political imperative for the ruling party to embrace all citizens from every section of society. Investing in each ideological spectrum from both the right and left

of the political spectrum, the AK Party has sought to mold a political identity exhaustively inclusive enough to embrace different segments of Turkish society. Basic political motivation of the AK Party is based on a reconciliation effort between traditional Islam and national values of Turkey to break the chain of ideological cliché. Speaking to Daily Sabah, Hilmi Daşdemir, who is the owner of OPTIMAR Research Company, said that according to their field studies, 15 percent of constituents who identify themselves as Atatürkists vote for the AK Party. This makes it clear that to a certain extent, dominant discourse of AK Party politics has succeeded in compromising distinct political ideologies so much so that not all voters who identify themselves as Atatürkists vote for the CHP.

Turkish politics functions likely in the middle of the political spectrum as an outmaneuvering antagonism among conservatives, leftists and nationalists. Nevertheless, a significant component of the process of interaction can overcome such oppositional identities as religious versus democratic, Islamic versus Atatürkist and conservative versus liberal. Remember the story of Özyürek, whose political identity was shaped by multiple vying identities. While all political movements are going through a substantive process of interaction with each other, polarization of ideologies with sharp lines has become archaic. We have a more colored and multidimensional political spectrum rather than a sharp black and white image. It seems that this change has already started with a process to eliminate the tyranny of ideological cliché regarding Atatürk's valuable image etched into society's collective understanding.

In fact, this is not the first time the AK Party has saluted Atatürk's heritage. Atatürk is still revered for his contributions as the founder of the Republic of Turkey, which places him at the center of the country's political sphere. Therefore, the attempt to eliminate rooted ideological cliché that has come to the fore in the debate over Atatürkism is not at odds with the emerging contention between rival political parties.