Exploring the Interplay between Economics, Justice, Democracy, and Socioeconomic Welfare during Antidemocratic Periods: The Case of Turkey
Abstract
The Arabic word for „ İktisat (Economics)” is derived from the root „intention”. Legal science defines “intent” as performing an act consciously. Economic science defines “İktisat” (economics) as the conscious prioritization of a person’s primary requirements over their secondary desires. Since intent serves as the true foundation for the administration of justice, it may be claimed that what is fair economically is also fair. In the study, examples of economic and fair administrations that can provide social welfare have been evaluated economically sociologically in the historical process. To prove the main idea of the study, the data of the international democracy rule of law indexes were used. In this context, the financial data during the one-party period, the military coups and the memorandum periods in which democracy and the rule of law were suspended in Turkey were analyzed in depth and interpreted by comparing them with the country’s financial sociologic indicators. Also, economic changes in periods when civil and political rights were limited or expanded will be discussed in the study. As a result, it has been found out that only democratic regimes that internalize liberal values, civil and political rights, and the rule of law can lead their respective societies to achieve economic prosperity.
References
Acemoglu, Daron, Johnson, Simon., & Robinson, James 2001. The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American economic review, 91(5): 1369-1401. DOI: 10.1257/aer.91.5.1369
Bingham, Tom 2011. The Rule of Law. Penguin Books. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019611300077
Cevizli, İbrahim 2013. Demokrasi ve ekonomik gelişme ilişkisi (Doctoral dissertation, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi). DOI: http://hdl.handle.net/11607/394
Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. Yale University Press. DOI:10.1007/978-3-531-90400-9_24
Dawson, John W. 2003. Causality in the freedom–growth relationship. European journal of political economy, 19(3): 479-495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0176-2680(03)00009-0
Demirer, Funda 2017. A Discussion: Bediüzzaman Said Nursi's The Treatise on Frugality. Katre Uluslararası İnsan Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(13): 213-219. DOI: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/katre/issue/29636/318369
Diamond, Larry 1999. Developing democracy: Toward consolidation. JHU Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/316974
Doğan, Adem 2005. Demokrasi ve Ekonomik Gelişme. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi (25): 1-19. DOI: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/erciyesiibd/issue/5882/77821
Doğu, Sinem 2020. Demokrasi ve ekonomik özgürlüklerin ekonomik kalkınmaya etkisi (Master's thesis, İnönü Üniversitesi/Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü/İktisat Ana Bilim Dalı). DOI: http://hdl.handle.net/11616/42186
Dreher, Axel, Nunnenkamp, Peter, & Thiele, Rainer 2008. Does Aid for Education Educate Children? Evidence from Panel Data. World Bank Economic Review, 22(2): 291-314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhn003
Gibbon, Edward 2020. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Volume 10 (10). Jazzybee Verlag. https://dx.doi.org/10.21550/sosbilder.1123231?
Gwartney, James D., Lawson, Robert A., & Holcombe, Randall G. 1999. Economic freedom and the environment for economic growth. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 643-663. DOI: 10.1177/2233865919846725
Hayek, Friedrich A. 1973. Law, Legislation and Liberty: A New Statement of the Liberal Principles of Justice and Political Economy. Routledge. DOI: 10.1086/292069
Kaytaz, Mehmet, Eğilmez, Mahfi, İnanç, Özlem, Şen Taşbaşı, A., & Görkey, Selda 2022. Türkiye ve Dünya Ekonomisinde Görünüm-2. DOI: https://hdl.handle.net/11729/4560
Lipset, Seymour M. 1959. Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy1. American political science review, 53(1): 69-105. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1951731
North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
Przeworski, Adam, Alvarez, Michael E., Cheibub, Jose A., & Limongi, Fernando 2000. Democracy and development: Political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950-1990. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804946
Posner, Richard A. 2010. The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. Harvard University Press. DOI: 10.1017/S0963180100003182
Rosenthal, Franz 1958. The Muqaddimah. An Introduction to History, 3. DOI: https://delong.typepad.com/files/muquaddimah.pdf
Sırım, Veli, & Eraslan, Mehmet 2020. Demokratikleşme ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki Etkileşim. Balkan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(17): 119-130. DOI: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/bsbd/issue/52567/660185
Stiglitz, Joseph E., Sen, Amartya, & Fitoussi, Jean Paul 2010. Mismeasuring our Lives: Why GDP Doesn't Add Up. The New Press. http://www.tinyurl.com/y63bg5dj
Şanlısoy, Selim 2019. İnsani gelişmişlik endeksinde Türk Cumhuriyetleri örneğinde eleştirel bir yaklaşım. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12(62): 1581- 1591. DOI: Https://Www.Researchgate.Net/Publication/331409944_Insanı_Gelısmıslık_Endeksıne_Turk_Cumhurıyetlerı_Ornegınde_Elestırel_Bır Yaklasın.
Topuz, Seher G. 2022. The Relationship Between Income Inequality and Economic Growth: Are Transmission Channels Effective? Soc Indic Res 162: 1177–1231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-022-02882-0
Unit, Economics Intelligent 2017. The economist intelligence unit’s democracy index. London: The Economics Intelligence Unit. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731