‘Leaders for guidance: Elite-led projects and the possibility of transformation’ by Evrensel Sebep

Reflection of “Gender, class and nation: (Re)shaping Identity in  British colonial Cyprus”  

In the second webinar of the bαhçές pilot series, Loizos Kapsalis discusses an often  neglected process in Cyprus’ social and political history: the efforts of the Greek Cypriot(GC) elite  to transform society during early colonial (British) rule in the island, and particularly following the economic crisis of 1886-1887 that saw a deterioration in the living standards of Cypriots. In this  period of social and economic decline, the GC elite took the task of social and moral reform of the  population. Their standpoint is nicely encapsulated by Kapsalis as the idea that ‘to transform  society, one has to transform the individuals.’ In the webinar we further learn that to this aim, a top down approach was followed that saw a direct intervention into everyday lives, values, traditions,  and morals of both Cypriot men and women, and especially the lower strata — the Cypriot poor —  who the GC elite perceived as “illiterate, superstitious and lazy”. Kapsalis explains how the  reformers aimed to transform the moral character of the population through the formation of sports  associations, reading clubs and religious associations. 

I find it interesting that similar concerns were raised by Rauf Raif Denktash, a key figure  within the Turkish Cypriot (TC) political elite during the 20th century and later the first president of  the De facto Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. In a column entry in the Halkın Sesi newspaper of 29th March 1947, Denktash criticised the TC people for their ‘illiteracy, laziness and carelessness’,  spending their days in cafes and spreading gossip about each other; instead of deliberating about the  social and political problems of the community. Denktash was also concerned about the  ‘purposeless’ and ‘undirected’ youth who lacked leaders to guide them in the right direction. It  shows how, despite the difference in time, the elites of both ethnic communities were concerned  about the way of life of the common people and perceived it as a contributing factor for the  communities’ socio-economic problems. Another common factor between the G.C. elites and  Denktash is their belief that leaders are necessary to guide the people.

The construction of an idealised Greek Cypriot masculinity and femininity was at the heart  of this top-down project. Kapsalis discusses how men were expected to be “brave, strong, hardworking and disciplined,”*1 whereas the ideal image of women was dyadic. There was an  emphasis on ‘feminine’ traits like “purity, submissiveness, devotion” as well as on ‘masculine’ traits  like “rationality, bravery, willingness to fight for the fatherland, and self-sacrifice.” It appears that  the GC elite had preconceived ideas of what each gender ought to be and ought to do. And, working  with such fixed gender roles and traits can have negative effects on at least some groups of  individuals. We learn one of those in the webinar through Kapsalis’ discussion of how unrestricted  female sexuality was perceived as a threat to social order. As a result, those who did not fit the ideal  person image of the elites were made to feel outcast. 

Kapsalis describes the efforts of the GC elite as a ‘project’. A similar notion, that of  ‘experiment,’ is employed by historian Ronald Grigor Suny (1997) to describe the efforts of the  Soviet leaders to transform society between the years 1917-1991. Throughout The Soviet  Experiment, the leaders of the USSR also tried to transform individuals into their ideal image of  Soviet men and women. Given the presence of such top-down, elite-led projects and experiments, I  want to highlight some theoretical and practical issues that arise with them and discuss those in  light of Kapsalis’ webinar. A good starting point would be to question how feasible it is to enforce  ideals on a multitude of people from above? In other words, can a true transformation take place  with such top-down projects? 

The imposition of certain ideals by the elites may result in two problems. First is the  undemocratic nature of few individuals trying to impose their ideals on a multitude of people. The  people are not given the time and resources to reflect for themselves to understand the value of the  ideal traits and gain the necessary consciousness to work towards them. Instead, the ideals are  chosen and imposed on them by the elites. This may weaken the population’s association with the  ideals. It is possible to argue, however, that the guidance of educated political leaders is necessary  for the progress of society; that the people themselves would not be able to change their lifestyles or  traits without intervention from the elites. And if the masses embrace and internalise the ideals  themselves and transform their lives accordingly, then the issues that come with top-down  enforcement may be circumvented. Further, the voluntary associations in the GC case could have  also overcome some worries of the top-down project as they appear to provide resources for a more deliberate lifestyle change. However, at this point, the second problem comes at our doorstep: the  strong possibility that the elite is promulgating their own bourgeois values, those that apply to them,  to their characteristics and way of life. Accordingly, there arises a doubt regarding the rational basis  of the morals. Have the GC elite critically thought about the values and traits and concluded that  they are necessary for progress? Or were they simply promoting ideals that they associated with  themselves? The Soviet leaders could avoid this worry as their ideas appear to be thought-out and  grounded on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism (whether the ideology is well-thought-out  constitutes a different question; however, there are charges of utopianism towards that ideology as  well). Lastly, I would like to present the Austrian/British philosopher Karl Popper’s (1963, p.47)  discussion of another issue. He argues that even if there is a rational plan/project for change, it  would never be realised in the way in which it was conceived; that “the real outcome will always be  very different from the rational construction.” Popper (1963, p.47) further states that “all social  engineering, no matter how much it prides itself on its realism and on its scientific character, is  doomed to remain a Utopian dream.” Here, we are introduced to an additional worry: even if the  project appears to be rationally thought-out, it may still come to odds with social reality. These are  then, three issues that may arise with top-down, elite-led projects.

 1. Loizos Kapsalis further informs me that “for the reformers, “public health” was the declared aim 1 of the project and “a strong and disciplined body” was the target. Underlying this however, were  certain ideas about masculinity and femininity”

Reading List 

For social engineering, moral transformation and the rationality of morals: 

Kant, Immanuel. 1784 "Answering the Question: What Is Enlightenment?”  https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/documents/what_is_enlightenment.pdf 

Nietzsche, Frederick. 1998 (1887). On the Genealogy of Morality. Maudemarie Clark and Alan  Swensen (trans.) Indianapolis: Hackett. 

Popper, K. R. 1963. Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge.  

Especially Ch16, 21; p.45-49, 64-71. 

For ‘The Soviet Experiment’ 

Suny, Ronald G. 1997. The Soviet Experiment: Russia, The USSR, and the Successor States. Oxford  University Press. 

For those further interested in the TC elite 

An, Ahmet. 1997. Kıbrıs Türk Liderliğinin Oluşması (1900-1942) Lefkoşa: Galeri Kültür Yayınları.  [Turkish] 

Kızılyürek, Niyazi. 2016. Bir Hınç ve Şiddet Tarihi: Kıbrıs’ta Statü Kavgası ve Etnik Çatışma.  İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları. [Turkish] 

Nevzat, Altay. 2005. “Nationalism Amongst the Turks of Cyprus: The First Wave.” PhD diss.,  University of Oulu [English]

Written by Evrensel Sebep