SOCIOPSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF ATATURK'S LEADERSHIP

Entrance

I.- A large number of books, articles and researches have been published in Turkish and foreign languages, which touch on Atatürk's life story, especially in the historical aspect. Among them, there are those who have made a reputation in the field of international literature. In this essay, we aim to analyze Atatürk's leadership as a sociopsychological event beyond narrating a life story, to determine Atatürk's leadership as a case against the data of sociology and pathology, according to scientific criteria, and thus to determine the theory and theory of the event. We would like to analyze according to the data.

Conducting such an analysis in a completely objective and scientific manner, out of emotional effects, is difficult in two ways: First of all, making such an analysis requires an interdisciplinary approach, since it requires the same degree of knowledge in sociology, social psychology, pathology, medicine, and history sciences in relation to the phenomenon of leadership. requires cooperation. Secondly, it is also very difficult to examine and determine the Atatürk leadership event with complete objectivity, especially by scientists from our generation. Because, a generation that has understood Atatürk's era as adult youth and is enamored with him cannot be fully objective by going beyond their subjective feelings of loyalty to Atatürk's leadership.

Charismatic authority and leadership

2. - Especially foreign writers and social scientists have been using Atatürk's leadership to date, relying on Max Weber's famous work and applying the information1 contained in this work to the social group formed by the Anatolian Turkish society of that period, in explaining the political authority established in Anatolia after 1919. they have chosen to characterize authority and the leader who wields it as charismatic; By stating that Atatürk was a charismatic leader, they wanted to express that the above-mentioned analysis would have been made2.

As it is known, Max Weber emphasizes authority, algebra power, power, physical force in the explanation of human relations and uses them as a kind of pivot while explaining social phenomena. Authority means the use of coercive, coercive power, physical force in human activities. Legally, sovereignty and power refer to the authority to use the authority in question. For Weber, the group, in a way, means the differentiation of roles relative to authority. Other than the normal, customary members of the group, there are people who bear responsibility and therefore exercise authority, including the chief who has the highest authority, and the administrators, that is, the administrative staff, who are in some ways under the authority of the chief and exercise authority over other members3. According to Weber, the character of authority in contemporary western societies should be considered as an illuminating element and used as a reference element in the evaluation. This type is rational-legal authority.

The authority in question, in short, means that the order is dependent on generalized, universal, impersonal rules. Rules are the main source of authority. Thus, the legitimacy of the authority used is provided by the rules that are dominant and bind the chiefs and administrative staff. The administrative staff that uses the authority forms the bureaucracy. Thus the social order is largely dependent on bureaucracy.

The second main type of authority is traditional authority. In this type of authority, legitimacy is based on the fact that traditional authority has always been present. There are also statuses in traditional authority. But they depend on the concrete and traditional rules of the traditional order. Above the statuses, it is obligatory to obey these people faithfully, as there are hierarchical and arbitrary powers and authorities that give the authority to freely grant favors to others. Also, there is no clear distinction between the domain of authority and the private domain of the person using it.

Rational-legal and traditional authority types form established, permanent forms of social system organization. Systems operate and go within a certain routine.

The third type of authority is charismatic authority. According to Waber, the charismatic type is “a kind of demand for authority that is in conflict with the legitimacy foundations of a fully institutionalized, established order by definition”. The leader who demands and establishes this authority becomes a charismatic leader and in a sense, he is a revolutionary. So the charismatic leader is a kind of deviant; It carries out a conscious opposition to the established aspects of the society in which it works and tries to establish it.

As we have explained, a charismatic leader is a person who exhibits a behavior of the nature described above, who wants to place it as a definite duty, and who demands legitimacy and moral support from his followers.

It should be noted that, according to Weber, charismatic authority and charismatic leadership are inseparable concepts. The charismatic character of the leader will be recognized by those who follow him. However, in a democratic sense, this is not a consent determined by the clear will of those who follow the leader, but it is their debt; is his duty. This recognition is actually the element that constitutes the legitimacy of the leader's demand for authority. The members of the administrative staff around the leader are almost like apostles; they also have the excitement of reaching a goal or the feeling of loyalty to the leader or both. The leader sets limits on the activities of those mentioned. Charismatic actions are supported by means of distributing wages or loot.

Thus, according to Weber, charisma, which, as a revolutionary force, aims to destabilize institutionalized orders, becomes a legitimate source of authority. Charisma establishes an individual's authority over those who rationally or conventionally hold statuses in the established order. However, charismatic authority will gradually become separated from the leader's personality through routinization and become an objective institutional structure.

As explained above, according to some authors4 Atatürk is a charismatic leader who used charismatic authority.

The works and thoughts written on the qualities and characters of charisma and charismatic leaders are very similar to each other, with minor differences; To summarize: The charismatic authority arising from the use of charismatic authority is based on an exceptional sanctity, heroism and exemplary character of the leader, and the wholehearted devotion of the members of the society to the order he brings5. Charisma itself, on the other hand, is a personality trait that distinguishes a person from other people and is believed to have divine or at least very exceptional powers and qualities6. When the leader makes demands by explaining that he is divinely appointed with a mission, it will be considered charismatic, and those who follow him will have the characteristics, skills, and abilities that are not found in everyone. If they believe that they have personality traits and accept this, they are considered charismatic. However, charisma stems from the leader's title, personality; otherwise, this expression is not used to refer to the goal that the leader is struggling to achieve. For this reason, Hitler, Napoleon and Roosevelt, whose goals were very different from each other, were considered charismatic leaders. As we explained above, charisma is used to express a certain type of authority, not a sociological person7. This is particularly Weber's approach. As we explained above, charisma is used to express a certain type of authority, not a sociological person7. This is particularly Weber's approach. As we explained above, charisma is used to express a certain type of authority, not a sociological person7. This is particularly Weber's approach.

Again, as we mentioned above when explaining Weber, charismatic authority corresponds to temporary, unstable and often revolutionary social situations. Facts that reveal charismatic authority and leaders; In this respect, changes in social values ​​and beliefs are political and economic instabilities and social depressions. For this reason, charismatic authority is in the non-democratic method.

As Merlin Krüger-Frieda Sivert explains, the leader does not seek legitimacy; demands it, that is, the meaning of this phrase is that the leader does not make any further effort to gain legitimacy. Only if the charismatic leader can fulfill his mission and as long as he can maintain his authority. Unlike rational-legal and traditional authorities, there is a relationship between the ruler and the ruled, and in this relationship, there is the giver and the receiver. In fact, this exchange is reciprocal.

Since charismatic authority is temporary and personal, political continuity and continuity problems will definitely arise in time and it will be necessary for charismatic authority to transform into rational-legal or traditional authority.

Charismatic authority and leadership?

3. - After these explanations about charismatic authority and leadership, it is necessary to review whether Atatürk's leadership and the authority he used were charismatic.

After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War, there was a great crisis of authority in the country. The authority and leadership of the Caliph-Sultan in the country, whose country was occupied by the enemy and himself under the threat of the enemy, had become only nominal. The authority used by the Sultan was a mixture of rational-legal and traditional authorities, according to Max Weber's classification, due to the constitutional movements in the second half of the 19th century and at the beginning of the twentieth century. Due to the defeat and the social events that took place, the Sultan, who had acquired this authority by inheritance but did not have actual leadership abilities, was in a pitiful state. He was also not in a position to exercise authority.

In this period, partial resistance movements against the enemy started in various parts of Anatolia. The authority used within the framework of the movements was power and might in the form of coercion7. However, in powers whose source is only coercion and power, authority is destined to dissolve and dissolve over time8. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's primary mission at the very beginning was to strengthen these resistance movements, to structure them sociologically and to link them to a legitimate authority. For this purpose, legal instruments were applied without delay: to establish a parliament to represent the national will through elections or a method similar to elections, and to structure and establish an authority based on a legitimate power to be used by it.

It should be noted that Atatürk did not seek to establish a charismatic power from the very beginning of the national movement. He did not try to establish a charismatic authority by using his personal charisma arising from the Dardanelles wars. It has never been in the way of establishing personal authority and leadership based on charisma. For one thing, he did not initially reject the Sultan's authority based on rules and traditions. Since it was known by Atatürk and his friends because of their vast war experience, that it would not be possible to organize the national resistance without eliminating the terrible authority vacuum created by the situation and conditions, it was attempted to fill the void without explicitly rejecting the Sultan's authority.

How would this gap be filled?

Mustafa Kemal and his friends tried to establish the rational-legal authority type, which Max Weber expressed in the first place in the classification of authority, instead of trying to fill the said authority gap from the very beginning, based on their personal charisma and using all forms of gaining authority and power. It has been tried to find the authorities in the objective rules that will be formed by an assembly whose image is always emphasized as the representative of the national will, not in the leader and those around him, no matter how superior personal qualities they may have. In our opinion, the absolute authority exercised by the Grand National Assembly was of a rational-legal nature. Of course, it should be stated that the charisma in Mustafa Kemal's personality facilitated the formation and establishment of such an authority.

Our view is that the authority established in the period until the victory of the War of Independence was of a rational-legal nature and Mustafa Kemal's personal leadership charisma was not the main factor in its implementation; but of course, it has been found effective.

After the end of the War of Independence, did the proclamation of the Republic and the realization of the revolutions one by one express the transformation of the rational-legal authority into a charismatic character?

As is known, according to Max Weber, the characteristic of the contemporary structural order is the relative dominance of rational-legal authority. Individual freedoms, market and market economy, academic freedoms and freedom of the press and the existence of others depend on the execution of such an authority. However, there are some drawbacks that this kind of authority can reveal; It is possible for the rational-legal authority to disintegrate and to gradually change the character of the authority. While the rational-legal authority frees the industrial worker from the arbitrary authority of the employer, it can also put the workers' organizations under the sway of their leaders. While the rational-legal authority changes, charismatic movements can also emerge. For example, an established order is shaken by widespread crimes and settled routines,

In the rational-legal authority system, free choice is the basis of legitimacy. Free elections, on the other hand, reveal party leaders who can approach the masses with their personal charms and charisma, and those mentioned approach the charismatic leader type to a certain extent. It should be noted that today, in elections, party leaders, to a certain extent, come before the people and ask for votes with revolutionary proposals, at least to change the social order.

After this introduction, let's move on to the answer to the question we explained above.

After the establishment of the republican regime with the Organization of 1924 and the liquidation of the Ottoman political order, successive reforms were made with the aim of changing the structure in terms of society. However, all of these were not movements expressing the transformation of rational-legal authority into charismatic authority, and all proposals for change were tried to be realized within the framework of law, that is, by means of rules and under the rule of rules. The authority exercised is legitimate power. However, communication power, identification power and sometimes algebra were also used. However, all of these were of a legal nature9.

4. - We would like to emphasize once again the following for a full understanding of our thinking: Atatürk's leadership is the leadership of a rational-legal authority order. There is a very strong charisma in Atatürk's personality, but authority is not exclusively based on this charisma. On the contrary, it is obvious that instead of relying on this charisma, Atatürk and his friends aimed to establish a rational-legal authority immediately, not to appear revolutionary at first, and to reach the goal with the tools of this authority. From the moment that the tendency to leave the Rational-Legal authority is suspected, it is seen that the disintegration and separation between Atatürk and his closest friends started to emerge.

Grown leaders and leaders who pave their own way

5. - As it is known, leaders with skills specific to these parts emerge in certain sectors within social groups. Leaders emerge due to certain personal qualities and the opportunities and opportunities provided by the circumstances and conditions they are in. In fact, there is a need for power and power, to use authority in human beings. In terms of society and social group, leadership is an indispensable need in terms of various fields, and for this reason, there will definitely be differences based on power within groups. It is imperative that some people have more decision-making power than others, so that a difference in society arises. If everyone had equal power over each other, society could not survive as a stable organization.

For this reason, society reveals its leaders, in other words, elected and appointed leaders are determined according to certain methods, but also some leaders gain their status as a result of their own preparations, efforts and struggles.

As social psychology states, a leader is someone who has leadership qualities. These qualities are not accidental; It is the result of a systematic education or experience gained in life and adulthood. For this reason, social groups train many people as leaders. Harvard and Columbia Universities in the USA, Oxford and Cambridge Universities in England, Enderun in Turkey, then Mulkiye, Haip School and War Academies fulfilled this function and they continue to do so today together with other educational institutions.

In this respect, Atatürk has the qualities and characteristics of a leader who was both raised and paved the way for authority and power with his own power and struggle. First of all, as a member of the Armed Forces, as for every officer, the development of leadership skills in education has been a fundamental element. Officers gain or should gain their ranks gradually, gradually, and to the extent that they can demonstrate leadership qualities. Thus, leadership qualities are established as a result of a systematic training in the aforementioned. At the same time, Atatürk strengthened his leadership qualities and charisma while taking the main roles in the wars and commanding the troops, especially in the Çanakkale Wars, he introduced and accepted his personal leadership qualities to large masses.

Personal leadership qualities and Atatürk

6. - It will go beyond the purpose of our paper to make detailed explanations here to indicate what personal leadership qualities consist of. However, let us point out that leadership in different fields requires separate qualifications, characteristics and skills, but there are common features in all leadership fields. It is seen that these features are very advanced in Atatürk:

Being highly motivated to achieve the desired goal is paramount. This motivation can even be so strong that it is sometimes deviant and indifferent to other areas of life. It can manifest as staying away from entertainment and family responsibilities, concentrating only on goal-oriented activities, and therefore getting away from many simple pleasures of life. His life story shows that these features had a place in Atatürk's personality. The main motivation in the War of Independence is the liberation of the homeland and the expulsion of the enemy beyond the borders of the national agreement. After achieving this goal, the second main goal is the establishment of a civilized rule of law and the motivation towards it. In addition to this, there are motivations for different areas regarding what to do to raise the society above the level of contemporary civilization. Thus, although there is a connection between them, Atatürk has been motivated towards many goals.

Atatürk's ability to concentrate on one of the different fields of activity, which is one of the common personal characteristics of leadership, is at its highest. One of the most important common characteristics of Atatürk is his ability to continue an activity with determination and without making any exceptions, and it takes place in various stages of his life story as one of Atatürk's personality traits.

However, it would be appropriate to be able to constantly devote oneself to work, to carefully distinguish between the concepts of perseverance and rigidity. Strictness can be defined as the inability to change behavior when necessary. Atatürk's ability to persevere is manifested in the form of being able to act, in the old saying, "instruction", depending on certain motivations. This behavior also includes changing the behavior pattern where wrongdoing is detected. Atatürk's attitude towards language constituted a very good example of this.

Two kinds of leadership and Atatürk

7. - As we have explained above, Atatürk is both a leader who was trained for a certain field during his lifetime, and a leader who paved the way for leadership in politics with his own determination and will. For this reason, he has made a kind of synthesis of these two types of leadership characteristics in his personality: Leaders who have been trained and recruited, if it is true, are less aggressive, in fact conservative. As one writer puts it, they are “like those who fight a bait war with old weapons and want the status quo to continue”10. Leaders who paved their way with their own power constitute the very antithesis of these. It should be noted that in Atatürk, the cautious behavior type and the ability to accurately and prudently determine the place to go and stop in his movements were at the highest level. The fact that the revolutionary moves on women were carried out with the utmost care and that there was no conflict with the attitudes settled in Turkish society in this area reflects the qualities of trained leadership. On the other hand, the courageous moves in the establishment of the new state order and the determination to break the resistances against them while the reforms are being made reflect the characteristics of the leader who paved the way for them, and thus a synthesis emerges.

It should be noted that although the personal characteristics of the leaders are almost built according to a certain education plan, both the personal characteristics factor and the common effect of the conditions and conditions revealed by the current historical period in the leadership that opens its own way with determination, will and ability to struggle are almost in two ways. there is a kind of synthesis of these factors: According to the theoretical view on which there is consensus today, the leadership qualities of the person and the conditions and problems of the society at that moment are in a state of interaction. The character of the time enables people with certain characteristics in their personalities to become leaders and determines which of those who have this potential can become a leader. In fact, in social psychology, how people have power, We have presented two different approaches to the issue of gaining authority and the view that indicates the synthesis of these two. The general view today is the integration of the two.

In this respect, it can be easily determined how this synthesis took place under the leadership of Atatürk. In Atatürk's leadership potential, talent first shows itself in Çanakkale and enables him to achieve a high degree of charisma. During his upbringing from his youth, the military staff essentially believed in Atatürk's leadership ability. As a matter of fact, when the pashas of 1919 agree on the idea of ​​organizing resistance movements in Anatolia, no difficulties arise in the appointment of the leader.

Since each period determines which leader will be the leader, the social conditions of 1919's Turkey, namely the political chaos at that time, and the problem of saving the country with an appropriate military strategy, revealed the leadership of Atatürk. As one writer puts it, “a person who will become a leader in a certain period of time is someone who has the qualifications to form leadership according to the special conditions of this particular time”11. History is not the life stories of leaders; but history manufactures leaders.

Leadership styles and Atatürk

9. - It would be appropriate to try to determine Atatürk's leadership style by dwelling on leadership styles here:

While pointing out the contrasts between their styles, Fiedler divided leaders into two parts12: Some leaders emphasize purpose13. On the other hand, another part emphasizes relationships™. Those who emphasize purpose and duty are completely dedicated to the purpose and use the power and might of communication, expertise, reward and coercion in their leadership activities15. On the other hand, those who emphasize relationship make an effort to maintain positive relations between people and masses, and they tend to use authority by identifying the masses with themselves16.

These two styles of leadership can be equally successful in the face of events, depending on circumstances and personal characteristics. Some people have the ability to be a leader in both styles and Atatürk is one of these rare talented people. Atatürk was able to use both leadership styles, thanks to his potential. While maintaining its positive relations with the masses successfully, it used all forms of authority for its purpose, never went to the path of maslahat, preferred to reach its goal in a straight way and always tell the masses correctly. Atatürk's ability to use both styles together stems from the characteristics of his personality. Indeed, Atatürk's personality seems to reflect the first of two types conceptualized in social psychology as (internal) internal and (external) external: traits such as the seldom of falling into depressions and the fact that physical health is essentially good. However, the characteristic of low addiction to certain substances of this type is not present in Atatürk in terms of alcoholic beverages. This type of person can produce strategies to prevent bad possibilities. In Atatürk, this ability is at a high level and stems from his expertise in the military. This type of person can produce strategies to prevent bad possibilities. In Atatürk, this ability is at a high level and stems from his expertise in the military. This type of person can produce strategies to prevent bad possibilities. In Atatürk, this ability is at a high level and stems from his expertise in the military.

Again, this type of self-belief is very strong. It is known how strong Atatürk's ability to trust himself was. Atatürk basically presented self-confidence to the members of the Turkish nation as the most basic principle. When he says "Turkish, praise, work, trust", he acts with the aim of identifying the society with his personality.

It is known that the internal type has a strong tendency to join political groups and movements. As a matter of fact, Atatürk's interest in politics and the power of his need to use authority show itself from his youth and constitute a very effective factor in his growth as a leader. It is an important example that indicates the intensity of this need for authority, that he addressed the German commander's question (wouldn't it be too much) when he was demanding the command of higher rank continents in the Gallipoli Wars, with the sentence (income less).

Skill-leadership and Atatürk

10. - Leadership exists in all areas of human relations. One of the very important elements in terms of leadership is undoubtedly the skill (expertise) specific to that field. In this respect, success in leadership does not depend only on efforts and physical efforts. On the contrary, it is related to the superiority of mental activity and mental ability. As one writer said, it doesn't matter to what degree, how hard and for how long the musical instrument is blown; The important thing is the quality of the sound made while blowing. However, it is certain that health and high energy are very important factors.

In this respect, we think that when Atatürk's personality is analyzed, the situation should be determined as follows: The situation of the country in 1919 was as stated at the beginning of the Great Speech. The resistance movements that have started in various parts of the country are waiting for a unifying leader. First of all, because it was about fighting, of course, the unifying leader had to be a skilled soldier, and at that time, history brought before the society a pasha who had been trained and trained for leadership all his life, and who gained a high degree of charisma by winning the victory in Çanakkale. Historical conditions brought together military and political problems and put them together. It was not possible to achieve military success without controlling the political conditions. It was not possible to improve the political conditions without achieving military success. For this reason, the military and political leadership had to be united in the same person. It can be seen that military skill was the foremost factor under Atatürk's leadership. Thus, military skill is the basis of political leadership. Thus, the political leadership developed with the help of the civilian and military staff who were with him. There is no doubt that the political movements that Atatürk himself has been involved in since his youth were influential in the development of political leadership. Let's also point out that the fact that we have stated how personal qualities and historical conditions provided Atatürk's leadership without competition does not mean that we have ignored Atatürk's efforts to achieve this leadership. Atatürk assumed the leadership of the period of 1919 and after as a reward of the society, but in Atatürk, He gave the award that corresponds to this independence movement. This award is the prestige power it provides to the movement. Some people bring prestige to the movements they participate in by the attention-grabbing power of their names. Atatürk's taking the lead of the resistance movement in Anatolia, assuming the leadership of this movement, and especially giving up all his official titles at a certain moment and expressing that he had no other aim than to work for the success of the movement as a member of nationality brought great prestige to the new organization in Anatolia and caused some hesitations to be raised. It has greatly increased the confidence and courage of the society by destroying it.

Thus, it is clearly and distinctly confirmed under the leadership of Atatürk that the behavior that constitutes the leadership is a manifestation of the personality, qualities and characteristics that were acquired as a result of social experiences and integrated with the conditions brought by history, and that the leadership behavior is a manifestation of the personal characteristics and social conditions that create these characteristics for a certain period of time. appears to be a function.

Democratic and dictatorial leadership and Atatürk

II.- There are various classifications of leadership in social science17. One of the most important of these is undoubtedly the distinction between democratic and dictatorial leadership: There is democratic leadership in cases where the leadership position is obtained within the framework of competition in accordance with the rules, following the institutionalized democratic process and progress procedures in accordance with the existing legal examples, except for the use of force, and where the leader acts in full compliance with the rules of law. . On the other hand, there is dictatorial leadership where the political leader has achieved and maintained the leadership position by using force. The dictatorial leader cannot maintain his position without the support of some of the people. “As such, dictatorship is due to social disintegration”18; It is a form of socio-psycho-pathology.

Some western writers define Atatürk as a dictator. In our opinion, this definition stems from the effort to fit social situations and situations into certain and rigid models. However, social events and phenomena cannot be expressed with such rigid models.

Atatürk's leadership is not primarily a form of socio-psycho-pathology; on the contrary, it indicates a completely healthy social development. Atatürk's political leadership, which started in 1919, was neither achieved by force nor maintained by force. On the contrary, as explained above, the rational-legal authority order has brought itself to the leadership without question; No one even thought of competing with him for leadership. The established order has always aimed at democracy and all efforts have been made to achieve democracy. Abuse and leadership

12. - If we consider this issue, which we briefly touched upon, in terms of leadership and abuse of power, the difference between Atatürk's leadership and the dictatorial leadership style described above can be seen more clearly:

It is one of the data of social science that power and power also carry the path of abuse in their soul and that absolute power can lead to absolute abuse. How this process develops and operates is explained in detail in the works of social psychology19. Among these explanations, the most important ones are that the owner of power believes that he is very active in terms of the activities of the target over time, thus he starts to see the target as less valuable, distances himself from the target, exaggerates the self-esteem, gets used to despising those who are outside of himself, and even considers himself as a partner. is to consider it outside the limits of morality. For this reason, in some organizations, it is bound by the rules of law that the leadership position can be occupied by the same person only for a certain period of time.

Atatürk has always tried to attribute all the achievements realized within the framework of his leadership period from 1919 until his death to the Turkish society, to strive and emphasize that all these were his work. When he shouted "How happy is the one who says I am a Turk", the Turkish people, who were worn out by constant wars and whose economic power has decreased, saw themselves as the proudest society in the world, capable of dealing with the whole world. Atatürk's tendency to see himself a little bigger every day, to deify himself and to record everything on his own account, which is characteristic of dictators, is not present in Atatürk, and he never got caught up in the process of abuse of power.

Exchange between leader and community

13. - We would like to conclude this review by addressing an important issue that Fiedler explained about leadership, also in terms of Atatürk's leadership:

to Fiedler. According to him, the relationship between the leader and his followers is not stable, except in very rare cases. There is almost a business deal, a shopping relationship between the leadership and the followers. In order for this relationship to continue, both parties must earn as much as possible. In terms of political leadership, the production of good and appropriate policies is a military victory for the nation forming the side. The leader can maintain his position according to his contribution to the achievement of the goals. Because status, fame, prestige, prestige and sometimes even material rewards are the rewards that the group can give to the leader. As the leader rewards the group for achieving its goals, the group in turn rewards it with powers of power. Regardless of the authority structure of the society, this process is valid.

When the Turkish nation gave the surname Atatürk to Mustafa Kemal, they did not do this to make up for the deficiency caused by orphanhood. On the contrary, the world's proudest nation gave its leader the highest award in return for the awards it provided to him, and crowned him as the ancestor of all Turks.

Leadership credit and Ataturk

14. - The rewards that the successful leader realizes for society, especially those of an economic nature, increase the expectations of the members of the group; reveals new expectations. People attached to leadership begin to expect everything from him. Since it is not possible to give everything to people, the leader who is successful almost prepares the end with his own hand.

To resolve this paradox, Hollander20 says in summary: The benefits that leadership brings to the group over time are like money in a bank; Thus, a fund was created to receive loans. This credit empowers the leadership to deviate from the expectations of the people. However, the accumulation of deviation can also reduce and even consume credit.

In this respect, when Atatürk's leadership is evaluated, it is seen that the accumulated credit is very high. So much so that, after the War of Independence, he was offered a literary presidency or even a sultanate. Then the adjective "father of the nation" is given. In Turkish tradition, the credit of the ancestor never ends. The greatness of Atatürk's role in the victory of the War of Independence and the opportunity for people to live proudly in front of the whole world increases this credit. For a people like the Turkish nation, where being proud is the most important part of its culture, the importance of this situation is extraordinary and the credit extended in this regard has been endless. Social change proposals, which are expressed as Atatürk's reforms, can actually be realized without any serious resistance other than one or two individual resistances, It is because of this loan opened to the leadership of Atatürk. In addition, the Turkish nation, which had come out of the War of Independence with its head held high, was in a really poor economic situation; After that, a development that would enable the theory of "relative deprivation" to work, and as a result, the rise of expectations could not be realized. In order for the event of rising expectations to take place, it was necessary to come back to the 1960s on Atatürk's path. Atatürk's life span was not long enough to make it possible to realize these expectations. If Atatürk had lived longer and expectations had risen as much as they do today, how would the events take shape? It would not be a scientific attitude to attempt to make predictions on this matter. Conclusion After that, a development that would enable the theory of "relative deprivation" to work, and as a result, the rise of expectations could not be realized. In order for the event of rising expectations to take place, it was necessary to come back to the 1960s on Atatürk's path. Atatürk's life span was not long enough to make it possible to realize these expectations. If Atatürk had lived longer and expectations had risen as much as they do today, how would the events take shape? It would not be a scientific attitude to attempt to make predictions on this matter. Conclusion After that, a development that would enable the theory of "relative deprivation" to work, and as a result, the rise of expectations could not be realized. In order for the event of rising expectations to take place, it was necessary to come back to the 1960s on Atatürk's path. Atatürk's life span was not long enough to make it possible to realize these expectations. If Atatürk had lived longer and expectations had risen as much as they do today, how would the events take shape? It would not be a scientific attitude to attempt to make predictions on this matter. Conclusion Atatürk's life span was not long enough to make it possible to realize these expectations. If Atatürk had lived longer and expectations had risen as much as they do today, how would the events take shape? It would not be a scientific attitude to attempt to make predictions on this matter. Conclusion Atatürk's life span was not long enough to make it possible to realize these expectations. If Atatürk had lived longer and expectations had risen as much as they do today, how would the events take shape? It would not be a scientific attitude to attempt to make predictions on this matter. Conclusion

15. - In this study, we just wanted to point out a new field in terms of Atatürk studies and draw the attention of young researchers, especially sociologists and social psychology experts. If our evaluations, diagnoses and conclusions are criticized, we will be more happy than anyone else.

1 Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (Edited with an Introduction by Talcoot Parsons), The Free Press, New York, fourth printing) 1966.

2 Partly on this subject, Dankwart A. Rustow, Atatürk as the Founder of the State (A Gift to Prof. Dr. Yavuz Abadan, p. 573 and last); Matta Doğan, Atatürk and de Goulle “Similarities between two charismatic people” (Türkiye İş Bankası International Atatürk Symposium 17-22 May 1981).

3 Talcott Parsons, The Social System (The Free Press, New York second printing, 1964, s. 136 ve son.).

4 Frank Tachau, (Atatürk as a charismatic Leader) should be counted among these authors.

5 Sulhi Dönmezer, Sociology, 10th edition, Istanbul 1990 p. 298 and final.

6 Merlin Krüger-Frieda Silvert, Charisma, (Ancyclopedia Americana, c.6, s. 296).

7 Power, power is also defined as the ability to change the actions and actions of others by influencing them.

8 As it is known, there are various forms of power used by leaders: The power and power to influence people in their relations are gathered in five groups in social psychology:

Communication power: It is changing the actions and movements of people by influencing them with the means of communication at hand. Communication power is a very important source of power because people generally act in accordance with their beliefs and attitudes, and because beliefs and attitudes are largely determined by the means of communication people have at their disposal. By using the means of communication skillfully, those in power can change the beliefs and attitudes of individuals in a way that enables them to act as they wish.

Power or power to lead people to identify with themselves: It refers to making a person, and naturally the leader, a positive reference by other people. The sense of identification with the leader provoked in the person will affect his behavior and actions and will provide a certain amount of power to the leader. (In this regard, see Sulhi Dönmezer, Sociology, 10. ed. 1990 p. 104 and the last.) Legitimate power and power: Legitimate power is the name given to the power arising from social agreements to direct and manage the behavior of individuals in different situations and conditions. This power is limited. It becomes strong and powerful when people believe that those who use power have to decide on a particular issue and society has to accept them. Expert power and strength: Skills to do certain jobs,

The power and power of giving rewards and using force: One of the tools used by the leader is to reward or punish other people, to use force and force on them. It is known that reward and punishment provide psychological change and behavioral harmony or incompatibility in individuals. (For this information, see Kenneth J. Gergen-Mary M. Gergen, Social Psychology, Harcourt Brace Jovanrvich, p. 312 and last; Sulhi Dönmezer, Sociology, p. 301 and last.) 9 See. note 8.

10 La Pierre-Farnsworth, Social Psychology, third edit, 1949, s. 256 ve son.

11 La Pierre-Farnsworth, sg.

12 Mentioned by J. Gergen-M. Gergen, sg ecer, p. 325.

13 Task Oriented.

14 Relationship Oriented.

15-16 8 No. lu nota bak.

17 Sulhi Dönmez.tr, Sociology, p. 296 and final.

18 La Pierre-Famsuorth, p. 256 and final.

19 David Kipnis, The Powerholclers, Chicago University Press 1976.

20 Hollander, Competence, Status and Idiosyncracy Credit (Psychological Review, 1958; zikreden J. Gergen-M. Gergen, s. 8. eser).

Ord. Prof. Dr. Sulhi Dönmezer

Source: ATATÜRK ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ DERGİSİ, Sayı 22, Cilt: VIII, Kasım 1991