{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024274406332453827, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0063324538258575196, 'mean_word_length': 5.216393442622951, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Social Psychology of the Ergenekon Case: The Collapse of the Official Narrative in Turkey

It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the Republic of Turkey was created in the image of its founder, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. In fact, those who subscribe to the official Turkish narrative often refer to the country as ‘Atatürk Republic’ (Atatürk Cumhuriyeti). That phrase emphasizes a certain political identity that was largely shaped during the Cultural Revolution Atatürk brought about under his one-party rule in the 1920s and 1930s. In very brief terms, the revolution aimed to replace, often by force, Turkish religiocultural practices and symbols with Western ones. Atatürk’s forced-Westernization policy was coupled with a strong cult of personality around his image as the nation’s leader. When Atatürk’s reign came to an end in 1938 with his death, the state sanctified his memory and ideals, and allowed his unquestioned status to persist in the years to come. His persona, ideology and Cultural Revolution since have become largely intertwined and have influenced official Turkish historiography strongly. Within the Turkish political system, it has been the bureaucracy, and especially the military, that have safeguarded Atatürk’s heritage for decades. But, as the restrictions on freedom of speech started to loosen after the turn of the millennium, not only the official ideology but also the whole system that maintained the status quo came under widespread criticism, mostly on democratic grounds. The criticisms directly targeted the official narrative and, by doing so, further stimulated public interest in history. For many, that was a recovery from ‘amnesia,’ since the state institutions had long inculcated the idea that Turkish history started with Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. According to the counter-narrative, however, even the choice of the self-proclaimed last name