{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02198852772466539, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019120458891013384, 'mean_word_length': 5.420245398773006, '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}}
STATE-CENTERED APPROACH IN OTTOMAN-TURKISH MODERNIZATION AND METIN HEPER

The aim of this study is to describe the role of the state in Turkish modernization. For this purpose, Ottoman-Turkish political history is discussed in the context of the "center-periphery" model and Metin Heper's "strong state tradition". In this context, it is discussed whether the general validity of the center-periphery model continues. The center-periphery theory, which reduces modernization to tension and conflict between the superstructure institutions in Turkey, has made the opposition between the urban-secular-middle classes and the traditional-poor-lower classes its starting point. According to the strong state tradition thesis, the ruling elites, who took the modern values transferred from the West as a reference, were insensitive to the environment while constantly strengthening the center. The authoritarian structure of the state prevented the development of different social classes and non-governmental organizations. The strong state tradition transferred from the Ottoman Empire continued to be effective in the republic period as the subject of modernization. So much so that the bureaucratic structure that established the Republic identified itself with the state and strengthened the center until the multi-party system. Cultural conflict and tension between the ruling elites representing the center and traditional society segments representing the periphery have also been decisive in terms of the power struggle. The rise of the neo-liberal wave in the 1980s had reflections on the power struggle in Turkey and affected the relations between the center and the periphery. While the old elites forming the center became the periphery, the conservative sections forming the periphery became centralized and formed the new elites. In conclusion, it can be said that the center-periphery theory and strong state tradition are still functional in explaining Ottoman-Turkish modernization with some reservations. Key Words: Ruling elites, Center-Periphery Model, strong state tradition.