ACFM - #ACFM Microdose: Ece Temelkuran on Crowds

Episode Date: January 13, 2021

Nadia Idle speaks to Turkish journalist and author Ece Temelkuran about the potency of crowds. Reflecting on their experiences in Tahrir Square and Gezi Park, they talk about feeling powerful in political demonstrations, why raves might be infantilising rather than inspiring, and how Covid-19 has put an end to free assembly. Ece, twice named Turkey’s […]

Welcome to me. Everybody knows it's studying in about an hour of June. Welcome to ACFM. I'm Nadia Idol and today I'm ecstatic to be chatting with ECHE to Milkuran about the politics of crowds. thank you so much for coming on the show. Oh, thank you, Nadia. It's a pleasure. Thank you so much. And I need to say at this stage that I'm very sad, that distance and COVID restrictions mean that I'm not able to offer you a lavish breakfast

and that we're not sitting together at the moment and we're separated by distance. I love feeding my guests. I also love seeing them in real life. And I kind of, I've got this Zatar made by Lebanese mountain monks, no less. And I kind of think you would have enjoyed to have that because I know you have an affinity with Beirut. But unfortunately, we are just sounds to each other at the moment. Consider that you owe me one. Okay, fine.

That's a deal. And you did say when you very kindly signed how to lose a country for me, which we'll talk about in a second, via my friend. friend Mariam in Edinburgh, you said as you signed it in August 2019, next time face to face, and it didn't happen, but maybe next time. Yes, and during your breakfast, and you know, you can be sure that I'll remind you this breakfast. Okay, I will, I'm happy for that. And so I guess my first question to you is, do you have enough of the Turkish walnut jam

that appears in the book to last you through the Croatian winter? Well, you know what? I have chosen the best country to live in on several levels because it's on the, you know, fringes, let's say, of Europe. And this country does not consider itself European. And it doesn't consider itself Balkan either. It's something in between. It's like if you ask me, it's the optimum, you know, blend of Balkan and European cultures. But one thing, only one thing about this country bothers me a lot. They don't have a culture of breakfast. And in a country where there is no culture of breakfast, I don't feel completely at home. That's really interesting. But Zagreb has loads of bakeries, doesn't it? Oh yeah. They're big on bakeries. Okay. Yeah, which makes you a fat person. But basically you think people... But E.E., we can talk about breakfast and food for really, really long time. But today we're going to be talking about crowds. And without further ado, I would like to give you a small, maybe big

introduction and talk a little bit about why I wanted to speak to you today before we jump into the subject. So for those of you who don't know, Eché, Ech etche Temel-Coran is one of Turkey's best-known novelists and political commentators. She's contributed to, and there's a long list here, the Guardian, new statesman, new left review, Le Mont Diplomartique, Frank Frankfurt, Runchao, if I'm pronouncing that correct, Der Spiegel, New York Times and so many others. Her books on investigative journalism broach subjects that are highly controversial in Turkey,

such as the Kurdish and Armenian issues and freedom of expression. And your novel, Women Who Blow on Knots, it's won several awards, hasn't it? The Penn translates awards, but also something in Edinburgh, I think, and it's sold over 120,000 copies in Turkey, in Turkish, and it's been published in translation in Germany, Croatia, Poland, Bosnia, France,

with forthcoming editions in China, Italy and the USA. You were born into a political family. You studied to be a lawyer, but you never practiced your profession, except for once to defend Kurdish children in a political class action as a symbolic act. And you were bored by law school, it says here. and you started to work for the newspaper, which I'm not going to be able to pronounce. Could you pronounce it for me? Jumhurriyat.

Jumriyet, okay, that sounds like the Arabic, during your second year in university, and then you grew in your journalism, and then, and we'll get to this, you were fired from your job. It also says here that you've been voted twice as one of the 10 most influential people on social media, which is amazing, but also a terrible burden. How do you cope with that? I don't. I don't. I have long stories about this.

When the term social media harassment was not invented yet, I was social media. I was one of the victims of that harassment, which was, you know, steered by the government trolls and so on. So, yeah, it wasn't invented yet, and I was the victim, so it felt so lonely that place. But today, it's easier because we now know that there are, you know, we're living in a post-truth world, so it's easier to manage that kind of attack, I think. And that's good to hear. And I came to you because I was in my local bookshop and I could see the hardback version

of how to lose a country, the seven steps from democracy to dictatorship, on the shelf. And I kind of, I held up the book and the woman who worked in the bookshop came over to me and she said, look, if you buy one nonfiction book this year, buy this one, it's really good. And I like, and I really, really like that. And there was something she was really saying, oh, this is really good. And I'm very, I have to admit, I don't buy nonfiction titles very often, simply because I tell myself, why do I need to know the detail of all the bad news that I know anyway? So unless I feel like there's a call to arms or there's some kind of, you know, action involved. I tend to get my news, you know, from articles and, and pieces,

etc, rather than from books. But I picked up your book, Etche, and I was addicted from page one. I mean, not only are, you're just a great storyteller. And the plane in which you're discussing the step, you know, the steps towards authoritarianism and how it happens, It's a different texture and a different level of conversation, which I've not found since then, even, in public discourse, even though it is being picked up a little bit more. But just a very, very quick synopsis of this book, you say that you wrote it as a guide for the West in an age of Trump and Brexit. Is that a fair representation? Well, yeah, but not limited to that. I think.

And it's a book that brings together sort of, this is why I love it. So I've picked up some of my favorite bits. It's a book that brings together a story of, you know, an authoritarian coup in 48 hours. The bucket, the ice bucket challenge. Trump, Farage and Brexit. Margaret Thatcher's handbag.

A frustrating chat between Aristotle and a right-wing populist. And my favorite bit, what it's like to feel like a panda up for a dog. option on a charity website, win faced with the question, what can I do for you? It's so beautifully written and we're going to put a link to the show notes. I know it's not in this show notes. I know it's not, you're not your most recent work, but I highly, highly recommend this for anyone in the UK who's saying what's happened to this country, what's happened to my neighbours and what's happened to this world and who am I and how do I interact with this

this um forward step of authoritarianism so thank you for writing that book oh yeah thank you i really really really do love it and i started a small left book club just to talk about i brought it to my left book club i absolutely adore this book and you know not just in this book but in other um other pieces you've written and you know interviews with you you discuss these very ACFM concepts which we love discussing on the show like, you know, melancholy, joy, despair. And each one of these can be a three-hour conversation between us. But unfortunately, we only have time for one today and that is the politics of crowds. So with your permission, I would like to do a quick retelling of a story in chapter, in the chapter called Let Them Laugh at Horror from

from your book, How to Lose a Country. Is that all right? And that will take us. Please go ahead. Okay. So to set the scene for our listeners, so it's the morning after the night before, you're sitting around for breakfast with some friends,

and you're being a killjoy. And your friends are saying to you, the problem with you, Ece, why you didn't enjoy last night's dancing or party, is that you haven't joined, quote, unquote, the kind of a lesque fun that comes out of being a chemical brother, part of the chemical brotherhood, i.e. you're misunderstanding all of these blank faces on the dance floor. What it is is these people are high and they're happy. And you're saying, no, they aren't. They're

basically atomized units. I think you said traveling and separately enhanced realities in this sort of situation of being neoliberal subjects. And everyone, you know, your friends who are veteran festival goers and burners, been to Burning Man Festival, I mean, are trying to cheer you up. And you're basically saying, no, there's something wrong with the way people are behaving in this way. But then you set your cutlery to one side

and you say, I'm the goddamn Cinderella of Carnival, real carnival, that is. And then there is a flashback to this moment where you should have been on a book tour, but you're not on a book tour. You are in the streets of Ankara, there's tear gas flying everywhere.

The hem of your long skirt is tucked into your belt. Your shirt is wrapped around your face and you're running through the streets wearing only one shoe. And you meet this man who's running after you, calling you Cinderella of the Revolution with your other shoe. you quickly exchange information you've just he finds out you've just lost your job you find out he's this rich uh lawyer and he's saying to you by cinderella of the revolution this is the real thing and you part and at that moment in the book you talk about crowds and you talk about

how pain and fear disappears and how it manifests itself in the crowd. So with that very, very, very long interaction, sorry, introduction that I've put there, I wonder if you could tell us a little bit about why and how you think fear and pain diminish in a crowd. Could you talk a little bit more about that? Oh, yeah. Well, when you're retelling this story, I went back to Gezi Uprising, which was the real thing, the real carnival that made me the central revolution with one shoe. You know, these two stories, the chemical brotherhood that makes everyone so-called happy or, you know, entertain everyone during the, you know, fashionable entertainment. of our age, which is clubbing or like dancing and so on. And the other story where, you know, I have to be fearing my life,

fearing for my life and so on during the uprising, during the protests. You know, when you juxtapose these two stories, one can see that the system we're living in is actually replacing the real joy with manufacturing. happiness, which is a chemically induced, chemically induced state of being high. It always, you know, bothers me. Maybe I'm to 19th century, but I do believe in communication among people. I do believe in talking. Maybe it's because I'm coming from Middle East as well. You don't need to apologize for that. I am unapologetically Middle Eastern yes

we think with words and we communicate with words and when there are no words there is no communication there is no connection so what today's entertainment is doing to people is removing words from between the people so they are becoming atomized as I told in the book as well. And what is interesting to me is they think that they are happy in that state, which is a tragic state of solitary, actually. And this replacing the joy with a certain kind of

entertainment is something that is deeply embedded in our culture, in today's culture. And sometimes I think that this is only done for people to make people forget the real joy of oneness, the real joy of human connection. And this is, you know, the protests during Gezi or in Tahrir or in Madrid or in Occupy moments all around the world. What people are experiencing, what the crowds are experiencing is an elevating moment. elevation and a real joy of being together, even though the circumstances are very dangerous. I mean, like there's tear gas, there's plastic bullets, sometimes real bullets. You are risking, you're literally risking your life. But then the joy of it becomes unforgettable.

That is why Gesea uprising happened in 2013. team. And many people have died. Many people suffered. They lost limbs. They lost their sights like people in Tahir. Of course. If you ask people today, to those people who joined these protests, they wouldn't hesitate a second when telling that these were the best days of their lives. What made the best days, what made them so beautiful was the joy of being present. one, physically present on the squares and being able to express yourself and to exercise the right of being recognized as human beings, with your words, with your voice, with your body,

and with your connection to other people. And this real joy is something political. And when we are talking about politics of crowds today, I think we should underline this joy and we should mark this in the, you know, in political history as well. Because most of the time when such protests are talked about, when we discuss such protests, we talk about how many people were injured, the suppression that followed, or, you know, how many people were killed and so on. But then we have to see the other side of the story, which was the immense joy that we experienced during the time we were physically present in a square or on the streets. Because that was the thing that brought people repeatedly to the square, even though they were risking their lives. And there was a lot of talking. There were no, you know, there were hardly any alcohol or.

or any, you know, chemical substance that would create such a, such happiness. But it was more like seeing people like yourself, ending and ending the feeling of loneliness. And that brought a lot of joy to people. And this has political significance that we have to emphasize, I think. No, that's, I really like the way that you put that. And I think I've just been reading this book, Keir, one of the hosts of ACFM, one of the hosts of ACFM sent me very kindly called Crowd Neti, which was written in 1960. But he has this really beautiful way of writing about the open crowd. And the, you know, the open crowd is his concept of the real crowd. And the fact that it has, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's. It's an entity in itself beyond the sum of its parts. And it always strives to grow, that it becomes this kind of living body that strives to grow, but it's also out of control. And part of the joy of it is that you don't know when more people are going to come. As long as more people come,

you don't know where it's going to end up. You don't exactly know what's going to happen, but it enjoys the bringing together of bodies as a central thing. talk about control now. Let's take two crowds, one in a big, huge club, you know, dangling with the rhythm. It sounds like you've just not had a good clubbing experience. I'm hostile towards crowds, obviously. I mean, okay, go on. We'll go with it. No. You were in a club. What I am interested is to make people understand that there is there is there is there is a joy hidden from them and that's a political concept

because I don't see many people joining these two concepts together, politics and joy so we are we've got a whole podcast on it and I'll send it to you after this. I'm very happy to hear that because

these two concepts has to be together, has to be thought together and discussed together until they are inseparably associated it's inseparably connected to each other. But people nowadays consider themselves having fun, being happy, went in a club dangling together, ironically, to a rhythm which is resembling to heartbeat.

Heartbeat is the first sound we hear before even we were born. We start hearing it when we are in the womb of our mother. So there is this heartbeat-like rhythm in the club, and everybody's, you know, playing along and so on. So I feel like we're in a womp altogether, and people feel like they are free there because they are, you know, using whatever. They are, you know, they're surrendering to the rhythm and, you know, releasing all. all the tension and so on. Whereas what I see is infantilizing, you know, sound of heartbeat, which makes us feel like babies and our insanity, so to speak, mind is controlled within the confines of a club. Whereas, you know, we are very much control there. On the other side,

in the crowd, I do not agree with Kanetti. there is a control. The body, the body of the crowd, controls itself perfectly well, in fact. And we have seen this during all the Occupy movements, and Gezi and Tahrir and similar other movements in Hong Kong lately. But the control comes in a very specific way, which is not resembling to the conventional power structure

that we know from state or any other political structure. The body controls itself without hierarchy. And that is one thing that is, you know, that we are going to be talking a lot, I think, in coming decades when we are restructuring the political institutions. I am hoping that we are going to inspire from that kind of control that is based upon self, self-governance and individual responsibility and common sense.

Well, when I say common sense, it sounds like British common sense. I don't mean that. I mean, you know, basics of human morality. So there is a control there, but it is not from top to bottom, but it is in a horizontal way, the crowd. is governing itself. So I think it is something that might inspire all of us to reimagine the power itself, the idea of power itself. Yeah, I mean, I think that's great. And I might have misrepresented Kenetti there. I think what I was trying to say is, is there's movement to it.

And as soon as that movement stops, because it has this other interesting concept of the closed crowd and we'll get on to that, you know, fascist, is there a fascist crowd thing in a second, but this idea that, you know, almost there is a movement to it and it grows and grows and it undulates into different directions. And that's interesting to think about in terms of the concept of the crowd and how that melds into, like you were saying, where the crowd became an occupation and where people actually sat down and how that kind of changes the movement of it, but also perhaps changes the expectation of it and also who stays and who goes in an occupation for better or for worse in that case. I did have something, I have got

three other things to say and now I can't remember. So I think, so yeah, that was the thing I was going to say. I was going to say, I suppose I'm interested in, or we're interested in, sort of what kinds of gatherings are can provide a function under neoliberalism and a kind of allowed to exist and which ones aren't and that's obvious and this on sometimes quite telling and I think you know in the UK definitely we are defending club culture and we're defending venues because those things are being taken away from us because um the way that you know clubs or spaces to congregate. And then again, on top of this, we've got now COVID, which is one of the main reasons why we wanted to talk about this, that we are not allowed to assemble in any form.

Well, is that so? Well, I'm thinking Turkey, especially when I say, is that so? Because it depends on the political desires of the political power, who is going to assemble and who is not, who is allowed to assemble, who is not. For instance, in Turkey, all other protests are, you know, very dangerous due to COVID, but not, let's say, the opening of Hagia Sofia as a mosque. The cathedral was converted to mosque very recently by Mr. Erdogan. So when people gathered in Hagia Sofia for a mass praying, there weren't there weren't any real regulations concerning the COVID so this is of course we all know

that COVID has become a political tool in order to suppress suppress the critics of the regime in order to ban all the protests and so on in several countries and Turkey is one of them so yeah but on the other hand you're right I mean like the you know we know how to deal with pain despair or anger by coming together and corona pandemic obviously makes it impossible so people are trying to find ways to express their contempt for such regimes. Sorry, I interrupted you. Please go ahead. No, no, no, no, no, no, not at all. Feel free to interrupt me. I'm very pro interrupting. I don't have any problem with it. So I guess both what you've just mentioned and in how to lose a country

in seven steps from democracy to dictatorship there is a bit where you talk about Erdogan trying to bring together his crowd to kind of emulate what happened in Gezi Park etc and also so I'm very interested in that in that in your lived experience

do you feel like being you know you've just given us a few minutes ago a fantastic description of of what it feels like to be in that kind of free crowd of people congregating, agitating for a kind of cause. But how does it feel like to be in a right wing or controlled or sort of government-mandated crowd? Have you been in one and have you noticed kind of the differences? Oh, well, when I was doing, when I was still doing journalism, of course, I did, you know, for reporting, I was part of, not part of the, but I was the witness of such crowds on several occasions.

To start with, I'm a woman, so such crowds tend to be conservative and not very female-friendly, so to put it, you know, to say the least. Yeah, we'll talk about that. Yeah, yeah. So it is threatening, it's hostile. that feeling of joy, that component of joy, let's say, is not there at all. There is anger, and there are less words, which is interesting. The vocabulary is very limited.

So, and, well, I feel like today what's happening is the more, you know, utter mobilization, complete mobilization of those crowds, it is organized ignorance, mobilized by political intentions, and these crowds are not organic and they are not growing bodies, as Kennedy says, and they are targeting what the ruler wants them to target. it is a, how to say it, it is not a fertile being, that crowd, but rather a sinister, super male thing. I don't know how to put it otherwise. I'm looking for words to explain my disgust in proper terms. No, that sounded great. And I think, yeah, there's something, because I think, you know, As progressives, and I'm pretty sure you'll agree with me here,

it's, you know, we're looking at the structures which cause human behavior, and I'm sure we'd like to think that those very people who were in that, you know, right-wing, organized, authoritarian crowd could also be in the open, joyous, resisting crowd, that it is possible for them to become those people. And it's very much the form that determines, how people behave is that is that fair hmm i'm like this is a very very long discussion topic of course one of the things um that happens after you live under an oppressive regime long enough

you start losing your faith in humankind so you start asking questions like is humankind evil in its essence. So you start suspecting this, you know, structures and, you know, this statement, this, this understanding of human being, he can be in that crowd or in that crowd, it depends on the structure, that idea becomes a little bit contested, let's say, because well yeah sometimes you start thinking in the wrong way you start asking the wrong questions such as is human being evil by nature so I am not even sure I agree with that anymore but I don't know if this is you know my mind is contaminated by too much evil or not I guess what I'm

thinking is you know there's it's important for us to believe that that that that that the circumstances that people are put in and the forces which they are, um, are, um, are facing. I agree with the essence of that argument. Obviously, in, of course, of course in practice, I'm not expecting someone who, you know, holds right wing reactionary views on one day to suddenly, you know, go to an amazing, beautiful progressive occupation the next day in a crowd. I'm not at all expecting that. But I'm, I'm imagining in the same way, way that people become, become right-wing and become attracted to congregating in those sort of crowds, win in those sort of crowds, win the leader or when, you know, and support X, Y, Z compared to a

spontaneous occupation. It's like it goes both ways, right? People who are, who are progressive, can stop being progressive and vice versa and therefore find themselves in, in those different kinds of congregations. I mean, we all know people, especially when you're in the Middle East, you know, I know people who went from progressive to Islamic fundamentalists and back, you know, and, you know, in the West, you know, I've met people who used to have really right-wing views and other people who had progressive views and have changed. And how they then will interact with bodies in a public space, they will obviously, there will be a magnetic force pulling them from one to the other. But I guess,

I guess I'm thinking about the form as well in that case. Absolutely. I mean, like, if I didn't agree with this argument, this, you know, perspective, I wouldn't have written that book anyway, how to lose a country. Because, you know, Western countries, peoples of Western countries, consider themselves democratic, civilized, and so on. And I try to tell them, if you are put in the circumstances that we have been through in Turkey, you would probably react the same way, which is happening right now.

I mean, like all these countries, well, let's talk about Britain. It is really not, I wouldn't say shocking, but quite painful to see that now. There are hashtags from British Twitter users for rule of law. Now it came to defending the rule of law in Britain. Who would have thought? But, like, 10 years ago, when rule of law became disparate in Turkey, any British citizen could not have, no British citizen could not have thought they would have to defend rule of law in their own country. So what I, of course, I, you know, agree with the, you know, main argument. If right-wing populism, for instance, you know, if a country is subjected to right-wing populism,

it goes insane in the same way like any other country. That's why I came up with the seven steps, seven patterns, so to speak, of this political mechanism that drives every country crazy despite the differences among those countries. So yeah, you're right. I mean, of course, the main argument is right. But then now I try to express my, and probably, you know, many people feel the same way.

And you start suspecting the human being itself because the suppression is so immense. And do you mean that in terms of when you suspect the nature of human beings, do you mean in terms of their behavior when they congregate? Not necessarily when they congregate. Now I'm writing a new book. I'm almost finished. It's called Together 10. choices for a better now. After how to lose a country, I became this international Cassandra,

so to speak. I'm going around the countries and I'm telling them, this is going to happen to you as well. You're going to suffer as well. I mean, you were right, frankly. Unfortunately, unfortunately. I'm not proud. But, yeah, I wasn't the most pleasant person when I was giving speeches in the United States or all over Europe. So now I decided to be the Mary Poppins of democracy or, you know, like for people so I wrote this book. It's almost finished and it's going to come out in May

next year. And what I am thinking in this book is who is what is human today? What is the human condition today? And since every country knows you know, more or less what political insanity looks like

since every country is contaminated by right wing populism, right wing populist leaders with authoritarian inclinations, now we can sit down together and find a way out. Not only, I'm not talking about getting, how do we get rid of these leaders, because I do think that it's bigger than leaders, these right wing populist leaders. I think it is what we are going through globally is the result of a crumbling system. when a system collapses, the human being collapses as well. So my question is, how do we rescue the idea of human from this collapse, a system collapse. So because many people, I mean, like this polarization in every country begins the same way.

You start dehumanizing the other. imagine the Brexit ears and pro-Europeans in Britain or Trump supporters and Trump critics in the United States once the polarization trickles down to the lower levels of society neighbors become host you know enemies to each other friends become hostile to each other the marriages break down because of this I'm like we've seen in Turkey happening and now it's happening

in other countries as well over politicization of the individual intimate relations become a sociological problem so societal problem so and when that happens you know that idea of human is evil that's why

we are going through this perspective becomes really dominant in the society. And I wanted to, you know, I am kind of fast-forwarding the film for the Western societies again and I am talking

from the point where they, I'm assuming they will arrive soon, which is human evil question. Because we've been there in Turkey, I mean, like we experienced this as well and still experiencing. So, yeah, we are still experiencing it. So I am trying to deal with that question now.

I am done with right-wing populist leaders, as you can see. You've done that. Well, I've done my bit. So, you know. What I'd really like to talk about now is going back to what you discussed just a few minutes ago about being a woman in a crowd and being a woman in a crowd in the Middle East. And I wondered if you would like to speak a little bit about your. experience in Gezi Park and the protests that happened in in Turkey and and whether you thought you know the crowd whether the crowd was a more egalitarian crowd in your

experience and also you were in Tahrir so we you weren't Tahrir is that right so Tahrir yeah I was Cairo so we were both there at the same time I co-edited a book saying the story of those 18 days called tweets from Tahrir and it's recently published in Turkey. Yes and has been translated in Turkish. Thanks. I mean, to be honest, Alex did a lot of the work with this. I was trying to hold down a full-time job at the same time as doing this, at the same time as having come back from a revolutionary moment. So, you know, the beginning of 2011 was a very, it was a crazy time in my life. But maybe just by way of introduction. For me, it was, you know, and you've mentioned this and already, but it was such a

profound moment for me to be in Tahrir because I had left Egypt, you know, 10 years before that, you know, and I'd moved to England. And one of the main reasons I'd moved to England is because of how I was constantly sexualized on the street. So Egypt, I will happily say is I, I confidently say, is the harassment of women capital of, you know, know, probably one of the capitals of the world. And I could not leave my house without being harassed every, I mean, every, every day. And I thought I constantly am being set back into my identity as female and just couldn't live as a person.

So that's one of the main reasons why I left. And, you know, and there are structural reasons which I can go about for eight on about for ages of why Cairo in the beginning of, uh, the beginning of, uh, the 2000, you know, when I left 2001, was like that. But at the moment when everything kicked off in Cairo, I, as I say in the beginning of the book, I sent an email to my boss and I was like, right, this is, I literally wrote a bucket list of what I wanted to do before I went because I didn't know if I was going to come back alive. And I said, this is one chance I'm going.

So we got on a plane and I luckily got there after the really, really, really difficult day where the, it's called Ma'aracti Gamel in Arabic, where they brought the camels in, in the middle of the square. And you can tell me more about when you were there. So I was there for like the good bit, so to speak. But the reason I'm saying all of this is because my experience standing in Tahrir in a crowd was, I've never experienced anything like that in Egypt before and I haven't experienced it since, which is that the male gaze disappeared and the male hands on my body disappeared. I was, I was a person. And I've never experienced that before. You almost brought tears to my eyes. So yes, I was a person, it would be a great

title for a book to start with. But it is so painful to say this. Yeah, I was a person too in Gizi, and many people felt the same thing, I guess. Not only female, but male as well. Yeah, exactly, yeah. Yeah, I was a person. You know, I think the crowd becomes female. I don't mean, when I say female, I don't mean women dominated. I mean, the female in the male is free to live itself as well in those moments of history

when such joyful crowds come together to be recognized as human beings, to ask for it to be recognized as human beings. Do you think it's the common, like it's the common enemy that does this? I mean, it felt like people were in a really almost bizarre and natural way, just very present. And everyone knew why they were there. And suddenly, there wasn't any, you know, harassment or violence or judgment on how much, you know, money people had or not had or what class you were from or what gender or where you came from. Like, all of that disappeared. It was just people doing hilarious stuff.

Like, hilarious. Yes. Egyptians are funny anyway, but like hilarious. And you know, you talked about that as well. And it's, and it's this, this just endless togetherness of just people, people, people, people. But of course, as you mentioned, like, you know, and we say in the introduction to, to the book tweets from Tahrir, which nobody paid attention to when we did all of the media interviews, is that the reason why what happened happened and we disposed the first dictator that we did in 18, in 18 days. And we had in 7,000 years, you know. is because of the bodies of people putting themselves on the line and the people who were killed and the people who lost their arms, et cetera. It's not because of Twitter, right? Exactly. But it's, you know, although, you know,

Twitter was a good organizing tool and also a good tool for broadcast because the government had kind of cut all official, there was very clear official lines coming out. But it was just this kind of incredible space. And it was so strongly marked by the fact that men were not looking at me in the same way that they looked at me for the last, you know, 10 years of living in Egypt.

It was just, I was not being looked at in that way. And it is so significant because it's completely different, because your life as a woman in that circumstance is completely different. Well, when I talk about Tahir Ghazi or similar movements. But it wasn't the same. Just to clarify, like in the atmosphere in terms of what women could wear, in terms of harassment. I don't get the impression that it was the same in, you know, Istanbul and Ankara,

or was it like that in Turkey too? Well, I cannot compare Turkey to Egypt in that sense, like the harassment sense, because I've been to Egypt. I know what you're talking about. It is horrific. It's really, like, terrifying. It's horrific. Yeah, yeah.

But what I'm trying to say is, in those moments of history, I think people did not only protest, they also created miniature glimpses of the life that they want to live. They invented the future. Yeah. When I talk about such moments of history, some people think that I am romanticizing those moments. And several people think that, okay, what happened? Nothing.

After that, nothing was, you know, it left normal. mark on politics, you know, neither Tahrir, no casey. I do believe that we have to keep talking about these moments of history because it changed something. It didn't change the political institutions. Well, I mean, like in Egypt, you got rid of the dictator for sure, but then it was replaced with another one. It didn't change the political institutions, let's put it that way. But these moments of history changed the zeitgeist immensely. And it changes what's possible, because no one can take that reality away.

No one can take that experience away from people's, and again, we're using this term bodies, but I think it's really useful here. Like, you cannot take it away from people's bodies that they had that experience. No one can take that away from me or the, you know, millions of other people in Egypt or or the squares around the world. Absolutely. And also, yeah, it's a memory that cannot be raised, obviously. it is not only a memory.

I think it's going to be the inspiration of the new world we'd like to see, we'd like to live in. Without romanticizing or without putting it down, without undermining it, we have to be talking about these moments of history to remind ourselves that we have done it once, so we can do it again. It cannot be repeated. I'm not saying that, but like it changed the zeitgeist in. that regard because if you look at the world history since 1980s, the dominant motto of the world

is there is no alternative. So in 2000, you know, beginning of 2000s, Occupy moments and, you know, Tahrir Gizi and such what's happening in Hong Kong as well, it's telling us that there is an alternative. Nobody's sure what that alternative is, obviously, but then they are removing that motto that built today's world. So that is important. That has to be, you know, noted. That has, you know, we have to recognize the significance of that. Going back to being a woman in such a crowd, yes, I felt like a person and probably many male members of the crowd felt the same thing. But I think those, we talked about this in the beginning, that self-governing body of the crowd

is also a female existence. I came to think that as well. Because as I said before, in the beginning of this conversation, it changed the very definition of power. So it changed the power from something hierarchical, hierarchical, oh God. it removed the hierarchy from the definition power and it replaced with caring and compassion so and it had a power that crowd had a power and that power was built upon caring compassion and the understanding of leaving nobody behind so i think this is a nurturing idea of power, which in my head is associated with femaleness. So those crowds are

female crowds in their essence. I think it's also because, you know, the squares were not covered in urine, which is, which tells me it's a female crowd, you know. Exactly. Exactly. So, yeah. Well, I became a, well, I became a journalist when I was 19. And I looked younger than I already was. So I was constantly trying to look older, but I also tried to look powerful. What is looking powerful for a woman? I acquired my characteristic walk when I was 19. I'm stomping, which damages my ankles and my knees and everything.

And I acquired this walk through journalism, because when you're a lot, journalist, a female journalist, a young female journalist, you have to make people respect you in some way so that they can answer, they will, they answer your questions and so on, they take you seriously. My buddy reshaped itself through journalism. It is interesting. After I was fired due to my political columns, I had to re-teach myself how to walk like a normal person. because I was no longer required to, you know, appear as powerful. So I am, since then, since 2012, I am re-learning how to walk. I'm serious about this.

Yes, yes, yes. No, no, I completely understand what you mean. I do the same thing with my shoulders. So I have a kind of swagger when I'm walking into a room because I want to have presents. So I, and, you know, and the same as if I'm walking at home at night on a dark road, I also adjust, you know, and all women do this, like to lesser or greater degrees, you adjust, you're very aware of making yourself small and or big. And, you know, we shoulder that burden, especially if you're, you know, in somewhere like a crowd. You're like, how do I behave at this moment for my safety and or to be able to get my point across? Do I make myself big, small, whatever? Exactly. And those crowds, in those crowds, you you are not constantly sucked in and spit it out by this existential vacuum operating on your body. You can be in the size you actually are. So that crowd gives you not only the right to act like a person and be treated like a person,

but also it gives you your true size, which is so important because I realize that female spine is constantly, you know, diminished or puffed up by the things that we are talking about right now. In certain circumstances, it reshapes itself constantly. So I really like that. I really like that. This revolutionary crowds gives us our true size. Right to stand straight in our true size. Yeah. This is important. This is healthy, I love that. And I know, I was thinking recently, I thought, I'm thinking about this, again, I'm really interested in, I've mentioned this a little bit earlier, like form versus content, you know, debate. I take the form versus content kind of form, sorry, a concept to a lot of different things I'm thinking about. And I was thinking, you know, did I get into left wing politics because of the content of the politics? Because, you know, of my, I tend to think of myself as a, a moral person. I do think about it in terms of morality. I do think about, you know, right and wrong and justice. Did I get into that because of that? Or did I get into it because of the crowd at a

demonstration was so addictive? Because I, you know, I went on my first demonstration. I was 20 in the UK. And, you know, as I've spoken on the show before, I joined a, you know, samber band or 40 people playing music in the street. And, you know, I basically did that for 15 years. Going to demonstrations was so a big part of me. And of course, you know, absolutely would not go to a demonstration. I don't care about the cause or an occupation or Tahrir or whatever. However, I think there's such a feeling of release and relief to your subjectivity when you are in that kind of crowd.

And it gives you that egalitarianism. But I'd not thought about it in terms of your true size. So that's really helpful for me to think about. but yeah um on that matter um you know in this new book i'm thinking about friendship as a political uh connection that can be beyond political party membership or comradeship and so on we've also done an episode on friendship yeah lovely um you know why we're going to those why we are supporting or why we are part of this progressive crowds, let's say, because they are offering friendship, whereas the conservative crowds

or, you know, authoritarian crowds, they are offering protection in return of submission, which is not an equal and just relationship, whereas friendship is the ultimate form of, justice in human connection. So that is why we are choosing progressive crowds because we want to be friends because friendship is the place where we are in our true size as well. So form and content in that sense is compatible to each other. They are inseparable in a way. But isn't there also something about being able to genuinely, you know, like you did with, you know, rich lawyer who ran after you

with your ballet pump, with the tear gas running, like, isn't there also the opportunity for genuine, authentic connection with people who are not your friends? Like, there is no history to this relationship beyond the fact that you're in this space at this time, and you know why you're there in this crowd. You know why you're there.

You might not start as knowing why you're there. You might have stumbled along to the crowd, but once you're a part of this, this, like you said, this organic, fertile being, you're able to very easily, you know, and especially for somewhere like the UK where in, you know, in the south and in greater London, there isn't a culture of just talking to anyone randomly,

especially at this time. What, you know, even last year when I went along to see what extinct was happening with the extinction rebellion stuff, it's like you can talk to anyone. You can walk in and talk to anyone. And that, that, there's, it's the free, or, you know, you can, eye contact, you can make eye contact with someone because you're part of this experience together

and it changes your day and your week and your month as a human being. Absolutely. It refreshes your faith in humankind for sure. When I talk about friendship, I don't talk about friends, being friends, intimate relation or so on. I talk about friendship in an abstract form. that's why you say even you don't know you can be friendly or you can establish friendships right away right then

because that crowd offers you this abstract friendship where everybody is equal and where there will be justice that's why it attracts so many people and that is why there is joy there and trust as well I think

and trust there's a absolutely which I think is really I mean it's definitely from you know, a female perspective, you know, there's that the trust is so central because we've had so many interactions, or at least we perceive interactions with, you know, the male crowd is quite different. But then I want to tell something a little bit, you know, let's, if you talk about Tahir, Gazi, feeling like a person as a female and so on, I am, like, witnessing, I am following what's happening in Western societies as well nowadays. So what we attributed to

darker nations, quote and unquote, as being oppressive of women, you know, where women are not counted as persons and so on, I think this perspective, this understanding of women or female, let's say, is now spreading towards the Western country. I mean, 100%. And you said it in, I think you were doing a talk in Bristol where you said misogyny is the wingman of fascism. Absolutely. And I love that. Oh, yes, yes.

Oh, we're definitely going that way here. I mean, the misogyny in all of its textures is growing in the UK. It's not experientially the same. I can still walk down the street, you know, with less of the male gaze, but much less of the male gaze, but in, you know, in greater London where I am. But, yes, it's coming. I mean, it's on Twitter, it's in legislation, it's on the street. Yeah, I'm like, and this was associated, you know, the oppression on women

was associated with Islam and, you know, certain practices of Islam for such a long time that, you know, I think Western societies thought themselves as sort of immune to this misogyny that would come together with the package of fascism. Which reminded me, by the way, in Amsterdam, when I said that, you know, Netherlands would be also subjected to right-wing populism. A journalist asked me, but, you know, we are Christian countries. You know, there are people, like, educated people. Yeah. Oh, God.

Yeah. I mean, it's in the book. I think it's in the book as well. So, yeah. You know, as I said, I'm like, I keep telling this misogyny is the wingman of fascism. And the problem is, some Western societies does not see the alarm bells ringing. Not enough. Because this misogyny does not come like in overnight beating up the women.

It's just this insignificant change in law. Or, you know, this a little bit rise in the self-confidence of the male around on the street and so on. I think, you know, we should be aware that this is coming towards the civilized societies as well. People should be more aware of this. I think Americans are aware because otherwise the pussy right wouldn't have happened. It's not pussy right. I'm sorry, you know, the women's walk against Trump. Trump, which we had here as well.

Absolutely. But then people should be, you know, ready to. face the worse, I would say. It's interesting, though, because it is really difficult to see if you're not looking out for it. I think if you don't have that structural analysis, it's, you know, there's historically one of the most successful parts of patriarchy is that women doubt themselves first. So, you know, you'll get more looks in the street or, you know, there's, tiny bit of legislation will be changed or not changed or like suddenly men start behaving

this way or that way in public space. And the first thing that women do, I think everywhere is go, it must be me. Let me check myself. I'll go talk to people first rather than an instinct to be like, this is bullshit. And I think where women have tried to say this is bullshit, there's all sorts of other caveats. And obviously, as we mentioned in the beginning, with COVID, there is that big thing, which is, you know, it's the thing which is making everyone go, we'll deal with this first and we'll get to you women later, you know, which over history has always happened. But what I'd like to do to take us back to the crowds on this is just very quickly, maybe, I realized, you know, both reading your work and Kenetti and other people yesterday,

I've never been in a crowd of just women. In fact, no, that's not true. I think I have been once. You're talking about the demonstrations. I mean, I've played in, you know, 40-piece female bands where I've mostly been surrounded by women in the street. And it's very powerful and it feels different. But I think there's this only once this Trump demonstration where it was a women's demonstration. It was only women.

But I think the truly women-only crowd is different. It's got a different part. It is powerful, but it has a different power. But if you notice, and you know, you tell me if I'm wrong, I have never seen any, that reflected in any media. I've never seen a picture. I've never seen a movie. I've never read a book. I've never listened to a podcast, you know, where it's not a pack, not a group, a crowd of just women.

And I think that's interesting. Hmm. That is interesting, yes. But then we will be seeing it for sure, you know, because times are changing. Well, misogyny can be the wingman of fascism, but then we are in a very interesting point in history as women. We know more than we had any time in history. We own, possess, like property more than any time in history. We are educated more than ever.

and we have political experience more than ever. I mean, like this male crisis, which is accompanying the, you know, fascist inclinations, is not for no reason. We are very ready to rule the world, and this creates some backlash. That's true, and this is a fact. And when you are ruling the history,

you are writing the history as well. It's very close, I think. We are very close to that point where stories are written only by women and only about women and so on. My question would be, would women read those stories? Because I noticed it in myself as well, you know, not now, but before I noticed it, we are more prone to understanding life through male experience we are reading male writers but not many male readers

are curious about female experience I mean statistics are horrific of men buying I mean I think it's 90% of fiction written by women is bought by women yeah but also women maybe not enough women are reading women either so that's that's

you know that might be the first step to change women read both apparently I'm just talking about UK statistics so the UK statistics on fiction is that women read fiction written by men and fiction written by women

and this is in the broadest sense but men I think it's 80 to 90% of sale books bought why men are male authors. And also we can add that to the long list of what we are doing better now. Women read more than men since decades. Yes.

In general. So, yeah, this, you know, naturally changes the zeit guys, changes the patterns of history. So we're going to be seeing a lot of women-only crowds, I think, very soon. Yeah, that's interesting. What will it look like? And what will it be? Beautiful, I would say. And of course, I mean, I don't know. I don't know if you have the same perspective, but I think as you were saying, you know, why do women like not want those stories or not want that? And I think, you know, there is a tension with women who are brought up, you know, under increased Islamization like, you know, myself in Egypt and presumably, you know, you as well. where you're kind of suspicious of this segregation because it's like, oh, I don't want to be in these women-only spaces because you associate that with Islamism.

Whereas, of course, when I then got my political education in broader feminism, I understood the importance of women-only spaces or women-led spaces from a different perspective. So I find that I struggle with that because, you know, I don't want a society where, you know, you walk into a room and the men are on one side

and the women are on the other side because that makes my skin cruel because that reminds me of Islamism. But yeah, it's just an interesting one to think about from a Middle Eastern perspective. Just a funny story about this. When you're a journalist, you are something in between, always.

You are not considered a real woman, but then always, you are not considered a real woman, but then you are not journalism in rural areas, especially. you are invited to the men's section but then you are not treated everybody is like kind of tense because of your presence as a woman and then you end up in the women's section

as time goes by and then women do not know what to do with you they send you back to the men's section I'll be through this for so many times I mean I know what you're talking about from Egypt journalism is like you are you are becoming not sexless, but like, hesitant. Yeah, you know, the entire space goes desert with your sex. Yeah. I mean, you know, and there are so many stories over history from all

cultures, you know, when women started wearing trousers, when women started riding bicycles in the UK, it was like, what are you doing? It was like a big hang on a minute, you can't wear trousers. Great. We've had a fantastic experience. We're having this, this, this. I hope you've enjoyed it as much as I have. I love that. Great. I've got a couple more things I want to ask you. Do you have, on the top of your head, one of your favorite experiences of being in a crowd? Well, yeah, I mean like, except for Gizi in Buenos Aires. When the economic crisis happened, I was there to report and I was with the Piccatero movement. They were barricaders. They were closing down the main arteries that entered the city.

And I was there with very young women fighting the police, and some of them had their babies with them. So I think that was one of the most interesting and joyful experiences as well, as well as Porta Allegre, the first World Social Forum. It was at night, and we were drinking Kaeperea. and doing salsa and talking about revolution and so on. I was very young, by the way. And so, yeah, I think these were the best experiences.

Latin America, all the progressive people, music and everything. It was amazing. Thanks for sharing that with us. I think for some of your different books that you've written, and people should go and check those out as well because it definitely sets a certain mood. So AJ, thank you so much for speaking to me. Thank you, Nadia.

You were awesome. Thank you. Thanks a lot. This broadcast is brought to you by Navaramedia. Go to navaramedia.com slash support.