The paths of many people have crossed in different time periods of life with the members or institutions of the organization referred to as the “community” or the “Hizmet movement”. These intersections took place for very different reasons such as exam preparation courses, student houses/dormitories, student/shopkeeper conversations. The part that is the most discussed and criticized by the public, which cannot be explained with the boundaries of the “community” is the “privy units-activities” with its much mentioned name.
We think that it will be useful to explain the issue of community and privy units-activities in a simple way, structurally and historically. We can say that this figure is much more descriptive instead of ” privy” recipes at length.
As can be seen from the figure, the ratio of the “privy” to the general is reflected in the three periods that we have summarized with the stages of community – society and network. While the ratio of the total “privy” presence to the general was the highest in the community period, it was the period when it was the least in number, but this situation increased and changed in the community and network phases.
The basic emotions and mentality, graded according to the institution and position are shaped by concepts such as “electedness, mission, dedication” in civilian and military individuals who serve in “privy” units. When you add the mood of “concealment/precaution” to this, you come across masses with multiple identities/characters who try to live and make it a lifestyle with an effort to not reveal their “narcissistic personality disorder” to the outside world.
They will not face serious humanitarian problems with their judicial/administrative and/or superiors thanks to the members of the “community/Hizmet” who are active and at critical points in the “privy” units, that these problems will be eliminated by the “brothers” with a number of preventive measures, and that they will overcome the problems with the least amount of casualties in any case. There is a stereotype that has been taught/learned over the years.
While the system provides these people with the most vital opportunity, on the other hand, the dominant factor that develops “addiction” in people is the presentation of the “unknowns” to the “privy” unit. Supervisors at the place of duty/appointment, colleagues, things to watch out for, what to do opportunities and threats to personnel and unknowns to people in various professions are given ready-made information.
The biggest trauma caused by the process experienced on July 15 and after for the “privy” unit”; they have to face the fact that this “unknown” veil is closed/not reliable anymore, that the “community/Hizmet” wheel is not as strong as they had thought for years and that an invisible hand could not save them.
We conducted a 20-question survey with a group of “privy” members, both at domestic and abroad, who have served in “privy” services/activities for many years and now define themselves outside of this organization, in order to understand their inner world, describe the extent of the trauma they have experienced and make inferences based on individual point determinations.
This survey study is the product of about 6 months of labor. First of all, we made a long effort to reach an enthusiastic and survey-reliable interlocutor through the “chain link”. It was a difficult process that continued in the form of our personal connections and their connections from the past. The uneasiness and withdrawal into their shells in people were naturally the most difficult part of the job.
Participants are responsible for taking part in different military and civil “privy” organizations, there are fugitives among them, and those who benefit from effective remorse provisions. Since our aim is to detect more human-oriented mental states, we tried to ask subjective questions in favor of general issues such as Community/Hizmet systematics.
We think that the results of this survey are also important in terms of showing the collectivist/individualist changes of people who have lived in community sociology for years. We also discussed conducting the survey on social media, but due to the risk of manipulative participants, we considered that conducting such an important study among people who knew each other in a chain would yield more realistic results.
When we examine the results with the graphics on the survey questions, the following can be said as a result:
- They were excluded by their relatives and did not receive enough support because they neglected their family/relative relations during their “community/hizmet” years,
- Due to the “privy” nature of the closed community, they are disconnected from the reality of society,
- They see themselves as “important”, “elected” and “in charge” because of their privacy,
- They see the university years they spent in comunity as insufficient academically and socially,
- Even in basic religious practices, their “communal” past has a negative effect on them,
- They believe that an invisible hand, like a protective shield, is active for them in “privy” activities,
- They wish to have integrated their childhood and youth years more socially, with sports and art,
- Their break with collectivism and group behavior reached the level of hatred,
- They feel anger against the “privy” and civil community administrators,
- Although they have low expectations for a happy future, they try to hold on to life for their families and those who love them,
- They want to forget their past completely, they turn to various hobbies / activities in order not to remember,
- Those who live abroad and those who have provided “privy” activities long ago show different approaches to certain issues, but are compatible with the general preference in the questions of “separating from “privy”, “being an ordinary person” and “forgetting the past”,
- They consider themselves lucky to have left the privy activities in any way,
- In the F.Gülen question, which is one of the most critical questions, almost all of them expressed their feelings in a negative way,
survey data reveals.
When we examine the results with the graphs on the survey questions:
1 – Strongly Agree 2- Agree 3- Undecided 4- Disagree 5- Strongly Disagree
SURVEY QUESTIONS
- I realized that neglecting family/relative relationships for years was isolating.
2. Being disconnected from my family and relatives for a long time distanced me from the realities of society.
3. I can say that I did not receive enough moral support from my family/environment in the troubled times I experienced after 15 July.
4. For years, I lived with the feeling of “I am involved in important works, I am not an ordinary person, I was chosen for this job”.
5. I wish I had benefited more from the academic and social opportunities provided by the campus and being a normal university student during my university years.
6. Since some religious rituals and prayers remind me of my “communal” years, keeping my distance from them relaxes me.
7. The most binding aspects of “privy” activities were that they offered people “unknown aspects”.
8. In “privy” units, I had the thought that “whatever I do, community/Hizmet will save me somehow”.
9. I am far from the idea of praying in congregation even in the mosque.
10. I am still hopeful for a happy future after this age.
11. I question the meaning of life, I cannot say that my joy of living is very strong.
12. Since my childhood, I would like to spend more time with art/literature/philosophy.
13. I am trying/I want to acquire a hobby to rehabilitate myself.
14. I feel lucky to be leaving “privy” activities.
15. I would love to be an ordinary person on the street.
16. I can say that I miss my “privy” activities.
17. My dominant feelings towards the community system and its administrators are “anger and hatred”.
18. I still love “Hodjaefendi”.
19. I want to leave behind and forget all my experiences with the community.
20. I try to live for my family and those who love me.
