Page 3 - 1JeanAnnNewsletter Fall 2012.pub

of topics from his early days studying in Tur-key to his current research agenda.

Professor Ocakli started his educa-tion studying sociology at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey, before making the switch to political science. When asked what drew him to the study of government, Professor Ocakli responded humorously that like most students he “took a class” which sparked his interest in “the big questions, such as questions of representa-tion, development, and power.” Professor Ocakli believes that political science is the discipline that gives students the "methods and tools" to study the pressing issues of our time "in evidence driven ways”. This empha-sis on the big picture carried over into Pro-fessor Ocakli’s ambitions towards a career as an academic. Asked whether he ever consid-ered working in government, Dr. Ocakli responded that he was fairly sure by his jun-ior year that he wanted a career in academia, a career that would allow him to explore these broad issues in a way a bureaucratic life might not.

Upon completing his undergradu-ate degree in Turkey, Professor Ocakli con-tinued his education in the US at Brown Uni-versity's Department of Political Science. When I raised the issue of leaving the Middle

East to study it from afar, Dr. Ocakli was quick to point out that he maintains an inter-est in the developing world as a whole, and studying at Brown offered a good foundation for investigating issues of development. Although much of Professor Ocakli’s work centers on the Middle East, and specifically Turkey, he rejects the “area specialist” label and told me that his future research will look at “the global south, not just specifically one country or one region.” One of his goals is to bring a comparative approach to Middle East studies. He believes the Middle East should not be treated as a region so unique that it defies comparison.

Professor Ocakli’s current body of research centers on Islamist groups and their appeal to non-ideological voters. This issue has only increased in importance with the recent Arab Spring, which saw Islamist groups elected to govern several countries. Despite the popular conception in the US of Islamist groups as appealing to the religious beliefs of voters, Professor Ocakli pointed out that only a relatively small number of people vote on purely ideological lines. His research has shown that a significant amount of their support comes from “pragmatic vot-ers.” In both scholarly analysis and popular conception, Islamist parties are often treated as an exceptional force that is able to “convert” voters into supporting them. Pro-fessor Ocakli claims his research shows that despite the conception that they are unique in the world of politics, Islamists “behave like normal parties when given the chance,” and often times play by the same set of political rules that other groups do. Looking at eight cities across Turkey, Dr. Ocakli investigated why electoral support for Islamists varied so widely across pairs of very similar cities. The sheer difference in these rates suggests that the success of Islamists must be tied much more closely to local politics than previously thought, and that often the grassroots organi-zational skills of an Islamist party contribute more to their success then any overarching ideology.

The recent success of Islamist par-ties in Egypt and Tunisia would seem to sup-port this theory. Surely countries with such complex societies could not all vote upon ideological grounds. Professor Ocakli points

out the excellent grassroots organizations of Ennahda in Tunisia and the Muslim Brother-hood in Egypt as evidence that Islamist groups appeal to voters in a manner not that different from "normal" political parties. In the case of Egypt, Professor Ocakli points to the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood over the more extreme Salafi party as further evidence supporting his ide-as. If Islam was the driving force behind people's vote, surely the Salafists would have done as well as the Brotherhood. Instead, the Muslim Brotherhood’s victory can be at-tributed to the “robustness of its organiza-tion,” and appeal to voters on pragmatic is-sues. Summing up his research, Dr. Ocakli stated “what my research can contribute is a better understanding of what Islamist parties are and what they do. Part of my effort is to dismiss this idea that their political organiza-tions are somehow unique. I think given the opportunity to participate in free and fair elections… they reach out to voters like any other pragmatic political party.”

So how does Skidmore fit into this ambitious body of work and professor Ocakli’s future plans? Reflecting on the na-ture of liberal education, Dr. Ocakli claimed that the liberal arts emphasis on well round-edness will only benefit his academic re-search. The ability to shun “short term gains, in favor of something bigger, better, and more beautiful,” can only help his research since the liberal environment will allow him to approach his work from a variety of per-spectives. At the conclusion of our inter-view, Professor Ocakli said he found Skid-more to be “serious about its mission… when I look at my colleagues and see how seriously they take their jobs, this also inspires me to do a better job… I think what distinguishes the really good institutions from the not-so-good ones is how they approach what they do. Do they first of all have good values and second of all are the people happy about their lives. Do they love what they do? I find that Skidmore is really dedicated to a liberal edu-cation, to academics, to research, and I think that’s what makes it a great institution. And of course the beauty of the campus doesn’t hurt.”