The Past Lies in the Present: A Social Psychological Investigation of History and Identity

In two studies, we examine the relationship between different modes of national identity and historical choices. In Study 1, participants (N = 340) rate the various national historical events in terms of their importance and relevance. These events are included based on previous studies as well as expert opinions. Accordingly, three forms of historical choices emerge: glorifying distant history, Republican history and a recent (critical) history. These were distinctly predicted by different modes of Turkish national identity: collective narcissism and self-investment. In Study 2, in addition to evaluating the importance and relevance, participants (N = 136) also indicate their preference of silencing certain themes which are to be excluded from the curriculum and not discussed. Silencing and exclusion choices regarded the establishment of PKK, deputy arrests of HDP, the July 15^th coup attempt, and AKP’s coming into power. Furthermore, inclusion choices based on importance indicate three versions the same as in first study. Although all versions were predicted by constructive patriotism, glorifying distant past was predicted by nationalist-conservative ideology, secular ideology predicted the Republican history, and recent (critical) history was predicted by left wing ideology. All in all, the results show that the way we evaluate (and perhaps, construct) our past is related to the way in which we define and identify with our nations today, but perhaps the distinction between the different modes of identity are not as relevant in the current samples.