Thanks for your answer. You are still 10 years younger than me
I can't believe that time is flying so fast, that I'll be 40 soon - I'm already so old
However, both were autocratic regimes, where political opponents were imprisoned for having different views. I wonder if there is a chance and when it will happen for Turkey to have some form of democracy (like Poland, for example, or Czech Republic) and for such situations not to occur. Unfortunately, it will probably be difficult now, because the international situation is difficult, so Erdogan can do more - UE, USA and Russia need him, but I hope that this will change someday.
Age is just a number my friend (i would've felt like a 60 year-old grandma the other week but now im in the streets with uni students, resistence makes u feel younger.
I can advice that
)
That's quite enough. I was interested in the opinion of someone from the inside, because those people from the Turkish diaspora, with whom I sometimes have contact, are simply very anti-Erdogan, and therefore not very objective.
I dont know if i can be considered objective or not tho. I am in favor of secularism, not a secular dictatorship but a secular democracy ofc. Then there comes Sokrates and our 'old republic' (im a swtor fan btw
) : anti-democratic thoughts finding way in a democracy can implode a democracy. Will we call Islamists an opposition or enemy of the republic, obviously the old regime did the second. On my part im still trying to find the answer of which is there a way to co-exist (well there must be if we want to end this violent spiral). But for that to happen, first Islamists should stop seeing the republic itself as an object to take revenge from for ending the ottoman empire and the caliphate. On that regard i find ur thought about the old republic a bit too Western-ish 
Turkey is both in Balkans and in Middle East, two places where identity politics cost way too much and took a toll on both people and countries. We have to also recall good things the old republic did. Old regime DID give up its chair to Adnan Menderes, one of two great things İnönü did was to give up his chair without intervention. But Adnan Menderes resorted to identity politics and became more and more autocrat, and violence began. Was the coup necessary tho? Idk, but army didnt trust its own people thats for sure. But the constitution the army did was the most democratic Turkey ever had. It was very pluralistic and there were many check and balance systems to state and its authority. One perspective on other coups is that they were done to dismantle the 1961 constitution and its effects on society, where the army believed it gave way to communism. And ofc there is 1971 coup, did u know that a few days before the coup was done, left-kemalists in the army tried to make a coup that will turn Turkey into socialist state but stopped by the right-wings in the army (not many people knows that even in Turkey). A perspective to 1980 coup is also to both dismantle 1961 constitution and also to introduce free-market economy to Turkey.
Long story short i dont think im objective
but one thing for sure is i feel a lot more political these few days so, sorry for uninvitedly sharing thoughts 