Many scholars argue that democratic transitions, particularly in polarised societies, expose countries to a greater risk of conflict and violence. Hegre et al explain this risk in terms of a lessening of repression and an increase in mobilisation. I apply this perspective to the history of democracy in Turkey since 1950. Two claims are made. (1) The validity of their approach depends to a large extent on how democracy is measured and with what tools. (2) Since these tools do not compliment each other it is better to try to measure the relationship between democratic transition and civil conflict with a maximal understanding of what democracy is, such as found in Dahl's Polyarchy.
