Aliyev (senior) worked a long time in Soviet establishment (being a minority ethnic group)...that too in secret security apparatus of it for significant portions.
That was by far majority of his life time...a commited (or maybe convenient) Marxist from a small minority ethnic group of a vast superpower he was serving loyally. When USSR broke up in one fell swoop, the ethnic strife became the dominant feature overnight for the corner of that empire he was from....it made sense to establish his own autocratic legacy there using the greater good argument of this terrible ethnic war. But the nature of all of this is its own thing in the end.
Ataturk is entirely different context and principle to that....given what he saw as eating away the Ottoman empire and the scale and intensity of battles he had to face himself against all manner of enemies stemming from the consequences of the Ottoman empire's deep flaws and utlimate failure.
His closest counterpart is something more along the lines of Washington. Neither Ataturk or Washington progeny (in fact both didnt have direct progeny) took over after with same name perseverance for example to create some dynasty.
Washington also went one step further and refused to represent any political party at all (so that none later could claim him exclusively and create or add tension or strife that way).
They both were much more interested in creating a republic (including waging the war to first secure it) with a proper fair system for its people's democratic ambition, the suppression of which played some large part of the earlier strife and war they found themselves in and fought in. They wanted a meritocratic system that would self-improve and self-correct as far as possible.
I myself look upon dynasties/names/political family successions very poorly in general....as it is almost always nepotism. Nepotism is highly localised as well and can only be really explained/understood by those living in it. Outsiders just dont have the full picture to compare with their own political history IMO.
Just look at literacy rate of population (and thus political responsibility capability present in population at large) that Ataturk had to work with compared to Aliyev. There is no real excuse to have dynasty politics in Azerbaijan IMO.
@Anastasius can probably comment on what he thinks.
emoji in the original post precisely to indicate it was nothing serious.
.Some things should not be exaggerated.
