Tweet
ALTERNATIVE TO TERROR
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments26361.html
Published: 10:39:21 - 30/05/2012
It is not a secret that one of the main obstacles to the development
of the Armenian economy is the lack of technological modernization.
This issue can be effectively solved in competitive conditions
because in the condition of the economy divided between oligarchs
and monopolists, the businessmen have no interest in modernization
and innovations.
Why should a businessman take care of investments if he or she can
gain huge profits through their monopolies or oligopolies if what it
takes is political adaptability or reproduction of the government?
The main stimulus for technological modernization of the business world
- the economic competition - is absent in Armenia due to the lack of
political will which for its part is absent because of the too high
level of coalescence of business and government, a major businessman
is government, a high-ranking official is a major businessman.
It is like a chain tied up around the hands and legs of the Armenian
economy.
On these days, the U.S. ambassador to Armenia John Heffern met with
the leadership of Free Democrats. The official message runs they had
dwelt on the importance of the development of the IT sphere and the
necessity to promote it.
Systemic changes and first of all changes in the current situation,
mentality and culture of the political system are required to Armenia
to ensure modernization of the economy, innovative economy. But
political resistance is strong. The government, realizing the deadlock
of the current situation and social risks, cannot run another risk of
trying to enter into a conflict with the oligarchs. This controversy
is present between separate officials, government groups but there
is no basic conflict and, if there is, it is only in the strategic
sphere when the interests of the oligarchy and the so-called de jure
political government contradict each other because in this case either
the oligarchy should be eliminated or the government.
But there is also the second option - to dismantle the system through
alternative systems, and the idea discussed during the meeting of
the Free Democrats and the U.S. ambassador on the development of IT
sphere is, perhaps, one of the expressions of this logic.
The political totalitarian system can be dismantled only through the
formation of alternative systems or a common one. Without this, the
oligarchic system will be more effective because it has penetrated
into almost all the spheres of public life. Meanwhile, the citizen
is oriented with the help of the systems because the theoretical
declaration of values is not enough for complete mobilization. In
order to join the dismantlement of the oligarchic system, the citizen
needs to be offered concrete things.
Otherwise, the economic pyramid can also be dismantled when alternative
economic systems are formed around it which would be new planes of
business culture, new economic behavior and thinking, new economic
values.
For example, such tries have been established by Russia-based Armenian
businessmen who managed to report serious economic success in the
international business culture and thinking. Ruben Vardanyan, Daniyl
Khachaturov and other businessmen were advertized in Armenia who,
at the same time, made investments in the economy of Armenia.
Nevertheless their systems were not alternatives to the oligarchic
system of Armenia but they fit into their logic, and no accident,
these businessmen stopped presenting in Armenia as examples of new
business thinking. Or, being the first wave of this process, they were
unable to maintain the speed in case there was not a second wave and
new examples.
The new examples need not be from Russia but from the Western
business sphere where the traditions and modernization culture has
deeper roots and can give more dynamic course to the formation of
alternative business systems in Armenia.
Though, in the end, much comes to the will of the power since only
the government's will can create opportunities for major investments
and formation of other systems and activities in the monopolistic
and oligopolistic economy in Armenia. Moreover, when we know that the
oligarchic system in Armenia, in its relations with the competitors,
is deprived of rational brakes. In addition, this system did not seem
to have legal brakes just from the beginning.
Nevertheless, in this situation, it is easier for the political
government to ensure a process of strategic revision in the sense
that there is no direct attack on the oligarchs and consequently
there is direct resistance and conflict. Instead, the formation of
alternative systems could impart public legitimacy to the economic
policy and strategy which could become a great resource for the
government for the dismantlement of the oligarchic system and the
institutionalization of the new system.
The main issue is whether the so-called government is ready to refuse,
being part of the oligarchy though otherwise it will have to reject
the idea of being part of the civil society and the government.
In this case, it is also important to guarantee the right to property
even for the oligarchy the elimination of which is a vital issue
for the state. Simply, the guarantee for the right to property will
ensure solution of another issue because otherwise the dismantlement
of the oligarchic system may escalate into a civil war or terror,
which is the most undesirable version.
The establishment of systems based on new economic culture and thinking
may result in a quick and effective change of the situation but,
at the same time, it is a good way to avoid terror and civil war.
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments26361.html
Published: 10:39:21 - 30/05/2012
It is not a secret that one of the main obstacles to the development
of the Armenian economy is the lack of technological modernization.
This issue can be effectively solved in competitive conditions
because in the condition of the economy divided between oligarchs
and monopolists, the businessmen have no interest in modernization
and innovations.
Why should a businessman take care of investments if he or she can
gain huge profits through their monopolies or oligopolies if what it
takes is political adaptability or reproduction of the government?
The main stimulus for technological modernization of the business world
- the economic competition - is absent in Armenia due to the lack of
political will which for its part is absent because of the too high
level of coalescence of business and government, a major businessman
is government, a high-ranking official is a major businessman.
It is like a chain tied up around the hands and legs of the Armenian
economy.
On these days, the U.S. ambassador to Armenia John Heffern met with
the leadership of Free Democrats. The official message runs they had
dwelt on the importance of the development of the IT sphere and the
necessity to promote it.
Systemic changes and first of all changes in the current situation,
mentality and culture of the political system are required to Armenia
to ensure modernization of the economy, innovative economy. But
political resistance is strong. The government, realizing the deadlock
of the current situation and social risks, cannot run another risk of
trying to enter into a conflict with the oligarchs. This controversy
is present between separate officials, government groups but there
is no basic conflict and, if there is, it is only in the strategic
sphere when the interests of the oligarchy and the so-called de jure
political government contradict each other because in this case either
the oligarchy should be eliminated or the government.
But there is also the second option - to dismantle the system through
alternative systems, and the idea discussed during the meeting of
the Free Democrats and the U.S. ambassador on the development of IT
sphere is, perhaps, one of the expressions of this logic.
The political totalitarian system can be dismantled only through the
formation of alternative systems or a common one. Without this, the
oligarchic system will be more effective because it has penetrated
into almost all the spheres of public life. Meanwhile, the citizen
is oriented with the help of the systems because the theoretical
declaration of values is not enough for complete mobilization. In
order to join the dismantlement of the oligarchic system, the citizen
needs to be offered concrete things.
Otherwise, the economic pyramid can also be dismantled when alternative
economic systems are formed around it which would be new planes of
business culture, new economic behavior and thinking, new economic
values.
For example, such tries have been established by Russia-based Armenian
businessmen who managed to report serious economic success in the
international business culture and thinking. Ruben Vardanyan, Daniyl
Khachaturov and other businessmen were advertized in Armenia who,
at the same time, made investments in the economy of Armenia.
Nevertheless their systems were not alternatives to the oligarchic
system of Armenia but they fit into their logic, and no accident,
these businessmen stopped presenting in Armenia as examples of new
business thinking. Or, being the first wave of this process, they were
unable to maintain the speed in case there was not a second wave and
new examples.
The new examples need not be from Russia but from the Western
business sphere where the traditions and modernization culture has
deeper roots and can give more dynamic course to the formation of
alternative business systems in Armenia.
Though, in the end, much comes to the will of the power since only
the government's will can create opportunities for major investments
and formation of other systems and activities in the monopolistic
and oligopolistic economy in Armenia. Moreover, when we know that the
oligarchic system in Armenia, in its relations with the competitors,
is deprived of rational brakes. In addition, this system did not seem
to have legal brakes just from the beginning.
Nevertheless, in this situation, it is easier for the political
government to ensure a process of strategic revision in the sense
that there is no direct attack on the oligarchs and consequently
there is direct resistance and conflict. Instead, the formation of
alternative systems could impart public legitimacy to the economic
policy and strategy which could become a great resource for the
government for the dismantlement of the oligarchic system and the
institutionalization of the new system.
The main issue is whether the so-called government is ready to refuse,
being part of the oligarchy though otherwise it will have to reject
the idea of being part of the civil society and the government.
In this case, it is also important to guarantee the right to property
even for the oligarchy the elimination of which is a vital issue
for the state. Simply, the guarantee for the right to property will
ensure solution of another issue because otherwise the dismantlement
of the oligarchic system may escalate into a civil war or terror,
which is the most undesirable version.
The establishment of systems based on new economic culture and thinking
may result in a quick and effective change of the situation but,
at the same time, it is a good way to avoid terror and civil war.