Tweet
ARMENIA: SYMBOLS OF STATUS, CULTURE IN CRISIS
By Zach Goldsmith
http://www.ianyanmag.com/2012/04/16/armenia-symbols-of-status-culture-in-crisis/
April 16, 2012 12:56 pm
The gap between poverty and wealth seems wider than ever in the South
Caucasus country. by L.Aghajanian/© ianyanmag With the fall of the
Soviet Union and the emergence of an independent Armenian Republic,
the tectonic landscape of Armenia, culturally, economically, socially,
and of course political, has drastically shifted. Twenty years on and
the ground is still unsteady, although clear patterns of change are
emerging, and these changes seem less than positive. While political
independence and the fall of communism are often hailed as opening
the doors of freedom here in Armenia and elsewhere, this freedom
seems superficial at best, and perhaps even illusory.
The new freedom prevailing in Armenia is the freedom Herbert Marcuse
wrote about in a Western context 60 years ago, a quantitative and
not qualitative freedom, or, as he put it, freedom to choose between
"brands and gadgets."
Before coming to Armenia from the United States I had never seen such
blatant wealth disparity. On a daily basis walking around Yerevan
one is confronted with obscene wealth (in the form of luxury cars
and other goods) and abject poverty, both extremes coexisting in a
contradictory and mind-boggling juxtaposition. Feudal capitalism, it
seems, has not been kind to Armenia-or at least the masses of people
living off the scraps let go by the oligarchs and their political
cronies. And yet, this truth is as plain as day, the blatant, extreme,
and clearly unethical income inequality, corruption, and lack of
governmental accountability goes unchallenged by large swaths of the
population. Why? The answer to this question has several elements.
The largest contributing factor to mass indifference toward the
Armenian political process and the failures therein seems to be
the poisoning effects of consumerism and commercialism on Armenian
society. The work of Armenia's leaders in politics and business has
been as effective as their strategy is genius. They know that an
individual has only a finite amount of energy to devote to any given
number of tasks. If, then, the individuals' finite energy supply
is consumed on tasks other than effective opposition to government
policies and Armenia's feudal style economy, the leaders have won.
Ubiquitous commercialism has allowed for just such an outcome. Opening
the floodgates of feral capitalism in its most feral form, sowing
the seeds of an all-encompassing consumer culture, has transformed
the social structure of Armenia with far reaching effects on politics
as well.
Brands and gadgets loom large in the Armenian psyche here, especially
in the capital, Yerevan. Despite the fact that the per capita income
in Armenia is under$3000 U.S. dollars, the perception of wealth and
status rules the day. Turning life into a game, a game of appearances
where each individual has not a life to live but a role to play. Even
though most roles are obviously divorced from reality the game goes
on, the players suspend disbelief and Armenia turns into a red carpet
runway, an open air Paris boutique. The sidewalks and buildings are
crumbling, social and government services are abominable, but fake
designer clothes wash away the misery.
For example, one can walk into the relatively new "elite" boutique in
Armenia: "Billionaire Italian Couture" (yes that is the real name)
and buy an incredibly gaudy pair of jeans for about 389,000 AMD
or Armenian Drams (about $1,000 US dollars). The shop is located in
Yerevan's trendy Northern Avenue, a street of faceless and incongruous
looking shabbily built "luxury" high-rises, the space for which was
provided by the government's legally dubious wholesale demolition of
the existing homes and structures already on that land, an Armenian
version of eminent domain.
Clearly most of the individuals flaunting these ostentatious styles
cannot be wearing genuine articles, the cost of which typically rivals
the average Armenian yearly salary. It seems those who can afford
this clothing buy it; those who can't, the vast, vast majority of
Armenians? Well, they buy knock-offs.
And of course this fact is widely known. Most people wearing such
expensive labels simply cannot be wearing the real deal. But this
is not the important issue. As said before, perception is what's
important. An obsession with wealth-and thereby status and power-serves
effectively to set the masses of Armenia into constant competition with
each other; divide and conquer as Machiavelli once said. A population
obsessed with being seen as "elite," being able to partake in "luxury,"
or any other such social construct cannot possibly have the energy
left to challenge those structures that force them into this game
in the first place. Therefore, while the masses are left fighting
over scraps to see who has the biggest crumb, those at the table,
the politicians, the oligarchs, the modern day Armenian aristocracy
are left laughing over the main course.
While the constant race and struggle for recognition and status is
going on, if it has not, like flame and oxygen, consumed every last
modicum of available human energy (available human energy, that is,
after work is finished, meals are prepared, shopping is done, the
children are cared for, and the rest of the daily list of necessary
tasks is accomplished) then there is energy left that could congeal
into a united and effective opposition to the status quo. But, leaders,
fear not, modernity and the global digital society at large has solved
that problem. Enter the new world of "slacktivism."
While the place of the Internet, and specifically social networking
sites, is still being decided and debated their use to express
political and social opinion is firmly established in Armenia.
However, as is the case with the new phenomenon of slacktivism,
the activism stops there: with largely meaningless expression
within an established online, and therefore largely fictitious,
milieu. With the movement of struggle and opposition from reality
to the pseudo-reality of the Internet, all that is solid turns to
air. The power of activism is undercut in a misplaced satisfaction
that something has been accomplished when, in reality, all that has
been accomplished is the expenditure of finite energy lost in an
irrelevant avenue.
With this black hole negating political expression, an outlet that
seems viable to many and yet, in actuality, merely swallows up
infinite amounts of misplaced energy to no real effect, the elite of
Armenia are able to rest assured that, after hours of work, chores,
and other jobs, if an individual has any effort to express their
legitimate dissatisfaction with the powers that be, such expression
will more than likely take place in this futile way. But what about
Mashtots Park? Teghut? Mass environmentally based occupy style protest
actions that-combined with online awareness campaigns-have garnered
widespread attention and are having some effects? These actions are
indeed laudable and deserve immense respect. However, we have seen
the tactics adopted by the Armenian government when the outrage
of the people overflows into actual and possibly effective demands
for change. 2008 a fraudulent election, mass unrest, and a state of
emergency declared by the conservative nationalist government that
left ten dead at the hands of unprovoked and brutal police aggression.
The safe guards are in place. All eventualities are planned for.
So what is to be done? This question is a difficult one. In short,
however, I believe the Armenian people need to start a meaningful
discussion that leads to concrete action to reverse the tide of
consumerism and misplaced outrage in this country. Episodes like
the political action at Mashtots Park can serve as one example that
effective political opposition in Armenia is not impossible. As well,
there are many NGOs in Armenia that are doing good work and are
attempting to chart a progressive way forward for an Armenia adrift.
However, this is not enough. Niche movements will not solve overarching
problem. As well, Armenian can no longer afford to be caught up
in the non-productive nationalist rhetoric, emanating from leading
politicians, or the dogged insistence of Turkish recognition of the
Genocide. Such dead end policies only hold Armenia in the status quo
and relegate the blame for internal problems to outside scapegoats. The
new national discussion, therefore, should encompass all aspects of
Armenian social, civil, economic, and political-as forces standing for
illusory change are colonizing all of these spheres. This discussion
furthermore, must be both general and individual. A rejection of
superficial consumer culture begins with individual acts of resistance
that multiply to be felt by society at large.
To clear up any confusion about the motivations for writing this essay
I will emphasize the following. My goal is in no way to denigrate or
patronize the people of Armenia; rather it is the opposite. My goal is
to sound the alarm, to alert those who care about this country to what
I see happening here. Armenian culture, once rich with literature,
theater, music, art, is being eroded under the faceless, valueless,
and utterly substantively bankrupt forces of consumerism and political
corruption. The contradictions so clearly inherent in Armenian society
are superficially glossed over with a veneer of a growing consumer
culture and the inability to successfully and meaningfully express
opposition to inequality and injustice. Furthermore, the phenomena
expressed in this essay are, clearly, not unique to Armenia. The
pacifying effects of consumerism and slacktivism can been felt
throughout the world without limit, however, Armenia offers a clear
and compelling example of the ravaging effects of these phenomenon
to arrest or even retard the denigration of culture and pluralistic
political expression.
The current republican incarnation of Armenia is still in its infancy.
A mere 20 years after independence the country is just learning to
walk and it is for this reason that the time is ripe for real change.
Armenian society in the Third Republic, its government, and even its
economy is still relatively plastic, still being formed. Therefore,
the national discussion about the current course of Armenian society
needs to ask one crucial question: where do we want our country to go?
Should the spring of our country be our rich history, our art,
culture, and language? Or, as is the current trend, should all of
this be subsumed under the faceless and utterly vacuous Moloch of
consumerism? Armenia, as I see it, is at a crossroads and the paths are
clear and distinct. It is my hope that the people of Armenia, however,
and not the elites choose which path the country should pursue,
and that the people, free of delusions, choose the right path for them.
Zachary Goldsmith is a recent graduate of the University of Michigan,
where he earned a BA in political science. He is currently a Fulbright
Fellow based in Yerevan, Armenia. These views are solely those of
the author and in no way reflect those of the Fulbright program or
any other entity.
By Zach Goldsmith
http://www.ianyanmag.com/2012/04/16/armenia-symbols-of-status-culture-in-crisis/
April 16, 2012 12:56 pm
The gap between poverty and wealth seems wider than ever in the South
Caucasus country. by L.Aghajanian/© ianyanmag With the fall of the
Soviet Union and the emergence of an independent Armenian Republic,
the tectonic landscape of Armenia, culturally, economically, socially,
and of course political, has drastically shifted. Twenty years on and
the ground is still unsteady, although clear patterns of change are
emerging, and these changes seem less than positive. While political
independence and the fall of communism are often hailed as opening
the doors of freedom here in Armenia and elsewhere, this freedom
seems superficial at best, and perhaps even illusory.
The new freedom prevailing in Armenia is the freedom Herbert Marcuse
wrote about in a Western context 60 years ago, a quantitative and
not qualitative freedom, or, as he put it, freedom to choose between
"brands and gadgets."
Before coming to Armenia from the United States I had never seen such
blatant wealth disparity. On a daily basis walking around Yerevan
one is confronted with obscene wealth (in the form of luxury cars
and other goods) and abject poverty, both extremes coexisting in a
contradictory and mind-boggling juxtaposition. Feudal capitalism, it
seems, has not been kind to Armenia-or at least the masses of people
living off the scraps let go by the oligarchs and their political
cronies. And yet, this truth is as plain as day, the blatant, extreme,
and clearly unethical income inequality, corruption, and lack of
governmental accountability goes unchallenged by large swaths of the
population. Why? The answer to this question has several elements.
The largest contributing factor to mass indifference toward the
Armenian political process and the failures therein seems to be
the poisoning effects of consumerism and commercialism on Armenian
society. The work of Armenia's leaders in politics and business has
been as effective as their strategy is genius. They know that an
individual has only a finite amount of energy to devote to any given
number of tasks. If, then, the individuals' finite energy supply
is consumed on tasks other than effective opposition to government
policies and Armenia's feudal style economy, the leaders have won.
Ubiquitous commercialism has allowed for just such an outcome. Opening
the floodgates of feral capitalism in its most feral form, sowing
the seeds of an all-encompassing consumer culture, has transformed
the social structure of Armenia with far reaching effects on politics
as well.
Brands and gadgets loom large in the Armenian psyche here, especially
in the capital, Yerevan. Despite the fact that the per capita income
in Armenia is under$3000 U.S. dollars, the perception of wealth and
status rules the day. Turning life into a game, a game of appearances
where each individual has not a life to live but a role to play. Even
though most roles are obviously divorced from reality the game goes
on, the players suspend disbelief and Armenia turns into a red carpet
runway, an open air Paris boutique. The sidewalks and buildings are
crumbling, social and government services are abominable, but fake
designer clothes wash away the misery.
For example, one can walk into the relatively new "elite" boutique in
Armenia: "Billionaire Italian Couture" (yes that is the real name)
and buy an incredibly gaudy pair of jeans for about 389,000 AMD
or Armenian Drams (about $1,000 US dollars). The shop is located in
Yerevan's trendy Northern Avenue, a street of faceless and incongruous
looking shabbily built "luxury" high-rises, the space for which was
provided by the government's legally dubious wholesale demolition of
the existing homes and structures already on that land, an Armenian
version of eminent domain.
Clearly most of the individuals flaunting these ostentatious styles
cannot be wearing genuine articles, the cost of which typically rivals
the average Armenian yearly salary. It seems those who can afford
this clothing buy it; those who can't, the vast, vast majority of
Armenians? Well, they buy knock-offs.
And of course this fact is widely known. Most people wearing such
expensive labels simply cannot be wearing the real deal. But this
is not the important issue. As said before, perception is what's
important. An obsession with wealth-and thereby status and power-serves
effectively to set the masses of Armenia into constant competition with
each other; divide and conquer as Machiavelli once said. A population
obsessed with being seen as "elite," being able to partake in "luxury,"
or any other such social construct cannot possibly have the energy
left to challenge those structures that force them into this game
in the first place. Therefore, while the masses are left fighting
over scraps to see who has the biggest crumb, those at the table,
the politicians, the oligarchs, the modern day Armenian aristocracy
are left laughing over the main course.
While the constant race and struggle for recognition and status is
going on, if it has not, like flame and oxygen, consumed every last
modicum of available human energy (available human energy, that is,
after work is finished, meals are prepared, shopping is done, the
children are cared for, and the rest of the daily list of necessary
tasks is accomplished) then there is energy left that could congeal
into a united and effective opposition to the status quo. But, leaders,
fear not, modernity and the global digital society at large has solved
that problem. Enter the new world of "slacktivism."
While the place of the Internet, and specifically social networking
sites, is still being decided and debated their use to express
political and social opinion is firmly established in Armenia.
However, as is the case with the new phenomenon of slacktivism,
the activism stops there: with largely meaningless expression
within an established online, and therefore largely fictitious,
milieu. With the movement of struggle and opposition from reality
to the pseudo-reality of the Internet, all that is solid turns to
air. The power of activism is undercut in a misplaced satisfaction
that something has been accomplished when, in reality, all that has
been accomplished is the expenditure of finite energy lost in an
irrelevant avenue.
With this black hole negating political expression, an outlet that
seems viable to many and yet, in actuality, merely swallows up
infinite amounts of misplaced energy to no real effect, the elite of
Armenia are able to rest assured that, after hours of work, chores,
and other jobs, if an individual has any effort to express their
legitimate dissatisfaction with the powers that be, such expression
will more than likely take place in this futile way. But what about
Mashtots Park? Teghut? Mass environmentally based occupy style protest
actions that-combined with online awareness campaigns-have garnered
widespread attention and are having some effects? These actions are
indeed laudable and deserve immense respect. However, we have seen
the tactics adopted by the Armenian government when the outrage
of the people overflows into actual and possibly effective demands
for change. 2008 a fraudulent election, mass unrest, and a state of
emergency declared by the conservative nationalist government that
left ten dead at the hands of unprovoked and brutal police aggression.
The safe guards are in place. All eventualities are planned for.
So what is to be done? This question is a difficult one. In short,
however, I believe the Armenian people need to start a meaningful
discussion that leads to concrete action to reverse the tide of
consumerism and misplaced outrage in this country. Episodes like
the political action at Mashtots Park can serve as one example that
effective political opposition in Armenia is not impossible. As well,
there are many NGOs in Armenia that are doing good work and are
attempting to chart a progressive way forward for an Armenia adrift.
However, this is not enough. Niche movements will not solve overarching
problem. As well, Armenian can no longer afford to be caught up
in the non-productive nationalist rhetoric, emanating from leading
politicians, or the dogged insistence of Turkish recognition of the
Genocide. Such dead end policies only hold Armenia in the status quo
and relegate the blame for internal problems to outside scapegoats. The
new national discussion, therefore, should encompass all aspects of
Armenian social, civil, economic, and political-as forces standing for
illusory change are colonizing all of these spheres. This discussion
furthermore, must be both general and individual. A rejection of
superficial consumer culture begins with individual acts of resistance
that multiply to be felt by society at large.
To clear up any confusion about the motivations for writing this essay
I will emphasize the following. My goal is in no way to denigrate or
patronize the people of Armenia; rather it is the opposite. My goal is
to sound the alarm, to alert those who care about this country to what
I see happening here. Armenian culture, once rich with literature,
theater, music, art, is being eroded under the faceless, valueless,
and utterly substantively bankrupt forces of consumerism and political
corruption. The contradictions so clearly inherent in Armenian society
are superficially glossed over with a veneer of a growing consumer
culture and the inability to successfully and meaningfully express
opposition to inequality and injustice. Furthermore, the phenomena
expressed in this essay are, clearly, not unique to Armenia. The
pacifying effects of consumerism and slacktivism can been felt
throughout the world without limit, however, Armenia offers a clear
and compelling example of the ravaging effects of these phenomenon
to arrest or even retard the denigration of culture and pluralistic
political expression.
The current republican incarnation of Armenia is still in its infancy.
A mere 20 years after independence the country is just learning to
walk and it is for this reason that the time is ripe for real change.
Armenian society in the Third Republic, its government, and even its
economy is still relatively plastic, still being formed. Therefore,
the national discussion about the current course of Armenian society
needs to ask one crucial question: where do we want our country to go?
Should the spring of our country be our rich history, our art,
culture, and language? Or, as is the current trend, should all of
this be subsumed under the faceless and utterly vacuous Moloch of
consumerism? Armenia, as I see it, is at a crossroads and the paths are
clear and distinct. It is my hope that the people of Armenia, however,
and not the elites choose which path the country should pursue,
and that the people, free of delusions, choose the right path for them.
Zachary Goldsmith is a recent graduate of the University of Michigan,
where he earned a BA in political science. He is currently a Fulbright
Fellow based in Yerevan, Armenia. These views are solely those of
the author and in no way reflect those of the Fulbright program or
any other entity.