Saturday, August 23, 2008

Who "They" Are.

Someone said that I was being conspiracy-minded when I used the word "they." So lets set the record straight: "They" are economic elites who are either:

1) dependent on drugs, or
2) mad (as in clinically insane), and
2) messianic (as in they believe in a, or should I say "the," messiah and are expecting him to arrive, probably even preparing for it).

Absolute power doesn't merely corrupt, it drives insane. Who but the most powerful has enough time on his hands to notice the meaninglessness of life? The most powerful go insane because after all their desires are satisfied, they are left without desires. And life without desire is life in hell.

Fear of death is actually the fear of life without desire. Can you imagine what it would be like if everybody did what you told them to? What would be left to conquer after that? Pretty soon you'd start sticking golden needles through your maidservants' nipples, or flat out play games with people's lives just to watch them suffer.

And while the cultures of ancient Egypt and Rome, pre-modern as they were, had the capability of incorporating behavior like that, how else can modern, liberal-humanist culture, with its million and one assumptions about what man is, see this behavior but as stark raving mad, or, more accurately, clinically, through the discourse of psychology, as "sadism."

That's why most rich people are perpetually on medication, either on tranquilizers or opiates--often on both.

But some of them need more than just drugs to relieve the despair; they need to feel that life has a purpose and that they personally have a role in it. Thus is messianism born in them; messianism, the desperate mad wish to, not only have a world that has meaning, but one where the meaning congeals into flesh and blood and manifests itself bodily right there in front of their eyes--as the Messiah--after which manifestation the world blows up and all is over, all of their suffering is over. A desperate thing, this messianism. A suicidal wish.

Ultimately, however, it doesn't matter. While we're at it, there is a conspiracy far more menacing, far more thorough, and far more undetectable than these conspiracies of interests seeking power could ever be, and that is the conspiracy of reason. That's how it is.

Obama picks Biden.

The attack on Georgia, who dunnit and why, McInsane, Suck-ass Willy, ... That's entertainment!

But here is the latest: Obama picks Biden as VP. A couple of sites with good coverage you may want to bookmark if you haven't done so already: This is where I go to for American politics, not that I endorse what they say, and not that I disagree--just good, clean, information, most of the time, from middle-class humanists:

Obama & Biden.

Biden is who will be President after they assassinate Obama, let me be clear. "They" at the very least think that assassinating Obama is an option. You know, considering Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy, and John Kennedy, and Malcolm X, all assassinated within 5 years, and with no other assassinations before or after for decades and decades--of course Obama is a target.

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Payqar: The Diaspora Must Decide. Part 3.

The author brings out the Howitzer in this part of the essay, making it much more interesting (and entertaining, from a rhetorical standpoint) than the last part. He gives the ARF a good whooping that it no doubt richly deserves, but I'm not sure whether he is being fair about his judgment that the ARF had never engaged in genocide recognition issues up until 1988.

Note: If the people of Armenia are being supported by money sent from outside; and if that money is being spent on buying goods sold by monopolies inside Armenia being protected by the corrupt government; then it follows that the monopolies will strive to keep the Armenian people cut-off from the rest of the market for their material gain. I.e. For Kocharian and Sargsyan and company, it is good that the people can only buy from them with the money that is not being produced by their leadership. In a word: Parasites.

Payqar: "It is time for the diaspora to decide which path it will take."
Published July 25th, 2008.
Part 3

As it turned out, the meeting [between Sargsyan and Turkish representatives] did not vindicate [Sargsyan]. Turkey made the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border contingent upon Armenia's relinquishment of all territorial claims to Gharabagh and Western Armenia, in spite of the fact that Western Armenia in this regard means the Kars-Ardahan region.

Armenia's domestic and foreign policy has been made to fail in the last ten years.

The power of the diaspora has either been used for the wrong purpose or, to put it in different terms, been opportunistically used for the strengthening of the government--not for the advancement of the country. Gharabagh was not re-settled; aside from the center of Yerevan, the outlying districts and surrounding towns have remained neglected, and we won't even get into the state of the villages.

Migration out of the country has not stopped. The people of Armenia have been surviving on money sent from outside of the country. Every year, 1.5 to 2 billion US dollars enter the country from Armenian citizens working abroad who have already established permanent residence there. The ones receiving the money are all consumers. The small number of people who are allowed to import goods from abroad sell those goods to these consumers and pocket the 2 billion dollars. The profits [from these sails] are not invested in Armenia for its advancement, but sent abroad again to be used for the improvement of their [the few's] businesses. Poverty, the emigration of the majority of village youth seeking work, fed-up by injustice and lawlessness, the flight out of the people--these all mirror the country's economic and political state.

The falsification of the last elections (the May 2007 parliamentary and February 2008 presidential) brought the people's frustration to a head. The political and economic crisis, the step-by-step retreat from the type of solution of the Gharabagh issue that would be suitable for us, the failure of R. Kocharian's foreign policy (with which he sought to use genocide recognition to place Turkey under "pressure," open the borders, and solve the Gharabagh conflict), all of these were the suggestions of the ARF as well, in exchange for which the ARF promised to help Kocharian in every way to use and abuse the diaspora for the benefit of the strengthening of his government.

The ARF tries to present itself in Armenia as the lord and master of the diaspora and its representative, a claim that, to put it mildly, does not correspond with reality. In an interview given to Aravot, Vahan Hovhannisian said, "To whom should we abandon the diaspora?" ( /politics /41717/view). It is due to this fantasy that the ARF jumps from branch to branch in its political life; opportunism has become the principle of its political life. Perhaps in 1914-15 in Western Armenia, the ARF likewise imagined itself the representative of the people; consequently, an entire people were wiped out along with their country. And to this day, the ARF has failed to give the story its woven the recognition that it deserves and has neglected to approach its history critically, and those who have tried to take a critical approach have been subjected to the most fierce blackmail and commensurate punishment by the ARF. What can be done? If it is the lord and master of the people, then it will do whatever it wants, and it won't have to take responsibility for anything.

And if the government thinks that the ARF is the master of the diaspora, it is badly mistaken, [and badly mistaken] while trying to develop its relations with its diaspora. And that is exactly the reason it has been to this day unable to enter into a meaningful, foundational relationship with the diaspora. The five hundred year history of reality is clear evidence to the effect that it has not been the ARF that has taken care of the diaspora or kept its Armenian identity; in reality, the opposite has been true. From the moment that the ARF entered the diaspora, it did nothing but cause splits and betray the best Armenian sons to the intelligence ministries of other countries. It was one of the ARF's "brilliant works" to split the diocese of the Iranian Armenians off from Edjmiatzin and connect it to the one in Antelias, Lebanon, sparing no effort in the process.

The ARF began demonstrating its political ignorance from the moment of its inception: as an ally of the terrorist SRs [Socialist Revolutionary Party], it opposed [first] the Tsar, then the Bolsheviks; as an ally of the Young Turks, it opposed the Sultan, then the Young Turks, and, when in need of the Young Turks' help again, the Bolsheviks.

After being denied leadership of the first Republic of Armenia, the ARF, up until 1988, instead of dedicating its energies to the question of genocide recognition, devoted itself solely to the fight against Soviet Armenia. During WWII, the Armenians of France fought against fascism, against Hitler; the ARF, on the other hand, joined the fascists to liberate Soviet Armenia. In 1988, when the Armenians of the same Soviet Armenia began calling for independence, the ARF labeled them traitors and called the idea of separating from the Soviet Union idiocy. It called Levon Ter-Petrossian a traitor because he has not made genocide recognition a fundamental part of his foreign policy or has abandoned it to forgetfulness. At that time they were in agreement with Turkey's becoming a member of the European Union. After they came to power (during R. Kocharian's presidency), they made genocide recognition and Turkey's not entering the EU the core of their foreign policy. They were against the creation of "The Commission of Historians for the Study of Genocide Evidence," but now they are trying to justify Serzh Sargsyan's announcement about [the Armenian government's] agreement with the establishment of a genocide commission with logic-free commentary and the refusal to offer a specific policy position.

What must the diaspora do?

(to be continued)

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Payqar: The Diaspora Must Decide. Part 2.

Here, the author discusses Kocharian's relationship to the ARF and the considerations that went into his decision to make genocide recognition a part of his foreign policy. A few points that are made are a bit ambiguous, but I'm hoping they'll clear-up during the course of the rest of the article.

Payqar: "It is time for the diaspora to decide which path it will take."
Published July 25th, 2008.
Part 2

In any case, Serzh Sargsyan, himself, is honest in the position that he has taken; the liars are those who have changed the cards and are now pushing him to take a path that runs contrary to R. Kocharian's foreign policy [1]. But that was useful only to those who pushed R. Kocharian in exactly the opposite direction: they made the issue of genocide recognition a fundamental part of Armenia's foreign policy, which has already started running low and become ineffective.

Neither his agreement with Turkey's joining the European Union, nor the announcements that he made at Moscow could have been positions arrived at independently and without the approval of the [Armenian Revolutionary] Federation. The ARF's [reaction] to S. Sargsyan's announcements has been through the same maneuver, familiar to us, that it has always used: to take the mistake in its totality and hang it around the neck of another, in this case Serzh Sargsyan, and, by doing so, hide its own participation in the matter and present itself in front of the Armenian people as innocent.

The ARF practiced the same politics during the presidency of Levon Ter-Petrossian; what happened with the help of Kocharian's government, however, deserves its own critique in another article; let us just note here that when R. Kocharian, as a representative of the ARF (a fact that the ARF and Kocharian, both, hide), took over the government of Armenia, he gave the ARF powerful abilities in the domestic and foreign spheres of government, so that, on the ARF's request, he made the recognition of the Genocide and the issue of Turkey's exclusion from the European Union a fundamental part of the country's foreign policy--fully expecting, of course, the ARF's thorough assistance in directing the Diaspora's economic power, in particular, toward Armenia, thereby strengthening his own position.

It must be said that R. Kocharian has clearly and without equivocation explained this situation as answer to Levon Ter-Petrossian.

Levon Ter-Petrossian: "In 1997, when I asked Prime Minister Kocharian to lead the National Armenia-Diaspora Relationship Development Council, he refused and cited the absence of the issue of Genocide recognition in the Council's agenda as the reason for his refusal. When in the presence of the head of the Armenia pan-Armenian fund, Manushak Petrossian, I asked for a justification of his point of view, Kocharian verbatim said the following: "I don't know what a genocide is, but I am certain that it is a necessary thing for the Diaspora. If we include this issue, it will excite the Diaspora, and it will financially help Armenia even more. Moreover, if Armenia officially demands Genocide recognition, Turkey will give-in and open the Armenian-Turkish border within a year. Aside from that, it will take a more neutral stance with regard to the effort to normalize the Gharabagh conflict and will no longer avidly support Azerbaijan's position."

In other words, the genocide question as, not a principle, but a means for profit--directing the Diaspora's internal power toward Armenia, in order to strengthen the position of the government.

And following that principle (of swindler's), R. Kocharian (who doesn't know what a genocide is), after being elected President, raised the genocide issue from the dais of the UN and turned it into a fundamental part of his foreign policy. But to this day Turkey has neither opened its border, nor quit the Gharabagh issue, and Armenia remains locked within its borders, while the Gharabagh question has become even more complicated, to detriment of Armenia.

1. The contrast is between Sargsyan's openness to the idea of establishing a commission to study the genocide (ostensibly for the sake of the opening of the border, as was discussed in Part 1 of this article) and Kocharian's making genocide recognition an integral part of his foreign policy. Ambiguous referents and the lack of context render the rest of this paragraph a bit confusing, though, to my mind.

Saturday, August 2, 2008

Payqar: The Diaspora Must Decide. Part 1.

Here's a translation of an article addressed to the Diaspora.

Payqar: "It is time for the diaspora to decide which path it will take."
Published July 25th, 2008.
Part 1.

Government officials and political parties who like to say black is white do so to justify, not Serzh Sargsyan, but themselves, because they, themselves, are his advisers.

Serzh Sargsyan's announcement made in Moscow and his recollection and clarification of it in his presidential newspaper statement leave no room for anything more to be said about the issue. To represent that crystal-clear announcement as anything else would at the very least be political underhandedness.

Serzh Sargsyan said the following, verbatim:

"The second issue that I would like to talk about is Turkish-Armenian relations. Our stance with regard to this question is clear: the border between neighboring nations should not be closed in the 21st century. Regional cooperation can become the best means for the establishment of a lasting presence.

The Turkish side has suggested that a commission be formed with the task of investigating the historical evidence. We are not opposed to the creation of such a commission, if, first, the border between our nations is opened; otherwise, it could become a means for prolonging and taking advantage of the question for years.

I am of a mind to take new steps to stimulate Armenian-Turkish relations. In all probability, I will invite Abdullah Gul, the President of Turkey, to Yerevan to watch together the soccer game between the Armenian and Turkish teams."

First, Serzh Sargsyan, himself, knows that Turkey will take advantage of that situation and draw the matter out for years. Second, if that commission is to be established after the border is opened, then why is it even necessary to establish it? But things are not what they are being made to seem: The establishment of the commission is the precondition to the opening of the border. Turkey must have a guarantee that, after the border is opened, the commission will commence with its work and conclude with advantageous results for itself--Turkey; otherwise, why should Turkey open its border? Why did it not open its border in the last ten years? Isn't it the case that, up until that time, Armenia had set no preconditions to the question of the establishment of Armenian-Turkish relations?

Serzh Sargsyan let his approval be know to the European parliament in as early as 2007: "We are not apposed to the inclusion of Turkey in the European Union." Serzh Sargsyan's opinions had long since been prepared and placed on the agenda, however. It was a part of his presidential elections tour. It is not by accident that PACE dealt more leniently than was called for with the present government and its ties to the events of March 1st. The polistical sale had already been made, and the promises had already been given.

Serzh Sargsyan started trying to make himself acceptable to the European Union after 2006. It was not for naught that during the second half of 2006 and the first half of 2007 he sold in the international market USD $331,666 in order to introduce himself and let his future policies be known (US Department of Justice/ /article/803/).