Armenian Libertarian-Socialist Movement

Global, Caucasian and Armenian politics in anarchist perspective

What is POLITY ???

Posted by kronstadt on February 10, 2007

Aristotle's classification of political systems

For the purpose of classifying different forms of constitutions and forms of governance, Aristotle (in Politics, Book III,7) noted that 2 questions must always be asked:

  1. Who is the rube by ? ,  and,
  2. Whose interest that rule serves?

He came up with 3 categories: One, Few, Many (One, Elite, People).

The above is what Aristotle’s classification of political systems looked like.

So…. “Democracy” is NOT the best system.  In fact, it is since ancient Greece that it was know that Democracy is “Rule of the People, in the interests of the Elite”.  This is one of the reasons why Imperialist powers love the concept of Democracy and try to sperad it accross the “un-Enlightened and backward” parts of the world.

As far as Armenian condition is concerned, it looks like we’re doing pretty bad.  It looks like we have Oligarchy: the rule of the Few, in the interests of the Few. 😦

Polity is the best system that we must aim for: Rule of the People, in the interests of the People.  Direct Democracy by the People, for the People. 



11 Responses to “What is POLITY ???”

  1. Observer said

    Actually – I have vastly different ideas both on democracy – in terms of interests it serves and the “next” system to come. Moreover, I usually describe several other concepts, including: netocracy, media-cracy and poligarchy – but I define it differently from that of Chomski. Wanna dance around these concepts??? 🙂

  2. kronstadt said

    Now… there’s a typically… (well, I don’t even know how to call it)… “Armenian” response from ‘Observer’. Typical. Why does one have to enter the dialogue with a prior assumption of opponent’s being stupid, uneducated, unsophisticated, with the primary mission being to astound the surrounding masses by means of belittling the opponent? That’s what the cheap-shot Armenian politicians do.

    Now Netocracy is a way overvalued neologism which is derived through a methodology that can best be termed as the “oversimplified version of historical sociology” (not good enough). For instance, the authors fail to see the limits of internet; they don’t bother to study how language really works; how language, reality, desire, fantasy and the Sublime (and NOT the neutral information or mode of information) configure subjectivities both in terms of cognitive psychology and ontology, as well as hermeneutically. It fails to see that while the substance of information is always already ideologically loaded and coded, the information itself is a neutral medium (it can swing either way depending on decontextualisations and recontextualisations); that it is still invariably a function of broader historically specific factors at play, not the least – the ownership of means of production. Last but not least, the book totally disregards the inherent problematic of sovereignty. Their analysis is poor, their claims are superficial, and the book is a mediocrity designed to sell to wider masses. If I had a choice between reading Netarchy and Hardt’s & Negri’s “Empire”… hmm, well, I’d be reading Empire. As for “Media-cracy” – well, I guess it’s pretty self explanatory — and tons has been said about it.
    As for what you call “poligarchy”, well the name is actually “Polyarchy”.
    But then one can play a postmodernist philosopher throwing in all kinds of inventions and neologisms: rhizomocracy, reificracy, reificarchy, simulacracy etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. What’s the point?
    Now, Chomsky and Aristotle are great thinkers. Maybe not the greatest in my book, but definitely a good start for people of Armenia who find themselves in political conditions whereby all previous intellectual and analytical tools have been discarded and disqualified, and replaced with the most primitive modes of political demagoguery. I think reminding people about Aristotle’s concept of Polity (as opposed to the deceptive trappings in Democracy), and having the global processes put in a historical context through simple words, like Chomsky does – I think that would be a positive step for political life in Armenia. The art of political theory is not to come up with almost meaningless or banal concepts and to twist and spin and over-complicate them so that the book hits the record sales without contributing anything constructive for the urgency of the day, ….but to think through the complexities of politics and to deliver it to broader audiences in a way that is accessible… now, that’s clever.

    And it is also useful.

    In this blog we are not trying to force our ideas on anybody. We also don’t have the arrogance to claim that we know the truth or the absolute solution to all problems. Instead we are arguing for a structural change that would allow and empower the people to struggle for their own justice and liberty, and be engaged with the political immediacy of their surroundings. We believe that the current scenery of Armenian political discourse is purposefully made stale and dull, so as to facilitate demagoguery, hypocrisy and populism (which are the ideological expressions of the right-wing Labrador Class and Imperialist powers working in alliance). Having said that, we believe that the generic vision of a POLITY, of structure within which a society of solidarity, sympathy, diversity and relative equality, and liberty can be built, is much needed in contemporary Armenian political life. So is a Movement that would choose to learn from the pitfalls of Communism and build (rather then “impose”) true Socialism that is at the same time Libertarian, Anarchistic, Communitarian (Համայնքական) and Directly-Democratic (organized horizontally or even rhizomatically).

    Of course the question of who controls the networks is important, but not as paramount as who controls the Cultural Production and Cultural Imperialism. If means of production could be owned by the Peasants, Workers and the newly emerging subordinate classes, then they can also control the culture, knowledge, information flows and networks.

  3. Observer said

    >Now… there’s a typically… (well, I don’t even know how to call it)… “Armenian” response from ‘Observer’.

    Hey! Watch it! Where did you see “a prior assumption of opponent’s being stupid, uneducated, unsophisticated”?
    a/ I’m not arguing against your viewpoints, but rather I’m stating that I have different viewpoints from those you have brought, which can by the way, be found with a little patience even on the Wikipedia.
    b/ You are not Chomski – so take it easy – ok?
    c/ I deserve an “excuse” from you – because you just abused me in a way, you are accusing me of trying to do, to be more exact, you have just tried to: nter the dialogue with a prior assumption of opponent’s being stupid, uneducated, unsophisticated, with the primary mission being to astound the surrounding masses by means of belittling the opponent? That’s what the cheap-shot Armenian politicians do.”

    I admit – I was trying to provoke a discussion, because what you are doing here – is laying out theories and covering up with names of authorities, in the hope that no one will challenge that, because those challenging, are in 99% of the cases more stupid then those authorities, right? Well – I’m not afraid of being called more stupid then Chomski – because that is a fact, and there’s nothing I can do about it. But – I am going to still try and challenge him and you – because that is the part of the learning process, and that is what blogs are for: to enter into a debate, to discuss, etc.

    If you are not in for a discussion please disable commenting options, so we know, that you are not a blog and treat you correspondingly – as a book, as a monologue or as a chunk of dead text.

    On a more positive note however, I would still like to go into a serious discussion if you still feel that this is, after all, a blog.

    Once we get the attitudes and mutual offences settled, I will be happy to reflect on the points you have made on your previous comment.

  4. kronstadt said

    Observer, there is nothing wrong with disagreement, as long as it leads to a dialogue (for out of dialogue spring politics and ethics). Now, in the previous entry you have used the term “the “next” system to come” in a typically Derridean way. Anyone familiar with workd of Derrida can see this obvious link (but maybe it was unintentional). In any case, I was not talking about systems to come, but about a 24 centuries old ideal that an anacient philosopher once aspired to (a generic form that is still relevant today). Then, you moved on dropping these very recent technical terms, which anyone who researches into politics knows very well… But why are you doing that? after all that is not the theme of my posting…
    And later you say “Wanna dance around these concepts???” with a smiley face. In short, it’s just not nice.
    (I mean there are other ways to encourage a discussion, like “have you read about netocracy or polyarchy – I think tyou might find these concents interesting and useful”).
    As for my response, I wasn’t intending to belittle you. If that’s how you read it, then I’m sorry. Last thing that I want to do in this blog is to convince or show-off my knowledge (trust me, I really don’t need to do that, as I ave enough of that kind of reputation in other broader and more specialized circles). I just want to keep it generally simple and accessible to a sufficiently educated public, who might be interested to explore anarcho-syndicalist ideas and their practical aplicability to Armenian and Caucasian politics today.
    … and now, I want to hear what You think about the points raised in my previous comment (and maybe the whole blog so far).
    Actually, we have just finished designing the FORUM, which we called “hraparak”, maybe you would prefer to take this discussion there?

  5. Observer said

    Short of time right now to come up with serious discussion points, so I’ll limit myself to saying: “Great job on this blog, it is just great! …and it is one of the most serious (if not THE MOST SERIOUS) blog out there in the Armenian blogosphere”.

  6. kronstadt said

    well I hope not too serious 😉 Otherwise we’d be turning into a SotsRealist empty, stale Slogan rambling dogmats.

    I’m looking forward to our discussions in the Forum. Especially about netocracy – the book was bad, but as a concept it is worth thinking over (especially in relation to Armenian politics and conflict resolution/mediation in the region).

  7. daniekat said

    I stumbled upon this after looking up a term in my book from socrates to sartre. i really have no imput but wow id love to read more from both of you cats. interesting stuff indeed. i have yet read any chomski but i am reading a bit of aristotle and decartes …. this may sound so ignorant but never before philosophy of politics or just in life in general, have i been so unaware of what is and can be out in our world. from abstract truths to certain governments to god as not in the christian sense but as the “one the unchangable truth” …..its a new world for me. any suggestions on current philosophy that has really inspired you? also can u tell me why? again i am a bag full of questions lol. also i didnt realize Armenia was is such bad shape or has people who want a big change like polity and not democracy. this to me is true example that there must be true morality and justice that is not relative to ones culture… or i dont know very interesting stuff .

  8. 3pm football…

    […]What is POLITY ??? « Armenian Libertarian-Socialist Movement[…]…

  9. Online Staff…

    That is true but there are conflicting ideas on this topic…

  10. […] transformed Armenia as a Federated Polity of Directly-Democratic Hamainqs and Unions as its political […]

  11. […] transformed Armenia as a Federated Polity of Directly-Democratic Hamainqs and Unions as its political […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: