Unity / United Armenians

[Harut]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around? Edited April 26, 2007 by Harut

[Takoush]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around?

Good point!!! I guess the talks have been around here pertaining to an idea. 'Hayeren qaghapar, gam qaghaparagan'. You see, there are two main idealisms in the diaspora for us. The Dashnaktsoutyoun and the Ramgavar Parties. Therefore the Armenian churches in the United States belongs to either under the Dashnak party or the Ramgavar party. The Dashank party is under the denomination of the See of Antelias that sits in Lebanon; and the Ramgavar party is under the denomination of the Echmiadsin that is situated in the motherland, Armenia.

 

Now most and especially the youths in America prefer to unite all the Churches under one denomination and not be a part of any 'Kaghaparagan' party. Such as being under the denomination of "Echmiadsin Church". They feel that it's redundant and sheer senseless and further separates the Armenian communities in the U.S. The fact of the matter is that we would have a better fight against assimilation if at least we were united under one denomination and especially when most of us are Armenian Gregorians.

 

In a nutshell that's what the unity is being talked about; and especially pertaining in the U.S. is.

 

 

 

[Harut]

Good point!!! I guess the talks have been around here pertaining to an idea. 'Hayeren qaghapar, gam qaghaparagan'. You see, there are two main idealisms in the diaspora for us. The Dashnaktsoutyoun and the Ramgavar Parties. Therefore the Armenian churches in the United States belongs to either under the Dashnak party or the Ramgavar party. The Dashank party is under the denomination of the See of Antelias that sits in Lebanon; and the Ramgavar party is under the denomination of the Echmiadsin that is situated in the motherland, Armenia.

 

ok... i didn't understand a thing you said...

 

there is no dashnakism or ramkavarims... these are political parties... so what "qaghapar, gam qaghaparagan" are you reffering to? neither are antalias or echmiadsin ideas...

 

Now most and especially the youths in America prefer to unite all the Churches under one denomination and not be a part of any 'Kaghaparagan' party.

 

so... in other word, the youth preffers to be "angaghapar"...

 

Such as being under the denomination of "Echmiadsin Church". They feel that it's redundant and sheer senseless and further separates the Armenian communities in the U.S. The fact of the matter is that we would have a better fight against assimilation if at least we were united under one denomination and especially when most of us are Armenian Gregorians.

 

ok... now you're beginning to make just a little sense... so, the cause we are called to unite around is the fight against assimilation?

 

In a nutshell that's what the unity is being talked about; and especially pertaining in the U.S. is.

 

so... why are all armenians called to unite? armenians in armenia don't give a crap about assimilation... and why should they...

[Takoush]

ok... i didn't understand a thing you said...

 

there is no dashnakism or ramkavarims... these are political parties... so what "qaghapar, gam qaghaparagan" are you reffering to? neither are antalias or echmiadsin ideas...

 

OK Harut; Dashnaktsagan or Ramkavar are both political parties, true; but sometime in the 40 or 50's? I really don't know the whole story or the exact dates; but Dashnaktsoutyoun have made their Catholicosate in the See of Cilicia. It was there centuries ago; but I suppose they have revived it, and then the Churches were built and so they've worked around those two political parties in the US.

so... in other words, the youth prefers to be "angaghapar"...

Yes the youth and a great many middle aged or older people too. Look at Arpa and many others too in here or elsewhere, they would much prefer that the churches didn't or wouldn't revolve around the political parties.

ok... now you're beginning to make just a little sense... so, the cause we are called to unite around is the fight against assimilation?

 

Yes, through unification we can achieve lesser extent of assimilation. It's because our people and the youth would get-together and see each other on a larger scale. Don't you think?

 

so... why are all armenians called to unite? armenians in armenia don't give a crap about assimilation... and why should they...

Harout, why would Armenians in Armenia care about such matters? They are all in the motherland, and of course the people, any people in their homeland they don't have to be frightened or worried about such matters and or assimilations. So yes, of course they don't give a darn about it in Armenia; because even if a boy would be Armenian let's say and marry a Russian girl; when they both stay in Armenia the children will become more Armenian than anything else. That's the advantage of having a homeland. Why do you think we fought for a homeland or Artsax, and that our writers and poets from centuries ago drove us (the people) to dream and work upon that dream to have a homeland again. Because in your homeland, the people will automatically remain Armenian for until the end of times. But you take that same people to the U.S. or Europe, for example; and there's always the fright and the great possibility of the same people being assimilated and vanished through the centuries.

 

Therefore nothing but nothing comes close to one's beautiful homeland my dear young and clever friend.

 

On the other hand here in the U.S. when it's not our own country, when an Armenian boy meets and marries an odar (American) girl; the country drives you and pushes your children to become Americans than all else. If not in every such case, but in most cases, I'm afraid. We say in Armenian;

Հոս Ամերիկայում հոսանքը զորավոր է, դիւրին եւ շուտով ցուլվելու:

[Harut]

Yes the youth and a great many middle aged or older people too. Look at Arpa and many others too in here or elsewhere, they would much prefer that the churches didn't or wouldn't revolve around the political parties.

 

i always knew that Arpa was "angaghapar"...

[Harut]

btw, Anahid, i think you didn't get the question that i was raising and took the whole issue to a totally wrong direction... so, i'll take the question to the public...

[Harut]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around?

[Takoush]

i always knew that Arpa was "angaghapar"...

Well, let's say he prefers unity in churches and unity in the people, rather than scattered here and there. One goes to one church and another goes to a different church just 15 or 20 minutes away. He feels it's senseless and stupid. I kinda agree with him, because it doesn't make sense really.

[Takoush]

btw, Anahid, i think you didn't get the question that i was raising and took the whole issue to a totally wrong direction... so, i'll take the question to the public...

Oh boy Harout. After all these good explanations of mine; now you're going to take it to the public.... oh boy...oh boy...oh boy.

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2007 by Anahid Takouhi

[MosJan]

exxx Harout jan exxxx Yaman Yammannn ~~

[Takoush]

exxx Harout jan exxxx Yaman Yammannn ~~

Movses jan; des im badasxanes Haroutigin ira corneri vera, inke gese teh yes chi hasgats@ zinke. Artyok im badasxanes djishd che mite? Ira hartsoume yes chi garoghatsa hasgenal? Yes ge gardseyi teh hasgatsa.

 

Toun inch geses Mosjan?

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2007 by Anahid Takouhi

[Zartonk]

How about a Culture Harut? A Republic?

[Harut]

How about a Culture Harut? A Republic?

 

you say culture... but do people / can people really unite around a culture? what are we uniting to do? to build a culture? to sustain an existing culture? sorry, i just don't get it...

if to build, then does that mean we don't have one? if to sustain, then are we advocating united reservationism and shunning progress?

maybe to create and flurish culture?... but then again, aren't people most creative when left alone or left alone to choose with whom to bind to create, and not be forced to be united with everyone... (kind of reminds of soviet union...)

[Eva]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around?

 

 

սկսենք հայերեն խոսալ հաճախ ?

[Zartonk]

you say culture... but do people / can people really unite around a culture? what are we uniting to do? to build a culture? to sustain an existing culture? sorry, i just don't get it...

if to build, then does that mean we don't have one? if to sustain, then are we advocating united reservationism and shunning progress?

maybe to create and flurish culture?... but then again, aren't people most creative when left alone or left alone to choose with whom to bind to create, and not be forced to be united with everyone... (kind of reminds of soviet union...)

 

Yes, people DO unite around culture, but ONLY if they are able to RECOGNIZE this culture.

 

Alongside language, culture is the anthropological inheritance of a grouping of human beings and the binding common factor of a people. In its sum, it is an inevitable product of a continuous community and society. It isn't a consciously crafted entity and it just is.

 

What we -and this goes for any group- are "uniting around to do" is to prolong the survival and existence of the given variation of the humanity. That's all. The embedded collective identity is constant, ethnicity, land and even language are subject to change.

 

The way I see it, it is a matter of sustenance, and BY NO MEANS does this mean "reservationist" withholding. I even think that once one knows his or her own cultural lineage and understand who he or she really is in the grand scheme of the globe, absolute personal liberty is easier to attain. Why should a people's knowledge of self keep progress bound?

 

Uniting (a vulnerable term) under culture does not mean offsetting individuality or creativity. A nation is functions only when she knows her past and her present definition through earnest, scholastic recreation.

[Shahan Araradian]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around?

I think I can answer.

 

Unite around:

1. The national self-determination of the Armenian people on their historic homeland (to the end of time)

2. The perpetuation of Armenian culture among Armenians around the world (to the end of time)

3. The return of the bulk of the Armenian population to their historic homeland

4. The well-being of Armenians around the world: in the diaspora and in the homeland

Edited April 27, 2007 by Shahan Araradian

[Anoushik]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around?

Driving German cars.

[Em]

we, armenians advocate unity at every step of our lives... yet we never specify what we should unite around... an idea? a struggle? a process? a project? a table of bread and wine? what? someone tell me what are we supposed to unite around?

 

In the most basic sense and by definition, unity keeps the "individual" in line, in check. Like "aghotats vochxar". It inhibits diversity and uniqueness. Our people like to follow a trend...German cars is a perfect example.

Those who break free and choose not to follow the trend are seen as a threat. They cannot be put in a box and labeled. That scares our people.

 

The most fascinating people I have met thus far have been the ones who break free of the notion of "unity". It can be a self-imposed prison sentence.

 

 

[Zartonk]

After seeing where this conversation began, I noticed a reply by Shahan Araradian that sums it up very thoroughly.

 

 

1. The national self-determination of the Armenian people on their historic homeland (to the end of time)

2. The perpetuation of Armenian culture among Armenians around the world (to the end of time)

3. The return of the bulk of the Armenian population to their historic homeland

4. The well-being of Armenians around the world: in the diaspora and in the homeland

Edited April 28, 2007 by Zartonk

[kakachik77]

After seeing where this conversation began, I noticed a reply by Shahan Araradian that sums it up very thoroughly.

 

 

Zartonk,

 

I only agree with #4 here, moreover I think #3 is an unrealizable dream...so then if there is a diversity of opinion then what we should not unite?

 

 

I think we can only "unite" based on loosely defined cultural, economic, political goals and by loosely I mean goals that do not require some sort of uber-patriotic extremist unrealizable committments. #4 in Shahan's list makes that exact point of loosely defined- well being of armenians both in the diaspora and in Armenia. What do we mean by well-being...well every Armenian individual can decide on their own.

 

In my opinion, our unity should be based around a lot of choices and flexibility given the diverse socio-economic, political histories that we all bring into the big picture of what today is to be Armenian.

And I refer to our diversity as a one of our important assets but we have to make sure to leave enough room from all diverse opinions to find their voice in this unity.

 

 

[vava]

....And I refer to our diversity as a one of our important assets but we have to make sure to leave enough room from all diverse opinions to find their voice in this unity.

 

With regards to your view of the diversity of Armenians today - I agree. It is an asset if leveraged as such. Unfortunately, many regard our diversity as a hindrance.

[kakachik77]

With regards to your view of the diversity of Armenians today - I agree. It is an asset if leveraged as such. Unfortunately, many regard our diversity as a hindrance.

 

then perhaps our political and intellectual leaders and community organizers have to make a conscious effort to "re-educate" the masses about the advantages of the diversity. This perhaps can become one of the avenues to achieve unity.

[Shahan Araradian]

In the most basic sense and by definition, unity keeps the "individual" in line, in check. Like "aghotats vochxar". It inhibits diversity and uniqueness. Our people like to follow a trend...German cars is a perfect example.

Those who break free and choose not to follow the trend are seen as a threat. They cannot be put in a box and labeled. That scares our people.

 

The most fascinating people I have met thus far have been the ones who break free of the notion of "unity". It can be a self-imposed prison sentence.

There's definitely the "good" type of unity, and the "bad" type of unity. Self-serving exclusive gangs and hierarchical patronage systems are examples of bad unity, and are negative types of social capital that are detrimental. But there is also good types of social capital...

 

In my experience, there's a very low sense of community in suburban America (especially in large cities like Los Angeles). You can feel it in the Armenian community too. It's the constant wave (maybe upto the 1990s) of Armenian immigrants from the Middle East which has fueled community life (Armenians from ROA often don't partake in community organizations at all).

 

To understand the value of community and social norms, a good book to read is "Bowling Alone" by Robert Putnam:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/074320304...d=21L61R2MJBRTJ

 

Putnam argues that there's been an overall decline in social capital in America in the last fifty years and that it's having serious consequences for American society: from corrupt local government (take Glendale's city council which chose to erect a new mall instead of a public park in central Glendale) to corrupt national government (e.g. the war in Iraq to serve particular parts of society: oil and defense corporations, and Jews/the state of Israel).

 

Much of society's problems stem from lack of community involvement...

Edited April 28, 2007 by Shahan Araradian

[Shahan Araradian]

Driving German cars.

Unfortunately, the entire world is being swept up by consumerism, especially in "developed" nations like the U.S., and it's definitely growing in developing nations, too...

 

That's what advertising does to people who watch television when they get home from work or school. That's what drives the world economy: workers called consumers who spend every penny they earn -- and even borrow on interest -- to satisfy the artificial conditioning planted into them by corporate psychologists (i.e. "marketing" managers) to buy products which they think will make them happy: everything from German cars, to Absolut vodka, to iPods, to mutual funds, to the "fastest" computers, to the newest phones.

 

All for what? To satisfy needs planted into humans by savvy psychologists, hired by corporations, so consumers can buy what they don't need, to impress people who they don't know, using money that they don't have.

 

While they think they are buying happiness, after the initial 5 minutes of indulgence, they have actually ended up not in happiness but in debt-slavery. Having been trapped in the vicious cycle of ever-increasing debt, they never get to fulfill one of the central ingredients of happiness: Freedom.

 

 

It all "clicked" for me after I watched this documentary series on public television called "Philosophy: A Guide to Happiness". The second episode ("Epicurus on Happiness") is really worth watching, since it analyzes how the vast majority of people in the world go about the wrong way in trying to create happiness, and how they are misled by advertisers.

 

(You can find the DivX out there on TorrentSpy for those of you who'd like to preview the video before buying... http://www.torrentspy.com/torrent/894339/P...Happiness_2004)

Edited April 28, 2007 by Shahan Araradian

[Zartonk]

Zartonk,

 

I only agree with #4 here, moreover I think #3 is an unrealizable dream...so then if there is a diversity of opinion then what we should not unite?

 

 

I think we can only "unite" based on loosely defined cultural, economic, political goals and by loosely I mean goals that do not require some sort of uber-patriotic extremist unrealizable committments. #4 in Shahan's list makes that exact point of loosely defined- well being of armenians both in the diaspora and in Armenia. What do we mean by well-being...well every Armenian individual can decide on their own.

 

In my opinion, our unity should be based around a lot of choices and flexibility given the diverse socio-economic, political histories that we all bring into the big picture of what today is to be Armenian.

And I refer to our diversity as a one of our important assets but we have to make sure to leave enough room from all diverse opinions to find their voice in this unity.

 

I'm sorry. I have to clarify myself a bit.

 

It's really population that should be #1. As Shahan has mentioned, it should be the priority of the generation to repopulate and thus reinvigorate the RoA. Our nationalist ideals don't match our reality in numbers. They are, at present, dreams at best. The only way for a step toward 'unity' to take place is for the the Armenian diaspora to invest in the sole relevant vestige of 'Armenianness', the Republic. How can this be initiated? By educating the diaspora (and indeed, RoA citizens) themselves about the patrimony of Armenian civilization (note the lower case c) and the truthful state of Armenia and the people.

 

SO, take a look at what I went back and made bold in the post. I know that's really taking a quote out of context by misquoting the message, but THAT'S what I picked up and decided to post.

Edited April 28, 2007 by Zartonk