Analytical

From the first days of the formation of the interim government of Armenia, discussions began in the country, first of all, about finding ways to fight corruption and creating conditions for holding free elections. The growing wave of information about large-scale machinations of the former authorities to the state budget caused a shock in all layers of society. Citizens simply don’t understand how to fix a public administration that has been mired in pervasive corruption schemes for decades. For now, the new government only promises to submit to the public’s court specific facts related to appropriations of budget funds and returning these funds to the budget.

However
the country’s problem is not only budget robberies. Capital and politics
complete convergence has other, no less dangerous consequences for the state.
The state budget is not only being looted, but also to be formed in the necessary volume
does not have the possibility of large-scale shadow business entities
due to economic activity. These entities act developed
within the framework of shadow mechanisms, receiving excessive profits and paying shadow taxes
at the top of the pyramid of power. The beginning and the end of those financial flows at once
almost impossible to bid on.

But
something else can be revealed. the situation described above in the country of ownership
is a consequence of lack of protection. When property is not protected, it
the only way to protect it is to usurp the levers of state power. this is the
what we witnessed in Armenia for more than two decades. And the government?
the usurpation leads to inevitable consequences: the elimination of justice and
paralysis of the mechanism of free elections. This is exactly the picture in Armenia
we see It is true that the people aborted all those shady connections that
maintained such a political regime, but it would be naïve to think that
without reforms in the financial and economic sectors, this picture can
to change.  

Question:
arises: why does property in Armenia not have protection until now?
mechanisms. The answer is simple: society does not recognize that property.
and first of all, the legality of the big one. A large property has been acquired
illegally, it was simply seized from the citizens of the country. And naturally
that citizens do not recognize its legitimacy. Large is also natural
owners to protect themselves from the demands of society through usurpation of power
the aspiration. That closes the circle. But with this property protected
does not become And here’s the problem.

Deprived of property and opportunities to form state power, the society is unwittingly ready to always support the efforts of any ruler who encroaches on other people’s property. If a large owner opposes the ruler, he puts his property at risk. That property is easily taken to the “applause” of destitute citizens. In other words, the society isolated from politics and appropriated national wealth turns into an ally of another property occupier “above”. Thus, society’s denial towards the government and big owners the attitude becomes the main condition of coups and property redistribution in the “clan-oligarchic” system.

Up
the given arguments allow to construct property insecurity
the algorithm is:

• big
  owners usurp the power of the society and
  using property to form power to society
  in removing from mechanisms;
• society
  sees his political opponents in the big owners, who
  he is removed from the mechanism of forming the legal government;
• from property
  deprived society is not inclined to recognize the legitimacy of property and
  tends to support any effort to redistribute ownership.

This
the main point in the whole algorithm is that society is not inclined
to legally recognize “from above” property. This is a sufficient basis for anyone
for the permanent redistribution of property by one. Property always
becomes a target of political processes.

Basic:
the conclusion can be the following. property can get
sufficient guarantees of protection if the public stands up for itself
to property. That is, property protection guarantees can be born
in society and not in power.

But
society can defend property if in the owner
not to see him as an enemy, but as an ally for the regulation of a just way of life. Nothing else
nothing can unite the one who has nothing with the one who has. Specifically, this
requires the position of the owners in the formation of the state authority
a radical change that can protect the interests of society.

For modern owners who
have accumulated their property, relying on the government, it is still not easy to understand
this logic. Indeed, it is not easy for owners to understand that
talking to the public in the language of bribery and forming the government
rather than removing the public from the mechanisms is much more beneficial
to cooperate with the society in the formation of the elected government and
shift to the practice of sharing financial opportunities with society.

Surely the owners might one day
realize that the issue of property protection should not be confused
with relations with government, other society. Realize that
property should be removed from the field of political processes – political
passing on opportunities to society. Protection of property
in return, a “tax” should be given not to the highest authority, but to the society
turning the arrows of public denial from the self to the government.

And the logic is that if legal
in the formation of the government, the owners become the society
allies then power in the redistribution of property
becomes powerless, because of such intentions of the government
in this case, the society will protect the owners, seeing in them its own
source of well-being and protection of political and economic rights
question to his allies. That would be it society’s wealth and
the first joint of the unisex classes the beginning of interest formation:
the interest that exists in creating a system of universal legal protection
in action.

The analysis presented in this article is weak
to assert that the key problem of Armenia is the property protection program
is implementation and getting rid of politics from the dictates of capital. This is possible
is to do with the adoption of a number of laws that will regulate economic and political
the activity. Economical համաներումը՝ big owners compensation to society
payment of tax provided, to regulate the state
is the most effective way. Towards a state management system for businessmen
blocking the way, the parallel adoption of the Law on Parties second
is the bracket that separates the world of politics from the world of capital. Everything else
which will be regulated by the “domino principle” in the state.

Manvel Sargsyan