in Armenian – http://crossroadorg.info/hy/a-manasyan_3_hy/
in Russian – https://crossroadorg.info/a-manasyan_3/
THE ANTAGONISM OF THE ECONOMIC MAN AND THE POLITICAL MAN
As the main contradiction of the era
Doctor of Philosophical Sciences Alexander S. Manasyan
Summary of the article in the VEM journal, Jan-March, 2020, № 1 (69)
Վէմ համահայկական հանդես, ԺԲ (ԺԸ) տարի, թիվ 1 (69), հունվար-մարտ, 2020
Full article in Armenian is in 19 pages.
This information in Facebook – here.
Key words – social force, political force, economic man, political man, western model of economic system, eastern model of economic system, economic parliament.
The article discusses the issues of transformation of the social power of an economic man into political power. On this basis, two historical phases of such a transformation are distinguished. The first historical phase is characterized by a direct transformation of the social power of an economic man into a political one, which was characteristic of a slave-owning society and feudalism. In the second phase that began with the era of bourgeois revolutions, the social power of an economic man within the framework of the Western model of the economic system could be transformed into political power indirectly through the parliamentary system. The economic man was in the minority in the total mass of the electorate and naturally feared that the formula “One voter – one vote” might leave him in the minority in parliament. Disputes were fierce in England in the 17th century over issues of universal suffrage between the Independents and the Levellers. Fears were not removed after the parade of bourgeois revolutions in Europe. Technologies were required to overcome the obstacle presented to an economic man by parliamentary democracy. The task became more complicated especially after in the middle of the 19th century political parties appeared on the political arena of Europe – new subjects of power. Over the course of the next century, an economic person solved the problem of legitimizing the seizure of power with various technologies. Now he owns a monopoly in both the economic and political spheres. In the eastern model in the economic system, this monopoly is owned by a political man. Both in the first and in the second model, the source of social evils is the monopoly possession of all power pockets. It is obvious that the true nature of the processes of transformation taking place in the Republic of Armenia cannot be adequately understood outside the context of the analysis of the main contradiction of the era – the contradiction of an economic man and a political man. Otherwise, they will be interpreted and presented as conflicts of individuals, clans and parties without ideology. The article substantiates the idea of dividing the power package between an economic person and a political person, describes a model for such a separation.