Social Democrat Hunchak Party, Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Liberalism, Yeghia Djerejian, Part Two
Part one
Hunchakians are an Armenian Democratic Socialist party - Dr. Yeghia Djeredjian
Armenian
Գլոբալիզմ, նեոլիբերալիզմ, լիբերալիզմ, դեմոկրատական սոցիալիզմ, Եղիա Ճերէճեան, Մաս Երրորդ
Bedros Manoukian
Comrade Yeghai Djeredjian, in the beginning, Most Socialist and Marxist parties used the term Social Democrat, even the Russian communists used this name, but today, this term has another meaning
Social Democracy demands reforms within the liberal free market system, but does not suggest or aim to move from the liberal capitalist free market system to a socialist system, while we are more close to the Democratic socialists who believe that we must transform and reach a socialist system through democracy, elections and the ballot, we the Hunchakians believe that we should reach a socialist system, don’t you think our name as democratic socialists instead of social democratic Hunchak party would be more accurate ?
Yeghia Djeredjian
No, I don’t agree, even the term socialist system, it has a variety of meanings, everyone understand a socialist system in a different and his own way,
But keep in mind, a political parties political, social and ideological beliefs are not determined by his name, whether the aprty is called a social democrat, a democratic socialist, a socialist or otherwise, a parties vision can be understood and determined by his political ideological social program,
There are left wing parties that there name does not carry the term socialist, like for example, a party mighty be called the peoples party, yet its program might be based on fundamental socialism
But most of the socialist parties have undergone the process of self-revision, self-reform, or have this tendency to do so,
For example, in Germany, under the leadership or Rammstein, they started the process of revision their Marxist views, even before the Soviet Union was born.
Even Karl Marx himself, who is known as the spiritual father and founder of scientific Socialism or Marxism, says that his ideas and theories, are not a dogma, or an ideology that may not be subject to revision and evolution,
Socialism is not a sacred divine teaching where a single word of its ideas may not be changed, it has to keep track with the evolution of technology, industry and circumstances, and change with this evolution, it will keep on changing, and it will even reach a phase where the updated versions will be deeply different than the original version, and Even Karl Marx accepts this fact
That is why today, for people to be considered socialists, every socialist has his own version
As such, if we today are to say that which version does the Social Democrat Hunchakian Party follow, we must take into consideration, that also inside the hunchakian party, every member has his own unique version of comprehension of Socialism, therefore it is natural that inside the party there will be a lot of interpretations of Socialism,
We must also take into consideration that inside the republic of Armenia, people have a negative attitude and emotions towards Socialism after the failure and collapse of the Soviet Union
Today there is an ideological confusion inside most political parties due to lack of solid determination and interpretation of their ideological doctrines
Now today, if we suggest a certain formula for the version of Socialism the party should accept, and demand that all members and supporters accept this formula, I think that approach is unreasonable, not practical or realistic, and will not benefit the party path in any way
The main objective is for the working class to be liberated from the pressure of the Bourgois
Bedros Manoukian
Comrade Yeghia, you gave such a profound and interesting answers, I will say that you beat me today, your words were convincing, and you did add more knowledge to my logic today, I lvged your answer
Yeghia Djeredjian
Well, I think the term Socialism, Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, should have a simple clear definition, which is the quest for Social Justice, and I believe that is the ideal solution both for the republic of Armenia and on the international level for all nations
And today, Social Injustice is actually more widespread everywhere due to the bugs inside the electoral system, to how governments are formed, ad this leads to suspicion that through the electoral system the will of the people is not enforced correctly and illegal maneuvers and methods affect the true representation of the will of the people
Social Justice, and peoples political maturity and awareness, that they are the source of power that decides the authorities, through his vote, all this leads to reforms in terms of the justice and social system
The struggle for this is everywhere, worldwide and inside the republic of Armenia, and the Hunchak party ideology has the right elements to enhance these values, regardless of the version of Socialism it should believe in
Bedros Manoukian
Comrade Yeghia, during the last 15 years, we saw a new political wave, it is called neo-liberalism, sometimes called interchangeably with the term globalists, or political globalism, and suddenly we saw a lot of leftist progressives and socialists who started cooperation with this movement, the neo-liberalism, which many regard as the more extreme version of liberalism, some socialists said that we socialists should cooperate with neo-liberalism, I am not with this opinion, I disagree, I am someone who regards that neo-liberalism is the deep political opposite of us Socialist, but a lot of leftist movements, starting with Senator Bernie Sanders who describes himself as a democratic socialist, and he is part of the Democrats in the USA, has entrusted his cause to Joe Biden of the same party (Democrats), who is regarded as a neo-liberal politician
Yeghia Djeredjian
The center of the liberals and the center of Socialists are very close to each other, as long as the formation of the government achievement through the will of the people is provided and ensured, democracy is ensured, and the wish of the people is realized through the elections, and the monitoring of executive mechanism is provided to guard it against exploitation, in some aspects, liberalism is acceptable, and the experience proved that in economic growth, liberalism is more productive than radical narrow-minded socialism, like the soviet union and eastern Europe for example,
Second world war reached both the Soviet Union and Europe, but let us take the example of Germany, which was a united Germany before the second world war, but after the world war it was divided into a communist eastern Germany and a liberal market west Germany, both parts were affected by the war, they were both defeated and destroyed, but West Germany recovered much more faster than eastern Europe, it returned to the market and the Western German products were of top quality, while eastern German products found no market
And there was no socialist country where their economy growths like any country with a liberal market
The main reason why the Soviet Union collapsed was that it was unable to endure to the economic competition with the free liberal market western countries and even the most radical communists reached a phase where they eventually accept this fact
Now if we decide to fight against Liberalism, with no alternative, therefore by using the traditional socialist ideas and theories, I do not think there will be any people in any country that will accept these ideas, therefore it will be meaningless
I think that the positive aspects of Socialism, I think that liberalism has accepted and embraced them, things like free medical care, free educational system, and that the quality of these services must not be so lower than the private sector, and also lower working hours, and higher wages
The state must make sure that these things are provided, free medical care, free educational system, free transport,(which is not found anywhere), we must take into consideration that the wages of the working class in the liberal free market system were much higher than the wages of the workers inside the Soviet Union
Therefore, the quest to provide the basic rights of the working class, improve their living social/economical standards, it does not have to necessarily be achieved through a socialist dictatorship, there might come governments that provide all this, this is not the radical extreme socialist approach, but rather the reformed moderate socialist approach, which is in harmony with liberalism in many aspects,
I think the ideal socialist accepts a mixture of three types of ownership
-State controlled
-Private
-And Mixed
The approach of state controlled productivity failed, something that historically failed cannot be returned to, it is meaningless to try it once again
Part Two
To be continued
