Civic Activism as a Novel Component of Armenian Civil Society

civic activism is on the rise. The difference between formal institutions and informal activism is
that government has been successful in controlling the system in terms of enforcing its rules and
overseeing procedures, accruing to the benefit of the ruling administration. The corrupt system
has functioned successfully because all branches of government operate together and are heavily
controlled by authorities. By contrast, it is difficult for the government to control civic initiatives.
The authorities attempt to exercise such control, but it is difficult because an initiative has many
participants, who are all different people, and enforcing control over each person takes time and
is therefore not always feasible.
The justice system is an important element of the political culture of a given society.
Armenia has succeeded at proclaiming independence as a country, but it has failed at
implementing a proper functioning of checks and balances based on an independent judiciary.
All power holders and sectors are intertwined, which leads to a single, large and corrupt system
of governance. Breaking the corrupt cycle of continued favours and dependencies would be an
improvement with effects spreading to development in many sectors. Much of the criticism for
the existence of a poor political culture is directed at the government, which is believed to set the
rules and is thus responsible for developing the culture. The existing rules are, regrettably,
considered to be nothing other than a pure profit-making, namely, a typical post-Soviet
oligarchic system operating in a profit-based political culture, with actors seeking personal gains
and developing a systemic monopoly.
The political culture is poor because even the political parties are formed and operate
based not on ideologies but profits. The political parties lack certain crucial qualities, such as a
culture of debate and cooperation. Therefore, the political culture will only become what it must
be once a constitutional order is established in the country, an order serving its people, not the
ruling few.
8.1.1 Political Culture and Activism
In fairness, some other existing components of Armenia’s political culture have to be recognised.
There is overwhelming agreement that the only sphere capable of creating development is the
civic sphere, as it experiences sparks of development from within. These sparks are visible in the
systematic non-violent resistance observed over the course of the last ten years.
The developing activism is a bright aspect of what, at times, is the very dark reality of
Armenia. For many participants, it is the only hope for change and, generally, the sole approach
to help address illegal behaviour. The public is characterised by a desire to become involved.
The recent experience of civic initiatives is an indication of this desire and readiness to demand,
with an overall maturity of protest and a real change (stemming from it) yet to come.
As outlined in the previous section, when defining activism, many refer to a variety of
methods and activities. When an attempt is made to apply the concept to Armenian reality,
activism becomes an action that necessarily comes from the outside. Activism in Armenia is seen
as happening on the street because this is the only way to achieve the actors’ goals. Due to the
67