What emphases would there be if Julien Benda were writing his famous book today?
The original French title of his work is La Trahison des Clercs—The Treason of the Clerks—where clercs literally refers to the clergy. Of course, for centuries, the majority of intellectuals were indeed members of the clergy. In the 1946 edition, Benda even talks about real clergymen in Germany who prostrated themselves before Hitler, the “anointed of force.” Spanish priests did the same in the 1930s; Benda calls them “servile.” And yes, we are familiar with such Armenian clergymen too.
But here clercs is used more broadly. Benda’s target is any intellectual who betrays his vocation. Let me clarify: In the West, the term “intellectual” does not fully coincide with the specifically Russian/Soviet notion of the intelligentsia—a person who is educated, literate, and active in public life. Benda has in mind people with knowledge and ideas, capable of influencing society. This only partly overlaps with the Russian/Soviet notion of intelligentsia.
What is this “treason”? It is the abandonment of moral responsibility: forgetting eternal values and starting to serve socialism, nationalism, racism, or any other passing cause. Intellectuals, who ought to be spiritually and morally free, are tempted into such service. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s for money, for position, or in complete sincerity—betrayal remains betrayal.
Read also
Benda is clear: an intellectual is someone who pursues ideals, not practical gain, and whose mission is to preserve and transmit these ideals. If intellectuals interpret ideas only through the lens of immediate interests—political, social, or otherwise—that is exactly what Benda calls treason.
The 2018 change of power in Armenia was presented as a fight against the “former authorities,” against “plunder,” and against a “third term.” But it quickly became clear that the “current” ones offered no moral or intellectual improvement. On the contrary, I realized that, at its core, the movement was not just against our identity, but against thinking itself. Instincts were inflamed in the crowd, effectively flipping the “thought switch” off for large parts of society.
Take a recent example. Before 2018, who with only a secondary education would have believed that the Catholicos of All Armenians was preparing to pack Etchmiadzin’s treasures into a suitcase and take them to Austria? Today, thousands believe it. Including educated people—not fools—who either pretend to believe or stay silent when confronted with such blatant absurdities.
And here we arrive at Benda’s point about “treason of the intellectuals.” If someone works in a state office and earns a high salary for a sinecure, that can be explained. But such intellectuals are just a few dozen. The overwhelming majority, seeing everything and inwardly disagreeing, remain silent. That is how betrayal happens.
“The mission of the intellectual,” Benda writes, “is to develop critical consciousness and to reject collective thinking, because collective thinking means not thinking.”
And that is precisely what we are witnessing today.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
