Tweet
GOVERNMENT OF MYTHS
Lragir.am
http://www.lragir.am/src/index.ph p?id=society&pid=14977
17:32:19 - 24/08/2009
Interview By Siranuish Papyan
Interview with Ara Nedolyan, theatrical critic and socialist
What is government and what are its mechanisms and functions, in
your opinion?
Government is a simple physical phenomenon. When we say government, we
mean the government of people, of society. As a rule, we notice that
as soon as people appear in the government they change. I first felt
this in the army. When one of our friends became sergeant, everyone
was happy, but after the appointment he became a different person,
from our point of view, a bad guy, an official who exercises power. And
this controversy took place under all the governments I've seen in my
life. I started doubting the notion of government, state. When I say
government, I imagine the boss sitting in an office and handling human
fates. I started thinking what can replace the governor. One must
think that a person consciously accepts only a government in which
he participates, from which he is not separated. It is possible only
in case he is part of that government. He does not entitle someone
to government but he is part of government. It is possible only in
the case of college government when that college is not restricted,
where I can be or not to be, I can be in different colleges, and
everyone else can be in one or several colleges. It resembles the
soviets created after the February revolution.
How would you describe the nature and structure of government in
Armenia?
When the government becomes government illegitimately, insulting
people, enters the office and carries out the functions of government
in an unsolicited way, it starts looking for a moral compensation. It
finds people or groups of people who do not have that natural feeling
of insult and are ready to make a deal with the government. These
groups can be both in Armenia and outside Armenia. In other words,
international organizations which are ready to deal with the government
which committed a moral crime.
The moral offense is that they decided that they are the government,
a pyramid government based on violence. These people always need a
group of friends who accept them the way they are. Therefore, the
government which is not popular, collegial, soviet is always looking
for an entourage from marginal groups where the social interest is
ignored for personal progress.
So, what kind of a government is this?
This is a government which has got marginal friends from everywhere
possible. In other words, it finds people and organizations in the
world and in the country which cannot deal with the normal society.
And since the like finds the like, are they so similar?
Yes, actually it is true. None of these people would be acceptable,
open, agreeable to a normal society. Therefore the government has
appeared in this false situation that it is government and uses the
entire mythology created during millennia: as if the government knows
something that others do not. Yes it knows what must not be known,
it knows how to live ignoring other people's rights, justice. They
shape different imaginary, religion-like values, as if power is
a secret and religious value, as if it knows something that the
naïve majority does not know, and it must, it has to ignore moral,
legal constitutional norms for the sake of special aims, to tackle
dangers which the majority does not see. In other words, they create a
fantastic worldview which is typical of alienated groups, governments,
which are guided by an A type logic and morality, rather than invented
and strange ways of thinking.
They say people deserve the government they have. Do we deserve the
government we have?
In absolute terms, I would say the contrary, no people deserve the
government they have. It is a test on all peoples which lasts as
long as they do not know the way to overcome that test, until they
realize that one cannot trust their live to anyone, the hero, the wise,
the moral, the just, not even God. In other words, a person looks in
the mirror and is afraid of himself, he says there is surely someone
better whom I can trust my government.
Returning the question I will say that the people deserve the
government who are around it, and only they deserve that government.
As I said, such consciousness occurred after the
revolution. Afterwards, all the soviets turned into pyramids under
the influence of fear, war, the monarch ruled, and Lenin's profound
idea that even the cook can rule a country was destroyed. Now Armenia
must realize that it need not fear, it cannot be worse than it is now,
and one can easily adopt democratic governance. Armenia is very safe
now, the only danger comes from the logic of self-alienation. And
the adoption of popular government does not pose any threat.
But it poses danger to the government.
Certainly, what I am saying may sound revolutionary but it can be done
very easily. For instance, the first step could be transformation from
a presidential into a parliamentary government. Then this principle
would be applied lower and lower, for instance the government
could be replaced by a regional council, the mayor is replaced by
the community council, etc, and afterwards all the agencies of the
government and the society could be turned into colleges, including
heads of departments, party leaders, religious leaders, directors,
editors-in-chief, generals, officers, managers...
In your opinion, what is the problem of the state and the government?
The government, looking for friends, has something to pay for
that friendship. It is government. In other words, the government
imagines that it has power and pays power for friendship. Today we run
across a very strange phenomenon when the criminal world rules the
policemen, in other words, the police imagine that they have power
and do not dare to share it with the society and share power with a
marginal group. Power is a burden which is always perverted. There
is a saying that politics is the way to avoid responsibility. It is
really a heavy burden, and the only way out is to share it with all
the people. People must be aware that there is such a heavy burden,
and it is impossible to trust that to someone or some group. We all
must carry that weight. And the government overlaps with the society
in the present stage of human evolution.
Does the Armenian government fulfill its functions? Whom does it
represent, whose interests does it protect?
I remember all the governments that I have seen. First, the
soviet government was happy to lose to the government of the
second republic. In the elections in the 1990s it cheered the
All-Armenian National Movement and resigned from politics and was
reluctant to remain in politics, to continue to fight for power
in the next election. It gave off the burden with a sense of tired
satisfaction. Levon Ter-Petrosyan was also aware that he had to rid of
that heavy burden, and he easily did that at a convenient time. Robert
Kocharyan with an uneasy sense in his body and a desperate facial
expression did not resemble a person who had reached the desired
goal, gained power. Maybe he got used to that during ten years but
he handed power with the same ease. Serge Sargsyan's face looks
very unhappy. It shows that power is a heavy burden. People invent
fantastic consolations, find irresponsible social groups with whom
they share power.
As to the question, the government protects private interests, that
is interests which cannot be common. A simple example. I walk along
the coast of the lake Sevan but I cannot go close, fences, private
property, "amenities"... The government protects the interests of their
owners but cannot protect my interest, right and freedom to walk on
the coast of the lake Sevan as a citizen, as a citizen of the world.
Is the government of Armenia adequate to the problems, the challenges
that Armenia and the world are facing?
There are two languages in the world, the first is the language
of ideas, principles, expediency, the second is the language of
private interests, deals. Both languages are equally used in the
world. We choose the language for others to talk to us. For instance,
imagine President Obama has to solve some problem with Armenia. He
is not partial, neither loves nor hates. He consults his advisers to
decide what language to use to solve that problem with Armenia. Is it
worthwhile to speak in terms of ideas, meaning, morality? Looking at
the Armenian government, he understands that it is meaningless. He
asks his adviser what other language they can use to solve that
problem. And since we said that this government can protect only
personal interests, he can communicate in terms of personal interests.
In what way can the society restore its right to shape government?
There are two ways. The first is to alter the government radically to
resemble at least formally to a collegial government. In other words,
when you demand reforms, you should be aware what you are demanding,
you should understand that the notion of a boss should be eliminated,
it should be replaced by colleges. Second, the border between the
government and the society should be eliminated, in other words,
government agencies should be created in the society, agencies which
have no walls, and everyone can participate in them. It is necessary
to create serious and authoritative social government agencies,
organizations not to have a tsar.
So when will they start talking to us in terms of meaning?
I think it can happen at any time. They talk in terms of meaning to
peoples and societies, they talk in terms of instinct with alienated
elites. As soon as it is necessary to talk to the society to solve
a problem in Armenia, and people have the least organization to have
someone speak on their behalf, any force will have to talk in terms
of meaning. Otherwise, the language the shepherd speaks to the sheep
is quite enough.
In your opinion, is the society aware of and does it participate in
public governance, decision making?
Certainly, the government is unaware, it is not its business, and
as soon as you try to know, the government says with surprise: it is
not your business, don't poke your nose into our affairs, this is a
system of support of private interests. I cannot go to the office of
Gagik Tsarukyan and say why are doing this and that. The government
agencies are similar offices, and the society feels that poking its
nose into private interests is not its business.
What kind of government would you like to have in Armenia?
When what I said comes true, as you said, people will deserve their
government. In other words, we will know and maybe we will be surprised
that those qualities are higher than we had thought.
Lragir.am
http://www.lragir.am/src/index.ph p?id=society&pid=14977
17:32:19 - 24/08/2009
Interview By Siranuish Papyan
Interview with Ara Nedolyan, theatrical critic and socialist
What is government and what are its mechanisms and functions, in
your opinion?
Government is a simple physical phenomenon. When we say government, we
mean the government of people, of society. As a rule, we notice that
as soon as people appear in the government they change. I first felt
this in the army. When one of our friends became sergeant, everyone
was happy, but after the appointment he became a different person,
from our point of view, a bad guy, an official who exercises power. And
this controversy took place under all the governments I've seen in my
life. I started doubting the notion of government, state. When I say
government, I imagine the boss sitting in an office and handling human
fates. I started thinking what can replace the governor. One must
think that a person consciously accepts only a government in which
he participates, from which he is not separated. It is possible only
in case he is part of that government. He does not entitle someone
to government but he is part of government. It is possible only in
the case of college government when that college is not restricted,
where I can be or not to be, I can be in different colleges, and
everyone else can be in one or several colleges. It resembles the
soviets created after the February revolution.
How would you describe the nature and structure of government in
Armenia?
When the government becomes government illegitimately, insulting
people, enters the office and carries out the functions of government
in an unsolicited way, it starts looking for a moral compensation. It
finds people or groups of people who do not have that natural feeling
of insult and are ready to make a deal with the government. These
groups can be both in Armenia and outside Armenia. In other words,
international organizations which are ready to deal with the government
which committed a moral crime.
The moral offense is that they decided that they are the government,
a pyramid government based on violence. These people always need a
group of friends who accept them the way they are. Therefore, the
government which is not popular, collegial, soviet is always looking
for an entourage from marginal groups where the social interest is
ignored for personal progress.
So, what kind of a government is this?
This is a government which has got marginal friends from everywhere
possible. In other words, it finds people and organizations in the
world and in the country which cannot deal with the normal society.
And since the like finds the like, are they so similar?
Yes, actually it is true. None of these people would be acceptable,
open, agreeable to a normal society. Therefore the government has
appeared in this false situation that it is government and uses the
entire mythology created during millennia: as if the government knows
something that others do not. Yes it knows what must not be known,
it knows how to live ignoring other people's rights, justice. They
shape different imaginary, religion-like values, as if power is
a secret and religious value, as if it knows something that the
naïve majority does not know, and it must, it has to ignore moral,
legal constitutional norms for the sake of special aims, to tackle
dangers which the majority does not see. In other words, they create a
fantastic worldview which is typical of alienated groups, governments,
which are guided by an A type logic and morality, rather than invented
and strange ways of thinking.
They say people deserve the government they have. Do we deserve the
government we have?
In absolute terms, I would say the contrary, no people deserve the
government they have. It is a test on all peoples which lasts as
long as they do not know the way to overcome that test, until they
realize that one cannot trust their live to anyone, the hero, the wise,
the moral, the just, not even God. In other words, a person looks in
the mirror and is afraid of himself, he says there is surely someone
better whom I can trust my government.
Returning the question I will say that the people deserve the
government who are around it, and only they deserve that government.
As I said, such consciousness occurred after the
revolution. Afterwards, all the soviets turned into pyramids under
the influence of fear, war, the monarch ruled, and Lenin's profound
idea that even the cook can rule a country was destroyed. Now Armenia
must realize that it need not fear, it cannot be worse than it is now,
and one can easily adopt democratic governance. Armenia is very safe
now, the only danger comes from the logic of self-alienation. And
the adoption of popular government does not pose any threat.
But it poses danger to the government.
Certainly, what I am saying may sound revolutionary but it can be done
very easily. For instance, the first step could be transformation from
a presidential into a parliamentary government. Then this principle
would be applied lower and lower, for instance the government
could be replaced by a regional council, the mayor is replaced by
the community council, etc, and afterwards all the agencies of the
government and the society could be turned into colleges, including
heads of departments, party leaders, religious leaders, directors,
editors-in-chief, generals, officers, managers...
In your opinion, what is the problem of the state and the government?
The government, looking for friends, has something to pay for
that friendship. It is government. In other words, the government
imagines that it has power and pays power for friendship. Today we run
across a very strange phenomenon when the criminal world rules the
policemen, in other words, the police imagine that they have power
and do not dare to share it with the society and share power with a
marginal group. Power is a burden which is always perverted. There
is a saying that politics is the way to avoid responsibility. It is
really a heavy burden, and the only way out is to share it with all
the people. People must be aware that there is such a heavy burden,
and it is impossible to trust that to someone or some group. We all
must carry that weight. And the government overlaps with the society
in the present stage of human evolution.
Does the Armenian government fulfill its functions? Whom does it
represent, whose interests does it protect?
I remember all the governments that I have seen. First, the
soviet government was happy to lose to the government of the
second republic. In the elections in the 1990s it cheered the
All-Armenian National Movement and resigned from politics and was
reluctant to remain in politics, to continue to fight for power
in the next election. It gave off the burden with a sense of tired
satisfaction. Levon Ter-Petrosyan was also aware that he had to rid of
that heavy burden, and he easily did that at a convenient time. Robert
Kocharyan with an uneasy sense in his body and a desperate facial
expression did not resemble a person who had reached the desired
goal, gained power. Maybe he got used to that during ten years but
he handed power with the same ease. Serge Sargsyan's face looks
very unhappy. It shows that power is a heavy burden. People invent
fantastic consolations, find irresponsible social groups with whom
they share power.
As to the question, the government protects private interests, that
is interests which cannot be common. A simple example. I walk along
the coast of the lake Sevan but I cannot go close, fences, private
property, "amenities"... The government protects the interests of their
owners but cannot protect my interest, right and freedom to walk on
the coast of the lake Sevan as a citizen, as a citizen of the world.
Is the government of Armenia adequate to the problems, the challenges
that Armenia and the world are facing?
There are two languages in the world, the first is the language
of ideas, principles, expediency, the second is the language of
private interests, deals. Both languages are equally used in the
world. We choose the language for others to talk to us. For instance,
imagine President Obama has to solve some problem with Armenia. He
is not partial, neither loves nor hates. He consults his advisers to
decide what language to use to solve that problem with Armenia. Is it
worthwhile to speak in terms of ideas, meaning, morality? Looking at
the Armenian government, he understands that it is meaningless. He
asks his adviser what other language they can use to solve that
problem. And since we said that this government can protect only
personal interests, he can communicate in terms of personal interests.
In what way can the society restore its right to shape government?
There are two ways. The first is to alter the government radically to
resemble at least formally to a collegial government. In other words,
when you demand reforms, you should be aware what you are demanding,
you should understand that the notion of a boss should be eliminated,
it should be replaced by colleges. Second, the border between the
government and the society should be eliminated, in other words,
government agencies should be created in the society, agencies which
have no walls, and everyone can participate in them. It is necessary
to create serious and authoritative social government agencies,
organizations not to have a tsar.
So when will they start talking to us in terms of meaning?
I think it can happen at any time. They talk in terms of meaning to
peoples and societies, they talk in terms of instinct with alienated
elites. As soon as it is necessary to talk to the society to solve
a problem in Armenia, and people have the least organization to have
someone speak on their behalf, any force will have to talk in terms
of meaning. Otherwise, the language the shepherd speaks to the sheep
is quite enough.
In your opinion, is the society aware of and does it participate in
public governance, decision making?
Certainly, the government is unaware, it is not its business, and
as soon as you try to know, the government says with surprise: it is
not your business, don't poke your nose into our affairs, this is a
system of support of private interests. I cannot go to the office of
Gagik Tsarukyan and say why are doing this and that. The government
agencies are similar offices, and the society feels that poking its
nose into private interests is not its business.
What kind of government would you like to have in Armenia?
When what I said comes true, as you said, people will deserve their
government. In other words, we will know and maybe we will be surprised
that those qualities are higher than we had thought.