Tweet
ENLIGHTENED PEOPLE ARE NEEDED
http://www.lragir.am/src/index.php?id=socie ty&pid=15078
Interview by SIRANUYSH PAPYAN
13:32:37 - 04/09/2009
Interview with the cultural critic Hrach Bayadyan
In your opinion what is government and what are the mechanisms of its
formations and its functions?
The point is probably about the political and public government,
because the word government has a very wide meaning-government in
family, in office and so on. This is a topic discussed since
Aristotle's and Platoon's times. Probably we want to understand the
type of the government in Armenia and our expectations for the
future. Even those people, who are pro-governmental, treat this
government with restrictions. The state government is the giving
monopoly of government to a system which is called state. And since
the word government is also connected with power so different force
structures fulfill force functions. The state has legal functions
among the public, which the public voluntary gives to the state to
defend its interests.
Are the problems of the state and the government the same?
The state is created as a system which embodies the government and
fulfills the governance which the public gives to a neutral system
such as the government which does not have personal interests. In our
case, it is interesting if the government which is to be democratic
serve its power for the public interests. But experts affirm that even
in democratic countries it is not so, let alone Armenia where the
monopoly of the state government is appropriated by several people who
are oligarchs, the church as well may do a try to appropriate the
state. For example, regardless the fact that in secular countries the
church and the government are separated in Armenia there is some kind
of pleasing between them.
In your opinion, what kinds of mechanisms of the formation of
government operate in Armenia? Whom does the government serve? Which
is the basis of the RA government?
In reality, the state supposes for the existence of such kind of
mechanisms as the election. Of course, there are other mechanisms of
formation of government but no one may say that these mechanisms work
in Armenia. In Armenia, the formation of government is far from not
only the idealistic version but also from a practical model. From this
point of view, the governmental and the public interests are very far
from each other and in Armenia, the violence is more legal. In this
context, the idea of government which is connected with legality is
mutated. We have no right to speak about the presence of legal
mechanisms in Armenia through which the government had to serve the
public interests.
How can the public return its right to form government?
It is difficult to take for serious such kind of questions because
they are asked from everywhere. The reporters as well proceeding from
their profession like to ask what is the solution and they are
despaired when we answer there is no solution. This is determined by
the fact that the public does not have voice today. If I say what the
solution is, no one will listen to me. I have no right to speak, to
vote, in other words, I cannot elect my parliamentarian, I have no
right to participate in governmental processes, in other words, if I
want I may speak to journalists, but no one will pay attention to what
I say. So I wonder why I have to waste my time on speaking about it if
there is no result.
I have the impression that you are a little despaired from both the
government and public.
The word `despair' is a little strong, it maybe soberness. And this is
some kind of soberness that lacks in pessimists either who say that
everything is bad, but I am an optimist. The difference between these
people and me is that I am not an optimist. Everything is bad and
those who ten years ago thought that everything is bad but after ten
years would be good, are mistaken. I think the existence of this
optimistic future which we have which forces us to try to find the
solution waiting it will come tomorrow or at the next election,
impeded us from being critics the way it is needed.
Two years ago, on the eve the parliamentary elections, you expressed
the opinion that you would like a new person to appear because in your
opinion both the government and the opposition exhausted their
imagination, conscience and sub conscience. Do you have the same
opinion now?
It is again wrong to seek for solution on the political plane. In
other words, if the government and the opposition do not find any
solution, a new political force has to appear. My wish to be sober is
determined probably by the fact that the Armenian social situation
does not give birth to a political figure or force which would make us
optimists. In other words, when they say that if we replace the acting
president with another one and everything will be great is not
true. In addition, (I am saying a dull thing) but the society has to
change. But how will this third force appear? During the events after
the 2008 presidential elections, I participated actively in the
rallies and covered them supporting the opposition but I can register
with sorrow that the potential present on those days changed very few
things. That is why I think that the possibilities to change the
country are determined by the change of the public's conscience. Here
the mass media plays an important role which are not on their highness
today. Today first of all we need enlightened people who know the
world and understand that the greater part of the governmental fault
is on the intellectual forces surrounding them, in other words there
are not intellectuals in Armenia who may propose right ideas.
Do you agree with the opinion that any nation deserves the government
it has?
In general, this expression is made for Western societies where the
government is controlled by the society which may change it if
necessary. So, this expression is not so right for Armenia as we may
have a self-proclaimed president. In this case, it is difficult to
accuse people why they went home on March 1 and did not struggle for
government (which would be right). From this point of view, it is a
little wrong to affirm that if a person fears from death deserves the
government they have.
What happened on March 1?
On March 1 happened that the society did not find the ways of social
struggle did not find its leaders and found itself in the simple
contradiction of government and opposition. Everyone waited to hear
what the leader of the opposition would say. In other words, even
having social riot, the society did not find the structures and
systems and ways which would give way to changes.
The state is already a problem. Even in case of a legitimate
president, there is always some kind of disagreement between the state
and the public, because apart from being the representative of
public's interest, the state also represents the interests of a small
group of people even in democratic countries. Regardless the
president, there is always some conflict between the state and the
public and these conflict do not necessarily lead to change of
government.
Does the Armenian government correspond to those problems and
challenges which are present in Armenia and in the world?
I dwelt on the appropriation of non-governmental organization by the
government. The other side of the question is that the Armenian
government is under the superpowers, in particular Russia,
international and national organization and so on.
The current government of Armenia can hardly find solution to the
daily problems, any strategy or project is out of their agenda. The
problem is not only the government but also the intellectuals which
lack.
In other words, do we need people?
Yes, Armenia needs professionals educated in the West. This is not
expedient for the present government because if these forces come they
will bring new values which are contradictory to the present
government.
What kind of government would you like to have in Armenia?
None. It is the same thing. There is no solution. Maybe after 20-30
years something will change. Those who want to see changes tomorrow
help the government. We have to understand that changes cannot be
quick we need to be sober and realistic to understand that we have to
act today and not to think that tomorrow will be better. Let the
government decide what kind of government we need. I know that this
government is not good.
Is change of government superfluous in this case?
No, it is necessary. The government must be changed especially
considering that it is the choice of the public. But we do not have to
expect radical changes and miracles after the change of the
government. Political struggle and social struggle are needed but we
have to have realistic expectations.
http://www.lragir.am/src/index.php?id=socie ty&pid=15078
Interview by SIRANUYSH PAPYAN
13:32:37 - 04/09/2009
Interview with the cultural critic Hrach Bayadyan
In your opinion what is government and what are the mechanisms of its
formations and its functions?
The point is probably about the political and public government,
because the word government has a very wide meaning-government in
family, in office and so on. This is a topic discussed since
Aristotle's and Platoon's times. Probably we want to understand the
type of the government in Armenia and our expectations for the
future. Even those people, who are pro-governmental, treat this
government with restrictions. The state government is the giving
monopoly of government to a system which is called state. And since
the word government is also connected with power so different force
structures fulfill force functions. The state has legal functions
among the public, which the public voluntary gives to the state to
defend its interests.
Are the problems of the state and the government the same?
The state is created as a system which embodies the government and
fulfills the governance which the public gives to a neutral system
such as the government which does not have personal interests. In our
case, it is interesting if the government which is to be democratic
serve its power for the public interests. But experts affirm that even
in democratic countries it is not so, let alone Armenia where the
monopoly of the state government is appropriated by several people who
are oligarchs, the church as well may do a try to appropriate the
state. For example, regardless the fact that in secular countries the
church and the government are separated in Armenia there is some kind
of pleasing between them.
In your opinion, what kinds of mechanisms of the formation of
government operate in Armenia? Whom does the government serve? Which
is the basis of the RA government?
In reality, the state supposes for the existence of such kind of
mechanisms as the election. Of course, there are other mechanisms of
formation of government but no one may say that these mechanisms work
in Armenia. In Armenia, the formation of government is far from not
only the idealistic version but also from a practical model. From this
point of view, the governmental and the public interests are very far
from each other and in Armenia, the violence is more legal. In this
context, the idea of government which is connected with legality is
mutated. We have no right to speak about the presence of legal
mechanisms in Armenia through which the government had to serve the
public interests.
How can the public return its right to form government?
It is difficult to take for serious such kind of questions because
they are asked from everywhere. The reporters as well proceeding from
their profession like to ask what is the solution and they are
despaired when we answer there is no solution. This is determined by
the fact that the public does not have voice today. If I say what the
solution is, no one will listen to me. I have no right to speak, to
vote, in other words, I cannot elect my parliamentarian, I have no
right to participate in governmental processes, in other words, if I
want I may speak to journalists, but no one will pay attention to what
I say. So I wonder why I have to waste my time on speaking about it if
there is no result.
I have the impression that you are a little despaired from both the
government and public.
The word `despair' is a little strong, it maybe soberness. And this is
some kind of soberness that lacks in pessimists either who say that
everything is bad, but I am an optimist. The difference between these
people and me is that I am not an optimist. Everything is bad and
those who ten years ago thought that everything is bad but after ten
years would be good, are mistaken. I think the existence of this
optimistic future which we have which forces us to try to find the
solution waiting it will come tomorrow or at the next election,
impeded us from being critics the way it is needed.
Two years ago, on the eve the parliamentary elections, you expressed
the opinion that you would like a new person to appear because in your
opinion both the government and the opposition exhausted their
imagination, conscience and sub conscience. Do you have the same
opinion now?
It is again wrong to seek for solution on the political plane. In
other words, if the government and the opposition do not find any
solution, a new political force has to appear. My wish to be sober is
determined probably by the fact that the Armenian social situation
does not give birth to a political figure or force which would make us
optimists. In other words, when they say that if we replace the acting
president with another one and everything will be great is not
true. In addition, (I am saying a dull thing) but the society has to
change. But how will this third force appear? During the events after
the 2008 presidential elections, I participated actively in the
rallies and covered them supporting the opposition but I can register
with sorrow that the potential present on those days changed very few
things. That is why I think that the possibilities to change the
country are determined by the change of the public's conscience. Here
the mass media plays an important role which are not on their highness
today. Today first of all we need enlightened people who know the
world and understand that the greater part of the governmental fault
is on the intellectual forces surrounding them, in other words there
are not intellectuals in Armenia who may propose right ideas.
Do you agree with the opinion that any nation deserves the government
it has?
In general, this expression is made for Western societies where the
government is controlled by the society which may change it if
necessary. So, this expression is not so right for Armenia as we may
have a self-proclaimed president. In this case, it is difficult to
accuse people why they went home on March 1 and did not struggle for
government (which would be right). From this point of view, it is a
little wrong to affirm that if a person fears from death deserves the
government they have.
What happened on March 1?
On March 1 happened that the society did not find the ways of social
struggle did not find its leaders and found itself in the simple
contradiction of government and opposition. Everyone waited to hear
what the leader of the opposition would say. In other words, even
having social riot, the society did not find the structures and
systems and ways which would give way to changes.
The state is already a problem. Even in case of a legitimate
president, there is always some kind of disagreement between the state
and the public, because apart from being the representative of
public's interest, the state also represents the interests of a small
group of people even in democratic countries. Regardless the
president, there is always some conflict between the state and the
public and these conflict do not necessarily lead to change of
government.
Does the Armenian government correspond to those problems and
challenges which are present in Armenia and in the world?
I dwelt on the appropriation of non-governmental organization by the
government. The other side of the question is that the Armenian
government is under the superpowers, in particular Russia,
international and national organization and so on.
The current government of Armenia can hardly find solution to the
daily problems, any strategy or project is out of their agenda. The
problem is not only the government but also the intellectuals which
lack.
In other words, do we need people?
Yes, Armenia needs professionals educated in the West. This is not
expedient for the present government because if these forces come they
will bring new values which are contradictory to the present
government.
What kind of government would you like to have in Armenia?
None. It is the same thing. There is no solution. Maybe after 20-30
years something will change. Those who want to see changes tomorrow
help the government. We have to understand that changes cannot be
quick we need to be sober and realistic to understand that we have to
act today and not to think that tomorrow will be better. Let the
government decide what kind of government we need. I know that this
government is not good.
Is change of government superfluous in this case?
No, it is necessary. The government must be changed especially
considering that it is the choice of the public. But we do not have to
expect radical changes and miracles after the change of the
government. Political struggle and social struggle are needed but we
have to have realistic expectations.