Tweet
A SPIRITUAL MOVEMENT IS RIGHT TO START
Lragir.am
05/02/10
Haji Nazenie Garibyan. Doctor of Art History at the Sorbonne,
publicist, YSU teacher, deputy director of the Armenian comparative
analysis Center for Egyptology
How would you assess Armenia's current situation? Which is the biggest
problem of the Armenian nation? Which are the solutions?
Today, we have the same problems that we used to have several years
ago. We have the Karabakh conflict and the problem of freeing ourselves
from the Soviet Union, in other words, the problem of building a
national liberating and free and independent country. But the most
important is the change of conscience of the Armenian nation.
Until we did not solve this issue, we will be unable to fulfill any
initiative. In other words, after twenty years, we again face the
need of revolution. Public relations have not been changed, and much
remained the same or even worsened. Armenia has harder issues today
than it had twenty years ago. Then, we won the Karabakh war and now
we lose independence and are about to cede the lands.
You noted about the need of change of conscience. But in 2008, you
noticed that change.
In 2008 a strong explosion took place which we compare to the movement
in 1988. Then, it was the Karabakh movement which ended in revolution.
During 20 years, we did not manage to solve the issue on internal
consolidation. After 20 years, people gathered in streets to defend
their vote. This question was not to be the reason of people's union.
In 2008 people gathered in the Freedom Square to restore justice, but
the potential of the people gathered there was more. It is another
question that the leaders of the movement were content of only this
demand. We have not used that potential and we have not even realized
it. There seems to be some disagreement between the potential of
people and their demands. Each time when elections are rigged after
2008, they bring about the limitation of that energy and in the end
it will just exhaust.
Nevertheless, lately, all have been complaining of the Congress.
Parallel to this, different initiatives are formed, and everyone
dwells on a new force, new opposition. Do you feel this need?
Let us treat this question from philosophical point of view. New force
is always needed for the development of a society, for progress. It
is a global issue, if there was no new force, people would still live
in caves.
The birth of this new force today is needed for the latter to solve
other issues in the future. During twenty years, our society did not
develop; today's new force has to return to '80, '90 to bring the
society back. I do not exclude the emergence of a new force, but my
position is somewhat restrained due, rather, to the perception of this
force in the Armenian reality. We have the traditional proposition
that the new should emerge from the ruins of the old, and to build
a new, you must destroy the old. That is, you need to throw out what
exists, to place new. In my circle of adherents, many throw stones on
the Armenian National Congress. The point is not whether this holds
true. And that those who want to build a new one can do so in a new
place, and if it is a healthy new, the old will come down by itself
or will remain standing. In the end, there is no harm from it.
And no matter if we like it or not, HAK is a valuable achievement.
Regarding the new force, there are two parallel streams - Sardarapat
and other groups working in the same direction. No matter where this
force will be, above all is the new idea. It is not necessary to
destroy the old order, we need a complementary, complementing idea.
These two groups have not yet put forward new ideas, they are both
trends of purely socialist persuasion. I am personally opposed to
socialism, not its basic ideology, which is based on social justice,
but on the classical definition of socialism - as an ideology and
forms of struggle to achieve the goal.
New model for me can become a force that focuses not on material
wealth, but human and humane values. The best model of socialism to
me is the teaching of Christ.
But do you see this new force?
No, because force is a collective term, but I see the carriers of
these ideas. Will these people be consolidated and become a force?
Interview With Siranuysh Papyan
Lragir.am
05/02/10
Haji Nazenie Garibyan. Doctor of Art History at the Sorbonne,
publicist, YSU teacher, deputy director of the Armenian comparative
analysis Center for Egyptology
How would you assess Armenia's current situation? Which is the biggest
problem of the Armenian nation? Which are the solutions?
Today, we have the same problems that we used to have several years
ago. We have the Karabakh conflict and the problem of freeing ourselves
from the Soviet Union, in other words, the problem of building a
national liberating and free and independent country. But the most
important is the change of conscience of the Armenian nation.
Until we did not solve this issue, we will be unable to fulfill any
initiative. In other words, after twenty years, we again face the
need of revolution. Public relations have not been changed, and much
remained the same or even worsened. Armenia has harder issues today
than it had twenty years ago. Then, we won the Karabakh war and now
we lose independence and are about to cede the lands.
You noted about the need of change of conscience. But in 2008, you
noticed that change.
In 2008 a strong explosion took place which we compare to the movement
in 1988. Then, it was the Karabakh movement which ended in revolution.
During 20 years, we did not manage to solve the issue on internal
consolidation. After 20 years, people gathered in streets to defend
their vote. This question was not to be the reason of people's union.
In 2008 people gathered in the Freedom Square to restore justice, but
the potential of the people gathered there was more. It is another
question that the leaders of the movement were content of only this
demand. We have not used that potential and we have not even realized
it. There seems to be some disagreement between the potential of
people and their demands. Each time when elections are rigged after
2008, they bring about the limitation of that energy and in the end
it will just exhaust.
Nevertheless, lately, all have been complaining of the Congress.
Parallel to this, different initiatives are formed, and everyone
dwells on a new force, new opposition. Do you feel this need?
Let us treat this question from philosophical point of view. New force
is always needed for the development of a society, for progress. It
is a global issue, if there was no new force, people would still live
in caves.
The birth of this new force today is needed for the latter to solve
other issues in the future. During twenty years, our society did not
develop; today's new force has to return to '80, '90 to bring the
society back. I do not exclude the emergence of a new force, but my
position is somewhat restrained due, rather, to the perception of this
force in the Armenian reality. We have the traditional proposition
that the new should emerge from the ruins of the old, and to build
a new, you must destroy the old. That is, you need to throw out what
exists, to place new. In my circle of adherents, many throw stones on
the Armenian National Congress. The point is not whether this holds
true. And that those who want to build a new one can do so in a new
place, and if it is a healthy new, the old will come down by itself
or will remain standing. In the end, there is no harm from it.
And no matter if we like it or not, HAK is a valuable achievement.
Regarding the new force, there are two parallel streams - Sardarapat
and other groups working in the same direction. No matter where this
force will be, above all is the new idea. It is not necessary to
destroy the old order, we need a complementary, complementing idea.
These two groups have not yet put forward new ideas, they are both
trends of purely socialist persuasion. I am personally opposed to
socialism, not its basic ideology, which is based on social justice,
but on the classical definition of socialism - as an ideology and
forms of struggle to achieve the goal.
New model for me can become a force that focuses not on material
wealth, but human and humane values. The best model of socialism to
me is the teaching of Christ.
But do you see this new force?
No, because force is a collective term, but I see the carriers of
these ideas. Will these people be consolidated and become a force?
Interview With Siranuysh Papyan