Tweet
IDEOLOGISTS OF RENAISSANCE
Igor Muradyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics27837.html
Published: 19:14:56 - 24/10/2012
The Russian both pro-government and opposition groups have always
needed a morning coffee type conference master, someone visible and
unexpected, who does not need notes to refer to, someone who is more
legitimate than the Pope of Rome.
One can remember that Boris Berezovsky was one of those who
first understood the necessity of such a clown. Simultaneously, a
Petersburg-based idiot Alexander Nevzorov, claimed to this role but he
lacked something. There were more smart and resourceful people such
as Yevgeniy Kiselyov, Alexander Prokhanov, Nikolay Svanidzeh. These
are different people but followed the same golden rule - they did
not go beyond the frame of the announced erudite to which they could
claim and did not pretend to something beyond their capacity.
Michel Leontief is a different case who can talk on both demonstrations
and rallies in Moscow and on the fate of the U.S.
dollar which he buried in 2009 and tolled its death at the end of
the same year. Michel Leontief never liked the role of one of those
many, he considered himself something extraordinary in the Russian
social and political analytics. Moreover, he pretends to the role
of a figure of the epoch of renaissance when a shoemaker came home
from his workshop in the evening and set down to write a doctrine on
the meaning of life or something like that in the candle light. In
other words, M. Leontief is a universal man and all the information
consumers, including shoemakers and authors of doctrines, should have
understood this.
His recent offensive on Armenia is not something new in his activities,
at one time a lot of countries whose policy did not meet the point
of view of the Russian leadership got enough of it. M.
Leontyev is one of the founders of the Eurasian movement which has
been generously paid by the government though the movement as such
soon declined and the leaders of the movement were not recognized as
apologists and policy makers of topical political decisions.
Neither M. Leontyev, nor more ambitious ideologists of Eurasianism were
able to get a certificate of access to the body. The reason is evident
- clowns and buffoons are entitled to a limited role and cannot pretend
to the role of politicians, commentators at best. At the same time,
Leontyev is not someone accidental in the Russian official analytics,
and if he covers one issue or another, it means that the Moscow
leadership is worried and does not fully understand what is going on.
The current policy of Armenia is not clear to Moscow and it is not
surprising because the Armenian political government has encountered
strange phenomena and challenges from outside which are explained by
not fully established strategies of the Euro-Atlantic community.
Moscow faces a choice - to take an initiative of cooperation with
NATO and the United States in the Near East and Eurasia or return to
a tough confrontation.
Choosing Barrack Obama as a more preferred partners in the U.S.
policy, Russia accepts these initiatives one way or another (by default
or not but accepts). Therefore, Moscow's reaction to the new foreign
political line of Armenia is not so tough and allows for variations.
The fact that for 20, 15, 10 years the Armenian society has refused the
Eurasian idea ceding its "natural place" to anthological opponents,
this is a different issue though a painful one. However, time passed
leaving reminders of the historical intellectual defeat.
The problem is not that Michel Leontyev comments on facts which are
self-evident. The problem is that the Armenian political class, as
well as the Armenian political authors, perceive foreign challenges
as round scoundrels who do not even have an approximate idea of the
importance of one doctrine or another.
Armenia is not able to tell between these doctrines and their
importance for our country. The participation of Armenia in a Eurasian
or a neo-Eurasian project had an important role - learn and play
a real game on the alien political field. At one time a top class
project was offered. All this mess demonstrates that the Armenian
society is not able to understand and work out a scheme and logic of
their participation in strategic projects. One only needs to have a
closer look at the ongoing developments of the 21st century and read
from time to time Michel Leontief's insinuations.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Igor Muradyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics27837.html
Published: 19:14:56 - 24/10/2012
The Russian both pro-government and opposition groups have always
needed a morning coffee type conference master, someone visible and
unexpected, who does not need notes to refer to, someone who is more
legitimate than the Pope of Rome.
One can remember that Boris Berezovsky was one of those who
first understood the necessity of such a clown. Simultaneously, a
Petersburg-based idiot Alexander Nevzorov, claimed to this role but he
lacked something. There were more smart and resourceful people such
as Yevgeniy Kiselyov, Alexander Prokhanov, Nikolay Svanidzeh. These
are different people but followed the same golden rule - they did
not go beyond the frame of the announced erudite to which they could
claim and did not pretend to something beyond their capacity.
Michel Leontief is a different case who can talk on both demonstrations
and rallies in Moscow and on the fate of the U.S.
dollar which he buried in 2009 and tolled its death at the end of
the same year. Michel Leontief never liked the role of one of those
many, he considered himself something extraordinary in the Russian
social and political analytics. Moreover, he pretends to the role
of a figure of the epoch of renaissance when a shoemaker came home
from his workshop in the evening and set down to write a doctrine on
the meaning of life or something like that in the candle light. In
other words, M. Leontief is a universal man and all the information
consumers, including shoemakers and authors of doctrines, should have
understood this.
His recent offensive on Armenia is not something new in his activities,
at one time a lot of countries whose policy did not meet the point
of view of the Russian leadership got enough of it. M.
Leontyev is one of the founders of the Eurasian movement which has
been generously paid by the government though the movement as such
soon declined and the leaders of the movement were not recognized as
apologists and policy makers of topical political decisions.
Neither M. Leontyev, nor more ambitious ideologists of Eurasianism were
able to get a certificate of access to the body. The reason is evident
- clowns and buffoons are entitled to a limited role and cannot pretend
to the role of politicians, commentators at best. At the same time,
Leontyev is not someone accidental in the Russian official analytics,
and if he covers one issue or another, it means that the Moscow
leadership is worried and does not fully understand what is going on.
The current policy of Armenia is not clear to Moscow and it is not
surprising because the Armenian political government has encountered
strange phenomena and challenges from outside which are explained by
not fully established strategies of the Euro-Atlantic community.
Moscow faces a choice - to take an initiative of cooperation with
NATO and the United States in the Near East and Eurasia or return to
a tough confrontation.
Choosing Barrack Obama as a more preferred partners in the U.S.
policy, Russia accepts these initiatives one way or another (by default
or not but accepts). Therefore, Moscow's reaction to the new foreign
political line of Armenia is not so tough and allows for variations.
The fact that for 20, 15, 10 years the Armenian society has refused the
Eurasian idea ceding its "natural place" to anthological opponents,
this is a different issue though a painful one. However, time passed
leaving reminders of the historical intellectual defeat.
The problem is not that Michel Leontyev comments on facts which are
self-evident. The problem is that the Armenian political class, as
well as the Armenian political authors, perceive foreign challenges
as round scoundrels who do not even have an approximate idea of the
importance of one doctrine or another.
Armenia is not able to tell between these doctrines and their
importance for our country. The participation of Armenia in a Eurasian
or a neo-Eurasian project had an important role - learn and play
a real game on the alien political field. At one time a top class
project was offered. All this mess demonstrates that the Armenian
society is not able to understand and work out a scheme and logic of
their participation in strategic projects. One only needs to have a
closer look at the ongoing developments of the 21st century and read
from time to time Michel Leontief's insinuations.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress