Tweet
Pseudo-Stability And Pseudo-Revolution
Naira Hayrumyan
Comments - Monday, 18 February 2013, 12:47
For already many years, the authorities of Russia and Armenia, as the
main imperative, put forward the preservation of stability. Vladimir
Putin spoke about this, Serzh Sargsyan promises the same thing saying
the stability is the main achievement of his first presidential term.
People really appreciate the stability unless it becomes an obstacle
for the preservation of their lives. Driving down Baghramyan Avenue,
many Yerevan residents, seeing Andrias Ghukasyan, who has been on
hunger strike for about a month, wonder, what he wants. Everyone knows
without him that the election is fake, but everything can't be broken
immediately. Let them do whatever they want, just let it not be worse
than now, many think. This is the stability Serzh Sargsyan and Putin
speak of. When everyone knows that the fundament is wrong, and the
point is not about positive stability, but maximum, marsh and stable
falling. For now, the pseudo-stability has not yet reached the
critical level. Andrias appeals to break the fundament of the
pseudo-stability. People pass by those, who try to deprive them of the
right to live in a marsh. The same situation was in the end of 1980s,
when the majority, having lived for years in a marsh, voted for the
preservation of the Soviet Union just to avoid `shakes'. Later,
everyone became advocates of independence and outlawed the Communistic
Party. Only later they understood in Karabakh that the
pseudo-stability leads them to death. First, they were afraid of
revolution. A similar situation is present in Armenia now: the only
thing to keep people far from revolution is the fear to lose the
pseudo-stability. And yet the proposed revolutions are also mostly not
true. In 2008, for example, they did not speak about a revolution as
the way to change the systems, but the overthrow of the government
almost on a national basis - `Karabakh people, leave!' It was a call
to pseudo-revolutions. On the eve of elections, Russian mass media
issued the information about the `color revolution' which is allegedly
organized in Armenia by the West through Raffi Hovannisian. There are
rumors he is already preparing rallies to hold after the elections.
Protests after elections don't mean revolutions, even if as many
people as in 2008 go out to protest because people prefer the
pseudo-stability, unless they are proposed real revolution. For now,
the pseudo-stability manages to repress the natural desire of people
to improve their lives. That pseudo-stability makes many turn away,
driving down the avenue Baghramyan.
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/28958
Naira Hayrumyan
Comments - Monday, 18 February 2013, 12:47
For already many years, the authorities of Russia and Armenia, as the
main imperative, put forward the preservation of stability. Vladimir
Putin spoke about this, Serzh Sargsyan promises the same thing saying
the stability is the main achievement of his first presidential term.
People really appreciate the stability unless it becomes an obstacle
for the preservation of their lives. Driving down Baghramyan Avenue,
many Yerevan residents, seeing Andrias Ghukasyan, who has been on
hunger strike for about a month, wonder, what he wants. Everyone knows
without him that the election is fake, but everything can't be broken
immediately. Let them do whatever they want, just let it not be worse
than now, many think. This is the stability Serzh Sargsyan and Putin
speak of. When everyone knows that the fundament is wrong, and the
point is not about positive stability, but maximum, marsh and stable
falling. For now, the pseudo-stability has not yet reached the
critical level. Andrias appeals to break the fundament of the
pseudo-stability. People pass by those, who try to deprive them of the
right to live in a marsh. The same situation was in the end of 1980s,
when the majority, having lived for years in a marsh, voted for the
preservation of the Soviet Union just to avoid `shakes'. Later,
everyone became advocates of independence and outlawed the Communistic
Party. Only later they understood in Karabakh that the
pseudo-stability leads them to death. First, they were afraid of
revolution. A similar situation is present in Armenia now: the only
thing to keep people far from revolution is the fear to lose the
pseudo-stability. And yet the proposed revolutions are also mostly not
true. In 2008, for example, they did not speak about a revolution as
the way to change the systems, but the overthrow of the government
almost on a national basis - `Karabakh people, leave!' It was a call
to pseudo-revolutions. On the eve of elections, Russian mass media
issued the information about the `color revolution' which is allegedly
organized in Armenia by the West through Raffi Hovannisian. There are
rumors he is already preparing rallies to hold after the elections.
Protests after elections don't mean revolutions, even if as many
people as in 2008 go out to protest because people prefer the
pseudo-stability, unless they are proposed real revolution. For now,
the pseudo-stability manages to repress the natural desire of people
to improve their lives. That pseudo-stability makes many turn away,
driving down the avenue Baghramyan.
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/28958