The pre-election process in Armenia has revealed that we have not yet developed certain standards which can be used to evaluate people playing a leading role in the society. This is the case in all spheres but particularly in the politics. As a result, these people are thinking about themselves not what they really are. Criminal does not admit that he is criminal, hooligan does not admit that he is a hooligan, illiterate does not consider himself illiterate. If you give him a dictation for a 4th-grade school child, he will get “unsatisfactory”, anyway, he will deny the fact of his illiteracy. Even the one who runs a brothel with sauna will not admit that he is such a person, he would rather boast that he is creating jobs for prostitutes. Instead, everybody is a “builder” and a “church-builder.” And everybody without exception wants this country to change. To the better, naturally.
People who are not criminals and hooligans, are literate and do not keep brothels appear on the list of political parties next to these “personages”. What are the motives of these people? Firstly, it is of course money: political activity in Armenia is not a badly paid job. But there are also people who are unselfish in making an alliance with “church-builders.” This is called a “political pragmatism”: people are unable to carry out their programs without entering into the alliance with these “good guys”. Naturally, the “rating” choice promotes to it. For instance, a “non-governmental” candidate is going to the neighborhood’s authority so that this “tough guy” ensures his winning. For the sake of what does he want to win? Certainly, for the sake of Armenia. But if you owe to the “tough guy”, then isn’t it expected that in the case of your success you will have to return your debt, and there is no guarantee that the “authoritative person” will “build” the state in a way that its institutions will not be restored as the “pragmatic” promises but on the contrary, the existing remnants will be destroyed.
Everything generates, I repeat, from the lack of clear standards. Should there be a common denial attitude towards the “church-building” criminals, hooligans and illiterates, they would not dare to show up and dictate rules of the game to those who are trying to be engaged in politics, and would not become the driving force of political parties and alliances. But actually, it is not the case. “People” although visually are cursing them but on the other hand, there is a certain respect for these people: “he is a thief but a patriot.”
And if we generalize, then the root is that there is a delusion rooted deep in our social consciousness that allegedly you can love the fatherland without loving the state. We find numerous excuses for this cruel attitude towards the state. And we are surprised why the “benefactor-builders” having two and a half layer of brain appear in the “top”.
