At the beginning of this week, the society focused again on homosexuals, probably understanding that the subject of elections is no more appropriate. The reason is well-
known; it is the arsons in the DIY club, which were committed most probably by adolescents inspired by nationalistic ideas. They ostensibly struggle against homosexuality in that manner. Certainly, it is a brilliant opportunity for Ms. (or Mr.) Tsomak to engage in self-advertisement and appear before enlightened Europe as a victim of intolerance, it is also a good opportunity to remind the City Hall not to allow such clubs’ activities in basements of residential buildings. Sodomites, certainly, have a right to gather and to spend time together, but I and my child have a right not to be involved in those “communications” of theirs in any way.
However, not homosexuals and “heroic” adolescents are interesting. It is much more interesting – and for me astounding – the society’s attitude toward that incident. The overwhelming majority, including people highly educated and mentally advanced, say during private conversations, “Yes, they all should be burned.” So, the imagination of our citizens is confined to violence, while struggling against intolerable and negative phenomena. What do people do in a civilized country, if they don’t like a certain club? They organize a peaceful picket outside that club, demanding to move that club away from the given community. Or they apply to the local administration elected by them with a demand. In the last resort, they demand from the supreme legislative body to adopt a respective law. What do we suggest – burn, kill, smash to pieces.
Nairi Hunanyan or Breivik is inside many of us to a certain extent and he thinks that one can violate human and state laws for the sake of the idea that seems lofty to us or that we try to present as such. Certainly, it is theoretically possible that those who burned homosexuals’ club are just hoodlums or solve some personal problems. I am not talking about them, I am talking about the majority of the society that considers arson as a part of “ideological struggle.”
Read also
As it is well-known, there is but one step from “lofty ideas” to ordinary selfishness. I remember that during the 2003 presidential election, the fraudsters justified their crimes in that manner, “Could we allow Styopik to become the president?” So, they tried to convince that the motive for their actions was not their own pocket and office, but the “supreme state interests.” In reality, there is no higher state and national interest than respect for written and unwritten laws.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
