Watching Davit Shahnazaryan’s interview on ArmNews, I, frankly speaking, was not under the impression that this figure had no contradictions with the Armenian National Congress (ANC) and that he hadn’t left the ANC, as the representatives of that party had been claiming for a week. Certainly, they can say now “Mr. Shahnazaryan said this, meaning that,” but there is no need for such an exploitation of words’ meanings, because it is obvious that he is against first President Levon Ter-Petrossian’s “analyses,” in which certain hopes are pinned on the Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP) regarding the dismantlement of the gang rule, because those analyses, in Mr. Shahnazaryan’s words, have become the policy of the ANC. That opinion is expressed clearly and unequivocally and trying to deny that reality with subtle definitions is pointless. By the way, in the mid-1990s, Mr. Shahnazaryan would oppose the Pan-Armenian National Movement (PANM) policy in the very same manner, which had obviously started to be based on the use of force, which, in my opinion, laid the foundation of the vicious political and economic relations in Armenia that exist up until now.
However, the issue is not only the contradictions between a certain person and his friends. The issue is more general – whether the system of values is important in politics. Niccolo Machiavelli’s followers give a negative answer to that question – according to them, the important thing is the balance of power, using which, one must achieve his ends (in this case, a part of the criminal-oligarchic system must topple down the other part) at any cost. However, the history shows that when the end justifies the means, that end is transformed, distorted very quickly and it is forgotten shortly afterwards – only so-called autotelic means remain. However, guess values are important – in that case, once some political force has chosen the path of Machiavelliism, it is deprived of the right to talk on behalf of any system of values. For example, he cannot call any political force a subsidiary or a blind gut of another force.
During his interview, Mr. Shahnazaryan raised another essential issue – union of liberal forces. By the way, the ANC has never declared itself liberal and in that sense it is honest – how can one, who labels anyone who expresses a minor disagreement with him an enemy, a traitor and sold out, be liberal? The former member of the ANC states quite accurately that this liberal spectrum of our society is represented very poorly these days. However, is it a coincidence? Isn’t it because of the fact that the majority of our citizens and liberal ideas are “genetically incompatible,” as they say?
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
