Words lose their glitter after months and years and become worn-out labels, which are repeated for no reason, without thinking, inertly. More so the words of political ideologists. “Gang rule,” “legitimacy,” “criminal regime” are all brilliant words, but they lose their weight year after year, they lose their, if one could say so, magnetism. Regardless of how adequate they are, people get tired of them. Those words are said automatically, without thinking in the same manner as the “target groups” that should be fired up are not fired up anymore and listen to and repeat those words without going into detail what they mean. This is the specificity of the human thinking – few of us can be eternally absorbed in an idea and it has both positive and negative sides, because at the end of the day, this is how our defense mechanism works. Forgive me for this a bit cynical comparison, but if a man has lost a relative, it is impossible that in the tenth year after the loss, his feelings will be as intense as they were in the first year. The opposite attitude is considered as weird, if not pathological.
According to the same logic, I haven’t heard any oppositionist talking about the events of March 1 in the past few months. Politicians seem to have “squeezed” as much as possible out of that slaughter organized by the government and it has ceased to be a “burning issue.” However, not one, but ten Armenians were killed on that day and those who committed that crime and the organizers of it are not punished. There are no eternally burning issues, as well as there are no eternally fresh words and slogans.
Figures also “wear out,” lose weight, topicality, regardless of what merits they have and what contribution they have made. For example, in 1996, Vazgen Manukyan was suitable as an alternative to the government and a year and a half later he was already obsolete. On the one hand, the political configuration had changed, on the other, the society was tired of hearing the same words from the same person.
I want to say that if the Armenian National Congress (ANC) participates in the upcoming presidential election with its own candidate, it will have to show some creativity and try not to repeat the old slogans, the old arguments and appeals. They will not be perceived adequately. Certainly, it would be very desirable, if the opposition participated with a new candidate, it could be anyone from the current parliamentary group of the ANC. Perhaps, he would not have the same political experience and prestige as Levon Ter-Petrossian has, but instead, he will be able to stress new things, which will be more interesting for the opposition electorate. And the first president will endorse him with his experience and speeches. As, say, Bill Clinton supports Obama.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
