“But take, for example, the centurion Mark, the one known as Rat-slayer – is he good?” “Yes,” replied the prisoner, “True, he is an unhappy man. Since the good people disfigured him, he has become cruel and hard.” As you might understand, it is the dialogue between Pilate and Yeshua from Bulgakov’s well-known novel. The main idea, as far as I can tell, is love that the Bible preaches. However, I also see there a concrete social meaning – not to rush to make judgments about this or that phenomenon or viewpoint, but to understand why that thing happened or why that person thinks so. That principle should be applied to both political life and, particularly, journalism.
In that sense, there has been slight progress in the past two years. The dialogue between the government and the opposition had been confined to the following arrogant talk in the previous 20 years. The government: “So you want power, huh? No way.” The opposition: “You are criminals, we will hang you all.” Certainly, this political mainstream has been retained, but some new elements have emerged, however, in the form of, first of all, the 2011 opposition-coalition dialogue and then the work of this convocation of parliament. And certainly, all political forces – first of all parties that are represented in the parliament – played a positive role here. Whether they like it or not, they should communicate and try to understand each other whatever fundamental contradictions they have. Particularly, we are gradually departing from the stereotype that the oppositionist should necessarily play the role of the one who has suffered, has been persecuted and curses; times have changed. When Serzh Sargsyan and Gagik Tsarukyan praise our best sportsmen together, it doesn’t mean that there are no fundamental contradictions between their parties, it just means that the condition of our sports is more important for both of them. This new culture has just started to sprout, but I am sure that in 5 or 10 years, this style will be dominant.
My students sometimes ask me why such and such doesn’t like me. They usually name names of people I don’t know. Perhaps, I should answer: “Some good people implanted some ideas in that man, and it is very probable that those ideas are better than mine.” If that person is ready to listen to me, fine, I will put forward my arguments, if not, it is his problem; then it means he enjoys not liking me. Although that joy, in my opinion, is rather suspicious.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
