Recently, I was talking with one of my communist acquaintances (whom I am personally sympathize), and he quite seriously said that this year 7 November holiday will be restored, and next year we will be officially celebrating 126th anniversary of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. I replied that in theory it is possible. Everything is possible. The layer of civilization and intelligence is so thin and fragile among us that quite a small external stimulus is enough, and we all will run to the forest and climb on the trees with great enthusiasm. So, it is not absolutely excluded that by the end of the year we’ll be also celebrating the anniversary of Stalin, and then we will make a big bonfire and will burn all “harmful” books. And it does not matter what books will enter the “black list”, Hegel’s, Lenin’s or Bleyan’s. The important thing is that all this is still theoretically possible. In our society, there are forces that act only on behalf of true ideology (for example, “national”, “social justice” or “basket”), for which they are ready to smash and destroy “anti-national,” “socially unjust” and “anti-basket” forces, accordingly, in other words, to satisfy our basic instinct of breaking and crushing. That is why I do not exclude that we can celebrate the anniversary of the figure, which knew by heart, who are friends and enemies of the nation, and was recommending, old chap, not to take the position of slobby intelligence towards the latter.
We know from biology that the instincts are the bases of reflexes, including the Pavlov’s reflex. When a piece of meat was shown to the dog, at the same moment turning on the light, for some time later the cause-effect relation between these events was created in the brain of the animal, and sputum was produced only when the light was turned on. The same mechanism also operates to some of our citizens: the word “communist” in their minds is connected with fed up with food, 24-hours light and warm apartments.
The psychology based on elementary instincts and Pavlov’s reflex is difficult to undermine with rational arguments and serious analysis. But those who are called to do so, the intellectuals, politicians, and journalists mainly operate in the opposite direction, trying to deepen and strengthen these instincts in two areas, “social” and “national”. Using the basic instincts in small provincial fight for the seat, they forget as to what a spiritual desert they are leaving for the next generation, such a desert that the existence of which Bradbury or Oriel could not think of in their most nightmare dreams.
“Man is a social animal,”- said one of the founders of the same doctrine. The second part of man’s characteristic is indisputable, but the first …
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
17.05.1995
