Often, the words become worn out as a result of being used, they become a chewing gum, and do not hit their target. In 70s, for example, at all big and small communist sessions, approximate five minutes later after the session starts, the session presiding person was reciting the following text: “There is a suggestion (just with the kind of impersonal formulation – A.A.) to select an honorary presidency of our session in the face of Lenin political bureau, Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev.” Stormy applauses, everybody stands up. “Allow me, – continues the speaker, – to take your applause as a sign of your support.” Applauses already seated.
It is a ceremony, a rite, where not a single word has a meaning, because it was repeated in 15 republics in every corner, every day, and several times a day. Was it increasing the respect for the “Lenin bureau” and its leader, I find it difficult to say. As a repeated “mantra”, maybe some people are affected by.
Now, these false targets are nowhere. And it’s good one the one hand. On the other hand, instead of wearing them out in the public lexicon, the politicians and publicist are making a chewing gum from real sacramental and important concepts, which should be voiced only in special cases, I would even say, slightly “ceremonial” situations. First of all, the “people” is such a concept.
Suppose, for example, in the USA, during the trial, when the beginning of the session is announced, it is said: the people of such-and-such State against such-and-such. Agree, it sounds bold, one of the parties is not an attorney, but the people, in its unity.
Read also
Well, let’s now compare, people are suffering, people are robbed, people will rise, people are standing in this square, the whole nation is condemning … In what appearance? In what image are the so-called people presented, who have became a subject of alleged homage in this formulation? Allegedly a gray and inert mass unhappy with everything, which, at best, can be a tool to satisfy some political ambitions.
Particular case of this lexical chewing gum is relevant-irrelevant repetition of absolutely correct constitutional norm of the “power belongs to the people”. In fact, this norm means only one thing: the authorities should be formed by the will of the majority of citizens, which, unfortunately, does not happen in Armenia. However, this expression has been so much speculated that it justifies any deed of any person. For instances, as the authorities in Armenia, pursuant to the Constitution, belongs to the people, I, as a representative of the people, have the right to go to the market and steal apples.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
