Since, recently, the entire political arena: the power, “non-government” and the opposition, is saturated with populism, I, not belonging to any of these three groups, consider my duty to tell unpleasant and unacceptable things for many people. My goal is that people, who have not yet lost the ability to think, think over my writings and, perhaps, worry together with me.
The vast majority of citizens in Armenia does not respect laws, including the traffic rules, does not want to follow them, and, naturally, does not want to pay the fines for violations. For that legal nihilism, they, in this case, have “serious substantiations” – rumors disseminated by the oppositions and their propaganda that “70 percent of the fines are going to Sashik’s pocket.” During the hearing on this topic on Wednesday, the MPs were coming up with populist statements, which, of course, is quite normal. I will not try to argue with them, our politicians know the truth, but, like in the whole world, they say what is favorable to them.
Nevertheless, I want to focus on a fundamental issue. If the “Security Dream” has bought products worth of euro 10 million (speedometer, camera), which is formulated in writing and legally enforced, on condition that the money should be paid back, then it is not worthy to call to break the contract and “drop down” this company to meet the discontent of drivers driving like a crazy. In this case, it is absolutely not essential whether the “Security Dream” belongs to Sashik, Abdul Hamid, or, the Satan, in person. Even, without it, our country, as well as the entrepreneurs associated with state officials, has so much deceived the investors that recently people generally do not want to make investments in Armenia. What is more important: collecting points before the taxi drivers complaining of the fines, or protecting the investors? In my opinion, the second. Unless, of course, we want our country’s economy develop based on private property. It’s another matter, if we want the property of a “good oligarch” be protected only, and not the “bad ones’”.
But, in this case, the situation that exists will continue, when people have to “establish a relationship” with relevant circles to set up even a small business. Isn’t this the source of “cancer” for our economy? What is the difference whether the entrepreneurs are “let down” by the will of the authorities, or because of populist speeches? Then why are we talking about the “Singapore model” and other many good things?
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
