I would like once again to refer to the government program discussion of last week, where, as I already mentioned, the Republican Party, in my opinion, had chosen a wrong methodology of criticism.
Before that, let me remind you the famous truth that defeats and failures are not an occasion for complaining about life, but ultimately a chance to move forward. If, for example, a party suffered a crushing defeat in the political arena, also because of its outdated pre-network ideas of propaganda, then it would be very reasonable to assume that these obsolete methods are no longer applicable.
Let us now remember the times when “Yelq” was a few member faction in the National Assembly before the revolution, and the Republicans seemed unmatched in terms of power. Then, when the Republican Party and the “Yelq” were debating, do you remember how Nikol Pashinyan countered, and who was the “winner” out of this debate? Especially when the debate was seasoned with artistic comparisons, folk stories, and personal jokes. The Republican members were obviously “losing” here: in the streets, cafes, and taxis, people listened to Pashinyan’s speeches on Youtube and enjoyed how the oppositionist put the Republicans into their place.
Now, when the power has changed and the “Prosperous Armenia” members in the parliament counter the Republican Party of Armenia in the same “folk” style, now it is not wise to enter this sphere. Is not it clear that in this case, the Prime Minister will “checkmate” the Republicans for 10:0?
Criticism, in my opinion, should be restrained, academic, without “biting”, without cynicism and absurdity. Today, even if the Republicans demonstrate the wisdom of Socrates, anyway, it will not be understood, will be rejected and ridiculed. However, this situation will not last forever: dry, argumentative criticism is a way to become a normal opposition. If, of course, there is such a wish.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
