Parallels between the Republican Party and Civil Contract have been heavily discussed these past few days. First, modest lifestyles are discussed, as well as lavish ones, service vehicles, renovated offices, and more. Not only those in power, but all people need to find the right balance between extreme minimalism and unnecessary luxury. It’s very clear why greed and insatiability are bad. But, in my opinion, the other extreme is also bad, because it’s a show of arrogance and self-praise- “look at me, look at how wonderful I am for depriving myself of everything.”
If you have the ability to buy yourself a car, but you make a show of traveling on a trolleybus, that is pharisaism. On the other hand, if you build several multi-million dollar palaces and you don’t even know where some of the rooms are, if you use a golden toilet and travel with a 4-5 car procession, that is greed (putting aside the legal and corrupt aspects). Eating “khash” with your colleagues is normal, and so is sitting in a cafe with your son who is on vacation from the army. Building palaces in Monument is not acceptable for me, especially taking into consideration the average Armenian’s lifestyle. In that aspect, I do not think that the authorities who are more middle class will cross the line, and parallels are not in the right place here. I also want to add that officials need to have specific conditions outlined by the law for carrying out their activities.
But this issue is not the only one where it is possible to find parallels between the old and new authorities. There is a sector where there truly are similarities: how they both deal with criticism. For example, the younger deputies in the National Assembly sometimes say things that leave people surprised, to say the least. If someone responds to that, it does not mean that they’re carrying out orders or that they were sold to the Republicans or something else. It is not worth becoming infuriated, getting frustrated, and issuing threats whenever you are being critiqued. If the criticism is fair, then the appropriate conclusions need to be made. If it’s unfair, then so what? Let the person criticizing you stay confused.
In the beginning of the 1990s, members of the Pan-Armenian National Movement claimed that all those who disagreed with them were Dashnaks in disguise. After 1998, Kocharyan’s allies thought that those who disagreed with them were PANM members in disguise. And now, members of Civil Contract want to find Republicans in everyone who criticizes them. Now that the situations are repeating, I tend to think that the problem is not so much in the mentality of those in authority, as much as it is in the level of our political culture.
Aram Abrahamyan
