As a result, the very meaning of politics has changed
Russian society is divided into two parts: thinking people, which are not few in that vast country, and the main masses who continue to believe the propaganda that is delivered on television by Kremlin propagandists. Armenian society is also divided, but into three parts: 1/ thinking people, which are not so many in our small country, 2/ those who unconditionally believe in opposition propaganda on the topic of “Turks” and “traitors”, 3/ the main mass, which believes Pashinyan’s propagandists working on Facebook. The leaders of Russia and Armenia believe in conspiracies, but each has its “evils.” Putin feels as if he is surrounded by malevolent Anglo-Saxons, a philandering NATO and a “collective West” whose mind and heart is set out to destroy his country.
It seems to Pashinyan that he has been leading the country wonderfully for 4 years, and that as a result of his incomparable work, everything is magnificent, and here are those who have no doubt about it, they are just serving the “former” and dreaming of their return. The revolutionary euphoria of 2018 in Yerevan and the imperial euphoria of October 2022 in Red Square (with the shouts of actor Okhlobystin) are similar in nature, however different they may be: instilling hatred and enmity, mass psychosis – phenomena that usually end in defeat. In accordance with the psychological deviations of their leaders, propagandists also work.
During his “discussions,” Solovyov has been “ignoring” the “collective West” and Ukraine “sold to him” for 8 years. (By the way, what kind of debate is it when everyone is shouting the same thing?) Our propagandists also have their constant theme – the former looters, who in 2018 brought the country to such a state that Pashinyan could not do anything. In recent months, another one has been added to that thesis as an “auxiliary theme” – the conspiracy of the “5th Column,” “Kremlin’s agent network,” and “Putin’s spies.”
Read also
Naturally, the topic is conditioned by Russia’s, to put it mildly, unfriendly attitude towards our country. In short, it is the propagandist’s job to develop the conspiracy theories that the country’s leaders believe. But from the point of view of analysis, it is interesting why our times give birth to those kinds of figures and propagandists, not only in Armenia and Russia. To understand, let’s turn to the American philosopher Hannah Arendt, who considered the origins of totalitarianism back in the 1960s (one of her major works was called that). The philosopher considered the breakdown of social and political stratification (division) as one of the prerequisites for the formation of totalitarianism, when an indefinite mass appears instead of classes and other clearly formed social groups. “As a result,” Arendt notes, “previously ‘sleeping’ majorities are overwhelmed by a negative solidarity that feeds anti-establishment sentiments. Such a situation is exacerbated in periods of crisis and upheaval.”
When there are no groups united around certain interests, and the “addressee” of the policy is the mass, it fundamentally changes the meaning of the policy itself. The programs and ideas put forward by this or that party no longer have any meaning. Let’s show it again with an Armenian example. Tell me, please, has anyone from the voting mass read the 2021 pre-election program of the “Civil Agreement” party, where it is written that Artsakh cannot under any circumstances be a part of Azerbaijan, and the status can be determined on the principle of “Secession for Salvation”? If they did read this, were they guided by the provisions written there when making their choice? Did anyone who voted for Civil Contract expect that plan to go through?
Naturally, the answers to those questions are negative. What does that show? That there is no party that represents the interests of this or that social group because, on the other hand, these groups do not exist either. Otherwise, they would be interested in what the given political force offers from a constructive point of view, and would strictly monitor that party to move forward in that direction. But instead, there is a mass. It is shown the hammer with which to hit all the “bad people” on the head, and that is quite enough for the electorate. Let’s approach the question from another side. Imagine such a situation: the Prime Minister meets with the parliamentary majority and declares that the state of Armenia is dissolved and becomes part of Turkey as “Western Vilayet.”
Do you doubt that the majority will unanimously support that plan, give fiery speeches in the National Assembly, justifying that it is directed against the former corrupt system and, in general, making Armenia a province of Turkey was decided back in 1991? On social networks, the propagandists of the government will prove that the implementation of such a program is prevented only by the “5th column” and the “agent network.” The problem here is not only careerism or conformism. The problem is that, as in society, these political forces do not have the ideological axes around which it is possible to have a serious conversation. In those conditions, the majority, the masses can be “won” over by everything, starting from “sea to sea Armenia” and ending with becoming a part of Turkey. It is in this case that any “-ism” loses its meaning.
Aram Abrahamyan
