Nikol Pashinyan recently spoke at the Academy, addressing a room full of scientists. As usual, the speech was hardly sophisticated—more at the level of everyday talk, “popular” both in content and vocabulary. The academicians nodded along earnestly, as if they were hearing something profound. Predictably, those in attendance were people who, one way or another, depend on the government.
The essence of his remarks boiled down to this claim: “What’s the point of developing science for its own sake?”
I’m not sure it needs explaining to readers why science must be developed “for its own sake”—that is, why fundamental research matters. A country’s size or level of wealth is no excuse for neglecting this strategic direction, at least if it aspires to genuine sovereignty. Anyone interested can spend ten or fifteen minutes looking up the answer.
Of course, anyone with even a remote connection to science will simply smile at such “earth-shattering” conclusions. But I doubt that the real audience of these remarks at the Academy was the scientists. The intended audience is the speaker’s electorate—people whose intellectual and moral frame of reference, as well as their sense of identity, are shaped in a very particular way.
Read also
Given that, the hidden message of such speeches is roughly this: “You’re freeloaders. I’m wasting money on you anyway—you’re of no use.” And the expected response from that audience is just as predictable: “He’s right—our leader knows best. Only he can deal with those fake intellectuals.”
Scientists are few. “The people” are many.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
