Tweet
CHARACTERS IN THE PLAY
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
Oct 6 2007
Armenia
"Party of Revolution"
Now that a few months are left till the presidential elections, there
are, in general, two political parties ("the party of stability"
and the "party of revolution") ending the process of their formation.
Naturally, those parties are not registered with the Ministry
of Justice; they have neither Parliamentary factions nor offices
distributing membership cards. But if we remember that originally
"the union of a group of people against others pursuing different
beliefs" was considered a party, it is obvious that the conversation
is really about parties.
In order to distinguish them from the other, registered parties, we
can call them real parties. And naturally the members of the official
parties (even pro-Governmental) may belong to different real parties.
"The party of revolution" in turn consists of several groups:
"radical revolutionaries", "moderate revolutionaries" and "pragmatic
revolutionaries".
The "radical revolutionaries" are the satellites of the Armenian
pan-National Movement. Among them are "Republic" party, the National
Democratic Union, "New Times", and a number of other smaller
fractions. The other pro-Opposition parties also have a considerable
number of "radical revolutionaries"; they are conspicuous, but
obviously they do not form a majority.
The "radical revolutionaries" draw their calculations by way of making
pressure upon the Government via street protests. And the goal is
to force the Government to agree to significant concessions or full
capitulation. The radicals do not rely on elections, as they clearly
realize that they have practically no chances.
They need elections only inside the country, as this will enable them
to legitimize the boiled products of their agitated brain in front of
the Western admirers. (As much as the foreign sponsors are concerned,
they know the real value of elections and never cherish illusions by
displaying utilitarian and technological approach towards them).
"Moderate revolutionaries" ("Rule of Law", "National Unity", The
Armenian People's Party, "Heritage" and a number of others may
be classified among them) hope that even if they do not win as a
result of the elections, they will at least be able to force the
administration to take them into consideration. Their dissatisfaction
stems from the realization of the fact that they are not in demand;
that they decide nothing or almost nothing.
"Revolution", with all its street manifestations, intimidates
them. They view this scenario as an extreme stem. But we without
hesitation classify them among the revolutionaries, because they
openly act against the Administration.
By the way, there is a rather notable nuance at this point. It is quite
possible that there exists the following program: the "moderates"
run for elections and naturally lose the game. Then the radicals do
the major part of the dirty job. In general, the latter realize that
in this way the "moderates" will be at stake if the common job fails
and "let them down" in case they are a success.
Nevertheless, the radicals do not have particular chances for success.
The third group, as already mentioned, consists of the "pragmatic
revolutionaries" (considered pragmatics too conventionally), who,
in general, do not care in what way they will attain the desired goal.
There are two goals, originally serving as a motive for the
"Pragmatics". First, to recover their losses, i.e. the power and
business which they think was seized illegitimately and then - to
settle personal accounts with R. Kocharyan and the people surrounding
him.
That's why they are ready, to the best of their abilities, to
support the "radicals" and the "moderates" as well as the part of
the Opposition not belonging to the "party of revolution".
As much as the proponents are concerned, these are mostly (naturally,
besides the party members) the impoverished who are indignant at the
state, i.e. the pensioners, the unemployed, as well as the remaining
representatives of intelligentsia. The "revolutionary moods" also
extend to the working people and some part of the youth.
It is obvious that no ideological unity can be created in a "party
of revolution"; even cooking a "salad" is impossible here.
And the most interesting thing: despite the fact that the majority
of the above-mentioned groups declare themselves as "right wing"
activists, "the party of revolution" is now developing first of all
as a "left-wing" project. The aspiration of influencing the moods
prevalent in public and attracting as many people as possible makes the
revolutionaries to hurriedly protect the relics of the "achievements
of socialism" and demand "justice" regardless their views.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
Oct 6 2007
Armenia
"Party of Revolution"
Now that a few months are left till the presidential elections, there
are, in general, two political parties ("the party of stability"
and the "party of revolution") ending the process of their formation.
Naturally, those parties are not registered with the Ministry
of Justice; they have neither Parliamentary factions nor offices
distributing membership cards. But if we remember that originally
"the union of a group of people against others pursuing different
beliefs" was considered a party, it is obvious that the conversation
is really about parties.
In order to distinguish them from the other, registered parties, we
can call them real parties. And naturally the members of the official
parties (even pro-Governmental) may belong to different real parties.
"The party of revolution" in turn consists of several groups:
"radical revolutionaries", "moderate revolutionaries" and "pragmatic
revolutionaries".
The "radical revolutionaries" are the satellites of the Armenian
pan-National Movement. Among them are "Republic" party, the National
Democratic Union, "New Times", and a number of other smaller
fractions. The other pro-Opposition parties also have a considerable
number of "radical revolutionaries"; they are conspicuous, but
obviously they do not form a majority.
The "radical revolutionaries" draw their calculations by way of making
pressure upon the Government via street protests. And the goal is
to force the Government to agree to significant concessions or full
capitulation. The radicals do not rely on elections, as they clearly
realize that they have practically no chances.
They need elections only inside the country, as this will enable them
to legitimize the boiled products of their agitated brain in front of
the Western admirers. (As much as the foreign sponsors are concerned,
they know the real value of elections and never cherish illusions by
displaying utilitarian and technological approach towards them).
"Moderate revolutionaries" ("Rule of Law", "National Unity", The
Armenian People's Party, "Heritage" and a number of others may
be classified among them) hope that even if they do not win as a
result of the elections, they will at least be able to force the
administration to take them into consideration. Their dissatisfaction
stems from the realization of the fact that they are not in demand;
that they decide nothing or almost nothing.
"Revolution", with all its street manifestations, intimidates
them. They view this scenario as an extreme stem. But we without
hesitation classify them among the revolutionaries, because they
openly act against the Administration.
By the way, there is a rather notable nuance at this point. It is quite
possible that there exists the following program: the "moderates"
run for elections and naturally lose the game. Then the radicals do
the major part of the dirty job. In general, the latter realize that
in this way the "moderates" will be at stake if the common job fails
and "let them down" in case they are a success.
Nevertheless, the radicals do not have particular chances for success.
The third group, as already mentioned, consists of the "pragmatic
revolutionaries" (considered pragmatics too conventionally), who,
in general, do not care in what way they will attain the desired goal.
There are two goals, originally serving as a motive for the
"Pragmatics". First, to recover their losses, i.e. the power and
business which they think was seized illegitimately and then - to
settle personal accounts with R. Kocharyan and the people surrounding
him.
That's why they are ready, to the best of their abilities, to
support the "radicals" and the "moderates" as well as the part of
the Opposition not belonging to the "party of revolution".
As much as the proponents are concerned, these are mostly (naturally,
besides the party members) the impoverished who are indignant at the
state, i.e. the pensioners, the unemployed, as well as the remaining
representatives of intelligentsia. The "revolutionary moods" also
extend to the working people and some part of the youth.
It is obvious that no ideological unity can be created in a "party
of revolution"; even cooking a "salad" is impossible here.
And the most interesting thing: despite the fact that the majority
of the above-mentioned groups declare themselves as "right wing"
activists, "the party of revolution" is now developing first of all
as a "left-wing" project. The aspiration of influencing the moods
prevalent in public and attracting as many people as possible makes the
revolutionaries to hurriedly protect the relics of the "achievements
of socialism" and demand "justice" regardless their views.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress