Tweet
ROLE OF INTELLIGENTSIA IN PROGRESS OF ARTSAKH SOCIETY
Norair Hovsepian
Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
Nov 9 2006
The round-table meeting at the Union of Journalists of Artsakh on
November 3 was headlined "The Role of the Intelligentsia in the
Life of the NKR Society". Members of parliament, representatives of
different spheres of culture, reporters were present. "When we say the
intelligentsia are the wealth of the nation, we mean the potential of
the intelligentsia. In this sense, we are a lucky nation," said Kim
Gabrielian, the president of the Union of Journalists. Unfortunately,
we lack a "bank" which would convey these ideas to those who are
supposed to bring them into being, whereas the government needs such
ideas, says Kim Gabrielian. Meanwhile, the intelligentsia often
is absorbed by daily problems, a teacher has to grow vegetables,
and an actor has to sell things to earn their living. As a result,
it is clear who suffers. Kim Gabrielian says this regress leads the
intelligentsia to decay. Naturally, in this state the intelligentsia
cannot be imagined to have an influence on the society and political
life in the country. Meanwhile, it was the intelligentsia that waked
people in the 1060s, and the intelligentsia is at the origin of the
Artsakh movement. Member of Parliament Vahram Atanessian, chair of the
Committee of External Relations and Information expressed his opinion
on why the role of the intelligentsia has diminished. The crisis
of the intelligentsia started when public speeches were replaced by
state building, he says. During the public speeches the role of the
intelligentsia was highly important. When state building started,
the intelligentsia slowed down (Vahram Atanessian says this behavior
is typical of the intelligentsia), and other forces went ahead. Today
the intelligentsia is unable to make important decision. Therefore,
it has no importance in the society. According to Vahram Atanessian,
the change of the political order was another heavy blow to the
intelligentsia. Formerly, the intelligentsia used to get instructions
from the government and carry them out without thinking about problems
with their implementation that would occur later. The intelligentsia
is supposed to be free, whereas carrying out the instructions of
the government restricts freedom. Today the intelligentsia is free
and is supposed to create their audience on their own. However,
Vahram Atanessian declined to say what the intelligentsia does in
this direction, and only noticed that the society should be offered
what it needs, and that is required by the time. The chair of the
Press Club of Stepanakert Gegham Baghdassarian expressed a similar
opinion. He believes that a strong individual is sure to find his
place, whereas the government support and working in the framework
of the government instructions is favorable for mediocrities. "Today
there is fertile soil for finding talents," Gegham Baghdassarian
believes. The participants of the round-table meeting had different
opinions whether the intelligentsia is able to overcome the crisis
without help. The intelligentsia must preserve its best moral
characteristics. "We need strong, authoritative individuals," says
Gegham Baghdassarian. He believes that when mediocrities outnumber,
it is difficult to hope for progress.
Finally, there were interesting opinions on the
government-intelligentsia relation. Most participants of the
round-table meeting believe that these two forces form a dichotomy. A
creative person is opposition. The next question stemmed from this
whether the intelligentsia should become engaged in politics. The
controversial opinions eliminated the probability of a general
formula. Is it necessary to set up a union of the intelligentsia or
the existing unions have already proved ineffective? These and other
questions remained unanswered. The participants of the round-table
meeting agreed that it is impossible to answer all these questions in
a single meeting. Especially that these problems are becoming sharper.
Norair Hovsepian
Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
Nov 9 2006
The round-table meeting at the Union of Journalists of Artsakh on
November 3 was headlined "The Role of the Intelligentsia in the
Life of the NKR Society". Members of parliament, representatives of
different spheres of culture, reporters were present. "When we say the
intelligentsia are the wealth of the nation, we mean the potential of
the intelligentsia. In this sense, we are a lucky nation," said Kim
Gabrielian, the president of the Union of Journalists. Unfortunately,
we lack a "bank" which would convey these ideas to those who are
supposed to bring them into being, whereas the government needs such
ideas, says Kim Gabrielian. Meanwhile, the intelligentsia often
is absorbed by daily problems, a teacher has to grow vegetables,
and an actor has to sell things to earn their living. As a result,
it is clear who suffers. Kim Gabrielian says this regress leads the
intelligentsia to decay. Naturally, in this state the intelligentsia
cannot be imagined to have an influence on the society and political
life in the country. Meanwhile, it was the intelligentsia that waked
people in the 1060s, and the intelligentsia is at the origin of the
Artsakh movement. Member of Parliament Vahram Atanessian, chair of the
Committee of External Relations and Information expressed his opinion
on why the role of the intelligentsia has diminished. The crisis
of the intelligentsia started when public speeches were replaced by
state building, he says. During the public speeches the role of the
intelligentsia was highly important. When state building started,
the intelligentsia slowed down (Vahram Atanessian says this behavior
is typical of the intelligentsia), and other forces went ahead. Today
the intelligentsia is unable to make important decision. Therefore,
it has no importance in the society. According to Vahram Atanessian,
the change of the political order was another heavy blow to the
intelligentsia. Formerly, the intelligentsia used to get instructions
from the government and carry them out without thinking about problems
with their implementation that would occur later. The intelligentsia
is supposed to be free, whereas carrying out the instructions of
the government restricts freedom. Today the intelligentsia is free
and is supposed to create their audience on their own. However,
Vahram Atanessian declined to say what the intelligentsia does in
this direction, and only noticed that the society should be offered
what it needs, and that is required by the time. The chair of the
Press Club of Stepanakert Gegham Baghdassarian expressed a similar
opinion. He believes that a strong individual is sure to find his
place, whereas the government support and working in the framework
of the government instructions is favorable for mediocrities. "Today
there is fertile soil for finding talents," Gegham Baghdassarian
believes. The participants of the round-table meeting had different
opinions whether the intelligentsia is able to overcome the crisis
without help. The intelligentsia must preserve its best moral
characteristics. "We need strong, authoritative individuals," says
Gegham Baghdassarian. He believes that when mediocrities outnumber,
it is difficult to hope for progress.
Finally, there were interesting opinions on the
government-intelligentsia relation. Most participants of the
round-table meeting believe that these two forces form a dichotomy. A
creative person is opposition. The next question stemmed from this
whether the intelligentsia should become engaged in politics. The
controversial opinions eliminated the probability of a general
formula. Is it necessary to set up a union of the intelligentsia or
the existing unions have already proved ineffective? These and other
questions remained unanswered. The participants of the round-table
meeting agreed that it is impossible to answer all these questions in
a single meeting. Especially that these problems are becoming sharper.