Thoughts on Tashnagtsootyoon...

[xBaron Dants]

In a bid to revive the armenian politics forum, and to also regain my title as "tashnag basher" ( ), I will now share a few thoughts about the Hay Heghapokhagan Tashnagtsootyoon with you. Now I know that many will start bashing me, as they have before, but I beg of you, to please, please stick to the topics and to the questions that I will have posted, and to not go off on tangents. This could end up being quite long, so please, bear with me.

Alright, so here goes...

On the occasion of Armenia's first independance, Hrant Margaryan, president of the Tashnagtsootyoon Bureau, was in Montreal. I was told by a tashnag friend of mine to attend, because I would get a better idea of what the Tashnagtsootyoon really is, and there would also be a question and answer session. So, on Sunday night, I drove to Sourp Hagop getron, with 3 questions already in mind, eager to hear his answers.

As soon as I stepped in the gymnasium where the event was being held, TAKH, some hand popped out and stuck a sticker on my chest. I removed the sticker, in order to see what it was that I was actually wearing on my chest, and already received a few looks. A nice metaphor, I thought, that it didn't matter if I knew what they had stuck on my chest or not, as long as I kept it there. The sticker, it turns out, just had the "zinanshan" of the first Armenian Republic, and the words "May 28 - First Independance Day" in armenian. Finding it innocent enough, I put it back on my shirt. The gymnasium was COVERED with at least 30 flags of Armenia., including a HUGE one (about the size of half the gym wall) right behind the podium. I sat down somewhere near the back, and the program was already about to start. The scouts marched in, played the Armenian and Canadian anthems, and left. It was quite nice. Then came in the MC of the night, and it already became clear to me that this wasn't going to be the type of no-nonsense political conversation evening I was expecting it to be...rather, it would be a celebration of May 28, and the Tashnagtsootyoon. The "kegharvesdagan" part of the evening started, with a choir from the Sourp Hagop Azkayin Varjaran. They sang a nice song about Yerevan, and the ever-famous "Tro-i yerke", a song whose chorus starts with "ARII TASHNAG TROOOO". Now, call me crazy, but I found it somewhat weird that the 9-10 year old students of an "azkayin varjaran" were singing songs about a political party. It struck me as somewhat forced. Anyways, the evening went on, with a poem, a female opera singer, and countless praise about the Armenians' heroic victory which occured on May 28th, when we fought the enemies and established a Republic, and how we shall always be ready to die for freedom, and so on and so forth...

And then came "Enger" Hrant Margaryan, the Pope of the Tashnagtsootyoon himself. He gave a speech about how Armenia is not only the homeland of the Armenians in Armenia, but the homeland of Armenians everywhere. He then said how important it was for Armenians around the world to care about Armenia, and to implicate themselves in Armenia's future. He said that this was the first Armenian government ever who had made recognition of genocide a priority, and had actually paid attention to the diaspora. Now, he also said that there IS corruption within the Armenian government. I was pleasantly surprised, as the tashnagtsootyoon is now part of the coalition government running our country. However, he followed up saying that the tashnagtsootyoon agreed to join the coalition government in order to clean up the corruption which the OTHER parties had created. His point basically seemed to be that the tashnags are not corrupt at all, and while he did admit that the government was corrupt, he still wouldn't admit that the tashnagtsootyoon, now PART of the government, could also be corrupt. Weird, I thought, considering the fact that one of the largest cafés in all of Yerevan is known as the "tashnag café", because of its tashnag owners, who also happen to be Members of Parliament...

Then came the highlight of the night, when Baron Margaryan started speaking about the Armenian Opposition. He said that, by always pushing for Kocharian's resignation, the Opposition was only weakening Armenia's stability, which gave it a certain advantage in the region, and strengthening our enemies (Azerbaidjan). Now you can agree with this or not, but what I found hilariously hypocritical about this was that Hrant Margaryan had been arrested in 1994 for.....plotting a coup against then-President Levon Ter Petrosian.

The speech ended, and the man was given a standing ovation, and I was given a few dirty looks as I was still sitting, with my arms crossed. Another amusing metaphor...How COULD I not applaud what everybody else was applauding?

And then came the new Archbishop of the newly created diocese of the Holy See of Antelias in Canada. It must be noted that he does not like the term of "Arachnort Giligyan temi" like all the other archbishops of the Holy See of Antelias, and wants to also go by the name of "Arachnort Canadahayots". Anyways, he came on stage and talked about politics, and I thought it would be fitting for him to go read the Bible, instead of meddling in things which are not the business of the clerics. It seemed to me that he wanted to be seen as a Ghevont Yerets, or a Khrimian Hayrig, and was in denial that the circumstances for Armenians to need a Ghevonts Yerets or a Khrimian Hayrig do not really exist at the moment.

Now, on to my impressions...The sceptic in my would analyze this evening as an opportunity to get your fix of somewhat senseless nationalism. It seems the crowd came, heard what they have already heard about needing to die for Armenia, and then left. They're most probably scheduled to get their next fix two weeks later. That may sound too harsh, and I apologize if it does.

What I found puzzling is this constant talk about "dying for the Motherland". Now, if Azerbaidjan were to attack, I would be ready to fight and die for Armenia, but it seemed to me that they were almost waiting for the opportunity to die for Armenia. As if not dying is not patriotic enough. I would think that it is a lot more patriotic to want to LIVE for Armenia, and to want to see Armenia LIVE, instead of always talking about how everyone must die.

And now, I'm going to mention something that may be more controversial, for the three people that had the patience of reading this post all the way here. Two weeks ago, Turkish historian Taner Akçam gave a conference saying that the history of Turkey had to be changed, so Turks would still feel proud of their country. I find that this also applies to the Tashnagtsootyoon. The perfect example would be General Tro, whose song was sung by the children's choir. Most Tashnags know Tro as a heroic general, who played a big role in the resistance against the Turks. That is true. Many sources would say that he was indeed a brilliant and brave tactician. Tro was also a minister in the short-lived First Armenian Republic, and many Tashnags would not know that he wasn't as competent a politician, as he was a general. Even fewer will know that once Armenia became part of the USSR, Tro actually became a Bolshevik for a while, then quit to, 15-20 years later, attempt to organize an Armenian legion within the Nazi army, who would fight the Soviets (with its hundreds of thousands of Armenian soldiers). Why are these facts not known by so many people? Why are so many people not aware that the great Zoravar Antranig quit the tashnagtsootyoon when he saw the way they were handling things? Why are almost all Tashnags convinced that the Tashnagtsootyoon was responsible for the liberation of Artsakh, when that movement began in the late 80s, when the Tashnagtsootyoon had not yet returned to Armenia, and when the Karabakh Gomidé was the one being arrested for their actions to achieve liberation?

And the most important case is of course the May 28 independance itself. While the image was given on Sunday (and is given almost every day), that the Tashnag government bravely fought off the Turks and declared an independant Armenian Republic, we know very well that the Tashnag government wanted to keep a Transcaucasian state with Georgia and Azerbaidjan, and had no choice but to declare its independance once those two declared their own, backed by Germany and Turkey, respectively.

So these are the thoughts that crossed my mind Sunday night...to all those who read until the end, I'd like to know your opinions. But please stay on topic, and don't start insulting.

[Genuine_Stud]

No matter what political party "gathering" you go to, their all going to boast that they were the ones that did this and that they were the ones that did that. The reason being is because unfortunately these parties are working to compete with each other on who does the best job for their country (which isn't a bad thing), but it also causes a lot of stereotypical views towards each party from other political parties, and it also causes somewhat of a seperation between Armenians themselves.

I should like to see the day when all three of the political parties work together and achieve something together, rather than work against each other, or compete against each other on small and big things/projects concerning Armenia.

As far as political parties go, I have respect for all three even though I may not agree with particular views from each of them.

The reason I have this respect is because, throughout the diaspora, each political party has organized many types of events to keep Armenians together and boast Armenian nationalism and patriotism. In a century after about 90 years of genocide, I think it's good for us to be reminded from either political party about who we are and the type of power we have to make Armenia better through that particular political party gathering we attend.

You don't have to agree with some of the views they express. Just take in what you think is valid, intellectual, benefial from that speech and learn from it. Sometimes, when you "step outside of the box" you learn a lot more than you think.

[nairi]

The gymnasium was COVERED with at least 30 flags of Armenia., including a HUGE one (about the size of half the gym wall) right behind the podium.

Reminds one of Grey Wolves and Turks in general. Ara Baliozian is right when he says many of us are still Ottomanized.

Thanks for the report Paron, although nothing unexpected...

[dusken]

Let us get this out of the way: "striked" should be "struck".

I wish I knew more about political parties and what they do for Armenia and how they do it. Because of my lack of knowledge I can only feel that I am hearing a biased point of view.

It does seem to me though that there is something to be gained from having Armenians that are more militant in their patriotism. It is unfortunate that views have to be reduced to political party designations to begin with, since it does separate people that all have the same goals. There is not a better approach to Armenia's success; there are just different angles that have to be fulfilled. The militant and the passive can co-exist — or so it seems to me.

Now, let us assume that the historical and contemporary political elements you addressed are truly misrepresentations. Censoring historical information for the sake of pride in a political party is absurd. It is absurd because, as I stated, the idea of a political party, especially for a diaspora, is counterproductive. Am I missing something? Is it really impossible to just say, "Hey, it is in my character to reach our goal this way and it is in your character to reach our goal a different way, but the fact remains that it is our goal." It is a state of mind that does not contradict individual approaches: mutual respect and true patriotism. That being said, censoring historical and contemporary political facts only forms the mental lines between parties and does not seem to have such a widespread affect on Armenian politics in general. Hell, maybe it does; I do not know.

Criticizing their presentation of the idea of sacrificing themselves for Armenia is an empty criticism. "t seems like this and it seems like that" is being said by someone is is prepared to criticize. If someone feels they are very willing to express their patriotism in that manner, so be it. I feel comforted knowing that there are people that are militant about their patriotism. There is nothing wrong with that. The difficulty I would have is the feeling of that mentality being the only patriotic mentality. There is the bullshyt; "my patriotism is superior to yours," and that goes for all sides that feel that way.

It is unfortunate that we do not recognize that the Armenian government is corrupt from top to bottom, regardless of the political party. There is more to be gained by bluntly expressing that the whole thing is backwards and should be fixed. Finger pointing and the partisan mentality is juvenile and, in my opinion, selfish and unpatriotic. Why? Because the country becomes a secondary cause for action, and as much as they say otherwise, I will believe this to be true.

[xBaron Dants]

Let us get this out of the way: "striked" should be "struck".

I wish I knew more about political parties and what they do for Armenia and how they do it. Because of my lack of knowledge I can only feel that I am hearing a biased point of view.

It does seem to me though that there is something to be gained from having Armenians that are more militant in their patriotism. It is unfortunate that views have to be reduced to political party designations to begin with, since it does separate people that all have the same goals. There is not a better approach to Armenia's success; there are just different angles that have to be fulfilled. The militant and the passive can co-exist — or so it seems to me.

Now, let us assume that the historical and contemporary political elements you addressed are truly misrepresentations. Censoring historical information for the sake of pride in a political party is absurd. It is absurd because, as I stated, the idea of a political party, especially for a diaspora, is counterproductive. Am I missing something? Is it really impossible to just say, "Hey, it is in my character to reach our goal this way and it is in your character to reach our goal a different way, but the fact remains that it is our goal." It is a state of mind that does not contradict individual approaches: mutual respect and true patriotism. That being said, censoring historical and contemporary political facts only forms the mental lines between parties and does not seem to have such a widespread affect on Armenian politics in general. Hell, maybe it does; I do not know.

Criticizing their presentation of the idea of sacrificing themselves for Armenia is an empty criticism. "t seems like this and it seems like that" is being said by someone is is prepared to criticize. If someone feels they are very willing to express their patriotism in that manner, so be it. I feel comforted knowing that there are people that are militant about their patriotism. There is nothing wrong with that. The difficulty I would have is the feeling of that mentality being the only patriotic mentality. There is the bullshyt; "my patriotism is superior to yours," and that goes for all sides that feel that way.

It is unfortunate that we do not recognize that the Armenian government is corrupt from top to bottom, regardless of the political party. There is more to be gained by bluntly expressing that the whole thing is backwards and should be fixed. Finger pointing and the partisan mentality is juvenile and, in my opinion, selfish and unpatriotic. Why? Because the country becomes a secondary cause for action, and as much as they say otherwise, I will believe this to be true.

iiiiiiiiiiiiiinteresting

First off, I must say that when I went to sleep after posting, it occurred to me, out of the blue, that I should’ve written “struck” instead of “striked”. However, thinking that nobody would notice, I decided that it wasn’t worth going aaaall the way downstairs to fix it. I should’ve known better.
Now on to the topic.

My post is most probably biased. They are the opinions of a person who thinks that political parties outside of Armenia have negative effects. However, all historical facts I posted are well-documented facts that I’ve read from both Armenian and non-Armenian sources. It would be highly idiotic of me to intentionally bring up erroneous historical facts to “demolish” an organization, as I would be doing exactly that, which I am critical of.

Now, if militant and passive had coexisted, I wouldn’t have needed to type that essay. The fact remains that there is some sort of artificial schism created between the two, or three, or whatever number of organizations we have. I say artificial because I do not believe that it is representative of the people. A young non-goosagtsagan like myself, can work very well with a young goosagtsagan (whether tashnag, hnchag, chootag, whatever). It works because we are able to see the common goal, and it becomes the only thing we work for, with heated and interesting debates on the side. But at a higher level, this has almost never worked out, and the reason why I speak of the tashnagtsootyoon is because in my community, the tashnagtsootyoon is the most vocal of the three, and I’m sorry to say, but also the one who, in these last couple of years, has most “kake hanel”. In Boston or Los Angeles or Tehran, it might be different. I don’t know. Having read the Armenian Reporter from Boston, I can say that the Tashnagtsootyoon there seems to be a LOT MORE interested in the common goal than the one here. But all this, I repeat, is an artificial situation created by some people on top: one adenabed who dislikes the other adenabed, one der hayr who wants a hat bigger than the other der hayr…aboush paner. And while they are to blame, the silent majority, who chooses to not do much to fix the situation, is just as guilty.

[dusken]

However, all historical facts I posted are well-documented facts that I’ve read from both Armenian and non-Armenian sources. It would be highly idiotic of me to intentionally bring up erroneous historical facts to “demolish” an organization, as I would be doing exactly that, which I am critical of.

I hope you did not think I was claiming that you were potentially making things up. This is not what I meant. The idea was that, since I do not know any of the historical facts, I have to assume that any assertions I hear or read about historical events is potentially lacking in a well-rounded view of the actual events. In any case, I went on to state my opinions assuming that history was misrepresented as you had said it was, and I believe we are not necessarily in disagreement.

My post is most probably biased. They are the opinions of a person who thinks that political parties outside of Armenia have negative effects....... Now, if militant and passive had coexisted, I wouldn’t have needed to type that essay. The fact remains that there is some sort of artificial schism created between the two, or three, or whatever number of organizations we have. I say artificial because I do not believe that it is representative of the people. A young non-goosagtsagan like myself, can work very well with a young goosagtsagan (whether tashnag, hnchag, chootag, whatever). It works because we are able to see the common goal, and it becomes the only thing we work for, with heated and interesting debates on the side. But at a higher level, this has almost never worked out, and the reason why I speak of the tashnagtsootyoon is because in my community, the tashnagtsootyoon is the most vocal of the three, and I’m sorry to say, but also the one who, in these last couple of years, has most “kake hanel”. In Boston or Los Angeles or Tehran, it might be different. I don’t know. Having read the Armenian Reporter from Boston, I can say that the Tashnagtsootyoon there seems to be a LOT MORE interested in the common goal than the one here. But all this, I repeat, is an artificial situation created by some people on top: one adenabed who dislikes the other adenabed, one der hayr who wants a hat bigger than the other der hayr…aboush paner. And while they are to blame, the silent majority, who chooses to not do much to fix the situation, is just as guilty.

The militant patriotism and the passive patriotism are not co-existing harmoniously and that is due to the fact that they are defined as political parties, which, by their very nature, support only one method of achieving a goal. They can co-exist harmoniously if people realize that both can be supported simultaneously to achieve the same goal. They are either attacking different issues altogether or are attacking the same one from different sides, not necessarily impeding on eachother. It is not a matter of right and wrong; it is a matter of the character of the patriot. It seems we are essentially in agreement but I do not believe that it is the fault of any one political party but the idea of parties. You said it yourself: "one adenabed who dislikes the other adenabed, one der hayr who wants a hat bigger than the other der hayr." Political parties, especially within the diaspora are, as I had said, selfish and unpatriotic by their nature.

I would like to see meetings where there would be designations among the "parties" as to which issues they will effect remediation. Party A will assume responsibility over Part 1 of Issue 1; Party B will assume responsibility of Part 2 of Issue 1; Party C will assume responsibility of Issue 2, and so on. It will never happen, of course. You say the silent are as at fault but such radical approaches would be near impossible to execute. I can only imagine complaining and hoping that the corruption does not get any worse and that parties average eachother out, with respect to their intensions regarding Armenian politics.

(whether tashnag, hnchag, chootag, whatever)

[xBaron Dants]

Well, cases of cooperation have only truly worked within ad hoc initiatives, where members of different parties and organizations have ably worked together. Of course, these initiatives were not "sanctioned" by any organization or party, and some even had negative ideas about them.

The perfect example would be April 24. I still do not understand how the Montrealahayootyoon was unable to be in one place, praying and commemorating together.

Oh well, the eternal optimist in me says that there is change that's coming. Youth today care a lot less about the petty issues, and are more interested by the real causes, both for Armenia and the Diaspora. Slowly, the Beirut/Haleb/Bolis/Yekibdos old-school mentality will go away.

[anileve]

...with respect to their intensions regarding Armenian politics.

Let us get this out of the way: “ntensions” should be “intentions”.

As for your post Baron, what you've described is very disturbing. Reading it was reminiscent of the foul smell of Communism, where the flags were larger than the red carpet at Oscar's and the voices of little children harmoniously barking complex slogans of communism without any comprehension of their meaning, were like watching a horror film. Militant patriotism is actually a very close relative of terrorism, which is slightly hinted in the wonderful call "to die for our nation", so to me it's all absurd. As for any patriotism or nationalism, it's all very unhealthy and a sure sedative for individualism. Moreover, I am tired of hearing the same "crepe" about Armenia, for once I would like to hear people come up with a more constructive and original plan, and not some trite.

[dusken]

Let us get this out of the way: “ntensions” should be “intentions”.

Right you are. My mistake.

As for your post Baron, what you've described is very disturbing. Reading it was reminiscent of the foul smell of Communism, where the flags were larger than the red carpet at Oscar's and the voices of little children harmoniously barking complex slogans of communism without any comprehension of their meaning, were like watching a horror film. Militant patriotism is actually a very close relative of terrorism, which is slightly hinted in the wonderful call "to die for our nation", so to me it's all absurd.

It is not a good thing but I think you are exaggerating it.

As for any patriotism or nationalism, it's all very unhealthy and a sure sedative for individualism.

I do not agree. I love the idea of culture and love the feeling of culture. It is for that reason I feel protective of that which harbors and symbolizes it.

Moreover, I am tired of hearing the same "crepe" about Armenia, for once I would like to hear people come up with a more constructive and original plan, and not some trite.

What exactly do you consider to be the same crap?

If it was so easy to create a real constructive plan that a bunch of youth with no political experience will concoct it on a website forum, well...

There is nothing wrong with discussing or expressing opinions. Everything starts there, anyway.

[xBaron Dants]

I disagree about patriotism being a bad thing. Militant nationalism can obviously lead to ethnocentrism and maybe terrorism, but I still do not understand why some people are so afraid of loving and appreciating (and also criticizing of course) their country, and their people.