as i see it
Sunday, March 13, 2005
********************************
ON PATRIOTISM
************************
There is nothing wrong with patriotism, provided patriots on both sides settle their differences without involving civilians.
*
Perhaps I take after my father. Was he a patriot? I am not sure. I don't know. I don't remember him ever using the word. I suspect he was too busy trying to survive in a hostile environment to have any time or inclination to speechify. He was the quintessential underdog, and for the underdog the difference between war and peace might as well be invisible to the naked eye.
*
I wonder how many of our fire-breathing Bush-league patriots would be willing to confront their counterparts in a field of honor?
*
Consider how many massacres would have been prevented in a world without patriotism.
*
Our understanding of the past is dependent on our choice of sources. And when I speak of sources, I don't mean sources of propaganda.
*
Is a patriot capable of delivering a single objective sentence, especially if he considers objectivity unpatriotic?
*
Has anyone ever been successful in convincing a man in love that the woman he loves, far from being the most beautiful woman in the world, is just a woman, like countless other women?
*
"When the rich fight, it is the poor who die."
#
Monday, March 14, 2005
*********************************
War-makers are never wrong, or so they expect us to believe. If they win, they consider themselves beyond criticism. If they lose, they call it moral victory. In either case, the men at the top, if they want to stay at the top, must at all times project infallibility. Which means, anyone who dares to question their conduct must be seen as an enemy of the people - please note: not a critic of policy-makers, but an enemy of the people, who had nothing to do with the formulation and implementation of the policy.
*
Whenever I make an honest effort to introduce some degree of objectivity in our perception of the past, I am accused of ignorance, and worse, of blaming the victim. Since I have consistently maintained the people to be double victims - victims of foreign aggression first, and victims of domestic incompetence second - I dismiss the second charge as the kind that consists in slinging mud hoping some of it will stick. As for being ignorant: I am more than willing to concede that, unlike my critics, I neither know nor understand everything. Which is why I ask questions. And I ask questions because I have doubts about our propaganda line.
*
If our revolutionaries are blameless, as their dupes expect us to believe, why is it that General Antranik blamed the massacres on them and at one point publicly declared that, if it were up to him, they would be crucified.
*
More questions: Why did Zarian say, "Our political parties have been of no political use to us. Their greatest enemy is free speech." Why free speech? What are they afraid of? What are they hiding?
*
If our revolutionaries are without blame, why did Hagop Oshagan say: "Our revolutionaries lost because they formed only tiny islands in a Turkish sea." Did we have to be massacred by the million for our revolutionaries to make that obvious discovery?
*
If our revolutionaries are without blame, why were they taken in by the double-talk of the West and the Young Turks?
*
Somewhere Toynbee tells us civilizations, empires, and nations are not killed, they commit suicide. Perhaps the question I have been asking is: What if we are not an exception to this rule?
#
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
*******************************
C.G. Jung (1875-1961), Swiss psychiatrist: "Our blight is ideologies - they are the long expected Antichrist."
*
Patriotism makes sense only if we place love of mankind and the world above love of country and countrymen. Unless patriotism fulfills this condition, it runs the risk of degenerating to the ideology of nationalism, and eventually to war and massacre.
*
The ultimate aim of censorship is to suppress the free speech of a few in order to oppress the many.
*
Propaganda is poison and freedom of speech its only antidote.
*
MEMO TO READERS
WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE ME SILENCED
************************************************** **
If you are right, prove it.
If you are wrong, admit it.
If you are not sure, be more flexible.
If you have a closed mind, open it.
If you are a fanatic, teach yourself to question your belief system. It is said that even the Pope of Rome questions his faith seven times every day.
If you are a man of faith, always keep in mind that faith justifies nothing. If it did, it would justify the jihadist Turks who massacred millions of innocent infidels in the name of Allah.
I would go even further and suggest that, if you make an assertion in the name of faith, it is sure to be false because to believe means to believe that which cannot be proved to the satisfaction of skeptics and non-believers, that is to say, the majority of mankind.
But if you decide to be abusive, identify yourself. Nothing can be more cowardly than to insult someone anonymously and from a safe distance.
*
C.G. Jung: "Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism."
#
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
**********************************
Milan Kundera (b. 1929), Czech author: "Hate traps us by binding us too tightly to our adversary."
*
Saroyan once said that he felt sorry for the Turks, thus proving that even a victim can be compassionate towards his victimizer.
*
Our religion does not teach us to hate our enemies. Our religion teaches us to love them, even if they happen to be our victimizers.
*
This is not a sermon on love and compassion. Like most of my fellow Christians, I am not a good Christian. But I wish I were. Neither do I agree with Saroyan. But I wish I did.
*
I was brought up to hate Turks. I still do. With one difference. I no longer see my hatred as an asset but as a liability.
*
I know now that hatred has so far failed to raise a single victim. Neither has it banished a single Turk. Hatred has not solved a single problem because hatred itself is a problem and the root of many other problems, mutual intolerance and divisiveness being only two of them.
*
We begin by hating Turks and end by hating fellow Armenians simply because they refuse to echo our sentiments and thoughts. We dehumanize Turks as surely as we dehumanize fellow Armenians by demanding that they behave like parrots.
*
If we view life as an endless experiment, we shall have to agree that hatred has failed. And if we view reality as infinitely more complex than algebra, we shall have no choice but to question the wisdom and integrity of our self-appointed pundits and elites who claim to understand everything and to know what must be done.
#
Sunday, March 13, 2005
********************************
ON PATRIOTISM
************************
There is nothing wrong with patriotism, provided patriots on both sides settle their differences without involving civilians.
*
Perhaps I take after my father. Was he a patriot? I am not sure. I don't know. I don't remember him ever using the word. I suspect he was too busy trying to survive in a hostile environment to have any time or inclination to speechify. He was the quintessential underdog, and for the underdog the difference between war and peace might as well be invisible to the naked eye.
*
I wonder how many of our fire-breathing Bush-league patriots would be willing to confront their counterparts in a field of honor?
*
Consider how many massacres would have been prevented in a world without patriotism.
*
Our understanding of the past is dependent on our choice of sources. And when I speak of sources, I don't mean sources of propaganda.
*
Is a patriot capable of delivering a single objective sentence, especially if he considers objectivity unpatriotic?
*
Has anyone ever been successful in convincing a man in love that the woman he loves, far from being the most beautiful woman in the world, is just a woman, like countless other women?
*
"When the rich fight, it is the poor who die."
#
Monday, March 14, 2005
*********************************
War-makers are never wrong, or so they expect us to believe. If they win, they consider themselves beyond criticism. If they lose, they call it moral victory. In either case, the men at the top, if they want to stay at the top, must at all times project infallibility. Which means, anyone who dares to question their conduct must be seen as an enemy of the people - please note: not a critic of policy-makers, but an enemy of the people, who had nothing to do with the formulation and implementation of the policy.
*
Whenever I make an honest effort to introduce some degree of objectivity in our perception of the past, I am accused of ignorance, and worse, of blaming the victim. Since I have consistently maintained the people to be double victims - victims of foreign aggression first, and victims of domestic incompetence second - I dismiss the second charge as the kind that consists in slinging mud hoping some of it will stick. As for being ignorant: I am more than willing to concede that, unlike my critics, I neither know nor understand everything. Which is why I ask questions. And I ask questions because I have doubts about our propaganda line.
*
If our revolutionaries are blameless, as their dupes expect us to believe, why is it that General Antranik blamed the massacres on them and at one point publicly declared that, if it were up to him, they would be crucified.
*
More questions: Why did Zarian say, "Our political parties have been of no political use to us. Their greatest enemy is free speech." Why free speech? What are they afraid of? What are they hiding?
*
If our revolutionaries are without blame, why did Hagop Oshagan say: "Our revolutionaries lost because they formed only tiny islands in a Turkish sea." Did we have to be massacred by the million for our revolutionaries to make that obvious discovery?
*
If our revolutionaries are without blame, why were they taken in by the double-talk of the West and the Young Turks?
*
Somewhere Toynbee tells us civilizations, empires, and nations are not killed, they commit suicide. Perhaps the question I have been asking is: What if we are not an exception to this rule?
#
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
*******************************
C.G. Jung (1875-1961), Swiss psychiatrist: "Our blight is ideologies - they are the long expected Antichrist."
*
Patriotism makes sense only if we place love of mankind and the world above love of country and countrymen. Unless patriotism fulfills this condition, it runs the risk of degenerating to the ideology of nationalism, and eventually to war and massacre.
*
The ultimate aim of censorship is to suppress the free speech of a few in order to oppress the many.
*
Propaganda is poison and freedom of speech its only antidote.
*
MEMO TO READERS
WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE ME SILENCED
************************************************** **
If you are right, prove it.
If you are wrong, admit it.
If you are not sure, be more flexible.
If you have a closed mind, open it.
If you are a fanatic, teach yourself to question your belief system. It is said that even the Pope of Rome questions his faith seven times every day.
If you are a man of faith, always keep in mind that faith justifies nothing. If it did, it would justify the jihadist Turks who massacred millions of innocent infidels in the name of Allah.
I would go even further and suggest that, if you make an assertion in the name of faith, it is sure to be false because to believe means to believe that which cannot be proved to the satisfaction of skeptics and non-believers, that is to say, the majority of mankind.
But if you decide to be abusive, identify yourself. Nothing can be more cowardly than to insult someone anonymously and from a safe distance.
*
C.G. Jung: "Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism."
#
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
**********************************
Milan Kundera (b. 1929), Czech author: "Hate traps us by binding us too tightly to our adversary."
*
Saroyan once said that he felt sorry for the Turks, thus proving that even a victim can be compassionate towards his victimizer.
*
Our religion does not teach us to hate our enemies. Our religion teaches us to love them, even if they happen to be our victimizers.
*
This is not a sermon on love and compassion. Like most of my fellow Christians, I am not a good Christian. But I wish I were. Neither do I agree with Saroyan. But I wish I did.
*
I was brought up to hate Turks. I still do. With one difference. I no longer see my hatred as an asset but as a liability.
*
I know now that hatred has so far failed to raise a single victim. Neither has it banished a single Turk. Hatred has not solved a single problem because hatred itself is a problem and the root of many other problems, mutual intolerance and divisiveness being only two of them.
*
We begin by hating Turks and end by hating fellow Armenians simply because they refuse to echo our sentiments and thoughts. We dehumanize Turks as surely as we dehumanize fellow Armenians by demanding that they behave like parrots.
*
If we view life as an endless experiment, we shall have to agree that hatred has failed. And if we view reality as infinitely more complex than algebra, we shall have no choice but to question the wisdom and integrity of our self-appointed pundits and elites who claim to understand everything and to know what must be done.
#
Comment