Sunday, October 30, 2005
************************************
In my dealings with most Armenians I have discovered that being an Armenian is not an asset but a liability. As a friend of mine who grew up among Armenians and Turks in Cyprus is fond saying, “Armenians treat Turks with greater respect than fellow Armenians.”
*
In the eyes of our Oriental carpet dealers and philistines in general, writers are no better than potential beggars to be avoided at all cost. I have met only one Oriental carpet dealer and one national benefactor who sought me out and were eager to shake my hand: the first wanted me to translate his memoirs into English, and the second wanted me to help him write his memoirs.
*
The aim of all power structures is either to kill you or tell you what to think.
*
The more benevolent a despot, the more ruthless his underlings and henchmen.
*
The best practical advice I have had from a Canadian writer: “Never serve chicken salad to chicken shit.” If I am a failure, it may be because like most Armenians I have tendency to ignore good advice.
*
Whenever I am accused of hating my fellow Armenians, I remember an eminent English critic’s description of Jane Austen’s fiction: “regulated hatred.” Hatred of what or whom? Hatred of the aristocracy, of course. Or, as my wise Canadian friend would say, hatred of chicken shit who pretend to be chicken salad.
#
Monday, October 31, 2005
***********************************
In a recent issue of HARATCH (Paris) I read a lengthy review by an Armenologist (Mutafian) of a textbook on Armenian history by another Armenologist (Mahe). If Mutafian is to be believed, almost every other paragraph in Mahe’s opus contains an error. That’s the way it is with experts: their best efforts go into exposing the misconceptions and inaccuracies of the competition.
*
A sociologist published a book recently in which he proves that crowds act more wisely than individuals.
*
If laymen are wiser than experts, it may be because laymen are like members of a jury, in a position to compare the testimony of experts (who, as a rule, contradict one another) and to reach a consensus (which experts are unable or unwilling to do).
*
Experts are seldom independent operators or objective observers. Rather, they are products of specific cultural and political environments or schools of thought; they work for institutions, serve vested interests, elites, or regimes. Very much like lawyers, they defend a set of ideas and question the validity of all ideas or witnesses that may introduce doubts into their assertions of certainty.
*
When crowds misbehave, as they tend to do in time of war and revolution, it is because they are misled by leaders with personal stakes and conflicting goals. If it weren’t for the Sultan or the Young Turks and our revolutionary leaders, the chances are there would have been no massacres and Turks and Armenians would now be living side by side in peace.
*
Rosa Parks was not a historian, a sociologist, or a political leader. She was the quintessential anonymous face in the crowd. She used her common sense, did the right thing, and changed the course of history. What we need, what mankind needs, are more individuals like Rosa Parks and fewer experts and academics with axes to grind.
*
Any one of us may change history if he uses his common sense, does the right thing, and ignores the sophistries of academics and the rhetoric of political leaders.
*
A nationalist historian who believes in his own version of history has a dupe for a reader.
#
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
**************************************
What happened I know. Ever since I was a child I have known. As an adult I want to know why. The conventional explanation repeated ad nauseam (Asiatic barbarians, degenerate West) might satisfy a dupe but not an adult who has acquired the ability to think for himself.
As an Armenian I don’t feel morally superior to anyone and I consider all assertions of moral superiority bogus. Only Jews believe they are the Chosen People and only Nazis believed they belonged to a Superior Race. An Armenian who asserts moral superiority convinces no one but himself and his fellow dupes. I don’t have to engage in academic double-talk or philosophical gobbledygook to reach this conclusion. All I have to do is exercise the minimum degree of common sense and objectivity.
Many readers have questioned my judgment simply because I dare to question racist slogans and nationalist propaganda – the very same mental aberrations whose victims we have been. To say or imply that Asia is populated by barbarians and the West by degenerates is to dehumanize mankind, and to dehumanize is stage one of all man’s inhumanity to man, including genocide.
If we are no better than the rest of mankind, it follows all men are brothers and deserve our understanding. To understand Turks is not the same as denying the reality of the Genocide. It only means that no matter how hard we try we are not equipped to understand everything.
If God exists, He may be infallible in His judgments. But as human beings we can only hope to understand today something we did not understand yesterday. If that’s being a denialist, then I say the English language is not our common medium of communication.
#
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
************************************
Whenever I read a book I learn a few things even when the subject is a familiar one; and since there are thousands of books that I have not read, what I don’t know far exceeds what I know.
*
If I have learned one thing so far it is to reject all dogmas and to question all certainties, especially dogmas and certainties in the name of which millions have killed or died. I have learned this not only from books but also from personal experience.
*
When as a boy someone suggested that what I had been taught until then had been stuff and nonsense, I was not outraged. On the contrary, I immediately assumed I was dealing with an eccentric who should be humored and ignored. It was very gradually that I became aware of my status as a thoroughly brainwashed dupe.
*
If dogmas and certainties are more popular it is because they are supported and actively promoted by power structures. Benefactors, for instance, know that money is no better than excrement (and Freud agrees) unless it is used to acquire power and prestige. Something similar could be said about religious, political leaders and their propaganda.
*
“Makers of idols don’t believe in them,” says an old Chinese proverb, and if Italians are to be believed, “Even the Pope doubts his faith seven times every day.”
*
Propaganda pays, philosophy starves. Because Socrates said, “Of the gods we know nothing,” he was condemned to death. If history, our own history, teaches us anything, it is this: all ideologies and religions are no better than bloodthirsty idols.
#