as i see it - Pt. III

[ara baliozian]

Tuesday, August 17, 2004

*********************************

THE PATIENCE OF A CORPSE.

THE ORIGIN OF OUR STATUS AS UNDERDOGS.

TO EACH HIS OWN.

A PASSAGE FROM A RECENT HISTORICAL NOVEL.

THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE.

***************************************************

What happens when a Ramgavar dies in a predominantly Tashnak town with a single priest? A Ramgavar priest is imported for the occasion from the nearest city, of course. This is exactly what happened in our town last week, but since the out-of-towner had to travel on a busy highway where accidents and delays are daily occurrences, he was three hours late. Inconvenient? Not to the corpse, it wasn’t.

*

We like to say and repeat: “We are a small nation. We are weak.” What we avoid asking is, Why? Is it because God or the sinister forces of the universe conspired to will it so, or is it an inevitable consequence of our penchant for dividing and subdividing ourselves? Even the mightiest empire in the world would become a perennial victim if it kept dividing and subdividing itself. And now that we know the reason, will we change? One can always dream, of course.

*

Once, recently, when I wrote something to the effect that Armenians and Turks, Jews and Palestinians live side by side in the United States and Canada without feeling the need to slaughter one another, a reader shot back: “That’s because Americans and Canadians are too obsessed with money and sex to think of anything else!” thus implying, massacre is morally superior to sex and dollars.

*

And speaking of Armenians and Turks, I read the following in a review of a recent book titled BIRDS WITHOUT WINGS by Louis de Bernieres: “The story is set in a small coastal town in the Ottoman Empire before the Great War. There, Muslims and Christians (mostly of Greek background, a few Armenians) lived peacefully together. Everyone spoke Turkish and was loyal to the Sultan.”

*

The uncertainty principle in physics also applies to human thought. Which means that no matter how competent a writer is, he will not be able to express his views with mathematical precision. As a result, his ideas will have a penumbra of doubt and uncertainty, and they will be open to misinterpretation. On the day man acquires the ability to express himself with mathematical precision, questioning the validity of his views will be like questioning the existence of the atom after Hiroshima.

*

[ara baliozian]

Ara, can you please explain what this means?

which line? / ara

[ED]

Ara, years ago I read an essay writhen by Derenik Demirchyan, it was called ՈՎ Է ՀԱՅԸ or ՀԱՅԸ, do you happend to have this article? it was published years ago in NOR KYANQ or one of the papers here in LA,

 

Thanks

[ara baliozian]

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

********************************

THE USES AND ABUSES OF NATIONALISM.

ATATURK, HITLER, AND…SIBELIUS.

MUSIC AND POLITICS.

WAS KHACHATURIAN A NATIONALIST COMPOSER?

********************************************************

At one time or another I have been accused of being against everything and everyone, including Mount Ararat, Lake Sevan, motherhood, apple pie, and, the other day…believe it or not…Sibelius. Why Sibelius? Because he is a nationalist composer and I am against nationalism.

*

For the record, I have nothing against Sibelius and nationalist music in general if only because it is not easy being against someone or anything that means no harm to anyone. If I am against political nationalism it's because it is one of the three pillars of fascism - the other two being racism and anti-intellectualism (that is, dissent, free speech, dialogue and consensus) and because it (nationalism) has been the cause of many wars, massacres, and genocides, including our own.

*

To say our nationalism is good but our enemy's nationalism is bad is to voice the very same propaganda line that emanated from the likes of Ataturk and Hitler.

*

To those who say our nationalism cannot be compared with Turkish or German nationalism because we are not guilty of genocide, and all our wars have been defensive wars, is to imply that we belong to a morally superior race (which happens to be racist nonsense). If we have not victimized millions it may because ours has been the nationalism of underdogs, and because we were vastly outnumbered by our enemies.

*

More on Sibelius: I love his music. He happens to be one of my favorite composers. I love not only his symphonic poems, symphonies, and Violin Concerto (with its Gypsy and Slavic interludes) but also his seldom performed piano music. One of the very first things I did when I became gainfully employed in a department store was to acquire a complete set of his seven symphonies under Karajan (please note: not of Armenian but of Greek descent- real name, Karayannis, literally Blackjohn).

*

More on nationalist music. All music speaks a universal language even when it employs local or native folk melodies; and it uses these melodies for the same reason that a Hungarian speaks Hungarian, a Romanian speaks Romanian, and an Armenian speaks Armenian. Sibelius used Finnish folk music not because it is superior to Greek or Russian folk music but because he was exposed to Finnish folk songs at an early age. This may explain why Khachaturian did not use exclusively Armenian folk tunes (he was born and raised in Georgia) but also Georgian, Azeri, Abkhazian, and Chechen folk tunes and rhythms. In music, unlike in politics, there is no such thing as enemy folk tunes or rhythms. Good music is accessible to all of mankind, and in that sense, its massage emphasizes the universal brotherhood of all men.

#

[Vigil]

Ara, why don't we just give our lands to Turkey for the sake of "brotherhood" and migrate out of Armenia? Why are you such a hard liner on Armenians and not Turks? Why is it that you speak of "brotherhood", but yet come to a Armenian forum to do so? I mean if indeed you dislike "nationalism" critisize the nationalistic spirit of more nationalistic countries like the U.S., Israel, and Turkey. Instead, you focus on Armenians that in no way are nationalistic because if they were Armenia would be in a much better state. Armenians are only as only proud of their identity when it is soically prudent to have one. In fact I can go as far as saying that Armenians feel they are in this "oppressed" state, which is because they lack any form of nationalism. They think our struggles are like the ones of the "black man" and feel that the "white man" is keeping us down, but fail to realize that they are them selves "white".

 

Ara, in short I think you have meet one or two hard core dashnaks and think the rest of the Armenians are as nationalistic, but in no way is the Armenian population nationalistic. We are devoid of any nationalism which is why we are in this state.

[Sasun]

In music, unlike in politics, there is no such thing as enemy folk tunes or rhythms.

With the exception of Turkey where Kurdish music was banned.

[ara baliozian]

Thursday, August 19, 2004

********************************

BELIEF SYSTEMS AND HERESIES.

A PROBLEM AND ITS SOLUTION.

THE SHORTEST BOOK IN THE WORLD.

REVERSE BOLSHEVISM.

*************************************************

In the eyes of a man with deep religious and political convictions, all disagreement will be seen as heresy, and as everyone knows, the only way to deal with heretics is to burn them at the stake, because they will burn in hell anyway. Likewise, to a fanatic Muslim, all non-Muslims are infidel dogs and killing them is no sin. To my gentle readers who disagree with me, I ask: If in your eyes I am no better than an infidel dog, in what way are you yourself different from those who at the turn of the last century massacred our forefathers?

*

If disagreement makes you unhappy, here is a solution to your problem: Gather around yourself like-minded men, start a forum or a club of mutual admiration, and live happily ever after.

*

There are many ways to prove that you are a better man or, for that matter, that you are right, perhaps even infallible, and going down into the gutter is not one of them. This may be elementary to Dr. Watson but not to Jack S. Avanakian.

*

If a writer were to think like everyone else, of what possible use could he be to anyone? – unless of course you say that the best writer is a useless writer, perhaps even a dead writer.

*

If every dissenting voice in our environment had been silenced, the history of our literature would be the shortest book in the world.

*

I never argue with someone who has all the answers or speaks in the name of God, because to disagree with him would be like disagreeing with God.

*

On the day you begin to think for yourself, you may be astonished to discover that some received ideas are no better than self-evident lies.

*

Jean-Francois Kahn: “What we are witnessing today may best be described as reverse Bolshevism. Instead of the USSR we have the USA. Instead of anti-Sovietism we have anti-Americanism. And instead of struggle for socialism we have struggle for democracy.”

#

[ara baliozian]

Ara, years ago I read an essay writhen by Derenik Demirchyan, it was called ՈՎ Է ՀԱՅԸ or ՀԱՅԸ, do you happend to have this article? it was published years ago in NOR KYANQ or one of the papers here in LA,

 

Thanks

i have translated parts of it and included in my DICTIONARY OF ARMENIAN QUOTATIONS but i cannot locate the article itself. sorry. / ara

[ara baliozian]

Friday, August 20, 2004

******************************

HISTORIOCENTRISM.

VERSIONS OF THE PAST.

THE CASE OF ARNOLD J. TOYNBEE.

THE WHOLE TRUTH OR A FRACTION OF IT?

****************************************************

A friend recently observed that Armenians are historiocentric. I suspect what he meant is that we are massacrocentric, or obsessed with the Genocide, or perhaps even that, we operate on the assumption that, since the past is one, our version of it is the only valid one and all other versions should be dismissed as lies, distortions and propaganda based on the testimony of hostile or perjurious witnesses.

*

It goes without saying that, as an Armenian, I trust Armenian historians more than I trust Turkish historians. The trouble is, Turks too trust their own historians more than ours; and also, very much like us, they too operate on the assumption that their own version of the past is the only valid one. It follows that, our Genocide must be a figment of our collective imagination.

*

The problem we face is not a new one. There are and have always been as many histories as there are historians with their own unique perspectives, memories, ideologies, vested interest, religions, and set of prejudices and blind spots. Consider the recent invasion of Iraq, which ought to be, by all accounts, an open book. Don’t even try to reconcile the Muslim with the American position, or, for that matter, the pro-Bush with the anti-Bush position.

*

History may also be divided between that of victors and that of their victims, such as the native-American or Indian version of American history, and history as taught in American educational institutions.

*

To complicate our own case even more, there are Turkish historians critical of Turkish conduct, as there are Armenian historians whose understanding and interpretation of the Genocide is such that they have been accused by their peers of revisionism and treason.

*

Even more confusing is the case of the eminent British historian Arnold J. Toynbee, who after writing several books on Turkish brutality and their Armenian victims, wrote several more books in which he said Armenian territorial claims at the turn of the last century (claims that had provoked Turkish reprisals) had been unjustified and unreasonable.

*

Will there ever come a time when historians of all nations and persuasions will develop a consensus? Don’t hold your breath. In the meantime it is safe to assume that (one) by emphasizing some aspects of the past and ignoring or covering up others, all historians give us only a partial or distorted view of the past, (two) only God is in a position to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and (three) mortal man is destined to know only part of the truth -- which, by the way, happens to be one definition of propaganda (“part of the truth”).

*

In case you think I am trying to whitewash Turkish crimes against humanity and to question the reality of our Genocide, let me emphasize that even pro-Turkish historians like Toynbee and Bernard Lewis have at no time denied the Genocide. What they tried to do is to explain (which does not mean to justify) why certain things happened and why men behave as they do.

[ara baliozian]

Saturday, August 21, 2004

*******************************

ON BEING FALLIBLE.

OTTOMAN TACTICS.

ON REPETITION.

AN ARMENIAN MISCONCEPTION.

**************************************

To be fallible means to think "I could be wrong," even when you are sure to be right. Remember, some of the most catastrophic blunders in the history of mankind were made by individuals who were so sure they were right that they were willing to risk the lives of millions of innocent women and children.

*

It is not at all unusual to come across an Armenian today who pretends to be 100% right on the assumption that his fellow Armenians are too backward, ignorant, or impressionable to dare to question his authority; and they are the very same Armenians who become abusive whenever they confront a fellow Armenian who is neither timid nor impressionable enough to be bullied into silence. Zarian was absolutely right when he said some Armenian do with their tongues what the Turks did with their yataghans.

*

To those who say I repeat myself, I say: You may ignore my words, but can you ignore our blunders? - especially when they are repeated.

*

In writing, whenever you try to please everyone, you please no one; and even when you try to please one person, you succeed only in poisoning your well.

*

A typical Armenian misconception: Free speech is a fundamental human right that applies only to those who agree with us or are willing to recycle our propaganda line.

*

To think that, just because you understand an idea, you can also explain reality, is like thinking you can guess another's thoughts by observing the outline of his shadow.

[ara baliozian]

With the exception of Turkey where Kurdish music was banned.

Wagner's music is also banned in israel -- but these are temporary aberrations...and wagner was a notorious anti-semite and hitler's favorite composer...but not all jews are anti-wagnerites...as i assume, not all turks consider kurdish music as enemy music...as for armenians: not only they don't view turkish music as enemy music, but they love it; some armenians even think turkish music is armenian music or the only good music worth listening....

[Sasun]

some armenians even think turkish music is armenian music or the only good music worth listening....

Yes indeed. I was surprised and a little upset when I attended an Armenian kef at an Armenian church to learn that the music they played was some kind of a Turkish/Arabic mix. The folks were proudly dancing under that tune and thinking that the music and their dance were Armenian. I mentioned to some of the youth that it I was unable to find anything Armenian in that. They didn't not like it and told me something like I as an Eastern Armenian have Russian influence that's why I could not understand the 'true' Armenian music

[Anoushik]

...and wagner was a notorious anti-semite

Actually, current studies show that Wagner just didn't like anyone.

[gamavor]

To Mr. Ara Baliozian!

 

If you call one individual an Idiot is a crime, if you call the whole nation Idiot, is a privilege of a self-proclaimed intellectual.

Edited August 21, 2004 by gamavor

[ara baliozian]

Sunday, August 22, 2004

******************************

IN PRAISE OF SKEPTICISM.

**********************************

If you doubt and question everything I write, I say, you are indeed on the right path and you have understood the moral of my story, which is: Question everything you are told, not only by Turks but also by everyone else, including fellow Armenians.

*

None of us lives in a vacuum. We all have an ax to grind. The ax may be well hidden, but it’s there all the same: look for it hard enough and you will find it.

*

My own ax to grind is against those who dished out all kinds of half-truths and lies to me when I was a child and had not yet acquired the ability to think for myself. Case in point: For many years I was led to believe Armenia had been a Christian island in a Muslim sea, until someone pointed out the obvious fact that Georgia to our north had been a Christian nation too, which made of us not an island but a peninsula.

*

For many years I was also led to believe our revolutionaries had been heroes and the Ottoman Bank takeover at the turn of the last century had been a brilliant exploit worthy of universal admiration, until someone raised the obvious question: “Was it worth 5000 innocent lives?” What kind of heroes make a separate deal with the enemy, secure free passage abroad for themselves, and abandon their defenseless people at the mercy of an enraged and vindictive tyranny not widely known for its compassionate and fair treatment of its subjects?

*

History, it has been said, is the propaganda of the victor. What if our version of history is nothing but the consolation of the loser?

*

I was taught to believe ignoring the lessons of history means repeating past blunders. Isn’t that what we do whenever we divide and subdivide ourselves, or whenever we fail to question the competence and integrity of those who pretend to know better, and based on that false assumption, proceed to draw the line of our destiny?

*

If our revolutionaries had learned to question and doubt the verbal support of the Great Powers, would they have behaved as they did? What if our central problem is neither being an island nor having bloodthirsty barbarians as neighbors, but being naïve dupes of charlatans who promise heaven and deliver hell?

#

[ara baliozian]

Monday, August 23, 2004

******************************

THE NORMAL AND THE ABNORMAL.

THE ABNORMAL AS A THREAT TO THE NORMAL.

THE LYNCH-MOB INSTINCT.

WHAT IS GENOCIDE?

BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG.

****************************************************

If you are honest, all the crooks will conspire against you. Likewise, if you speak the truth, liars will retaliate because they will feel exposed and threatened.

*

At all times and everywhere the majority takes it upon itself to set the rules of conduct and to view dissent or divergence as a threat. The majority may tolerate the existence of a minority so long as the minority adopts a subservient role. But in times of crisis, when the majority feels threatened, minorities will be suppressed, persecuted, and sometimes even eliminated.

*

The lynch-mob or gang-rape instinct is not peculiar to a single race, color, or creed; it is a universal phenomenon.

*

Genocide has nothing to do with number of victims. Killing even a single person on grounds that he belongs to a different race, religion, or ethnic group is genocide.

*

In my efforts to raise consciousness, sometimes it seems, I lower it. That may be because, after centuries of conditioning, some of my readers don’t know whether they are rising or falling. It is as though their sense of gravity had been permanently damaged beyond repair.

*

In everything I write I describe the evolution of a damaged consciousness from subservience to liberation. But where subservience is a millennial condition, it becomes second nature and liberation is seen as a deviation, perhaps even an aberration.

*

It has been observed that when the blind acquire vision, they take refuge in dark rooms.

*

Some of my partisan friends are shocked when I tell them the greatest statesman in the world is not qualified to tell even the worst scribbler in the world what to feel, think, and write.

*

In the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we read: “Every individual is equal before the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination.”

*

It may be safer to assume you are always wrong with extenuating circumstances if only because the alternative – that you are always right – is too absurd to merit serious consideration.

#

[ara baliozian]

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

*******************************

REPLIES TO MY CRITICS

*********************************

To those of my readers who at one time or another have questioned my qualifications as a writer, or, for that matter, as a concerned citizen (which is how I prefer to identify myself), I say: If you speak as a commissar of culture and your secret god is Stalin, you live at the wrong time and in the wrong place, and I have every reason to suspect, before things get better for you, they will get worse. Prepare yourself for a minimum of seven more lean years.

*

I define a dupe anyone who is taken in by propaganda; and because I have criticized dupes, regardless of national origin, I am described as an Armenian-hater by our dupes, who it seems, are so hungry for love that they can’t stand anyone who fails to flatter their ego. To them I say: You are not the only game in town, my friends. Unlike you, there are many others who have mastered the ability to think for themselves. I will go further and say that, the overwhelming majority of Armenians (especially the assimilated and alienated) are not dupes. I count among my friends members of the Party who reject the Party’s propaganda line. The only reason they continue to be members is that they come from a long line of partisans and membership in the Party has become a family tradition. Their loyalty is motivated more by nostalgia than ideological commitment.

*

Criticism in defense of a propaganda line is not criticism but cretinism.

*

To those of my critics who write under a false identity, I ask: Does anonymity make you behave in a more responsible or irresponsible manner? If irresponsible, don’t you think there is more merit in being responsible? And if everyone were to behave irresponsibly, would we be better off or worse off?

*

A final question: How honest are political leaders in whose version of the past they have done nothing wrong, they are blameless and beyond criticism, and all their utterances must be treated as if they emanated from the Vatican?

#

[ara baliozian]

Wednesday, August 25, 2004

********************************

If all human utterances have a margin of error, dogmatic assertions can't be right.

*

On the subject of our genocide, when I attempted to explain the Turkish side of the story, an outraged reader countered: "Some stories have only one side!" thus echoing a sentiment first expressed by Albert Camus (who was himself, be it noted, in the eye of several controversial firestorms). But isn't that what the Turks are saying too? - that their side of the story is the only true one and all others must be lies? Is it not inconsistent of us to repeat a line or to adopt a mindset of people whom we consider bloodthirsty savages?

*

No one's version of the story is Holy Scripture. And even if it were, not all of us are fundamentalists.

*

There is an entire library of writings (poetry, prose, criticism, fiction, drama, epic poem, moral treatise, dialogue, etc.) that consists in telling "the devil's side of the story." Three literary masterpieces that come readily to mind: Milton's PARADISE LOST, Goethe's FAUST, and more recently, Thomas Mann's DOKTOR FAUSTUS.

*

Speaking of Thomas Mann: during World War II he published an essay on Hitler (who had tried to assassinate him) titled "A Brother."

*

I doubt if there will ever come a time when Armenians will develop Mann's degree of detachment and call Turks their brothers, but consider some of the arguments in its favor: For six centuries we were their most loyal millet (ethnic group), and since intermarriage was a common practice, it is not at all unreasonable to suggest that a good fraction of Turks today, perhaps even half of them, may well be our half-brothers.

*

If this is bad news to some of my readers, blame historic reality, blame facts, blame statistics, blame even God (as some of our poets have done) but do not kill the messenger, because if you do, you may run the risk of being a Turk's brother not only in thought but also in deed.

*

Even an august institution like the Catholic Church finds the concept of the devil's advocate useful. If we are to the right of the Vatican, can we be too far off the left of Genghis Khan? That may be a comfortable position for some, but not for others, among them myself.

#

[ara baliozian]

Thursday, August 26, 2004

*****************************

THE ART OF DIPLOMACY.

ON ARMENO-TURKISH RELATIONS.

THE RIGHT AND THE WRONG WAY.

A MODEST PROPOSAL.

A CRIME AND A TRAGEDY.

LOGIC AND EMOTIONS.

*********************************************

One of the first things Raffi Hovannisian did when he went to Turkey as a minister of foreign affairs was to say to the Turks: “You must recognized the Genocide.” The Turks responded by saying: “This man hates us and we cannot deal with a man who hates us.”

*

One way to define diplomacy is to say that it consists in dealing with the adversary in such a manner as to make him see your side of the story in order to consider its merits. Obviously, so far and after nearly a century of trying, we have failed in that endeavor. We must therefore be more versatile and less stiff-necked and dogmatic in our approach.

*

Before they are condemned, Turks want to be understood because they know instinctively that to be hated precludes understanding, or for that matter, objectivity, fair play and justice.

*

The need to be understood is universal. But we can’t understand someone we hate. The alternative is not to love him (only saints can love their enemies) but to try to understand him on his own terms, if understanding him on our own terms means hating him.

*

Henceforth, we should concentrate our efforts on humanizing the Turks as opposed to dehumanizing them, if only because we cannot make any moral demands on a dehumanized entity.

*

If a wolf kills a sheep, is he guilty of murder? In a way, when we reduce Turks to the level of bloodthirsty beasts, we also enter a plea of not guilty on their behalf -- a plea similar to that of insanity. Because if they are no better than animals, they cannot be held responsible for their actions. It is therefore to our advantage not to dehumanize but to humanize them. In other words, to think of them as we think of all other nations that have at one time or another committed genocide and other unspeakable crimes against humanity – that includes Germans and Americans.

*

Our genocide is not just a crime against humanity but also a tragedy, and tragedy, as defined by the Greeks, consists in the downfall or destruction of a being who, as a result of a weakness (as pride, envy, etc.) breaks a divine law or moral precept that leads to terror and catastrophe.

*

I don’t always agree with what I write, but if logic dictates, I follow, hoping in the near or distant future my emotions will catch up.

#

[THOTH]

Ara - I like this last post of yours. Have you posted it in Armenian Club forum yet? I think it is relevant to a discussion going on over there.

 

Oh & BTW - have you voted in my (obscenity) poll yet? (yes I am not beyond campaigning [ie begging] to win my point...)

[Nakharar]

That's one of the most meaningful posts I have read so far in this forum. Our hate will only dehumanize ourselves, if it didn't already. Not only is it self-destructive, the effects of this can be seen all around us, but bloodletting by our own hands.

[ara baliozian]

Friday, August 27, 2004

*****************************

AN ENIGMA & A BUNDLE OF CONTRADICTIONS.

THE BEST AND THE WORST.

THEM AND US.

ABDICATION OF RESPONSIBILITY.

******************************************************

Writers who have analyzed the Armenian temperament agree that an Armenian is an enigma and a bundle of contradictions. Writes Derenik Demirjian: “An Armenian curses God and the Church constantly. But behold the magnificent cathedrals he has built!” And Neshan Beshigtashlian: “Even the Good Lord could not make up his mind what to make of the Armenian. First He made him an angel, then He turned him into a devil, after which He changed His mind again.” His conclusion: “The Armenian is an enigma that refuses to be solved.”

*

But then, one could say (with Freud and Jung) that all men are to some degree, bundles of contradictions and enigmas even to themselves. Our situation or the Armenian enigma, if you wish, is an integral part of the human condition. Hence the spectacle of the worst parading as the best.

*

Some cases in point from the last century: Fascists in Italy, Germany and Spain; Stalinists in the USSR, and before them, Southern racists in the U.S. before the Civil War, all of whom pretended to be la crème de la crème, but were in fact la crème de la scum.

*

There is however a significant difference between them and us. Whereas racists, fascists and Stalinists have been exposed, and militarily defeated or politically consigned to the dustbin of history, ours continue to be in charge of our destiny. If that’s progress, it’s more like the progress of a terminal disease.

*

As for those who say it will take at least two generations for things to improve in Armenia, it seems to me, they lack the common sense and decency to see that, by adopting and promoting a passive stance, they are not only abdicating their responsibility as citizens but also legitimizing criminal conduct by supporting a corrupt and incompetent crypto-fascist and racist power structure in both the Homeland and the Diaspora.

#

[ara baliozian]

Ara - I like this last post of yours. Have you posted it in Armenian Club forum yet? I think it is relevant to a discussion going on over there.

 

Oh & BTW - have you voted in my (obscenity) poll yet? (yes I am not beyond campaigning [ie begging] to win my point...)

obscenity poll?

please explain.

where? / ara

[ara baliozian]

Saturday, August 28, 2004

********************************

THE TURKS AND US.

THE ARMENIAN WAY AND THE RIGHT WAY.

TURKS AS UNDERDOGS AND VICTIMS.

THE SULTAN'S COMPLAINT.

******************************************************

May I confess that when it comes to Turks and us, more often than not I agree with my critics on an emotional level. But I also know that in diplomacy, politics, and life in general, it is preferable for emotion to be subservient to reason. There is an old saying that I heard again and again as a child: "Why stand up in anger if you are going to sit down the loser?" Isn't that what we did? We rose in anger and most of us didn't even have a chance to sit down.

*

With the slogan, "We have no enemies, only interests," the British built an empire. Consider our status as perennial losers, underdogs and victims to theirs….

*

And since we have been stressing our status as perennial losers, underdogs and victims by constantly reminding ourselves and the world of the massacres, the cynical manipulation of the Great Powers, and the bloodthirsty conduct of the Turks, it never even occurs to us to think of Turks as underdogs and victims. And yet, that's exactly how they saw themselves - and victims not just of a single ruthless adversary but victims of the whole world, beginning with the Russian colossus to the North, the Great Powers to the West, the United States and Australia from across the oceans, and from within their own borders, Arabs, Greeks, Kurds, and Armenians.

*

Listen to the Sultan: "By taking Greece and Romania, the Great Powers cut off the feet of the Turkish state. By taking Bulgaria, Serbia and Egypt they cut off our hands. Now, by stirring up trouble among the Armenians they are getting close to our vital organs and want to cut out our intestines. This is the beginning of mass destruction."

*

With a disintegrating empire and surrounded by enemies on all sides like vultures ready to feast on its carcass, the Turks made the mistake of allowing their emotions to dictate their actions. They were told repeatedly by foreign diplomats and observers that not all Armenians were their enemies, but as a victimized minority, they did what felt right, not what reason told them to be right.

*

It is only very recently that I read that in a single battle at Gallipoli, the Turks had lost 350,000 men to the Allies. But I still don't know the total number of Turkish dead during World War I. I wonder, does any Armenian? Or is it: "The only good Turk is a dead Turk"? Why should we be surprised if the Turks adopted that slogan too? "The only good Armenian is a dead Armenian."

#

[gurgen]

Wagner's music is also banned in israel

They don't know what they're missing.

 

I bet they listen to Richard Strauss though.