Dissatisfaction with the incumbent authorities in 2018 triggered public’s willingness to change. Vote buying (by the way, a large number of people were engaged in it), oligarchs, anti-aesthetic figures periodically found in the parliament, corruption and many other vicious things led to perversion of the political field, and naturally no one was to blame for the willingness to changes. Whatever happened, was supposed to happen one day. However, the main problem that brought us to this disastrous situation was related to the concepts the protesters suggested and the mission they undertook.

The few theses that were articulated in the square had destructive, rather than constructive energy. It is not by accident that the main slogan was "rejection" of everything. But not everything that was rejected was replaced with creation of a new, better one.

Thus, the theses of the "revolution" were

a) "Let us reject Old Armenia and build New Armenia."
b) "The old generation is corrupt, and an "undamaged "new generation must come to power."
c) "Let us reject corrupt Russia and the EEU and join the civilized world."

It was clear that whatever was rejected was to the liking of many, the thirst for change was so great, which was used by the protesters who declared themselves revolutionary. But what did they offer in return? In fact, they dismantled the old working mechanism, for better or worse, and did not offer anything new to replace it.

Now let us try to consider those slogans separately.

1. The developed countries rely on their national traditions, naturally, by improving them. For instance, Britain is one of the most conservative and, at the same time, advanced countries. The British are proud of the strength of their law enforcement system, the oldness of their universities and colleges, the values ​​created by the previous generations. The older the university, the more prestigious it is,
   the older the house, the higher its price is, and they hang the portraits of the previous generations in their houses. There can be no New Britain without relying on the Old Britain. The same is true about China, Japan, USA, France. Both the European and the Eastern countries, which are able to develop and prosper, do not deny their past, but combine it with new tendencies and develop. No country that renounces its past, traditions, fathers has been able to modernize, but we have witnessed the opposite: it was, for example, Cambodia at the time. The slogan "Old Armenia-New Armenia" could not have lead to any good results.
2. The false thesis of Old Armenia-New Armenia was developed on the shores far from Armenia in order to divide us and deny the previous generations. They might have been psychologically preparing for defeat by appointing culprits in advance.
3. "New generation-old generation." No new generation can appear from heaven, having virtues and skills. Every new generation takes the best from the old, adds its new and passes it on to the next ones. In the 20th century, there were also tendencies of self-denial culture in Europe: nihilism, decadence, hippie and punk movements. They rejected the culture and way of life of their fathers, but none of them became the ruling ideology. But such a thing happened in Armenia. Looking at the "new generation" of today's National Assembly and Government, this simple truth becomes obvious: they are the embodiment of ignorance, unprofessionalism, unprincipledness, willlessness.

Countries can adopt different ideologies, but they cannot escape their geopolitical reality. In international politics, it is interests that prevail, not ideologies and the value system. In particular, Armenia has good relations with Islamic Iran, the United States with Wahhabi Saudi Arabia, Britain with totalitarian Azerbaijan, and so on. There are many such examples. Pashinyan was trying to make a flag of the "Armenian revolution" and "sell" it to the West for support. We saw that it did not happen, even during the war between "democratic" Armenia and "totalitarian" Azerbaijan. The important thing is the interests, which are very definite and objective, in contrast to those values.

Ignorance of politics and geopolitical rules led us to defeat not only in the Artsakh war, but also in the economy, the improvement of state institutions and many other spheres.

Let's hope that the next government of Armenia will pursue a more realistic and pragmatic policy.