Davit Ananyan, the former chairman of the RA SRC, writes:
"The thesis about the dialectic of struggle "for" and "against" is present in the depths or origins of every political and social movement.
"It is necessary to fight for, not against," urge political scientists and analysts. However, is it not possible to effectively combine the two to achieve maximum results and minimize public shocks? In this regard, it is important to understand that being "for" or "against" are not mutually exclusive concepts, but rather complementary efforts to achieve progress.
Consider the struggle for the homeland. this is a great, unifying principled behavior that inspires people to heroism and self-sacrifice. People are ready to give their lives, strength, and dreams for the Motherland, embodying the bright image of the heroes of the past and present.
At the same time, this struggle implies rejection and active resistance to the enemy, internal or external. In this case, the enemy is identified with everything that poses a threat to the existence of the Motherland itself. Such an enemy is the embodiment of evil, destruction and hatred.
Therefore, the fight for the Motherland and the fight against the enemy are two sides of the same coin. For the sake of a bright future and the ideals of progress, there is also a need to fight against darkness and slavery. Bright examples of such a confrontation can be found in different parts of the world and in different historical eras.
People who have the passion and ambition to build a just society are ready to sacrifice themselves for a bright future, but at the same time they cannot forget that darkness and oppression seek to destroy their ideas and efforts.
Therefore, the daily struggle against that darkness and for the dreamed future requires not only energy, but also cold calculation, a sober look at enemies and obstacles. When it comes to the state, the context becomes even more complicated, because the struggle for national integrity and cultural identity conservation can take place in the context of the struggle against anti-national power.
Understanding this paradox requires a deep maturity of political thinking, because in such a situation, being "for" state interests predicts the desire to see one's own state strong and prosperous, but at the same time, being "against" a corrupt, anti-national and tyrannical government is an integral part of the same desire.
Thus, the essence of the struggle in the world of politics and social movements is not the choice of "for" and "against", but the balancing of these forces. Heroic self-sacrifice in the name of vivid ideals must be supported by pragmatically structured action against those who threaten those ideals. This is the only way to achieve the desired balance and ultimately win."
