This is another phase of our lovely discussion with Anon 2. It began here and will go on forever.
Dear Anon 2,
Welcome back again. Let me go to the point straight away.
Whenever we talk of our shameful civil war, we must remember that it was not something rare in the world. On the contrary, discontents, wars and dramatic upheavals have been recognized as a linkage between two different phases of a nation’s development. You will not be thoroughly refined through the process of evolution without those upheavals. Perhaps, Europe would have never achieved political and social maturity without the French Revolution (1789-1799). Russia would have never risen to be a world superpower without getting involved in the World War II. Or as Emmanuel Todd, a French political thinker puts it in his “After the Empire”, “the 350-year-old English Revolution is a good example of the paradox of modernization. No one would deny the crucial role that England played in the political and economic development of Europe. It was also a country with high levels of literacy early on. But one of the first effects of the English move into modernity was an ideological crisis, expressed politically and religiously, that led to a civil war most Europeans would have a hard time understanding today.”
The Jewish French thinker who had predicted the fall of the Soviet Union in his “La Chute finale” (1976), believes that the way to modernity usually lies through fearsome upheavals and an explosion of ideological violence. If you remember, in the very famous English Revolution in 1649 King Charles I was decapitated. We are not here to argue about its level of morality or amorality. It is just the natural normal independent course of the history. Hence, there is no need to curb our socio-political activities just because 10 years ago we had a bloody fight. That fear will remain in our blood vessels, only if we do not succeed to realize the necessity to move on. The period of stagnation must be evolved to a period of brave prosperity-motivated movements. The very fact that you are speaking of ‘our trauma’ may lead you to the point that you’d resist the traumatic effects of the past and start looking to the future. I think there should be no embarrassment for the past as well as no extreme pride for it.
Moaning about our disadvantages ‘despite having brilliant individuals’ does not make the situation less frustrating. Whenever we look for an excuse, we are trying to mask our weakness. As I argued before, we don’t have to be ashamed to reveal all our weakness in its entirety. Before operating a heart a surgeon has to unhinge the breast to have a proper look at the heart which is causing a problem for the rest of the body.
I do not believe that “many of our failures are the result of our “99% of literate population”. Perhaps, overall literacy was one of few advantages we had had from the Soviet Empire. That means, the task of a social change could go on smoother; almost everyone would be able to grasp and absorb the purpose of the change. What is not working well in Tajikistan is inherited from the Soviet Empire too: mismanagement, lack of perspective, political vision and national self-determination.
Furthermore, dramatic increase of literacy at the beginning has got some negative side effects and that’s ‘the psychological disorientation of population.’ I suppose, that’s what we are experiencing right now.
By the way, English teachers would never teach my children how to die for their Motherland. That’s the task of their parents indeed.
I wish you all the best, dear Anon 2.