A Dream: Nicholas Alahverdian

Nicholas Alahverdian’s Dream

Jim Hickok and I sat in a dark diner in a lodge during a light snow, silently staring into our coffee and mulling over the recent midterm election. As Jim wasn’t from the Ocean State, I had to give him the lowdown on the ways of Rogue’s Island. In the smallest state, you had schemers and cleaners, aging old school dons and Italian grandmothers who still didn’t speak English. You had the different hills of the capital city, straight out of central casting, each with its distinct power structure — with some based in legitimate interests and others in so-called crime.

For two decades with a brief interruption, this capital city of this state called Rogue — the Island of Rogue — had an inspirational Mayor. Some say he was Jekyll, some say he was Hyde, but at one point or another, aren’t we all a little bit of both?

Nicholas Alahverdian
Nicholas Alahverdian’s dream

Jim worked as a stagecoach driver and had met some colorful characters out there on the high prairie and the frozen tundra. He was well known throughout the west as a gambler and actor. He had seen it all. Jim had many stories to tell and met people I could only dream of meeting. He had lived in places far and wide, and if there ever was a thing Jim Hickok knew how to do well, it was to put his finger on the pulse of a town and see what made its gears turn.

Jim sat back and stared at me with his icy eyes. “Back where I’m from we have a saying embossed on a plaque that we give to every incoming elected official, no matter their office,” he said. “It goes something like this. Oh, let me write it down… you’ll need it some day, Nicholas.”

Jim grabbed a napkin and pulled a fountain pen from his leather waistcoat, which seemed to have a pocket for something needed for any profession. This was *the* Jim Hickok after all.

He handed me the most luxuriously crisp parchment upon which he wrote:

“Leader of the people, come with humble heart, know there are few that can play your part. When you are faced with worry or woe, ensure you do right for friend or foe. Will you serve your fellow man? Remember the code taught since time began.”

After the passage, on that crisp beautiful parchment, old Jim Hickok wrote “To Nicholas Alahverdian, survivor of the Island of Rogue. May the eyes of God weep on that land until the corrupt scions and political lions are flooded out.”

“Island of Rogue,” I said. “Quite fitting.”

Nicholas Alahverdian Tortured by Rhode Island Government
Nicholas Alahverdian

Island of Rogue

“Son, don’t you even know your own history?” Jim asked, sounding slightly annoyed. “I’d hate to go back West and tell them about the fabled Nicholas Alahverdian, that old survivor, the one they called the storm, who everyone thought fought so hard yet had so little faith in himself, was yearning to learn but applying it to nothing, working for something but forgetting why he started fighting like a one-armed boxer in the first place.”

I stared into the black abyss of the coffee, trying to focus myself into oblivion. Here was old Jim Hickok, the legend. The lore surrounding this man haunted me for decades. Now he was insulting my performance. I didn’t even know anyone bought a ticket, let alone someone was watching the performance that was my broken, shattered life.

Hickok stood up from his chair, his heavy leather boots stomping on the creaky wooden floor and shaking the trinkets on the walls of the lodge.

Nicholas Alahverdian, Buddy Cianci, Vincent Cianci, Vincent A. Cianci Jr., Providence
Vincent A. “Buddy” Cianci, Jr., host of WPRO’s The Buddy Cianci Show and former longtime Mayor of Providence, R.I.

He grabbed me by the lapels and shouted, “Besides the tigers that crouch and wait for your blood, why were you brought here? You’ve walked with great men, they’ve led you with the scepter and the pen. You betray the promise you made the day you left home. The promise you were meant to keep under every spire, roof, and dome.”

I felt sick and queasy and he tossed me about. Old Jim could easily fry me as he would a freshly caught trout.

Haunted by the past and fearful of the future

I stuttered and staggered, falling about like a bleeding hound. “Under the dome of which you speak on a hill called Smith, I shined a light on a war that people called a myth. The forests know, as do the mountains; nature is my silent witness that the blood spouted from my head like a million fountains. I was nearly killed, just another body for the counting. And then one winter night, a villianous trollop made everything worse, and forevermore they’ve left me with this curse.”

Hickok just stared at my discourse as if it floated in the air, something tangible, nearly palpable. His burly fists still clutched my lapels, like pearls clinging to shells.

Jim Hickok paused and released his grasp. “Nicholas Alahverdian, don’t you know why you survived so many blows? The curse of which you speak was a ticket to a life — without it, your existence would be terse. You were taught to travel, ramble, and roam, and never again will you be alone. You survived a treacherous scheme masquerading as a church, they bedeviled you from their lowly perch. As the wind came and went and blew you away, you survived yet another day. Do you remember your days in the Ivory Tower, your moments of enlightenment blooming like a flower? No more did you need a motley unattractive throng, no more did you require to sing the warrior’s song. You fought power and you demanded penance from a corrupt king, you made everything new — your life, once again, is in its morning.”

Nicholas Alahverdian, Willow
© 2009-2018 Nicholas Alahverdian. All rights reserved

The Renaissance is a lie

Two men appeared, dressed in black. They held newspapers with headlines. Electoral victories for Nicholas Mattiello and Gina Raimondo. Rogue’s Island remains true to its name. Hickok grabbed the paper from his bodyguard and walked slowly back towards me. “You don’t want to be on this sinking ship,” he said, “that you can see through the nearly blinding brine. You would speak the truth and once again be treated like swine.”

I put on my Stetson and moved for the door. “Old Jim,” I said, “My thanks comes from my heart, indeed, it comes from its core.” I turned around and closed my eyes, the frost on my face felt like a welcome prize.

”Alahverdian!” he shouted, before I left. “Don’t ever think you’re ever bereft. Your fighting days are over, step away from the deaf and blind. Go forward with wisdom, and use your mind. Those rogues, Nick and Gina, this is their day, but know now and forever, they have a price to pay. Just like those past who ruled from under that dome, their corruption and treachery will soon be known. But don’t waste your time, it’s no longer your war, you’ve made your mark and it has been felt at the core.”

I looked down, my brow caked with sweat. I forgot about the Mayor, which I began to regret. “Old Jim,” I said, “One more thing. The Mayor brought more than anyone else could bring. To this Island of Rogues, he gave a city called Renaissance, his place in history firmly ensconced. To suffer and be exiled from my glorious city, doesn’t it cause you to have any pity?”

Nicholas Alahverdian, Rhode Island, Rotunda
Nicholas Alahverdian

“Nicholas,” he said, “in Renaissance, your skies were eerily overcast, and don’t you recall, the fiery blast? It’s not your home, you don’t belong, they tortured and beat you, and sung you death’s song. I can bring you back. I can let you see. But do you really want to engage in such stupidity?”

I shuffled my boots and emptied my brain. I thought of the strife, I thought of the pain. It was Jim, who reminded me of this toil, and at that second my blood started to boil.

“Old Jim,” I said, “It seems you’re right. There’s no point in returning to a land without light. They drained the sea when they exiled me, the first time, the second — there won’t be three.”

NIcholas Alahverdian in WPRI Providence Eyewitness News clip, leaving the State House
Nicholas Alahverdian in a Providence Eyewitness News clip, leaving the State House

Exit

Old Jim stood solid at the brass back door. He straightened his tie and tapped his cane on the floor. “Alahverdian,” said he, “you’ve finally made the best choice. There are causes and efforts more worthy of your voice.”

I turned around, and faced the cold. I knew in my heart the decision was bold. Chopping down the tree of knowledge, I thought of their hate. I then knew that this was my fate. I worked and toiled and made a pirogue, to sail forever away from the Island of Rogue.

Advertisement

Nicholas Alahverdian, Author of “Dreading and Hoping All”, offers commentary on the 2018 Election

RI State House, Nicholas Alahverdian

According to Nicholas Alahverdian, Rhode Island is embroiled in an important race for governor this election cycle. They really have only two choices: Republican Allan Fung and Democrat Gina Raimondo. Joe Trillo could very well be a Raimondo plant. He seems to have a personal vendetta against Allan Fung that transcends this election.

The failures of Gina Raimondo

Gina Raimondo has had an awful run over the past 3 and a half years. She is responsible for the disaster at the Department of Children, Youth and Families. There is now an active federal investigation and audit against the DCYF — again. She is responsible for the Unified Healthcare Infrastructure Project (UHIP) disaster. “UHIP has now cost the state $660,000,000.00 due to the failures of Deloitte, the company brought in to build the IT behemoth,” said Rhode Island political expert and Harvard scholar Nicholas Alahverdian.

Under Gina Raimondo’s tenure, we have seen a 1,450% increase in child deaths or near deaths for children in DCYF care. This is unconscionable. We have also seen Gina hire away a Providence Journal reporter, Jennifer Bogdan, to work in the Governor’s press office. This is the one of the worst examples of political thievery I have seen in my 17 years in Rhode Island state politics. The governor hired away a reporter to stop reporting on the state-sanctioned tortured and killing of children. Think about that.

Gina Raimondo has brought the state to its knees. Nicholas Mattiello, Speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives, makes things even worse. They both fail Rhode Islanders because of the UHIP fiasco, the DCYF deaths, the loss of the Pawtucket Red Sox, the distorted data in the state’s online transparency portal, and too many other errors to name.

Nicholas Alahverdian, Allan Fung

The success of Mayor Allan Fung

Allan Fung, in contrast, presides over one of the top 50 cities in America. He is an honest, sincere mayor of the second largest city in Rhode Island. Fung listens to his constituents and hears what they have to say. “Simply put,” said Nicholas Alahverdian, “Fung will do the same thing in the Governor’s office. He will listen, weigh the options, and decide the best course of action.”

With Gina Raimondo, we have seen inaction. We have seen policymaker after policymaker in her wretched and poorly-run departments depart in shame. We have seen unqualified and uncertified individuals performing tasks costing Rhode Island millions  — like law — when they do not have the necessary qualifications to do so. Gina is in this for herself and her future political career. Raimondo does not have the best interests of Rhode Islanders in her heart.

“Gina Raimondo is a wealthy East Side limousine liberal,” opined Nicholas Alahverdian.  “She is cut from the same cloth as those who speak endlessly about “working families” and supporting the average Rhode Islander. At the end of the day though, her security detail drives her back to her lush East Side home where she can live her life in peace and prosperity with her family while Rhode Islanders suffer and kids in DCYF care are tortured and killed.”

“Apparently caring about working Rhode Islanders only lasts until 5pm on a weekday.”

Allan Fung will be the antithesis of Gina Raimondo. Dare I say he will be the anti-Gina Raimondo. He will bring back jobs, he will lower taxes, and he will protect kids in DCYF care. There is no question in this election — Gina Raimondo is inherently unfit to be governor due to the numerous disasters we’ve seen in four short years.

“Rhode Islanders can be guaranteed that if Allan Fung is elected, from 2019 on we will see a Rhode Island with more possibilities,” said Nicholas Alahverdian. We will see an air of optimism and not despair. Allan will do his best to bring the spirit of dynamism back to the Ocean State — something we’ve sadly been long without.

Nicholas Alahverdian, Gina Raimondo, Nick Mattiello

Not the Ol’ Boys Club anymore — Gina leads the “Troll Girls Club”

Gina Raimondo presides over a state in which the gears grind on political deals and an ol’ boys club culture. That has now turned into a troll girls club. “I use the term ‘troll girls club’ not as a mark of disrespect, but because Gina is trolling Allan Fung. She refuses to debate him one-on-one without the distraction of Joe Trillo, the candidate without a chance. She is blasé at his suggestions for leadership tactics that will work. And she dismisses his common sense solutions to fix state departments,” said Nicholas Alahverdian.

Nicholas Alahverdian

Rhode Island will thrive with Governor Fung

Rhode Island is lost in the woods. Gina Raimondo will continue to lead broken departments where kids are killed, DMV lines go out the door, and unqualified professionals make executive decisions.

“I am confident that inept lifetime bureaucrats like Mike Burk and Kevin Aucoin will finally be shown the door at DCYF, ending their reign of terror once and for all,” said Nicholas Alahverdian. “Allan Fung will audit and analyze each and every facet of DCYF to ensure that the agency is the epitome of what a child welfare system should be from when he is elected and into the future.”

Allan Fung will provide real leadership from day one. He is a hands-on mayor and he will be a hands-on Governor. He will repair the Ocean State and give it what it needs — a boost in its economy and its self-esteem. With Allan at the helm, kids will be safer, jobs will increase, and more money will flow into the state than ever. He will be Rhode Island’s champion — and relentlessly fight for our families and children.

Allan will fight for you.


Nicholas Alahverdian is a Harvard-educated scholar and political activist. As an adolescent, Nicholas survived torture and abuse inflicted upon him by the Rhode Island government under the direct orders of a chief judge and a governor following his political activism against them while Alahverdian was an employee of the Rhode Island House of Representatives.

Nicholas was sent to two facilities far from New England that had extensive records of torture, abuse, and negligence. He was forced to remain in these abusive facilities until his 18th birthday and was not allowed to contact anyone, go to school, or prepare for adulthood. Alahverdian survived the torture, sued his abusers, settled in court, and studied at Harvard University.

The primary scholarly focus of Nicholas Alahverdian is the intersection of philology, rhetoric, and politics. He has been featured in The Providence Journal, NPR, BBC, NBC, CBS, and ABC News as well as The Buddy Cianci Show, The Boston Globe and countless other media entities.

Can You Spare Some Change? The Moral Argument of the Beggar

By Nicholas Alahverdian

When a beggar asks a passerby for money, a litany of thoughts may congregate in one’s head. Indeed, it is up to the passerby to act in the right way, or in a way that tends to promote happiness, or in the wrong way, or in a way that promotes the antithesis of happiness. But whose happiness matters? To the passerby, it may be their own or it may be that of the beggar.

On the contrary, one could “reject all established morality while believing to be an objective truth that it was evil or corrupt”. At what point does the practice of freely giving money upon request with no effort on the part of the beggar become evil and/or corrupt? What does the beggar have to lose?

Through the lens of John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism, especially considering the existence of pleasure and the absence of pain, the foundation of morality would suggest that a passerby giving money to a beggar on the street is actually the right thing to do. Objectively, it may be the right thing to do and may cause a pleasurable and altruistic experience. But what of the approach which considers the moral framework that strives for pleasure and pain whilst eliminating the devastating impact of animalistic tendencies, specifically ridding one’s community of panhandling and squalor?

If a person uses his or her higher faculties, it is completely within reason to suggest that Mill would reject the idea that succumbing to the requests and/or demands of a panhandler is the right, moral, or ethical thing to do in every single case. Consider the circumstantial and/or prima facie evidence which may or may not be apparent upon being asked for money… Does the beggar have marks on his arm from injecting himself with heroin? Does his breath sting one’s face with the pungent scent of cheap alcohol? Does the beggar have any stated intention of what he or she will do with the money? All of these questions are essential and imperative when considering whether or not catering to the request of the beggar for a bit of money is actually catering to his higher faculties or his lower faculties.

So would Utilitarianism endorse the general act of panhandling? Perhaps, but not before considering the aforementioned. Now, looking through the concept of Cultural Relativism advocated by philosopher John Leslie Mackie, we are presented with the quandary that standpoints are equally privileged and no standpoint is uniquely privileged over any other. Mackie advocates the viewpoint that all moral claims are false since they assert characteristics that are “ontologically queer” cannot be perceived by normal empirical means.

The characteristics of goodness and altruism can indeed be attributed to the act of one giving his or her money to the beggar, but when viewed through the lens of the argument of cultural (or moral) relativism, the giver becomes trapped in a moral dilemma since there is no hierarchy of what should take precedence. The same with the beggar, who stands at a crossroads of ethics: is his financial dilemma, whether it be due to lack of work, a drug habit, or gambling, significant enough to jeopardize the happiness of others to the point of soliciting donations from unsuspecting passersby.
Thus, we arrive at a crossroads ourselves: how would Mill respond to the appeals of the beggar? And what about the notoriously blunt Mackie?

Mill, as an advocate for seeking for pleasurable experiences throughout one’s life by exercising a variance of faculties, both higher and lower, would adamantly advocate that there is no uniform approach to approaching a begging panhandler. One must contemplate the subject’s situation, demeanor, plea, and other characteristics; proceed to analyze the facts in accordance with the begging panhandler’s statements; and finally use his or her higher faculties to come to a complete and wise determination of how he or she will respond – all in a matter of seconds. “Can you spare some change?” never seemed so complicated.

Mackie, alternatively, would prefer a comparably self-serving result wherein the begging panhandler is ignored, or worse, interrogated. The dialogue that would ensue would be a microscopic analysis of the history of haggling as opposed to inventorying the needs of the begging panhandler since, again, the “ontologically queer” characteristics that seemingly advocate for moral righteousness (i.e. goodness, care, altruism, etc.) cannot be perceived by normal empirical needs.

Mackie’s argument depends upon the stance that no one situation is more important than any other. In fact, the argument would be so convoluted that he would walk away with an extreme sense of frustration that he was held up for far too long.
In conclusion, the best way to address the situation, or, rather, the ideal way to deal with the situation is to employ the analytic and rational foundation of establishing the needs of the person in question.

Mill allows for flexibility in one’s thinking in his Utilitarianism philosophical approach, whereas Mackie would exact a nihilistic blow to the panhandling beggar. Mackie’s approach does not go over so well ethically and morally because there is no grading system or analytical approach that would allow a passerby to shift the mirrors to see where the smoke was coming from.

Put another way, the passerby has literally seconds to establish the history, background, factual synopsis, and prima facie evidence that needs to be assessed in order to allow a solid moral framework to be established. At that point, it is unquestionably a more robust approach to figuring out whether or not giving a begging panhandler money is the right thing to do according to one’s higher faculties.

Mackie’s philosophical approach is rigid, invariable, and irrationally stringent. The ethical and moral approach to understanding the needs of a fellow human being are better suited by Mill’s intelligible and compassionate, yet practical, approach. It is only through this practical approach that a reasonable resolution can be reached.

Works Cited and Referenced
Rachels, James. The Right Thing to Do.
New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. Print.

Moral Relativism. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/moral-re/
Date Accessed: 24 August 2016.

www.nicholasalahverdian.com/

%d bloggers like this: