Chapter I. How to make a career
Chapter II. Why is honesty a weakness
Chapter III. Senior fascist, Junior Communist
Chapter IV. The nomads all look the same
Chapter V. Junior socialists idealists
Chapter VI. The elite turns into big brothers
Chapter VII. Communist Telman
Chapter VIII. Remids statesmen
Chapter IX. There is no state
Chapter X. Levels of totalitarianism
Chapter XI. Ouroboros
Chapter XII. Without remids there is no totalitarianism
Chapter XIII. Legacy
Chapter XIV. Why did you like Marx in Russia
Chapter XV. Right Nazism, communism to the left
Chapter XVI. There was no fascism in France
Chapter XVII. Pitfall
Chapter XVIII. Three totalitarianisms
Chapter XIX. Reaction
Chapter XX. An honest name is important
Chapter XXI the Germans did not steal
Chapter XXII. What are we like
Chapter XXIII. People of their own way. Vivat Italy!
Chapter XXIV. This is a time of war.
Chapter XXV. Tradition. What’s the point?
Chapter XXVI. Where events will flow.
Chapter XXVII. The first world war was born like this.
Chapter XXVIII. Pyramid gives fascism
Chapter XXIX. When tradition is against the people.
Chapter XXX. Neither God, nor king, nor hero…
Chapter XXXI. If you look long into the abyss.
Chapter XXXII. An example of how the collective farmers destroyed the state.
Chapter XXXIII. Why do I like the laws of the rootless?
Chapter XXXIV. Why there is no democracy and cannot be.
Chapter XXXV. What a new fee.
Chapter XXXVI. The world war is on.
Chapter XXXVII. What to expect in 10 years.
Chapter XXXVIII. Socialization as a sign of communism.
Chapter XXXIX. Communism is there, but there is no war.
Chapter XL. Storming the sky.
Chapter XLI. Totalitarian trade.
Chapter XLII. Marx’s Car.
Chapter XLIII. Trotskyist Khrushchev
Chapter XLIV. Pregnant marches.
Chapter XLV. Why the zeref have become quiet
Chapter XLVI. As refags became the guru of humanity
Chapter XLVII. Covid -19 and zeremids loop
Chapter XLVIII. The national elite to save the dollar?
Chapter XLIX. Who came up Covid? The Information magnates
Chapter L. And reinsurance.
The leader of the Russian revolution, Trotsky, was asked in the last interview with the Western press: What will happen to the world if there is no world socialist revolution? Trotsky replied: If the world socialist revolution does not happen, will come the era of world fascism.
Of course, Trotsky was referring to the second totalitarian monster. Where the German zeremids, inspired by superiority, will manage the untermensch all over the world. Although Marxism sees under fascism the radical dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.
But we know that a market trader will not touch anyone, let alone put someone in a concentration camp. Here the question is one: who controls whom: the idea to the banker or the bankers to the idea. In the face of the German second monster all the same, the idea managed the bankers who sponsored Hitler, that is, the tradition managed the banks, and not vice versa bankers egoism. In the present embodiment, the bankers control all of humanity. And there is no ideological group other than patriots scattered around the world, from leftists to right-wing activists of the fascist type. The zerefs of the world can do nothing with their current ruling elite, which worships the dollar.
Why she worships, we have already said. It is better to buy than to fight. So sellers and then bankers gained power over the entire population. The corrupt elite of nation States have accumulated a lot of currency. Her personal interest prevails over that of the community. Because refags magic stronger hits rootless parvenu, for obvious reasons found themselves in the managerial elite of these States. Zerefs don’t like smart people. Nor did they love the noble ones. The zerefs destroyed their feudal elite when the first horseman of the Apocalypse blew his horn. There are examples in the world when the feudal elite even survived. But she was still under the magic of money, not her own dignity. Once you buy something in your life, it makes you powerless. The crowd, the people, the eternal appeal to the popular masses, the lower classes, who were the most powerless before a bunch of money. The world has lost its nobility. The world is being destroyed by hypocritical populism. There must be some divine purpose in this. Or absolutely not divine.
«And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters; And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter»
Bible (King James) /Revelation
There is neither communism nor fascism. These are all the conventions of dictate. Conditionality of the will of the ruling group led by the leaders. In fact, what is called communism and fascism is a traditional scheme. This is how the traditional family was built over the centuries. Worldwide. It was only in Germany and the USSR that the traditional family and its expression took place through the state. That is, in these peoples, kinship was higher than interest, the collective higher than individuals. Only one chief and his men remained. In fact, one father of the people and his sons. It may seem strange and surprising to someone, but the whole difference between communism and Nazism is actually a difference not only in the «age» of peoples. That they were later than others on the market path. The difference is also that Nazism is an indicator of market youth, and communism of market childhood and infancy. And if we take the state as a traditional family, then the Nazi in this family is the older brother, and the Communist is the younger brother. They both obeyed their father.
But today all Nations have lost their care. In plain sight, the great concern of the rulers is that the population does not get sick. But do the rulers really care about their people? Or they’re thinking of something else entirely. And under the guise of caring for the population, they try to save only personal money. Who manages them at all? And who do they really want to please with their concern for the population? To understand this, to see the face of the third monster, you must first carefully study the first two. It was in the womb of the first two monsters that the third monster grew. This monster is now in control of everything. Most importantly, submission to the third monster is completely voluntary. Only people are forced into some kind of isolation.
Throughout the 20th century, the most radical struggle was waged against tradition and the traditional family in particular. Only in the U.S.S.R. and in Germany did market progress and universal freedom receive a total response at the state level. It was a struggle for old and new traditions.
All traditions today have become anachronisms.
HOW TO MAKE A CAREER
«Where the triumphant mediocrity, to power always come black».
Who they choose and why (negative selection).
Command and administrative style.
What is everyone knows about the command and administrative style of leadership?
Where did it come from? Where does the philosophy of totalitarianism grow from?
Soviet people do not need to explain. All of them lived under the command-administrative system, often called socialism, these words are sometimes uttered together, sometimes alone, but this does not change the essence. This is a style or organization where the non-initiative majority, you can call this majority the people, society, brigade or collective farm is subordinate to the head — the chiefs of different levels and caliber- from the General Secretary General, director to ordinary caretakers. When the chief-the head of a smaller type of Director or foreman comes and tells everyone the will (plan, instructions) of the Secretar, and the Secretar tells the will of the General Secretar. And everyone starts working together to solve this will-plan depending on the number of employees. The proletarians, workers, and collective farmers are working, therefore, fulfilling the plan — will, the whole country is fulfilling, straining or pretending. Agitators discuss the need and importance at fiery or hypocritically pretentious gathering, or just formal and tedious, depending on what experience, meetings, workers shed three buckets of sweat and can also pretend that they automatically go to work every day, which does not exempt anyone from responsibility.
Let’s assume one option from the early versions, when the responsibility was not only moral: the head of the correctional labor camp for the enemies of the people comes out and informs: «Today, the plan increases by 5 percent. Every day now you will give 5% more.» The prisoners are silent. «Any questions?», — asks the head of the camp. «No question». Escort! Here from the gloomy, impersonal, gray, melancholy crowd: «Chief, will be increased the ration of bread?». The Chief of camp snapped to voice: «Who said that? «One step forward!»
Of course, no one will take any steps. If the boss doesn’t insist. Here is a grotesque version of the command-administrative extreme: I am the boss — you are a fool, and the conditional fool was not given a word. Everyone who has learned from their life experience knows that in such a system, initiative is punishable, it it looks almost as impertinence. It is better to mix with the crowd and then the bosses not will take revenge And the boss will certainly want to win back, to show others. To beat squirt, so that others be afraid. In the camp, the camp commander may appoint the punishment, the carcer, among free citizens the head will just lift the Braves to laugh or try to do it, to show who’s boss.
Why do people say keep quiet.
You can pass for a smart guy or a quiet calf sucking two cows. But in fact. And this is not a simple retelling of popular wisdom. This is a welcome paradigm of communication from top to bottom. It’s a tradition. A quiet heifer or the son of a strict father actually has a lot of things, a bowl of soup, but most importantly-a greater chance of inheritance than a the obstinate or a man with a strong character. Traditional father and parents don’t like proud sons. They love compliant, obedient, maybe even cunning sons. Such a quiet little son will surely increase the family’s capital. And the rebel will spend everything on empty fantasies or just drink it up as wine. Idealists, romantics and dreamers on the farm to anything.
At the top, there is exactly the same personnel policy.
The system is looking for heifers, sly, obedient, hypocritical, but not contradicting the authorities, and pleasing — honoring. Humble sons honor anyone, even an unworthy father. They don’t care what their father is, he’s their father and that’s it. Even if he is a nonentity, a thief or some other moral violator, the main thing is that he bequeaths business and good. Exactly the same personnel policy in power. One in one. And careerists do not care what kind of power, even if it is total, even if it is administrative and command. Even if it is corrupt-stealing, rotten, immoral-at least some. The main thing is that she will let in the coffers of the state as her father’s inheritance. Well, does not the command and administrative power want the sons to be truly submissive and Executive? That’s why bosses don’t care that their subordinates are careerists and sycophants and that they lie. They themselves once adapted to be stroked by their fathers. What is down in traditional families, what is in power, the picture does not change.
The provincial government is gaining the provincials.
In this system there is a counter-evolutionary selection.
Negative selection. Provincials are not the front of society, they are its backside. Middle-class fathers and party secretaries choose identical heifers in their own image and likeness. Hence this system of stagnation and decay. An ovin is being built in the center of the state. The system of adaptors has no other morality or ideology than the traditional one, which is the traditional morality of survival. Therefore, in the center is built an Ovine or corral for a cow. Only the application system is good for peacetime and then not for very long. As soon as there is a danger, the owner’s people go to the woods or move to the steppe — you do not touch me, I you. In the meantime, I’ll sit out until better times come. Bad boys give way to others for the feat. Why risk. At the moment of force majeure, all potential adaptors hide not only themselves and good, but also their smiles. The life-loving, radiant smiles disappear behind the lips. They don’t just suck their tongues, they just clap their lips in silence. And their antipodes, the adventurers and scoundrels, come on the scene. And they start. If of course the risk is not great again, then it will certainly be crooks. If the risk is limited, then the scoundrels will be behind the bushes with their life-loving adaptable brothers. This is more suitable for the heroism of modern Maidan, when the crowd can be controlled like a herd of greedy, selfish animals.
Scoundrels and cynics this is a new version of a quiet heifer for the time being. They know that they will still win at the finish line when the chip is right. And suckers voters will bring their own pennies, not their poor fathers. The enraged citizens will bring it themselves, because they will no longer recognize meek and comfortable rulers.
But when do the real characters come on stage?
This is when from any situation senior-junior son, father-son, boss-fool there is no benefit to look faithfully in the mouth. At the same time, there is no profit in deceiving the maddened and embittered crowd of the so-called electorate, which has been changed many times for affection from the next boss by the most docile heifers of the proteges. Moreover, the same active or creative new heifers know perfectly well what the maddened and brutalized electorate wants. He’s not looking for any justice. He wanted to be humble himself. But he was cheated and robbed. Everyone wanted to.
This is the culture.
In the traditional system, regardless of the existing ideology, the authorities themselves choose the most docile and comfortable heifers. At the same time, the people pretend to be submissive to the point of stupidity, because in the traditional system, this is the only way to make a career. Regardless of ideology! It’s just the fashion to talk about socialism at first. Or they spoke, loyally and pompously in the name of chance. Then those who said that this is socialism, this is a great invention, easily exchanged socialism for the market. The one who spoke about socialism betrayed the socialism. Why? Because the other system (the market) is more profitable already.
You need to look at it faithfully and in a different way, but creatively. All the people are still making loyal eyes out of habit. As all existing leaders do yesterday, and they do today. Everyone in the crowd hopes that their dull gaze will please the next chief (of the camp). This is a culture you don’t want to understand! If the people are traditional, it doesn’t matter what ideology is in the offices, what banners are flying in the wind. Every traditional son wants to inherit. Therefore, he is silent and stares loyally into the distance. But not in the distance, and where it is necessary.
And now the scammers or other hypostasis of the heifer-the sons of Maidan. What they want and where they look. But you know exactly where they are going. They’ve already chosen the roof. It is the most powerful nation in the world. Both is a money. But they do not look only there with quiet devotion. They are looking at a crowd that is raging and at the same time quiet in its root, which itself would not mind looking calmly, but patience has run out. And now these eyes meet. The crowd recognizes that the activists-a new emanation of heifers lie to it, just the meek have changed the fashion, but also understands that today’s expression of loyalty is completely different than it was yesterday. They all want to suck. To suck the American cows for free. Just formed a generation of freeloaders. They don’t just show a denial of the camp’s morality. They had their last dance in the camp. One day but it’s mine!
WHY IS HONESTY A WEAKNESS
In the traditional world there is no concept of honesty. Perhaps the modern people understand honesty as openness. For their brothers and sisters zeref should be clear as the steppe wind. By honesty we must understand responsibility. And even more correct is the concept of duty, although for zerefs the duties assigned to them. and there is a daily duty of a relative. Who would think of calling a caring father honest? He’s not honest at all. He does what he has to do — take care of the children. About his wife, about his family, and then other duties for him. If he does not comply with them, he will be condemned by the entire tribe. They will be judged and expelled from the collective. Each unit is important to the people. Therefore, all zerefs are trained or brought up from childhood: everyone in the family performs their role depending on age. Every man is not only a provider, but also a warrior. A warrior is not honest. More like is a hero. Or is a coward.
The attitude towards hostile tribes is exactly the opposite. The zeref of the neighboring tribe was also brought up, as was the zeref of this one. Therefore, they are heroes if the neighboring clan is defeated. If one zeref escapes, which is unlikely, because he was not taught cowardice, only courage, then he will be a coward for the people. He would still be a coward if he kept the captured enemy zeref alive. This moment of cruelty and lack of compromise will help us understand why zeref honesty has a weakness.
In addition to the responsibility to the team of relatives, zeref wants to be higher. The zerefs have a zerefs ambition. They want to be above everyone else, always seem to be honorable people.
If we take people completely wild, just to understand the motives in nature itself. Modern zerefs are no less ambitious. They must always seem more authoritative than other zerefs. The more authority, the more honor. The zerot elite, the zerot live very well. They may not even work. Relatives will bring everything necessary themselves. This pronounced desire to be, to look like the elite, while not forgetting about your family and your interests, is perhaps the most obvious quality for today. It is the lack of honesty, which is a responsibility, that makes it easier for zeref to live. There is no need to answer, he may not be responsible for anything, even be beyond the jurisdiction of a modern court, if he is of such a high rank. That the services him, and other traditionalists will benefit from it.
Honesty implies teamwork. Honesty is an invention of civilization. If zeref is honest, he will leave himself and his family hungry. He will almost pity the enemy by analogy with the primitive condition of cowardice. Thus, the modern traditional person will be faced with a choice — to grow up, become authoritative and support a family, feed their children, or show cowardice — to be honest. At the same time, other zerefs will not understand him if he chooses honesty. With honesty, he will work not for his own kind, but for the whole people. It will be like an authoritative zeref from two hostile tribes at once and even more. The entire culture of the ancestral world says that this is contrary to the surrounding nature. Two tribes cannot graze on the same plot. Nature cannot provide two people with food at once. All tribes are great individualists. Their egoism is due to the scarcity of resources and the poverty of technology for the development of nature. This is because in the difficult moments of the economic crisis moreflexible people are the most tenacious. They don’t think about honesty, they don’t know it just by culture.
If any ruler wants to be honest with the people of tradition, he takes a great risk. It risks being misunderstood. He risks being considered an outsider and a mangurt. Few people will want to help him in this. Especially if other zerefs have already seen what they can profit from. And at the market, many traditionally educated people saw a lot of so-called market temptations. And even more so, after mastering a lot of money, no one will want to return it back. So there is no chance of equality. Equality is even more unlikely if there are fewer non-traditional, non-zeref people. After all, all other traditional people will understand them. In the traditional world, therefore, if there is justice, it is specific. Fair or just even good, and not fair, which is good for you and your family. This way it will be clearer to understand the actions of the zerefs.
Zeref- a traditional person with rigidly set social actions, low reflection almost zero, hence the word zeref-reflection zero (zeref).). Has no semitones, serves the idols of the genus, communicates in the circle of native blood. Zeref has no semitones of perception, is categorical, irreconcilable, hostile to others and to another opinion in the development of rejection of “not your own”
Zerefs loop — the baby boom, overheating of the population.
Zerot- the traditional feudal elite
Zerots loop — the creating a solid cast, an impenetrable social barriers. None of the lower castes can enter the feudal elite. The lack of social mobility pre-revolutionary situation.
WHY IS THE ELDEST SON A FASCIST AND THE YOUNGEST A COMMUNIST
What do we know about fascism? We know from Soviet dictionaries that fascism is a reactionary movement of the petty bourgeoisie. Fascism is represented as a negative, a misanthropic current of morality.
The birthplace of the fascist movement is considered to be Italy in the 20s.
But most of all, fascism is associated with the Nazi regime of the Third Reich.
The fascist States profess the monopoly of the state, in plain language, state monopoly capitalism. In other words, they do not deny market relations, but try to put market anarchy under the control of the Nazi idea. The ideological officials, in this case the Nazi officials, were opposed to the cosmopolitan exchange. In this way, elements of paternalism became apparent in the fascist movement. In fact, Nazism turned out to be a continuation of the German feudal tradition. No one was surprised at what was said? One will grow out of the other, no wonder. For what reason it was so hypertrophied, this is a question of another topic. But German statism or a tilt toward state interests did not appear out of thin air. German statism came from German culture, which in turn came from German history. Here, of course, it is appropriate to recall the economic lag in Germany’s development, as its former fragmentation left the Germans without colonies, and therefore without additional resources. Yes, it is. But how German culture turned into the militarization of the Germans. Were it not the Germans themselves, their Dukes, barons, and counts, who most resisted unification? Autarky of the autarky. Similarly, the militarization has occurred from traditional German feudalism. The German official turned out to be almost a German medieval knight. But why did he become a Nazi instead of a cosmopolitan stockbroker, as happened in other civilized Europe?
How could a German family contribute to this?
How did a German official become wildly belligerent?
We could turn to the German tradition. To find the origins of statism in it. We found it in German feudalism. Others will say, why didn’t the same statism manifest itself in Europe in another dream? A radical tilt towards state interests is not only a disease of the Germans. But it was among the Germans that it became radical. Absolutism seems to grow out of absolutism. Totalitarianism from totalitarianism. Paternalism, from paternalism. Nothing is superfluous. So, what is the reason?
Any European father passes the inheritance to the eldest son. Not just German. This eldest son not only inherits lands and things, he passes on the habits of the family to his children. This is how the tradition develops, and this is how the people turn out. Fathers look at their older sons, and their sons try to adopt their father’s look. They imitate him in everything. The transmission from generation to generation of the father’s character, behavior, and style creates this nation. When fathers saw that to the eldest sons (namely, the eldest!) not enough land, not enough inheritance, they armed themselves and went on a campaign. Thus the entire feudal people armed themselves. But the ideologues were the eldest sons, the ones who take over and pass on the tradition from father to son.
In fact, the German official Nazi was not a feudal Lord in disguise, but a new copy of him. He was the eldest son of a German burgher. Throughout Europe, fathers passed on their covenants in the same way, through their elders. It was the older ones who were the heirs of the tradition, and of the property as well. That the people did not turn off the path trodden by their ancestors, and in the end did not disappear as a people, just all the older sons watched this. Some seniors grew old and passed them on to other seniors. Those in turn also grew old, but managed to teach their older sons. All these operations are somehow connected with the earth. There is an invisible connection, a sacred unity of tradition with the aristocracy. The only career for the eldest son is an honorary military career. All the officers in the army are the eldest sons. So why, with the advent of the market, would these senior officers not support the Nazi idea? Younger sons also became officers. If the eldest inherited all the property. The younger ones, having entered the military service, supported the very institution of the traditional family and society.
In the all Europe of the 20s and 30s was ruled by the military. Many modes: in Hungary (Admiral Miklos Horti), Romania (Marshal Antonescu), Poland (Marshal Pilsudski), Portugal (General De Costa), Spain (Generalissimo Franco) did not grow up to Nazism, to the ideology of total superiority, but were authoritarian regimes, dictatorships. But they were very similar to the German regime.
If you have noticed the connection of right-wing totalitarianism, right-wing statism with the entail, that is, with the institution of inheritance to the eldest sons, then now look at what the younger sons are doing at this time.
I would like to ask you to take a particularly close look at Russia. In addition will have to be considered in the development of the movement of anarchists from Italy, Spain and Russia have the same problem. This problem is not so much about bringing anarchism into the arena a little earlier than authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, but rather about getting the problem of younger sons out. In other words, any left-wing and other protest and themes of equality and social justice are tied to the problems of inheritance and the lack of it in the youngest.
«The old man has three sons: the Eldest was a clever fellow, the Middle son was a fool.…
THE NOMADS ALL LOOK ALIKE
The eldest son is smart because he does like a father. The eldest son is the father’s copy. He can’t be stupid by definition. All the older sons are sedate, important, walk strictly, and speak little. Where have you seen old people talking incessantly and crossing the village from end to end? There are no such old people. Older people don’t have much energy. They’ve already used it up. Similarly, the older sons are not noticeable. Although there is still a lot of energy in them. The seniors will not waste it on trivial matters. Everyone is watching them. And the very first eyes in this observation are the eyes of the younger ones. The younger ones are the first to get slapped on the head by the older ones for indecent behavior and stupid behavior. Is there a demand from the younger ones? That’s why all the younger ones are spoiled behavioral waifs. Fools, almost like in a fairy tale by the storyteller Yershov.
If such sons were to inherit, how would they be able to pay them back? No way. They will drink it, waste it, and skip it. How similar it is to the behavior promoted by advertising-take, walk, take advantage of the moment, live is once! If younger sons were not festivalis older brothers, all younger sons it would be possible to write to the Democrats and refuge. Anyone who has had even a little experience with tradition in their biography, and there are many, if not all of them, they will not be able to be a Democrat, even if they are the youngest in the family. In order for the younger to turn into a complete traditional degenerate and reformer, a certain period of the traditional vacuum is necessary. This person should be detached from the tradition, not have younger brothers. Or maybe just the only child in the family. Then no demand. Only self-indulgence. Here the ideology of hedonism is just right. Is this why the ideas of freedom and a market society are popular among young people? After all, this is a different congregation, a city crowd.