CONTENTS
Zeroth year
First year
Second year
Third year
Fourth year
Fifth year
THIRD YEAR
Contents of This Year
3.00. Between Barbarity and Morality
3.01. About main current and lateral rivulets
3.02. About the toleration to the different
3.03. About the freedom and the slavery
3.04. About no demand for good deeds
3.05. About the barbarity of … the laws
3.06. About Bulgarian people
3.07. About Bulgarian language
3.08. About Bulgarian … perdition
3.09. About the communism and … the Zionism
3.10. About the niceness of civilized … barbarity
3.00. Between Barbarity and Morality
Hello my rare (as it turns) readers. One more year has passed and I am again here to teach you, what you do not at all want to learn (and I'll tell you why you do not want to: it is so because the less one knows the more he /she does not want to learn more — because if it was on the contrary then this he /she would have known more, what does not correspond to the real situation, an inquisitive person usually knows more). But anyway, I will try to produce as much as I can for a pair of more years, till I reach 75, this is my firm decision (after what time I will probably begin to learn … Arabic and /or Sanskrit — because I must prepare myself for meeting some eminent ancient philosophers in the afterlife, right?).
Yes, but otherwise I will use the same ways for giving words from other languages in '' quotes in the way how they are read in my usual transliteration, and in "" ones in the way how they are written (if with Latin alphabet); also I will shorten all nations with 3, or sometimes even 2, chars in the most obvious way; and probably also some often used words, like: lang. for language, smt. for something, smb. for somebody, and maybe smt. more. And let me repeat again that the main pillars of my transliteration are 2, namely that: "y" is read like the old and contemporary 6-th major vowel (acc. to me), which is like in Eng "girl" (only not elongated), and which is usually called schwa; and then "j" is read like in the Ger (say, like Johannes), and also for softening of the previous consonant like in Sp 'canjon'). So these were a kind of preliminary remarks.
OK, and the zeroth chapter this time is about the barbarity and the morality, not only because it is an important topic, that allows digging around some other related opposite notions, which follow till the middle of this year's book, but also because I feel myself personally involved in it. And what means this? Ah, it means that I am born and living in Bulgaria, which country is (unquestionably) most barbarian one at least in Europe. I have spoken about this even in the 0-th book, but here I will dig more profound about this (when I have the time for it, and even wonder about what to speak to you during this time). So that there will be some unavoidable repetition, but many things will be given chiefly as statements, without much explanations.
Good, but I can't jump over some fundamental points like what I understand under barbarity, because, you know, the human langs are polyvalent, and many words are used in different, quite often opposite, meanings. So I will understand here (as also on other palaces) that a barbarian is just an unbeliever, in the commonly accepted meaning of believing in some divine Being called God (or otherwise, it depends on the religion). And I will include in the believers also the … atheists, because they are believers, they just believe that there is no God, but this can neither be proved nor disproved; yet they are in no way barbarians or unbelievers, and I count in this number also myself! And you must already now see that the barbarians are defined going out of the religion, and respectively, as negation of the morality, which is hidden in each religion, and this exactly is the motivation for the existing of religions.
But there is also one, rather funny, understanding, that the barbarians are people who can't speak properly, they utter only some cries (like the animals), what has to be the etymological idea for the word, that they say smt. like 'byr-byr', what in Eng is usually translated as blah-blah. You may take this for not serious, how it really is, but such ideas are often used (like, in order to give an example, the Slavs call the Gers 'nemci', where 'njam /nemoj' means dumb). Yes, but widely more important is that I will not call barbarity cases of manifestation of cruelty in mass killings, because such things are done mainly on religious ground, these are not cases of barbarity (as opposed to the religiosity or morality).
Like, for example, you have surely heard about Islamic jihad, where these, as if tolerating people, at once go crazy and begin to kill on the left and on the right. So you may not know this (but it is well known) that the Turks have just massacred about one whole million innocent Armenians, simply because they expected that the latter will begin to kill them (but they have not begun), i.e. they have applied the widely spread rule that the best defence is the offence! The Turks know themselves pretty well, and because of this it has happened that back about 1990 a quarter of mln ethnical Turks in Bulgaria have immigrated massively in Turkey, because they have expected that we will do smt. nasty to them — what we have never imagined to do, nothing physical, we have simply forbidden them to call themselves officially Assans or Aishes and the like. Yes, but the names are not equal to human lives, and we have been nearly whole 5 centuries under Turkish yoke, we might have wanted to pay them back what they have deserved, yet we are not such people, we are … barbarians, we value the human life!
And if you think that such things have happened earlier, and in not so well civilized countries like the Western ones, then I have to disappoint you because such cruel acts of mass killings in order to prevent the necessity of defence with open offence continue to happen even today, where such bad examples give not only some fascist Gers, but as if the biggest democrats of all times, the US Americans! Because you have not forgotten about the thrown A bombs over the Hiroshima, have you? Where these nice and educated Americans will tell you that their actions were reactions to brutal air attack of the Japs, right? Yes, but not exactly, because the Japanese have attacked an obvious military object, while the Ams have bombarded 2 peaceful rear towns and killed women and children what is smt. quite different, methinks. Or take the other American wars in the previous and in the current century. Or just look at the geographic map of these united states, they have cut nearly all seaside territories of Canada and Mexico, because they want to defend themselves, right? And with the same purpose they have built air-carriers, in order to extend their territory to every point in the world ocean, what I personally will not call defence, but nobody listens to me, or is rather afraid or those world gendarmes.
While the Nazis are is a way exonerated, because they have dealt in a similar way like the Hebrews, not with the same means, that's true, but in a similar way — they have simply stated that they, too, are chosen and beloved by God nation, being in some extent Aryans! But mark, that the Gers have, again, acted as entirely civilized nation, they have led wars like everybody else, right? And also only they, from all surrounding them nations, have not had colonies, i.e. they were good to the others, and because of this they have suffered, so now let us fight — have said they in those times. But they were, and still are, religious, they are not barbarians. Or take also those nice guys and girls who are very fond of playing … duels with the … bulls, honest duels, surely! So they have massacred many thousands West-Indians in the name of God, to be sure!
In this way you can now see well that to be religious and "moral" is not always a good thing, but as if in more cases than not is a bad behaviour! And what means good or bad? Ah, surely according to the others, from the standpoint of their (vision about their) God! So that the religion and the hidden in it morality is (or are, if you take any other religion) a good thing per se, as idea (or excuse) — just like the … communism was (and is)! And now let me remind you a thing, that is often forgotten or neglected by people who defend the democracy, that the religion, in a bunch with the aristocracy, was thrown away out of the government, together with its so necessary morality, before more than 2 centuries, as far as I remember (because the year is easy to be remembered) in 1789-th, in the Great Fr revolution. Have you got it? I mean: is the religion a good thing, or it is a bad one (say, opium for the people)? And I beg your pardon, my dear (and rare) readers, but here I will also add "like the communism", because the things are not so easy, the binary logic is seldom well applicable, it depends!
So how I can get the things the Fr people were just … pissed by the priests, they wanted, probably — who can disprove this? —, to have free love with everybody, not only in the marriages but out of them, too, because the Fr-men, as well -women, wanted more freedom to chose alone! Id est, the people wanted that the religions existed, but who wants can go to church, yet not compulsory, hence they wanted to make some compromise, not totalitarian Church state with once and for all chosen aristocratic rulers. Yet this proves (and from before several centuries) that to set only on religion is not good! Otherwise put: that the morality can become non-moral, even this, because everything changes! And it really is so, smt. what is utterly conservative and strongly defended may happen to become an obstacle for the development, and then it becomes necessary to reject it, and this right of rejection must be in the hands of the very people! So to say: the human to the humans, and the divine to the God!
And now let me come to the barbarity. The simplest view is that this is a pre-religious stage, smt. not grown enough, a past stage and because of this it has to be avoided! Yes, but not only so, because the things are cyclical, the life is a thing of constant repetition, and some returning to a previous state may often prove to be a wise and necessary thing, again like the communism, which, according to me, is not new, but very old idea, and the old ideas have not to be thrown entirely away! This is so at least from dialectical point of view, because the religion wants uniting in order to become stronger, but this uniting may lead to … suppressing of the individuality (and I hope that now you alone can see that the problems are similar with that of the communism). And why the barbarity has existed before the religions came in power, and why we must return to this stage from time to time, ah? Or else: why the dear God has allowed the existence of barbarity? (Because, you know, there is the saying that the vox populi is a vox dei, and this is so because, in my interpretation, when the God has made us such, meaning in this case silly, then this was His own intention.)
Well, in 1 word, because of the … freedom! Yeah, as simple as that. The barbarity means survival of the fittest, and on the level of single individual! While the religious moral means … again this, only that on the level of some bigger group, of a tribe, nation, or even empire (what is not exactly the same). Put in other words, the barbarity is good from the standpoint of God (or Nature), where the resources and the time are unlimited (and our God feels no ache when smb. is hurt or killed), while the morality is good from the standpoint of the society, it cares for the preserving of lives of own people (more or less, as a rule). But this is so if nothing is overdone, when the things may change to diametrically opposed. Because if one cares only about himself this may have harming effect on the very him; as well as if one cares only about the bigger group then not only he but the very group may suffer (because his preservation and development of the individuals may be of big importance for the whole group). So that, as it is normal to expect, everything depends on the suitable compromise between the personal interest and that of the society.
Yes, and exactly there lies the difficulty, in the finding of good compromise, suitable enough for the individual and the group. There is not a once and for all times taken decision, such one will inevitably prove bad after some time, but for the time being it may be good enough. Like the previous social orders, let me remind you this, were good for their time, even the serfdom and the slavery, or then, the communism (and even the very Stalinism — like I have exclaimed once, that if there was not this nasty guy Stalin, there would have, most probably, be no Gagarin!). I will dwell more profoundly about the good barbarity in the last chapter here, but the important thing for the moment is to see clear that to come to whatever of the observed here poles may be as good, in some aspect, as it may be also bad, in another aspect. This is everything for the moment, and I will end with one small illustrative verse, that follows.
Barbarity 's-to catch and fill your ow°n guts;
morality is to defend your tribe as whole.
The first means that the ties with others are just cut;
the second means that the society's the goal.
Yet these are poles, and taken pure they have buts!
Dec. 2023, Sofia, Bulgaria
3.01. About main current and lateral rivulets
Here I will say probably nothing new, but the topic is interesting, because these are also poles in some aspect, and neither the one nor the other is the best, they are just necessary elements of the whole. The idea is that the main current, or flock, has to be better because it is proved, it exists, this is sure, yet not only that everything changes and there may come time when this current may prove wrong, but it is depriving of individuality, one can't show off there, yet, on the other hand, it is safe there, much safer than on the periphery. So that the existing of some other "rivulets" is a good moment, even when one may not easily change the place of his habitat (say, for a Hebrew to become non-Hebrew), but there are things or people or whatever, existing on both places. And I will use also as if strange examples, from the field of … langs, but they are somehow nearer to me, for I have begun to use often the relations between the words as proofs for unfaked truths about the way of thinking of the common people of all nations; in fact I am doing this already more than 30 years. (To tell you the truth, there was quite similarly sounding chapter in the 1-st year, about the core and the border, but when I looked very schematically there it turned out that I have spoken about different things, and only at the end have come to smt. similar, mentioning the vulgarization of the langs; so that I will not repeat myself here.)
OK, let me begin with the Rus lang. as obvious main "current", the chief Sl lang., and my Bul one, which is spoken by some 30 to 50 times less people, hence surely is lateral "rivulet". Yes, but this is so now, yet before a millennium or so earlier, it was not so, hence this parallel is entirely justified. And here I have to tell you that before just a pair of years and under another pen-name I have translated one of my papers in more than … dozen langs (with the help of computer translators, but still), so that I have quite good insight in practically all contemporary Indo-Eur langs, at least from my point of view, which is the simplicity of the langs. Without going into much details I will tell you that the Rus lang. is as if a bit easier than the Ukr, significantly easier than the Pol (because it is the most difficult, not only Sl but also Eur lang., in every aspect: phonetically, grammatically, alphabetically), a bit worse than the South Sl langs, like chiefly the Ser, yet also than Czech, Slovak, and Slovenian, but significantly worse than Bul, which is in many aspects like Mac (for Macedonian). Yes, but there will be another chapter about Bul lang. so that let me skip this for the moment, you just take that, acc. to me, it is the top!
And as to what is so bad by the Russ I have mentioned yet will repeat it again: they (like also all other Slavs) have cases, 6 (and in some other Sl langs even 7), have over-simplified tenses, a bit more difficult phonetics than the Buls, have long endings for the nouns and adjectives what makes their lang. sound a bit like … Chi (for Chinese), and probably smt. else; but in recompense of this they use very often their soft sign (denoted here with 'j' after C.), and due to this their lang. sounds better than Bul, yes, this is so. They think that their tenses (also in the other Sl langs) are easier than in the Bul, what is true, in a great extent, but this is chiefly because they do not have at all past tenses, they use only participles! For example the verb "work" is 'rabotaju', and they conjugate it in present tense ('rabotaju, rabotajeshj, rabotaet', etc.), but in past tense they can say only 'rabotal' for all persons, where if it goes about f. person is added '-a', and for pl. — '-i'. In addition to this they, as well the other Slavs (what comes from the good old Lat) miss practically always the forms of the verb to be, so that there is no perfect, no imperfect, or pluperfect, or whatever else past tense, what is pretty strange on the contrast of all other Western langs, this is, in a way, improper behaviour! Ah, and they have no definite articles at all, what also seems utterly strange. In one word: their lang. is outright outmoded!
And as to the forms of the verbs, let me mention that for the Sp is said that they have about 50 different forms of one verb, and that in It there are 14 tenses (in Sp a bit more), where only the past are whole 5, so that so many forms of one word surely do not make the lang. more easy, but on the contrary, here the situation is relatively similar to that with the cases, while in Bul we have only 2 tables with forms of the tenses, 1 for the present, and 1 for the past, the other nuances are made with particles, or with changing of some V. in the verb. And allow me to squeeze here one interesting example about the length of the words, or more precisely the syllables, using the very suitable word "democratic" (because it is world-wide spread), where in Rus it is 'demokraticheskij', in Bul is 'demokratichen; and in Ser is 'demokratski' (nearly like in the Eng)!
And only now I come to the term vulgarization of some lang. (what I have mentioned in the 1-st year), where what is not orthodoxal to the main current is called vulgar (linga vulgata) and this is dated to the old Lat, where all other Rom langs were called vulgar ones! What means that this word must not be taken as really abusive but just as side rivulet, like I call it here. Yes, but the majority of the langs are, surely, the vulgar ones! Main currents are: for the Sl langs — the Rus, for the Teu ones — the Ger, and for the Rom ones, in fact, the old Lat, because all other contemporary langs may pretend to be main currents (say, I find that the It is as if the most Lat lang., but other people, including the author of Esperanto, take Sp for such, and for about pair of centuries the Fr was taken for such). Even the highly appraised and used — because of the power of the USA, to be sure — Eng lang. is some Teu (officially it is so, not Rom) lateral rivulet. There are other Eur langs that are unique, like the Gr., the Hun, also Est, but they are small "rivers" on the map of Europe (even the Gr lang. is causa perdura nowadays, at least because of the alphabet).
So that, if we return to the Rus "current", I will tell you that roughly about half of the reasons for the present war of Russia with Ukraine (which I have predicted in my paper Thoughts about Ukraine) are because of their langs! Only that these reasons are hidden and people don't take them for serious. I know this for sure (or at least am convinced in it) because I have studies before exactly half a century in Russia, in the beautiful town St. Petersburg, and recall that Bul students in Kiev have complained that they listen to lectures in Ukr, what was smt. forbidden then, it is like in some USA University to read in … Heb, or Jap, or Ar, smt. of that kind. And their (Ukr) lang. is in no way better sounding, because they have thrown out the Rus "donkey" sound (acc. to me), the so called eri (what is 'eryi' in my notation), but they have begun to read every Rus "i" as that sound 'yi' and introduced Lat "i" for the usual one, so that they have more donkey Vs. But they will never become 1-st Sl nation, because their territory is probably 50 times less than that of Russia! So that this problem, or you may call it also "Who is the bigger brother?", is one very important.
And do not think that this is smt. occasional, because before as if 2 dozens of centuries there was one Alex Macedonian who was forced to fight with the Greeks in Athens not because he wanted this, but because they were the main current, and he just some side "arm" or the Gr "river". And for so many centuries they have become not a whit cleverer, surely, not they — because when Mac-a declared its independence some 30 years back they have rejected to accept it (and still reject it); like they still continue to call the Tur coffee Gr one. Some disturbances (yet not wars) have happened in Belgium, again because of the lang.; and let me remind you that there is still not one official lang. in EU, everybody uses the Eng but it is not official (and on the products is written one and the same in 5, 10 or even more langs), what borders with … insanity, if you ask me! And all this because of not clear understanding of what is good or bad, according to some reasonable criteria, but in the most childish way of rightness, that right is the bigger brother!
Yet let me return to the langs, this time to the Teu ones. The main lang. in this category, the Ger one, is very nice sounding, with correct building of all derivative words, the right successor of the good Lat, with nearly brilliant phonetics (they are fond of the letter "sh", use often the V. 'y' but don't have special sign for it), and many other good things, but this lang. as a whole is one … nightmare! Surely! I suppose that there is no other lang. in the … Solar system where, say, all numbers till 1 mln are written as 1 word, have strict ordering of the words (no matter that their category is very precisely defined), capitalize all substantives (because they are names of a whole groups), and other difficulties. Yet in this way, with the impossibility of such lang., they have made old Eng people to revolt and drop all good elements in the Ger lang., producing one, I would say, monster of a lang. with confusing of all grammatical categories, which lang. is in the current days the mostly spoken on Earth (and the Solar system, too). In other words, there is always some blessing in disguise, or rather that there is smt. good in the worst! Because the main current is path-breaking, but the lateral arms give the diversity, the dynamics, the life, with 1 word!
And on the way of the Eng go nowadays all Scan langs (like Dut and Swe), rejecting the genders and all cases, and mark that all at once, like the (vulgar) Rom nations have done before a millennium or so. I don't say that they are doing the right thing, or, then, are doing smt. right but in a wrong way, if you'll allow me this pun, but the langs are changing, as everything alive. My view about the right way I have expressed in several papers, where I discuss and propose better alphabet, better phonetics, and intend to propose also a pair of improved langs in a pair of years (for the moment have sketched the main points about the Eng and Ger), but the point is that the lateral rivulets are necessary, because many of them become later main current, and even if they will not become such, they carry interesting ideas (like the Bul way to put the definite articles at the end of the words and appended to the words). But if smt. appears when it is forced to appear (how the dear God does, and happens also with the langs) there appear also many new defects (like, again, with the botched Eng lang.) while if the things are thoughtfully planned in advance such defects will not appear. So that some tolerating of the differences is utterly necessary, but to this I will come in the next chapter.
Here I want to mention also the total way of rejecting of the old things, not in steps and stages but at once, as, for ex., the rejecting of slavery, where it could have been prepared and done more peacefully. Say, all Rom nations have vulgarized the good (but difficult) old Lat at once, rejecting the cases unanimously! So is in the Fr, the Sp, the It, and also in the "port of France" (i.e. Portuguese). Before similar change stay also the Russ and other Sl langs (except Bul), because they also have all grammatical cases, and have not articles (like in the Lat)! They can continue in this way for a pair of centuries, but I am afraid no longer, this is like to still live under … serfdom (how the Russ have done for a long time; or the Ams under slavery). Also the Rom nations must think about inventing of some standard lang. (I suppose smt. starting from the It, and using the Sp, or the other way round), because otherwise the all-swallowing and defective Eng will simply gulp them, what will be a loss, in my view.
Well, I have spoken here about langs, but similar problems appear with the various species, of plants or animals, where some main representative of a given kind is a good thing, but some mutations are also well accepted. Anyway, with this I finish the chapter, also with a little verse.
The°re's always, you know, current main,
which is very precious kind of grain.
Yet with it quite often flow side arms,
which must not be met with sharpened arms,
but be left to carry some time gains!
3.02. About the toleration to the different
Ah, the toleration to the different from us is probably the highest virtue, at least on the contemporary scene, because of our enormous power, so that this leads to many bloodshed, surely. It is not that this is not known to everybody, but it is just smt. beyond us, we are humans after all (what means silly, or sinners, etc.), we can't restrain our emotions — which, mark this, produce utmost inadequate reactions! Yeah, unquestioningly, because we are wide away from the biblical phrase "eye for eye, tooth for tooth", we exaggerate always when we can. I recall that in my third popular book, with the Cynical essays (written before more than a 1/4 of a century) I have invented one very important (acc. to me) law of the living matter, the distorted and inadequate reaction, where this means roughly the following: to weak actions follow strong reactions and v.v., the scale is not linear but rather logarithmic and also modal, and the human beings are just the top in this distortion (because of their imagination and ability to think and predict). This was a bit naive, but I was relatively young and wanted to give to the people smt. easy for understanding (yet it turned out that they do not care about understanding, they care about having fun, and usually with smt. indecent).
I will not dig in this direction here, and will begin with some … etymological research about the very word toleration, where are 2 approaches (which must somehow meet at the end): my guesses and the official statements. So my guesses (naive but plausible enough) are that the root is related (somehow) with Ger toll as wild, rampant, Sl (Rus) 'tolstyij' as plump or fat, the toll as duty, what means smt. heavy, what is probably related with Gr … letter tau and the Rus 'tajga', and Ger Taube as pigeon, the latter things because of some wavy deformation from some heavy ball (there is Bul 'topka'-ball, and Rus 'topj'-melted-place), and I may come even to the … toilet, where is given some Fr root for woven matter, some curtain, which has given Eng towel and It tovaglia as cloth for table, what are tedious things to do (your toilet, meaning different ointments, make-ups etc., or to weave a peace of cloth)! Anyway, it is some kind of burden, because we just don't want to tolerate and that's that.
The official assertion is that this is from the Lat tolerare (what is obvious), what has appeared about 16-th century in religious sense, but has come from some pre-Indo-Eur root -tele as to … bear! This seams pretty good shot (acc. to me), because they cite the mythical … Atlas as the bearer of Heavens, also the toll-duty, some extol(l) as to … praise highly, i.e. heave up, only that this time the supposed by me heavy thing is lifted high, but nobody tells us why this "tele" means to carry or bear. Yes, but myself can enlighten you on that point, this is because tele is, for one thing, smt. cut, (there is at least Ger Teil read 'tajl' as part, and Sl 'delja' as to divide), and for another thing exactly 'tele' in Bul is a … calf, which is in the sense of part or the cow, this is giving birth as partition; and there is also the well known tele-phone or whatever (because exactly 'tel' in Bul is, this time, 1-D object, a wire, which word has to be Tur). So that, to make the long story short, the toleration is the ability to carry, to raise high some (necessary) burdens. Signed and sealed explanation!
Ah, I must not indulge in such profound thought, because this means overstraining of my old brain cells. Anyway, it is high time to begin with the topic, but I postpone this moment because am … not sure about what to speak here (ha-ha), because everything is as if obvious, but not done by the humans, as a rule. And when 2 parties quarrel or fight for smt. the one party is usually stronger and the other is weaker, but both are guilty for smt., from different point of view! So that I will beg you to allow me to cite again one of my brilliant thoughts, this about the different guilts, which every party carries. I have come to it somewhere about 1991, when was the war in former Yug-a, and have quoted it again in my Thoughts about Ukr-ne, and it sounds so: Guilty usually is the weaker side, but the responsibility caries the stronger one! Obvious, isn't it? (Yet it isn't a wide-spread wisdom or rule for taking of decisions.)
The 1-st is so because the weaker party is as a rule (this is a thing with probabilistical truthfulness) more vicious, evil, at least not honest, what in turn is so because otherwise, in a fair battle, it will never succeed to win, being weaker. This is well remarked and there are linguistical proofs about it: the one may be the Eng meaning of left as the other, remaining side, which is not really right, because the right one is which is on the side of the stronger hand (which is on the other side of the heart), and the other is even more resolute, it is the It. word sinister, which means both, left (as on the side of the heart) and evil, vicious, what means that this was the opinion of the old Latins. And the 2-nd part of my sentence is so because the stronger, being such, is simply bound to find some suitable, at least not very cruel (like, e.g., throwing out of an A bomb) decision. So that, as to the war in Ukr-ne the guilty unquestionably are the Ukrs, but in the end the Russ will become blamed about the war!
And why I am so sure in my opinion? Well, because the Ukrs as nation are — I am sorry to tell it, but that's the truth for me — good for nothing nation, and I will give you at once 2 proofs for this. The 1-st is that their lang. is not better than the Rus, where it must have been better, taking into account the fact that they are Southern Slavs (hence I would have expected for it to be more or less like the Ser-n, because the Slavs are Southern tribe, they are not coming from, say, Alaska); and the second fact is that they can't make even an usual … light bulb — I can vouch for this, they last about 3-4 times less than the Bul ones, and we are the most barbarous tribe at least in Europe (and what concerns their car brand called 'Zaporozhec' then this is worse than our no own brands at all, because we have seen that can not unite to make our own cars and have stopped, while the Ukr cars were called 'Zhoporozhec, where 'zhopa' is an … ass, and 'rozha' is a … mug in sense of physiognomy, and there were even anecdotes about them, where one asks: "Is it true that the 'Zaporozhec' floats?", and the answer was: "A … sh#t does not sink"!).
So that's it about those people, although they are very merry, they like much to gather and sing almost always, their girls are pretty enticing, and other details. And the Russ, for their part, were bound to find a better decision, but they have probably tried this for 20 or so years, the fix mania of the Ukrs to play the first violin (if I change a bit the usual expression about the brothers) is incurable! But the point is that the nations believe only in the strength (of the arms, usually), and the Russ are the biggest empire of the world; yet probably a good politician could have devised some deceit, some carrotting manoeuvre, whether I know, I just can't deceive. Yes, and similar was the case with the Serbs and the Croatians, where the very name of the latter people is some … wheezeling sound, 'Hyrvati' in Bul (this is the sound what one with cut throat emits).
Hmm, I have still not begun to speak more profoundly about the toleration but it is because I guess only about 2 important observations of mine. The one is that, if we agree that in every aspect there are practically 2 kinds of sides or parties, the good in the given aspect and the bad ones, so under this condition the more tolerable are usually those who are better! Did you get it what means better? Ah, it is easy, say: the nice and the ugly looking, the wealthy and the poor, the younger and the older, the more intelligent and the simpletons, and so on. So the 1-st of these pairs is the better one and he is (as a rule) the more commiserating one, what is explainable either with the fact that the state of badness precedes the state of niceness (one is born with many deficiencies, which he eliminates with the time), so that the good knows the situation of the bad one, he understands him, or then that the better one lives under better conditions (usually), he is somehow appraised and honoured, so that he has no reasons to be embittered at his environment (he is not forced to fight in order to survive), or for other reasons; yet mark also that the younger person looks better than the older one, and because of this is well inclined, but the really old people are usually cleverer than the middle aged, so that the children and the ancients are usually more tolerable and commiserating (one is born good, the society is what embitters him). So this is about this dependence, hence exactly those from about 20 to about 50, or in the working age, are the worst in sense of tolerating the others, especially if they are also deprived in smt., not like the majority.
And the 2-nd observation of mine (which is nothing extraordinary, this is a known thing) is that the nearly placed individuals, or relatives, are mostly antagonistic one to the other! This is, for one thing, because of the bad example immediately before their eyes (say, children and parents, or v.v.; or also compatriots — to remind you the biblical phrase that "Nobody is prophet in his own country!", where our Christ is meant), and, for another thing, because of the laws of biological inheritance. I can't, unfortunately, explain the latter good to you, because I have not studied biology, but in very simplified form it means that there are dominant and recessive genes, as if now called allel pairs, and because of this some genes are stronger and other weaker, but in the next generation they become combinatorially mixed, so that for the time being (i.e. the generation) some characteristics simply disappear, but show in the 2-nd and 3-rd generation. As I said, this is usually known, and one likes more his (or her, surely) grandchildren than his direct posterity, as well in the other direction.
As if this is everything what I can say about the toleration or not, and wish to squeeze a sentence or two about the module /modulus. If I do not confuse smt., here officially is said that the module comes from the mode as manner of behaviour, with what I do not really agree. I mean that this, surely, sounds practically the same, and in a way is so, but the meaning is different. The mode is an inclination towards smt., an alternative way, smt. of the kind, while the modulus in mathematical sense (and I am a mathematician, by the way) carries the meaning of smt. limited, cut, and in this way also cyclically closed! Say, modulos 7 is how the days of the week are sometimes counted, where 0 is Sunday, and so on, or more precisely this is only the remainder of dividing of one number to another, where the integer part is just missed (it is another operation). In this way we get final number of digits, obvious cycle, moderation! But the confusion here comes because medi- /meta- is a middle point, it is golden or honey (here is the Sl. 'med'-honey and the Eng met, also as that forgotten now alcoholic beverage), where the root comes from the Skr), and this means a way (say, in It mediante means with the help of) because is supposed that the humans are clever enough to search the moderate way (what they are not, alas). So that the modulus is not exactly moderation but a way to it, cutting of the infinity and going in cycles.
OK, and why I have written this entire chapter? Ah, because the toleration is closely related with the barbarity or (religious) morality, and not in the expected way, that the more social structure, a religious community, will be more tolerable to the others, but rather on the contrary, the uneducated barbarian tribes, and even the animals, a more tolerable to the different, if it does not hinder their existence, naturally! Id est the moral preaches that we have to be tolerable to the others, of course, but this is applicable to our people, of our faith, while the aborigines are as if in more cases better inclined to the others. I personally suppose that this is so because when one is wilder he /she is brought up in more freely environment, he believes that everything what lies somewhere is left (by the gods) for everybody, they often have not good understanding of what is private property, do not use money, such things, they are more natural.
And our barbarians are more tolerable to the others also because they are exactly not well united, they meet so many foreign persons that can't be alien to all of them, while for the believer it is otherwise, he just divides the people in our and foreign ones. Hence, I again come to the conclusion that the morality can be bad, while the barbarity is more natural and does not set before the own people other than the existing natural, i.e. set by some god, prohibitions. When one has to be more friendly to his people this has to be compensated with more unfriendliness to the others! And the natural or minimal toleration to the others is such, that cares only about minimizing of the bad effect of environment to us (what is accessible even by the animals), not adding some other limitations and dividing the people in good and bad ones. That's it, and this time also follows a little illustrative verse,
To tolerate is not an easy thing,
because we take: it nothing good us brings.
But in a tied together world we do this must,
because bad attitude just ricochets at us!
Repeat this like a mantra, even sing.
3.03. About the freedom and the slavery
Well. this is a very important topic and I suppose that you will not object to me speaking about it, will you? Yet allow me first to dwell a bit about the … Slavs, because I am a Slav, after all, and the relation of the Slavs with the slaves is more than obvious! Yes, but in spite of the fact that I rarely admit pure coincidences, I insist that here this is a coincidence (although not exactly pure, it is motivated etymologically). It is natural because on le- or sle- are many words meaning smt. lying down, like the lie as not truth, the Liebe-love, the Eng "slang", one Bul 'slana' as frost or rime, Rus 'sljakotj' as muddy soil, and many others, including also the Sl 'sled /sleda' as trail or trace, and our 'slava' as glory. And exactly the latter is what I suppose that has to be the reason for our name Slavs ('slavjani') and not the slaves because there are no motives for this to be smt. with what we can boast and be proud of. Because if some word with bad meaning has inverted its meaning to good (what happens, relatively often, especially if is done change to diametrically opposed meaning) there have to be reasons for this; the Slavs even as a whole are not such big and, hmm, crazy believers, in order to apply the old "trick" to begin to glorify the ignominious cross and introduce the making of this sign as smt. sacred, because, you see, our Jesus was crucified, and has overcome the death with his death, and such childish fables, and has to be called from that moment on Christos.
So the slaves are called so because this name is like the word slang, where the Slavs are called so because they are 'slavni'-glorious people and want to leave behind themselves some nice 'sled'-trail; besides this 'slava' is smt. like singing (h)alleluja(h), a modification of "ave"; besides the slave in Sl sounds entirely different, it is 'rob' (like the word "robot", because to work is 'rabotatj"). But the reason why the folks on the West believe in such fables about the Slavs being slaves, is that the Slavs do not like to fight just for the sake of fighting, they do not invade foreign territories just to show off and have reasons to hit their chests an cry like gorillas, no, they fight when they have been assailed; they practically have and have had no colonies — think about this! While all Western nations, excluding the Gers before Hitler, have had colonies wide away from their borders. That's it.
Yet even if we are slaves then to be a slave is not such bad thing, it is just one of the parties in the society, there are, and have been from times immemorial, masters and slaves, in a way how there exist men and women, we can't praise the one part and debase the other. And let me remind you that the Ams have fought wars to defend the slavery, and in the army of its defenders have fought also slaves! So that I will for some time defend the slavery, not in the current world, naturally — because nowadays exist much better ways for increasing of the … exploitation, of course, of the working masses —, but at least to show you that the bad things happen not on one of the poles, but on both poles, where the good things may happen only somewhere in the middle. So the slavery in the ancient times was simply necessary otherwise it would have not existed (also that of the women to the men, as a kind of mild slavery). Let me recall to you also that the very Pythagoras was a slave. And even that — truly not in literal meaning, but still — every child is a kind of slave of his parents, or at least for good child is accepted that one with more slavish behaviour.
But also every centralized structure, like a state, a Church, a company, etc., wants to be able to treat its subordinates like slaves, and because of this have emerged the slavery in the times of pharaohs. Yet the point is, as I just hinted, that the slavery is preferable for the very slaves, because the masters somehow defend, and feed, and provide sex for their slaves; they do this not much differently as they care for the home animals, but be it so, the animals also are glad to be pastured and kept secure; and to lead a free life somewhere in the desert, amidst lions and other wild tribes and without not only food but even water, only to live without slave masters is rarely preferable for the masses, this is life of some hermit or recluse, or bandit, outlaw, but this isn't a decent life. And because of this have existed also sultan states, or Eastern rulers and samurais, or the serfdom, or then the totalitarian states. Hence if you are, so to say, a good dog, you are well fed and happy, naturally; or also if you are meek parishioner the Church authorities are glad and may help you in case of need. What means that the slavery is tolerated and preferred by the social morality — and are we not all some slaves of our God?
Or are we now not all of us slaves of the capital, of the money and the stinking rich ones? And what irritates me most of all (being a reasonable person) are the incessant ads that deafen my old ears, where I am sure that I want to see or hear not a singe ad, no matter of what kind, but I just can't get rid of them, they enslave me! You see, I am watching no TV for at least 10 years, because of the ads, reading no papers or journals, for the same reason, listening to no radio, again because of this, I avoid even to go to the shops and buy be it only bread (and prefer to circle around … garbage bins to provide myself with food — this for about a pair of years), but even walking on the street my ears catch from here or there some silly ads, and working on the Internet I become victim of the ubiquitous ads! So this is real slavery, but people take it easy and just get more moronic then ever! Yet let me remind you that in the good totalitarian times there were not silly ads, not at all; there were from everywhere praises about the successes of the Party and Government, but this was endurable, this was motivated, while the ads are motivated with nothing else except the stagnated capitalism in its final phase and the crazy democracy!
But well, let me now move to the other pole, to the freedom. Etymologically the point here is in the … flying, what you can think is so because of the often for the West changing of "l" with "r" or v.v., but in Bul there is the word 'hvyrkam' (even 'fyrkam' as illiterate pronunciation, or as variety 'pyrham') for to fly, so that it is clear that being frei-free we are feeling like some birdies soaring in the air. (Here the root is based on some rh- because this is the usual for the Slavs, as well also for the Teus, sounding of the work as 'rabota' or Arbeit, but this is also some rotation, of the wings of the birds by flying, yet let me not go in more details.) But this is just an image, where I would like to quote now the definition of Comrade Lenin, that the freedom is a recognized (or perceived) necessity! Hmm, this is a bit Jesuitic definition, because one recognizes it when he loses it, where until he is free he does not care at all about what precious present he has; yet it is right, although I would have stated first of all that the freedom is a relative notion and does not exist in pure state!
Yes, surely, because to be free of smt. we must be able to do well without it, to be independent on it, while we are material beings, and all material objects depend on the … matter, of course! For this reason only the God Himself can boast to be really independent and have free will, but the notion about a god is simply philosophical, theoretical, we have no proofs about such Being, and can also never receive some real proof about this, because we just have no idea about some pure idea! I, for my part, like often to say that God is simply information, but no believer will accept such definition, to believe in information is a laughable thing. And let me tell you also that the Islam does not praise the … angels, it does not deny them as nice creatures, because in the Tur exists the word engilik as niceness, but the angels for those people are deprived of free will, they are slaves to God. So that real freedom can not exist, or as I have put it before nearly 30 years: our world is of the strong ones (wins always what or who is stronger in some aspect), and because of this the only salvation for the weaker is to unite in some groups, around some thesis or acceptance or belief, but doing so the weaker loses his freedom, hence the common person is always a loser!
Probably for this reason I state also that the intelligent person accepts every power or ruling, while the silly one denies every one (and wants just to be free)! The intelligent person (like myself) accepts every force, because he is not strong in fighting but in intelligent confrontations, and he also (I suppose, judging by myself) understands well that agreeing with the stronger does not change the truth (say, agreeing that the Sun rotates around the Earth changes nothing in the real movement of these celestial bodies), not to mention the very force with which one is better to comply, so that such opinion is not really free personal one. But the silly person likes to vouch and give oaths (in the same way how he likes to play with the destiny, to make bets etc., thinking that if he guesses smt. then he has turned to be cleverer than the gods). The common people usually are not interested in some pure knowledge, or then morality, they are interested only in the personal win, and because of this some kind of compulsion, even slavery, shows favourable effect on such people, they feel better and act more clever when their choices are delimited. And because the barbarians have, as I state this, more freedom, they do not comply with some moral obligations, so they quite often lose their heads when are put before more freedoms. I will give you some examples about this from my poor Bul-a.
Say, in the very first days of our democracy we were drunk with this freedom up to such extent that have begun to show, like I have called this, one syndrome of the unleashed dog! Yes, surely, and practically the first act of our new government was to legalize the prostitution! But look here, the prostitutes, together with the soldiers are the first ever professions (and the soldier has to be called so being the salt of the earth, I think this is well known), so that it was normal to allow it somehow (because the communism was a moral order, surely, and the prostitution was officially forbidden, unless some higher state's interests required it), but it is one thing to admit some necessary evil, and it is smt. else to boast with it and to curse the bad communists who have forbidden it. Yet well, these are only nice flowers (like the Russ like to say), this can be somehow swallowed. The worse came when we began to outwit us mutually in every possible way, and in the very 1991 happened some real crisis because of the … sunflower oil, could you believe it? And this in conditions of free market, where the prices could always be equalized with those in the other countries. But the crisis happened because everybody thought: let me hoard some dozen liters in case of necessity, a thing which people have never before (as well after some years) done, the normal reserve was 1 or 2 bottles. And this continued for a pair of years.
Yes, will say smb., but this was in the first years, now in the new millennium our folks have learned not to do such egoistic and silly things, right? Yes but NO, we have learned nothing, this was a whole generation before, so that 30 years later we have performed the same scenario, in about 2021 — honest as to God, although I am convinced atheist! And how this happened, ah? Easy, there was one … general, whom we have chosen for several mandates, no matter that even one mandate was much for him, but people simply wanted to have strong hand, iron fist, and a general is not a "head of onion" (like we like to say — although he was not military one but … firefighter), yet at the end our people become sick of him and began to protest practically for years. We have by 2-3 elections in a single year, because we were (and are) the last EU country according to the standard of life, especially our pensions — I have seen this somewhere on the Internet — were 3 times lower than in some African countries (compared with the European the times become 5 to 7 less for pension or salaries), so that after an year or a bit more the pensions were raised significantly. And what of it, will smb. say? Ah, this, that they were raised with about 50 percents in an interval of a pair of months, what was the worst possible scenario, it was exactly according with the wishes of our fascists (and we have 3 such parties in the Parliament), and I exaggerate nothing (being a mathematician, as said), because my pension was raised just a bit more than 2 times (being the minimal of the minimal, i.e. half minimal one)!
Yeah, and seeing so many money in their pockets our people began again to hoard everything, not to leave smt. also for the neighbours (and our shops have made their contribution to the opera having written above the sunflower oil that there is limitation of 10 bottles per person — to remind to the buyers to by as much as they can!). As a result of this the people really bought as much as they could, so that this oil grew nearly 3 times (roughly from 2 Lv to above 5, even to 6 Lv) for about half an year; and when they have seen that have made the right thing with the oil they began to do the same also with the flour and the sugar, so that in the next half an year the prices of these products (accompanied by those of the … eggs) also grew yet only 2 times. Just in the end of 2023 the prices of this oil were reduced twice (to 2.5 Lv) but for the sugar and the flour we must wait another year, probably (for the moment the reduction is with about 1/4 only). So this is what the freedom can do, and surely does in a barbarous country like ours. On this example you see well that some, if not exactly slavery then at least limitations, are necessary in order to make people act reasonably, i.e. to come to realizing of the necessary amount of freedom!
That's it, my rare readers, and here again follows one poetical miniature, where I will advise you to read "really" and "nearly" as 'rilli' and 'nili', for a bit more fun.
Well, w`e are fond of freedom, to be su°re,
and try us mutu°ally to allu°re
enslaving often th'others, or just nearly,
with things that are unnecessary, really!
An animal will such thing never do, ah?
3.04. About no demand for good deeds
It is suitable to begin this essayistic chapter with one funny, said to be old Heb, sentence (which I might have already told you in this book, but I have no time for such checks), namely: not a single good deed on this world has remained … unpunished! It sounds pretty interesting for to stress the importance of the topic, only that, ha-ha, I have practically no idea about what I will speak further! Yet I will try to complete the task, because the topic is interesting, and, after all, what is an essay if not some attempt, a try to do smt.? So that I will try, but let me add also that this try is some kind of … existence, this is Lat essere as the verb to be (as ist-is, or 'estj' in Rus). What allows me to say that an essay is some … being, if we personalize it, so that, please, allow me to … beget this being, it must turn to be worth the efforts, I want to believe in this.
Because there are some little thoughts that can be mentioned. Like that there is no demand but some supply exists, there are people, and also animals, surely, who continue to do good deeds, no matter that they are not much welcomed. And what conclusion can you draw from this? Ah, for me this undeniably proves that we (including the animals) are born good — what means that I, in a way, praise the dear God, that He has created us good! Yeah, we are good, principally, only the real life can embitter us and make us bad, or the society, if it goes about human beings. (Though when the real life spoils the things this means that our God has created not much good life, surely, yet we can skip this objection taking that God has have at least good intentions, has created initially good creatures, but the nasty … Matter has tied His hands with its requirements, what I must have mentioned somewhere.) Anyway, people are good and continue, while they are young and inexperienced, to be good. And if smb. asks: and what means good or bad, then this is clear, I have said this probably several times, that all is measured in relation to the others around, so that we are taken to be good if we are such to our neighbours, and respectively bad, if are bad to the same people of our near environment.
But let us ponder a bit more profoundly why we are trying to be good, and how I have come to this conclusion. Ah, this is not difficult, we want to be good again because of the others, because we want to be liked by the others, we do not want to be left alone, we want to socialize with our environment. And I have come to this conclusion because all young beings, animals and humans, want just to play with the others! (So that we would have been good also without the help of God, we would have wanted to be liked in order to be able to show off on the background of the others, i.e. for egoistic reasons, but this looks like collectivism — because such is the dialectics!) Yet let us not question this anymore, we are good in our hearts because we want to be liked and … conquer the others, in a way, make them to depend of our goodness, such things.
But there is smt. that worsens the situation with the humans, because we can … hmm, think, imagine, so that if smt. or smb. looks good to us we become — or must become — suspicious why it or he is so good, what is hidden in this? Although the higher animals, the mammals, are also keen and can cheat successfully the others, yet the humans are the top. I have come to some peculiar linguistic observation before about 30 years comparing Eng gift with the same Ger Gift but this time as … poison! And then have recalled the tale about the Trojan horse which was a present, and also about throwing initially of some food to allure the fishes when fishing, and now the beloved by the shops method of cheating with highly reduced prices of some products (because in an unmoral society everything is allowed), and have confirmed my guesses about the widespread cheating with presents. (About this Eng - Ger gift nobody confirms my observations, and is given that the Eng word is from to give, as variation of "given", but then the poison is also smt. given, come to think about, and I continue to believe in this obvious for me relation between similar langs.) So that we are often good, and because of this showing good attitude to smb. is a booby trap (in your beloved, I suppose, democratic society).
Yet if smb. comes from all said here to the conclusion that it is better to do evil than good (because the evil always hits, there is no conditional accepting of it), then he surely is wrong here — because the right attitude is not to go to the other pole (I just don't know for which time I am saying this, provably for n-th), because the evil or bad behaviour ricochets to us. What, alas, is a bit simplified, it ricochets to about us, to smt. similar to us, to our relatives, co-citizens, compatriots, or even to all human beings (like the previous AIDS or the recent Covid, and many other examples)! (What I also have repeated many times, but I warned you that I have practically nothing new to tell you here, I just exercise my brain cells.) So that our instinctive good inclination is in all cases good thing, we must continue to provide no demanded good deeds (if you want, in order to raise our self-esteem), only that we have to be a bit more clever, to show some reflection when thinking, what is meant as thinking about what the other person (or be it even inanimate object, this makes practically no difference) thinks, and even in some more times of reflection (say, I think, that he thinks, that I think). Why?
Ah, because the thinking is in effect just reflection, seeing, comparing, building of models of environment, such things. And we must try to better the society, what we have given up to try, leaving everything in, so to say, auto-pilot, without morality at all (at least incorporated in the ruling bodies by the democracy), because all our efforts to build good morality have failed after some time. Yes, I am not lying to you, I have even come to the sentence that: every system built in order to follow the common sense after some time begins to … contradict to this very common sense! Where under common sense I understand such things which we feel instinctively, especially the older people, about which things exist various proverbs, and so on, yet this must not be understood literally, because many common sense truths are usually denied by the majority of people, chiefly by the young ones, so that the common sense is not really common for the people; and more so in the last one or a bit more centuries when we are denying all moral norms (say, allowing extra-marital sex). And how do you think, why this happens?
Ah, because of the dialectics, naturally, because everything wants, waits for its … denial, and even prefers to do this denial alone, with its own means (like this our … suffocating with unnecessary luxury and forgetting the simple way of life led for millenniums)! So that because panta rei, panta kinetai, we can't build once and for all established good social structures. And because of this we have denied the morality and have substituted it with laws, which little by little become obvious for many people that are worse than the morality! Yet about the laws I have reserved the next chapter so that let me continue with the badness of morality and how to overcome these problems — because nowadays we can overcome everything, if we only wish to do it! Here I will tell you 1-st what is the remedy, and then why we can not apply it an mass. But, again, continue to expect smt. nearly obvious, which we, still, do not want to do, because of some unavoidable dialectical causes.
So there is one, and I suppose only one way in order to ensure dynamical changing of smt., but also preserving its natural evolution, avoiding the stagnation, to which every religion inevitably leads — because the goal of every ruling is to preserve the status quo! (I have come to this thought before maybe 1/3 of a century, when the 1-st sprouts of my 1-st book about the Communism as religion have begun to grow in my clever head.) And this way is when we learn to maintain some … intersection of all moral structures, of what good is contained in them, here chiefly as religions! I do not say that this is an easy thing, but as notion this exists in the mathematics in idealized form, and some approximation of it can be realized, as I said, if we only show that want this. There can, surely, be imagined some common Congregation of all, I repeat all, Churches, including the atheists (and probably other moralizing bodies, if they appear to exist), which body must be renewed periodically (say, once in 5 or 10 years), and which should not directly govern, but must play important role for establishing of what is observed as good in the spiritual area of judgments. The existence of all possible structures with similar functions will exclude every thinkable stagnation, because it will contain the necessary dialectical, mild, contradictions in itself!
And together with this Congregation must exist also some democratic structure — say, regional, by countries, and in world-wide scale Representative Assembly — built in order to maintain the sacred vox populi (via some questionnaires and statistics — say, on the question whether the sexual desire can stay above the moral obligations to the posterity, and when, in which cases, such things!). We can build this, as is said, from tomorrow for the yesterday, yet nobody (except me) proposes such Utopian ideas — and because of this the bloodshed in the whole world continues to exist! It is "As we like it", in a Shakespearian manner. And now on the question: why we meet with many problems when are trying to do smt. reasonable or logical?
Ha-ha, but surely because we are not reasonable beings, we are emotional clots of organized matter which have the ability to perform some intelligent judgments, yet always postpone this as much as possible, because we have different feelings, yet not a good, and convincing for us, feeling of the logical or reasonable, even not of the plausible (all kinds of fictions have crashed all beginnings of such feelings, we believe in the unbelievable, like it is well known)! Besides we are built bottom-up, nobody (what means also the very God) has known what will turn out of this experiment with organized matter; there is a heap of proofs about this, but I will give you here only the last thing that I have learned in my old years, that the genetic material, the chromosomes with the long molecules of DNA, are present in each body cell (what has absolutely no sense if the organisms were built top-down), because all has begun with the protoplasm and single-celled organisms. In other words, we are historically built like feeling, and not thinking, beings. And this was known, I mean felt, by the first shamans and church priests of very primitive religions, so that everything is based on the ubiquitous … cheating! So did you get the difficulty?
Ah, when everything is cheating then all religions rely mainly on some distracting manoeuvres, so that they must, still, have nice and valuable intersection, but it is very hard, for the moment impossible, to come to common truths without the basic bricks of delusion, so to say! Some ancient religions do not hide very deep their intentions (like the Buddhism, Islam, probably others, and I may make errors in these matters as dilettante in them), but beginning with the Judaism and the later Christianity in all its varieties everything is spoiled irreparable. Yet the effort is worth trying, we must try this, maybe the atheism, together with the … Islam, can help here.
So this was about the efforts of every newborn to try to be good, no matter that all human past confirms that this is silly behaviour. Probably after a pair of … millenniums we will make the necessary effort to approach the question properly, i.e. albeit with deceit but in the interest of whole humanity. This time, too, is a poetical impromptu, but I must give before it some explanations because I use there words from … 3 langs, namely: the Lat per se as by itself, the Tur, yet known in Bul, word 'kjos`e' (probably given as köse) as without beard or mustaches, and our understandable in the context 'pras`e' as pig. The verse follows.
To d`o good deeds 's-a good thing if per se,
yet not in world of animosity.
So does an youngster when he's still 'kjose',
but your behaviour will be positive
if you'll act just like all, as … pig-'prase'!
3.05. About the barbarity of … the laws
Well, here I am not literally right, because the laws are product of civilization, so that they can not be directly barbarian, meant as pre-religious, before building of the states as big social groups, and so on, but they are such in related meaning simply as: unjust (chiefly to the poor and deprived), morsch-foul (in sense of not well appropriate to the concrete situation), corrupted (in what regards the very system of execution of the laws), and so on, or in one word, as dead-born (bad in the very moment of their appearance, not to mention their further worsening with the real application of them)! (And here I not occasionally mention Ger morsch because it is related with the morte-death.) As intention, or approach to the matters, they are well thought, but everything went badly done, as it happens with practically all human deeds. I will try to disentangle the nodes, figuratively speaking.
So the law suit looks like some bargaining on the market, it is typical example about this how must not be done justice, i.e. not for money, surely! It is one thing to recompense somehow the losses of the victim of some injustice, and it is quite another thing that the judicial system must win by this, but there is paid for everything, and is paid to the institution, not to the suffering party! This can be seen, if you want, even by the very building of the law Courts, in every state or town, this is an imposing building, like a bank or a … gambling house, where the facade must hint to everybody that this is a wealthy place. I mean that the paid taxes are not according to the pockets of common people, they are for quite wealthy and even rich, but it should not be so! I can see well why this is made so, but this is not excuse for the situation, this is only stating of another injustice. The real reason for this is not that people like to sue and in this way such cases are a bit limited, no, the real reason is that when the judicial system can cake some money, then it must do this — i.e. this confirms my statement that the law is a kind of bargain. And also, naturally, there is that moment, that the Courts are established in order to … avoid feudal quarrels!
Yes, substitution of armed conflicts between some wealthy owners with law suits is much better, this is peaceful, as if more reasonable, etc., but a severe old fashioned … tyrant (or then sultan, pharaoh) would have (and had) done the same thing! As I said, there are good intentions used as excuses, but this is not so important as it is insisted to be. And the prices are not measured to the poor citizens, surely not, the law suits continue to be for very rich persons and /or companies. Say, I remember that in my youth, i.e. before about half a century, was some law suit in USA where the biggest computer company, IBM, was convicted for monopolizing the market and forced to pay some mln dollars fine, what was demonstrated as good civilized laws in one democratic country. Yes, but not exactly, because the fine was a matter of bargain, such that only allowed the Court institution and the state of US to win smt., also to help for boosting of the computer branch in the country, and nobody was severely hit, because the fine was, presumably, of the amount of pair of percents of company's last year gain. But if, for example, for a stolen hen the convicted was sent in prison for one year (or for much more time, or was … cut a wrist of him as punishment, what was done in many countries in old times) then this was a "bit" more severe penalty, right?
I will come to the disproportion of the penalties a bit later, but now let me add smt. more about the law taxes. Say, when a notary signs some document he receives for this childish easy work payment of the order of a daily work by an usual labourer, and this if there is not some money interest in the document, but if it goes about some act of selling of an, e.g., a home, if there has to be paid a tax to the state, then the notary wants to receive as much money for his work as the very state, what is a robbery in a broad daylight, I think! But this is so (and I remember that for to receive a copy of a court decision I had to pay, well, not really big money, but still, about a dozen times higher than for a copy made by copy machine, which also was used, i.e. really payment for nothing, just to feel that the Court is a rich institution and everybody must make his contribution for making it richer).
And because I have mentioned some personal experience with the Courts, let me continue a little more. I have lived through one law suit initiated by my former wife, which (the suit) I have lost — naturally, and you will at once understand why —, because have defended myself alone! Yeah, having 2 tertiary educations and having worked as research assistant in our Bulgarian academy of sciences (BAS) I have felt myself bound not to use a lawyer for such trifle, because an advocate means added voce-voice, and I am quite able to speak for myself; in addition to this I had simply no spare money, having been remained unemployed with the coming of our (beloved) democracy, simply as over-educated for those times. And when it has come to the question of alimony I proposed — just to be sure of the malevolence of the Court — to give the child (son) to me, in which case I will have no wishes for whatever payment from the side of the mother! Yes, an obvious decision (although I was unemployed), if it was before some moral institution (all problems solved; also with the question where to live, because I lived in my father's flat and have applied a signed document by him that I can live there with the child until he comes of age; and take also into account that I could have been of big help for the education of the child, at age of 7 in that time, being alone highly educated and with enough free time as unemployed), but not before a law organization! Well, the Court was, obviously … pissed by me not wanting to begin to ask for mercy, and in addition to this … insulting the very law system, in a way, with my not using a lawyer!
But, people — and I am coming to the question of lawyers —, as I said, the money, and the lawyers, too, are marketing elements in the system, such things must not exist, and they have not officially existed in the ancient Courts of the monarchs. It is well known, as I alone also proved this, that the suit is won by the good lawyer, what, for its part, is obvious proof that at the suits is not defended the truth — because for money can be proved everything! So that the lawyers must be at once removed from the court rooms; they may exist as advisors, before (or even after) the suits, yet not during the suits, with the only exceptions when the person is disabled and can't speak or hear, or is some imbecile, smt. like this; and also when a party of the suit is some organization then before the Court stands the authorized person, who can have judicial education (like if this also occasionally happens if one of the parties is such person). As you see, everything is clear, but in a democratic country everything is based on one or another form of delusion, so that the Courts are not an exception. More than this, the laws are specially made so difficult that to require special education, where no morality presupposes that the persons must have legal education, neither this is learned in the schools, no, everything is on purpose, because the very system is foul and deadly born! All this about the goddess Themis being blindfolded are fables for pre-school children, she pretty well sees who is the wealthier and gives the winning to him.
Now about the disproportion of the penalties to the offenses. Well, I suppose that practically nobody between you, my readers, have thought about this, but I personally have thought and have come to the conclusion that here also everything is botched! And I allow for some little distortion, of about 2-3 times usually, bit not of dozens and more times, how it really is. What I mean is that for a stolen hen, as I said, one is fined (in the best case) with a sum about ten hens, plus the court expenses (which may turn to be even bigger), while for stealing of a car (and destroying it somehow) he will be hardly fined with the price of a new car, also for destroying by negligence of some property he is fined usually with smt. in the amount of 10 % of the price, then for causing of severe bodily wounds one can compensate probably only some percents of the damages, by causing death one practically always remains alive, and even for a series of killings nowadays one has all chances to live till quite old age! Yeah, and you probably remember the old biblical phrase about "eye for eye etc.", what shows that the contemporary laws are, at least in some aspects, much worse than the old moral commandments were. I see well that the point here is to have some deterrent and preventive effect, but as I said, not beyond any reasonable limits.
And the funny, i.e. bad, again, moment is that we are so entangled in some invented as if moral obligations, which are not in some necessary proportion with the real situation or way of life of the offender, so that sometimes happen obvious curiosities! Like, for example, that a prisoner leads better life, in sense of more secured, than a free citizen! Believe me, I invent nothing, I have personal experiences (in poor life — because of my pretty higher education, as I mentioned it —, not in having been imprisoned, because I respect the strength, albeit I spit at it)! Let me again remind you that I have received for about 5 years pension in the amount of 3 (even a bit less) buss tickets daily, for all expenses, while a sustenance of one prisoner can in no case — you bet it — cost less then 5 times bigger sum! Yes, a prisoner (nowadays) will not be kept by temperature in the winter of about 15 degrees Celsius, will be properly fed (on a sum, say, of 5-6 tickets daily only the food), will have medical care and this free, will be allowed to educate himself in some more demanded profession (say, as plumber), will be invited to do some work in the prison (not to stay unemployed for decades), and his good intentions will be appraised somehow, not be left to invent various ways for deceiving the others in order to win his living, and probably smt. else; the only right that he will not have in comparison with the free living people is … ha-ha, to circle around the garbage bins (like myself), what is a big … fun, I'll tell you!
But well, I have written (maybe before 10 years) a paper about the Just injustice, so that go and read it, if you want. Here I will only sketch, in a pair of paragraphs some of the basic points in it, without whatever details. Say, it has to be given everything in new and better units, not in national currency, and even not in years (if of imprisonment), but in … minimal salaries! There can be MDS (as daily), MMS (monthly), and MYS (yearly), but probably only MMS will suffice (in order to avoid typing errors). So for each offence is given some punishment in MMS which is a perfect decision because nowadays (from maybe about a century) in each country exists some officially established MS (usually for a month, but in some cases as daily payment), which is objective and cannot be falsified. And in this way the punishment stays always actual, even if after half a century, and even under very high inflation, and must not be periodically corrected. I just don't know why such obvious decision is not applied till now, and probably will never be applied (maybe it is because the majority of people are not mathematicians, or educated in some other of the exact sciences).
In this way the punishment can be in every moment recalculated in the current money units and paid to the state or the victim, in some limits (say, for criminal acts the years of imprisonment must never — I suppose, but it may depend — be less than the half of the total punishments). Also there can be different (say, of 3 levels) prisons, where the usual average ones can be recalculated by the quotient: 1 year prison = 2 yearly MS (or, say, 25 MMS), but if with hard labour it may reach 30 or more MMS per year, while there can be also easier prisons, with about 20 or less MMS per year. Yet the more important moment (if you ask me) is that the exact punishment must be established in the way of averaging the values of every of the jurors; and the number of the latter must vary according to the level of the Court, where the lowest must be (probably) 3 and the state's level be (say) 7 or 9, yet not excluding the possibility for some national voting (via some personal accounts and keywords). There can be also some 0-th level, or pre-court level, where are taken some administrative decisions normally by only 1 person.
All this means that the voting of the punishment can result in filling of some tables, according to each of the points of the indictment, so that everything can be done automatically (and probably even later be transferred to some artificial intelligence — this is possible to be done even today, but I do not mean by only one standard algorithm, but that there can exist several personages, with their level of humanity in the understanding of the laws). And when everything will be given in MMS then the human … life can also be calculated (conditionally, but usefully) in MMS on the basis of some accepted parameters like that one lives the average length of years (say, 75), that 1 year life costs one average MMS (as if 2 and 1/3, or how it is taken around this value), that after 70 years is taken that always remains another 1/10-th of the life span (or 7 years), that for every injury is established some percent of the remaining life (and this can be varied by the jurors), that every one is valued on the basis of his /her salary for the last 5 years (smt. of the kind), that can be many and different coefficients in every case, because there can be, for ex., intended or planned murder, but there can be just occasional death or injury, and similar moments. And so on.
This, on what I want to stress is, that the low system is organized in the practically worst possible way, everything is based on uncertainty of the punishment, that one must be always afraid, that if one is wealthy he can remain unpunished, that the point even before the Court is above all to deceive the others (and the lawyers exist exactly for this purpose), and further in this direction. And because of this I have the suspicion that in about 1/3 of the cases the convicted suffers more than he deserves (if some divine Being has monitored everything and taken the right decision). And because of all these unjust moments one tries always to outsmart the law and order system. In other words, that the laws nowadays are much worse than the morality of the religions, they are not moral, practically barbarian! And it sounds insulting to the very humans that everything can be organized much better, yet we just do not want, we like our … sh#t, it does not smell to us.
Ah, I have finished, and here again follows one poetical illustration of my negative opinion about our democratic law and order system, but if you are believer in the democracy, you better skip this verse, it is for open-minded people, not for believers.
`I will tell you, peop°le, that the law
wants to make us all know how to … blow!
Yeah, the phallus of the democratic state,
and be ready to perform the job, to wait!
This is what the system is, the core!
3.06. About Bulgarian people
Ah, my task here is very difficult, because (when I cast a glance at the contents of the previous years) I have spoken already in 0-th year about Bul deplorable condition and the barbarity, and a bit later again about our barbarity, so that I must have said everything necessary. Yeah, I will inevitably repeat myself a bit, but I will try that this will be not very much; after all I will try to give you some picture of the image of the common Bul-n, to make some rough sketch of him (or her). This is important, because in the next chapter I will speak about the nice Bul lang., and then in the following one about our inevitable perdition, when I must be able to cause … rivers of tears to pour out of your eyes because of the expected loss of such nice nation, with such unique genes! Really, it is so, and I begin to shed tears even now, but wipe them bravely and continue my narration, because I am a philosopher (in my heart) and see well that it is so in our world, one loses but another one wins. Yet let me begin.
OK, here I have 2 approaches: either to begin, that we are very nice people but (unfortunately) are barbarians, or then in the reversed order, to say that we are barbarians but (on the other hand) we are very nice people! And what would you alone have preferred? A difficult question, right, but let me tell you that it is similar to that funny definition of the difference between the pessimist and the optimist, which is showed best of all when they are placed before a … bottle with smt. nice (say, an alcoholic beverage), in which case the pessimist exclaims "Ah, but it is already half empty!", while the optimist cries "Ah, but it is still full to the half!". So that in this or in that way the reality remains the same, and here it is that we are both, good and bad, surely! Where I (as a philosopher — have I missed to tell you this?) state that the only good decision in this case is some compromise, when, if we can reach it, everything will be brilliant (for our contradictive world). And this is what I say and have said, and to what I must come also in this year.
So I am convinced that we are nice looking people, both the men and the women. Yet this must be true for practically every nation, for every biological species; I don't know why, but probably our God has decided to show that He is worth being called God, but every animal or vegetation is with smt. interesting and perfect! Id est everything is functional. Say, the Chinese have straight hair in order that, if some gull … sh#ts on their head, then this (as well also rain drops or snow flakes etc.) could fast and easy skate down — isn't it so? While the Negroes have curly hair, and even with tiny curls, because by the scorching temperature there the hairs have no other salvation than to curl themselves in order to escape the direct rays of the Sun, and in this case their heads are covered with some isolating layer, which builds some barrier for the heat. As you see, everything is functional, and I have even read in one scientific book why the gorillas have such big … nose holes (much bigger than by a normal man, not to mention the finely built feminine ones)? There is no need to tell you to think about this because it is so sophisticated that you will never guess. So this is because even their pinkies are so thick that will never enter in an usual human nose hole, but in their own noses they can and enter!
With what I mean that if God has created the Buls as such incorrigible barbarians, then there has to be some reason for this. And I even have hinted that this is in order to allow more freedom to the people (and to make them happier in this way). And, funny or not, but it is so, and the barbarity is wider spread (as I have said this somewhere) in more southern areas (meant for the northern hemisphere, i.e. in warmer places), than on the North (and, e.g., the Eskimos are in no case barbarians). This is easily explainable with the fact that in warmer places it is easier to survive and, hence, more freedom for development of the individuals may be allowed, while in colder areas the collectivism is strongly necessary. Yes, with this addition, that some southern tribes are pretty religious (say, Hers, Sps, Its, and so on) but we are not such people. I mean that we are officially Christians, but about 90 (or more) %s of us go to church chiefly on Christmas, what means like on a theater performance, not as believers who need the religion. And especially nowadays everything is beyond repair. (This time is exactly the very moment for appearance of some atheistic religions — like my Pentaism, proposed in my 1-st book about the Communism, but we are still much silly for such things, we have to better our spirit first, probably via the Buddhism or the Islam, as more thought-through religions.)
But our niceness is also in this, that we are not pure ethnically, no, we are a conglomerate of ethnoses. This has begun wide back in history, in 7-th century, where our state has been built, because there were probably 10-15 %s proto-Buls, maybe till 10 %s Thracians, and the left part were Slavs. Somewhere in 1975-th (when there were more exact estimations made) was officially given that the Turks are about 25 and the Gypsies about 20 %s, but now (acc. to me) the Turks must be not less than 35 and the Gyps than 25 %s because in the provinces live practically only Gyps and Turks. Hence, adding about 5 %s for other ethnicities, we come to the really frightening 2/3 of the population as non-Buls! (Ah, and let me explain what means this exacter estimation of the ethnoses: you see, when there was that military commission which decides who can be enrolled in army as recruit all boys were present before it totally naked, but the Turks are all … circumcised, and the Gyps can be recognized from high in the air, as we say. And with such big percent of Turks we have invented some military alternative, the so called "building troops" which were trained not in using arms but as cheap building workers.)
Now, I don't say that this mixture of ethnoses is smt. bad, no, it is good for the breeding, for the population, we become similar to one Brazil, or US, and also other countries, but, still, in everything has to be preserved the right proportion, which (if you ask me) dictates that the non-Buls must not exceed the real Bul, isn't it so? But it isn't so today. And the proportion is worsened because our emancipated women, which do not accept any families, have practically ceased to give birth to new children, we are … ideal state according to my calculations from 20 years ago about the reaching of 1 only percent of negative growth, we are maintaining this percent already more than 30 years. Yes, but why we and not, say, the Chinese? Also the Turks are not mixing with us, neither we with them; they do not do this on religious grounds, I suppose, and we on historical one, the 5 centuries Tur yoke; they are probably mixing only with the Gyps, yet I may be wrong about this. And when so then this policy of nearly … apartheid with the Turks is not so good for us; after all, we do not need them, while they need us! They will probably retain the name Bul-ia, because this speaks nothing bad for them (and rather confirms that they have conquered us, in the end). But maybe we will also gain smt. from them, together with the Arabs! And don't ask "what", please, because this has to be obvious — we may learn to help us mutually, not to be such barbarians! I may again be wrong, but it goes to this, so that you better pray that I will be right!
Because they have various methods for help to some of their people when this is necessary, there is the whole Turkey behind them, and it is more than 10 times bigger than us! We are midgets compared with it. And in the same time we just don't want anymore union with Russia, with this backward Asian country (how many Buls still think, especially if they are ethnical Turks or Gyps or Arabs). It is, for more than 30 years, time to think about our future, but we are … democrats, we just don't like to plan! So that we are good nation, good people (meant the ethnical Buls), but we have bad perspectives, yet I will stop with this now because there will be another chapter about this. Let me add smt. more about our goodness in my understanding (of being not like the other civilized countries).
Let me take smt. as if insignificant, how we cross the streets. Ah, we prefer to do this not on the crossings, I mean that if the crossing is at up to about 50 m we will most probably go to it, but otherwise we do this in the way in which our stray dogs are doing it, with just looking on the left and on the right, and when we take it for safe then we cross; with the addition that even being on the crossing and seeing that there are no cars coming we quite often cross on red, especially if the street is not very broad — at least I am behaving in this improper way. And why? Well, because I take it for unquestionable that not the pedestrian is dangerous but the cars, and even if I am on a crossing I still look at the sides (because if a car hits me it may be guilty, its driver, but I am who will suffer). I know that this behaviour is not correct, but for me this is what is safer, and this is a thing which a dog (or a child) understands, to look around and to take care about himself (or herself); to teach a dog to cross only on green light I still think for difficult and dangerous. Yeah, but it turns out that these judgments are true for us, but not, e.g., for one Ger-ny! And really, I still remember how I have seen once in the former DDR a dog walking unleashed on a 30 m before his owner, and he (or she, but for me a dog is animated being) came to one crossing, not at all wide, and stopped there because it was red. Oh dear readers, I could have never believed it if had not seen it with my own eyes!
What you may think proves that we are barbarians (and I do not deny this), but for me this proves also that we have heads on our shoulders, that's it. We know the regulations, but we prefer to judge for ourselves, because: what if there is smt. wrong with the regulations? In this way exactly, suppose I, we have once saved the lives of several thousand Hebs, one whole echelon which has stopped in Sofia waiting to be sent to the West (where they would have been sent in some concentration camp)! Yes, but do not forget that this was in Nazi's time, and we were their allies in that time! Yet we have raised some protests and the state's government complied with the people in the end.
Also let me tell you one interesting comparison which I have made before maybe 10 years. It is about some relative percent of talented persons, chiefly musicians, and is based on the fact that we make on the average 1 permille of the world population (and even less now, because we are moving to 6 mln, while the world population is already over 8 bln). Yes, but do you think that the world known Bul musicians (opera singers, or pianists, or violinists, or others) are about 1 to 1000 ? Because I highly doubt in this! I think that they are at least 10 times more, most probably 20 to 30, but maybe even to 50 times (say, if we are 1/1200 part of the all, this means that if they are 1/40-th part then about 1 to every 30 such persons must be Bul, smt. in this order); My guess is that the world-known Bul musicians are roughly about those from Russia, but it is 30 times bigger than us. And this, surely, must mean smt., because everything what is more than a pair of times bigger or smaller is already an exception, and about 30 times this means that we are quite suitable candidates to be called geniuses, like the Hebs, what many Buls also think! And I will also tell you why we can't boast with world-known specialists in other areas (say, orchestral conductors, or physicists, mathematicians, theologians, architects, sculptors, and others). But this is easily explainable — it is because we are poor country and for these professions are necessary big investments, while with the musicians it isn't so. Also this, that we are not ethnically clear nation has its advantages, I think that this is practically obvious.
But on the other hand we are barbarians, and in a bigger extent than I would have wished, about what I will also give you some (mournful) examples — in order not to begin to think that I am only defending my people, no, I also spit at them, when they deserve it. And these examples will be from my own experience, i.e. I can vouch for them! So let me tell you that I have made a habit (before 4-5 years, about two years before the virus) to visit some vegetable shops just after their closing, because quite often they have left what is spoiled and cannot be sold before the (closed) doors of the shops. Sometimes there is nothing left, but sometimes is so much that I can't carry it all; also in some cases or shops they leave pretty well smashed fruits, but sometimes the leftovers are nearly perfect (especially for free products); and even sometimes the sellers (seeing that I loiter about waiting for them to close) have told me explicitly to take this or that, really. It depends on the people, and some are not really avaricious, or care about some decent place in the other world, or are just realistic and see that if smb. like me takes smt. this will save them the work to carry the things to the garbage first thing in the morning, or similar reasons. I explain these details to you in order to perceive that this is smt. quite natural and even of mutual advantage.
Yes, but once when I lifted some empty crates to see whether there is smt. left below (because in very warm summer days — like it was then — they leave some crate as cover), and was disappointed that there was nothing else except some single smashed … leaves of salad, but still caught a pair of them (as appetizer for my "night cap"). Exactly in that moment I heard some cry from a distance of 20-30 m, as if of a … camel (or, then, donkey) driver as to what am I doing there, or who am I to touch there or smt. of the kind. To this I most probably have answered that who is he to ask me, and than from one shining white Jap car jumps out some … gorilla, with a physiognomy exactly of hired killer, comes fast to me and — listen carefully — grasped me (with his hairy hands) for the collar and literally heaved me in the air, because he, as it turned out, was the very proprietor of the shop! Well, I didn't believe him at first (because there were a pair of women who sold the goods), but for all eventuality I crossed myself (no matter that am unbeliever), and there came a pair of sellers from the nearby shops, so that he did not succeed to choke me, but you can, anyway, imagine my surprise!
So he continued to demand from me to put back the 2 salad leaves — just think about this — what I also did (although I have occasionally put 3 leaves in my bag, so that my evening appetizer was again ensures with a single leaf — ha-ha). That's it, people, this is the image of our free and young Bul small scale owners! For me this was shocking experience, no matter that I was for decades of years, with the very coming of our democracy, convinced that we are typical barbarians. And somewhere after maybe half an year began the Corona pandemy and there was enhanced security and exactly at that place I met with one old woman hired temporarily as warden who also objected to my taking whatever left before the shops — what after all I accepted as … care for herself, to look at the breaking of the day what was left and take the best, rather than as scrupulous performing of her duties.
Ah, there are other examples, about my discussions with my direct neighbours, and other moments, but I will leave this for the next and one above chapter, probably, because here I have significantly exceeded my limit of about 10 KB chars. That's it for the moment.
3.07. About Bulgarian language
Ah, I have spoken about Bul lang. at least on 5 places, also under other pen-names, but here is the exact place for this, in order to juxtapose our obvious barbarity with our brilliant (acc, to me) lang. and draw some conclusions, because on this world everything is somehow related, surely. I mean that there rarely happen unmotivated coincidences, and usually there are relations of many things (and, resp., it is difficult to establish which relation is more important), than not to exist some relation when there are drastic exceptions. And here the exceptions are really drastic (in my view), because we are the unquestionable barbarians in the whole Europe, and our lang. is again unquestionably the simplest of all Sl langs (at least in relation of the cases, which we do not at all have, not a single one)! So that I am forced one more time to speak about our lang., but I will try it to be in different way, not like the previous ones.
The main difference this time will be that I will not be very precise, but will speak more generally, without details. Yet I will also not miss the pillars on which my thesis stands. Yes, but because there is also the Mac lang. as pretty exceptional let me add once and for all that the Mac is practically dialect of Bul, yet in some extend worse, and these people are pretty few, about 2 mln (what can be due to the fact that they are divided, and this for pair of centuries, between 3 countries: Serbia or the former Yug-ia, Bul-a, and Greece), so that I will not mention this country anymore. But I am not inventing, because they have not the super important (acc. to me) 6-th V. (for Vowel; like also C. for Consonant), this 'y' sound, use 2-nd auxiliary word (a thing that no other Slavs have), have 3 kinds of definite articles (say, for f. they are '-ta, -va, -na', where we have only '-ta'), which they use for near of wide away placed persons, have also 3 kinds of pl., and probably smt. else.
We (the Buls), for our part, have not a single case (there is occasionally used Voc case but this only for names, and it is the easiest case, and the young people do not use it), have much simplified phonetics, read the words always how they are written (but always — what makes enormous difference with the Eng, for ex.), have shorter words (than the majority of the Slavs), have all needed articles, all used on the West tenses, yet a bit more difficult than necessary, methinks! Why? Ah, because we have some modalities (acc. to me), we make difference in the past between I am sure in smt. because have seen it (with the particle 'bjah') and I am not sure but so have heard to be said (with the particle 'bil', where these particles are forms of the verb to be in the past tense). And we have also a pair of more past or future tenses in the sense that smt. has happened once but is no more happening, or then has happened many times in the past, or then in the future in the sense that I would have wished to have done smt., but this is chiefly in theory, used in the conversation, not in official texts (or if still used officially then is not stressed on the real difference), and it goes about some particles, not about word forms or endings, suffixes, what is the important thing!
And in what is the importance here? Ah, in this, that I state that our Bul lang. is worth to become … world standard, if people begin to take into account the easiness of studying it, not the importance or strength of the country speaking it (because we are small country and with … disappearing functions, so to say — to what I will come in the next chapter)! But well, because we, still, have some competitor (the Mac-ns) let me ponder a bit about the exceptions in the langs. So, as I have just hinted, the exceptions appear usually when smb. (or smt.) is just … pissed by smt. in his near environment and begins to make smt. in spite of this thing! So have begun to do the Greeks in antiquity (because they are neither Arabs, nor Negroes, as well also because they are just stubborn — I have mentioned this), in a similar way have behaved the Turks (which are not Arabs, they have also unique lang., although they have taken many Ar words because they are also believers in Islam), then in this "pissed" way have behaved all Lat nations with their langs, which they have made vulgar just to go as far away from the difficult Lat lang. as possible (Its, Fr-ns, etc.); really pissed by the scrupulous Gers were the old Eng-men (because, let me remind you, the Gers were like brothers to the Lats, germanicus in Lat means a brother); and more or less so behave the Scan countries in the current times.
After this so convincing emptying of some "bladders" becomes obvious why the Mac-ns have become so in-spite-of-doing — because of this dividing them in 3 countries. And probably because we, the Buls, were the most tolerable to them, they have gone in our way of rejecting the cases (and not in the Ser-n of retaining them). Yet they, as I just said, continue to be ashamed to use the best V. 'y', which exists as letter of the alphabet (let me shorten it to alph.) in the Rum. And how about us then, who has "pissed" at us? Ha-ha, all near nations, all our neighbours! (Let me tell you that in our history is known the Second Balkan or also Inter-Ally war in 1913, when all our neighbours have begun to fight against us — because we are taken for barbarians but in the worst meaning.) Yeah, we are so extraordinary that all nations do not take us for real people, and because of this we have begun to think and to care only about our comfort, about what is easy and not about what is used in the countries around us, be it even taken for monstrosity (this gluing of the definitive articles at the end of the nouns and adjectives). But surely, people, we are just geniuses, or at least originals! (More or less like me, like how I teach all people around, in a heap of langs, and am practically not read because am so untraditional.)
So this is the case with us, we are simply pretty clever as a nation, and only this can explain how we have created this most simple of all Sl langs, no matter that it does not sound so nice like even the Rus, but also compared with the Western langs (Fr, It, Eng, even Ger). Yes, but let me continue, first with the phonetics. According with my views for simplicity there are basic, modified (mod.) and combined (comb.) sounds, both for the Vs and Cs, but more important are the 1-st; there can be also special signs which I call Ms (for modifiers), which must not be between the usual letters, yet till this moment they were, naturally, exactly between the used letters of the alph.; and there are also semi-Vs, and other moments but I will not indulge in more details. And when I have defined some Vs and Cs as basic, then from here follows that it is preferable to have if possible only basic chars, with as little as possible other sounds. And I have done this starting with my Bul lang., taking it in the very beginning for the simplest possible (at least in phonetical aspect), what may seem little perverse as approach for some of you, but I prove and justify my decision, as you will see everywhere.
On the other hand this means that some person of another nation, speaking another lang. as mother one, is impeded to come to my conclusions (because, hmm, excuse me, but I will quote one more time one indecent saying, yet pretty exact here, namely that: your own sh#t does not smell!). (Yes, surely, you try to convince, say, a Rus-n that the grammatical cases are obsolete nowadays, or a Ger-n that to write every noun with capital letter is just silly, or an Eng-man that not to have general rules for reading of every word is a bad and uneducated habit, and other examples.) So that you have no other choice except to believe be (or, then; to cease reading me. right?). But the point is that we have practically only basic Vs ('e, i, o, u, a, y') and Cs (including 'sh, ch, zh', but for more details you search my proposition for world-wide alph., where I start from the Bul lang.), no mod-d sounds (what means to begin saying 1 V. but ending with another one — like Eng 'ya' as in "but", or 'ae' as in "man", or Rus 'yi' which I call donkey sound), and only the most natural comb-d sounds, what means with 'j' from either side — like 'aj, oj, ju, ja,' etc., also the C. 'sht'). Yes, this is practically everything about the phonetics, and all other Slavs have more difficult sounds, where from the Western langs. in this aspect the simplest are the It and the Ger.
Than let me take the definite articles, which (as said) are appended to the nouns and adjectives (and, e.g. "beautiful country" in Bul is 'hubava strana', what with an article will be 'hubavata strana', or then "the strong man" will be 'silnijat myzh', or "the even field" will be 'ravnoto pole'). As you see there is nothing difficult. Well, there are, naturally, exceptions, and they are not so little as I would have wished, say, our plurals are not exactly easy, and, e.g., pl. from 'vol'-bovinus-buffalo is 'volove', because 'voli' just does not sound good. Also we have genders (like it should be) and exactly 3, the n. must not be thrown away, but they are usually guessable by the endings (say, on C. are m., on '-a, -ja' are f., and on '-o, -e' are n.), but, alas, there is 1 big branch of words which in Rus end on their soft sign (here written as 'j' after C.), which are f. but with ending for m., for the simple reason that we drop all soft signs!
So that this isn't good for me (no matter that nobody has said this), and I am thinking to propose (in one paper about the bettering of Bul lang.) to use here the not so easy yet unmistakable f. ending '-ija' (for ex. 'moshtija' instead of 'mosht'-power, 'noshtija /noshta /nochka' as night, etc.). I even think that there are no problems to move the articles in front of the words (say, 'ta hubava strana', or 'ty silen myzh', etc., what for the moment sounds funny, but if occasionally our Bul lang. will be taken for some standard, at least for all Sl langs, then this can be done, after all. (Yet for the Slavs the point here is that they have not at all definite articles, like in the Lat — probably because of some conflicts with the case endings —, so that where one will put the articles they will always object, but when even the impossible Eng lang. has definite articles I think that they must exist, they are necessary.)
Till here there are not very difficult moments, but the problems come with the tenses, especially for the Slavs, who (in Lat manner) have practically no past tenses at all — they use only the participle (as I mentioned this). But, people, this is a must, there can't not be made difference between imperfect, past perfect, pluperfect, etc.; probably our grammar is not really so easy — there is missing the brilliant simplicity of Ger and Eng tenses, yet with some remarks (to which I will come soon) — but smt. must be preserved! And what means difficult? It is officially given that we have 9 tenses but this is formally so (at least this "I would have done smt.", called past in the future or the like, is neither used so often, nor is smt. difficult, because it is made with the use of some particles, not real grammatical forms. Also this whether smb. was present at the occasion (with 'bjah /beshe') or not (with 'bil') is just a modality.
What must be really difficult is that we change often some V. and neither the last nor the root one, but somewhere in between (say, 'rabotich' is the so called past finished from 'rabotja'-work and means that I have worked but am no longer working, while 'rabotech' is called past unfinished for the same verb and means that I have worked several times in the past, and would probably again be in position to do the same)! So here lies the difficulty and I alone can never remember which form is finished and which is not, but I orient myself pretty well and don't make errors. Yes, this is like driving a car or walking, one does the things automatically, without thinking. But mark, please, that such phrases are not used in official documents, this is conversational lang., so that there are no problems for introducing of Bul lang. as some standard, where exist 2 ways for making the things easier: either you simply drop these differences and add some additional word (like: often, or once, or many times, etc.) and take them for doublets, or try to use some patterns (like in Eng I always try to write the word in order to be sure in it, only pronunciation is not enough). So that our lang. can be simplified, but it is always easier to reject some possibility than to introduce some new one — don't forget this!
Well, this is difficult matter, and I have no intention to explain more precisely the things (I alone have never liked the grammar), so that let me better make some additional remarks, about our lang. and some of the Western. I said recently that the Eng has brilliant tenses, but even this is not exactly so, because there are strong verbs and usual weak ones, which receive only -(e)d in the end. But in Ger there remains (and also in all Rom langs, like Fr, It, and so on) the transitivity or not of the verb, where there are no such "beasts" in Bul; we have no 2-nd auxiliary verb, only to be! (Ah, we have even not an infinitive form and use as such 1-st per. sing.) But the Gers have, and thus is a difficulty. And we have no weak or strong verbs, all are weak; and, in fact, we have only 2 tables with personal forms, for the present tense and for the past, where the future is built quite like in the Eng, with a particle ('shte' instead of "will").
There are also some rules of the thumbs for recognizing of the finiteness of the verbs (like: 'rabotja' is to work and is in basic form, from it is built 'izrabotja' as the same but once (to work out), and it cannot be pronounced alone — we must use the particle 'da' — hence it is finished, but if we want to make it unfinished we must add a suffix and make it longer — 'izrabotvam' — hence it continues longer! Some simple rules surely must exist, and this is common Sl., so that these most difficult moments for the westerners do not exist for the Slavs. In two words, the point with all Sl langs (including Bul) is that they have not usual forms of the verbs and continuous such, but finished (that do not continue) and unfinished (that continue), and this is done with each of the verbs. Yet the past finished ('rabotih') is called aorist and is taken for pretty archaic, especially by the other Slavs, who have not forms for past tenses. So that, yes, we are different, but the things can be simplified if necessary, yet not with rejecting of all past tenses and using only participles.
Ah, this time I also exceeded my limit for a chapter so that the best thing is just to stop here, and move to the next one, where I will try to convince you that we, really, are doomed to perdition.
3.08. About Bulgarian … perdition
Uh, the things here are easy and I have hinted them several times, have circled around them mentioning this and that, so that if you are busy (say, if you have a girl waiting naked for you, or homologically, a boy), then you can simply skip this chapter and go to the next, where I will tell you smt. new for me personally, from about one year or so. And here I will first explain you that our barbarity has shown itself chiefly with the coming of our democracy, that we try to conceal it usually pretending the opposite, that this is smt. inborn in us and we not only do not feel remorse for it but even like it much, feel proud with it, and this is massively spread trait exactly between our common, ordinary citizens (or rather villagers), in which case we will never change whatever in our behaviour, then that we are diminishing with drastical speed, we simply move out of our country (because, unconsciously, do not like it), that we change the very ethnical composition of our nation, that this hinders chiefly us, but we just don't care, and that this is quite good thing for the other nations, for the world, so that there are no reasons at all to mourn about us but be even happy because we will better world … genetical banks, and probably smt. else, but the order of mentioning may vary. So that's it people, go and have some refreshing sex, while I will continue my narration predominantly for the posterity.
So under the (goodly intended but badly accomplished) totalitarianism we were quite good boys and girls, our barbarity was not seen, because the communists were — surely, if you ask me — moral people; their morality was a bit stagnated and outmoded, but it existed, and if a bad morality is worse than a good one, then no morality is worse than whatever such thing! Say: we have public … baths (what I probably have mentioned) and laundromats (not exactly on self-service like in other countries, but still have), and cheap eateries, and transport on funny prices, and free at all healthcare, the same about even the tertiary education, and on and on. Yes, but, as one funny Bul saying exclaims, "Who has f#cked has f#cked, Mara (what is a popular Bul f. name) is no more whore", with the coming of our democracy all these things disappeared.
The known from 5-th century thermal baths in the very center of Sofia have ceased to function as such, only the water (about 36 degrees Celsius) flows free; the transport (on city prices — what means about … 1/2 of an egg per ticket) to nearby placed to Sofia Vitosha mountain has practically ceased to function (there goes one bus on about 40 min and chiefly in the summer, and to the half of the previous distances); practically all communal services have stopped (with the exception of dry cleaning); all cheaper eateries have sunk under the earth (and relatively recently I have checked in some usual coffee or snack bar that a cheaper sup costs from 5 to 7 eggs, while earlier it was about 1-2 eggs (and let me remind you that I am using for many years the price of 1 egg as the simplest … consumer basket, at least for cheaper products); all forms of education higher than the usual secondary are paid (including also some specialized secondary, like for mathematics, or some lang., etc.); the medical care is as if free for insured persons, but in fact paid, because one must pay to every physician and for whatever analyses (and this means at least twice, but usually 3 times) and for me personally 1 such tax takes one whole daily pension, the medicaments have risen more then 10 times, and the dental care is at all paid (not included in the insurance), one bus ticket is now about 4 eggs (but this because the eggs have jumped twice before 2 years, otherwise it has reached 8 eggs before this); and so on.
Ah, this, that some — and quite good, in fact — medical care and education has existed before for free, leads nobody to the thought that these things can be made free for the poor (no matter why) persons; we are as if moving like the West, but with about 6 times (and more) lower average pensions and salaries! And in order not to think that I only spit at our economy and the prices let me tell you that in Istanbul is said that 1 bus ticket costs 15 TL (liras), what by about 0.03 E makes 0.47 E, and in Sofia it is about twice more, but this town is about 10 times bigger than our capital, and I compare now not with Ger-y or France but with not wealthy country. So that there is a difference, and the barbarity is just barbarity (for the moment as insufficient paying to the citizens for the same — mark this — work; and the difference is not in percents but in times — you just imagine that everything costs for you 6 times more!
And, people, there is a thing that must arouse doubt in every more or less thinking person (or even animal), and this is the persistent repeating of smt. what does not seem to be true! The more smt. with dubious veracity is repeated the more doubtful it seems, and if it is trumpeted from everywhere, then you may bet that it is a lie! (But the people are so easily gullible that pay no attention to this rule, while the animals cannot be so easily deceived.) And I'll give you some examples. Say, that the democracy is the best possible ruling (while it is practically the worst — and if there were not the technologies and the robotized industries and food substitutes and GM foods and so on nowadays we would have led probably the 6-th or 7-th … World war now; I will come to the World wars quite unexpectedly in the next chapter). Or then take the slogan that stays over the entrance of our National Assembly (the Parliament) which tells that "In the unity is the power"! So why it stays there, ah, and in how many countries exists smt. similar? But I'll tell you, that it stays because we are the most disunited nation which can exist (at least today and in Europe), and continue to split and give new fractions (especially the right-wing parties, the "democrats"). Or that the paying for smt. means freedom (say, a paid school, or clinic, etc.), while this is the strongest limitation and hindrance for entering there. And we do very actively pretend now that are polite and helpful but this is when smb. pays smt. to us, or when we expect that he /she will pay, i.e. this is a mimicry, but in reality we don't give a damn about the poor persons, surely.
The pretended politeness is a common trait by us nowadays, like also in all my disputes with the neighbours to which I will come soon, but let me tell you how we help to the poor persons. Ah, with products, say, beans, lentils, tins with tomatoes, etc. — I don't know exactly because I have not begged for help, but I have found the quoted things left after a pair of years around the … garbage —, which help was just a mockery because was of the sum of 1-2 (or maybe 3 to 5) … bus tickets, really! Yes, but the usual sum for 1 winter month for the steam heating of 1 bed-room flat (we call it 2 rooms one because we count also the drawing room) comes to about 50 such tickets (80 and even 100 Lv), and this is each month. But this, what … pisses me most of all, is the applying of the rule for which we have a special proverb, namely: "The ailing carries the healthy (on his back)"! In other words this means that the less smb. uses smt. the more he must pay for it, and if he uses it not at all, then the minimal taxes are probably 5 times higher than it is decent! This is a common shopping or sellers trick, which has to force the persons to use some services more actively, so that this is natural, bit the business is one thing, and the barbarity is another — I mean (how have repeated many times), that the society has to care for all citizens, in order to make their life endurable, to mitigate the hardships, and if it does not do this, then this is direct proof for barbarity!
While I have, as 1-st example, a mobile phone (which I never carry with myself, it is a stationary model), for which I pay 5 Lv monthly, with prepaid 50 min talks with the same company-provider, which I have never used all (at least in the last 10 years I have used less than 1 hour in total) but I have paid a pair of Lv for talks with other phone providers. And I can't pay less for this, even if I apply for stopping of it (if preserving the telephone number). But this formal "usage" must not be valued higher than, say, 1.50 Lv monthly, without prepaid minutes. Or take also the banks, now they give you nothing for keeping of money there — such mockery with the clients has never existed in the old totalitarian years, the maximal percent was rarely more than 3, yet the minimal was the symbolic 1, but that is the right-wing capitalism, it is in many aspects worse than the left-wing —, yet you can still leave your money there in some banks. Yes, but in the most banks in Bul-ia you can not open an account for a given term, be it even an year, and this is not enough for them, but they require from you payment when you add money to an existing term-account — simply unimaginable yet existing thing —, what for me is a robbery in a broad day-light!
Or also another moment with the banks: if you want to transfer money in other currency abroad, the minimal tax is about 10 to 15 E, and only above 1000 E is added by 1 permille of the sum (so that even for 10 E you must pay 15 as tax — as you like it, it is democratic and free!). And if smb. objects that it is so in every country I will tell you that it isn't, I can vouch for this (because I have seen a quittance for transfer of 100 US$ from the US, for which were paid 2.45 $ tax, if I don't err with the cents)! So that it is possible to take some care for the poor, yet not in Bul-ia! And practically the same approach use the persons (till the moment always women) in my entrance of the cooperative building (only 6 storeys) where I live, who have required always 2-3 times more than the right sum from me, be it for the cleaning woman, be it for the lighting in the staircase, or for smt. else, for the simpler reason that I am living at the 5-th floor but do not use the lift — i.e. when I use less, then I must pay more, to compensate for my desire to economize!
Ah, it is a whole saga this, I have written about dozen letters (for about 10 years) to them, have hanged them below at the door of the entrance and what? Hmm, the only thing that I have achieved is to teach them (for about 5 years) not to take the letters down before at least 3 days passed, yet they have also never left them for more than 10 days too (though some nasty ads hang for months there and nobody objects). But to read them carefully, they have never done this; and they have learned to keep them on the board at the door only after I have put for several years (roughly 1 letter for an year) copies of the letters in every apartment's post-box, else they have taken down my writings in the same day. Here it is interesting why they behave in this way, and about what (in some more details). I like to explain the simplest things first (in order not to fill my memory stack), but here I don't know what is simpler. This story was published under another pen-name, yet I will not go here in whatever details, I will proceed as succinct as possible, and will begin with the reasons as just for orientation, as smt. unprovable but plausible, after all; I even will drop the what-examples and move them to the last chapter, because they sound pretty funny.
So this behaviour is for many reasons, which can be reduced somehow to my thesis, the barbarity. You see, I am an ancestral intelligent (and have taken posts in several scientific institutes, including BAS, our Academy) and from all others (in 18 apts) there is no one (as far as I know) with a single tertiary education (and I have a bit more than 2 such); then I am living in a working-class quarter and in the capital town, what means that there live predominantly … paysan-peasant-s, you bet it, it is usually so in the big cities nowadays; then these are all women and they are well known with their partiality and inobjectivity; then these people are working class and small owners, where the 1-st have about 6-7 times higher income (i.e. the average one) than me (as permanently unemployed with the coming of democracy as too higher educated), and the 2-nd have a dozen times higher income; then it is generally true one Rus proverb that "the narrower the forehead, the broader the self-esteem"; then it can hardly be found more unmoral layer than the nouveau riches; then people cannot imagine how one can live (even singing) on an income of 1/3-rd MMS like me (what means that for me everything seems about 6 times more expensive); then that we are the unmistakable barbarians of the whole Europe; and probably smt. else. I hope this is enough as explaining of the reasons for the impossibility to find common language with my barbarous neighbours.
But people, let me repeat that all mess began with the very coming of our democracy, when we have decided that will become smt. like a 2-nd Hong-Kong, or a nation of traders only. Yes, not workers but sellers, and for this reason our individual entrepreneurs are officially called individual traders! And with this dream before our eyes we have accepted one silly model of taxing, the flat tax, which is the most barbarous that is possible at all! Yes, but this am stating only I, nobody else. And why I think so? Ah, because more barbarous than this could have been, say, the following: those with income above 3 MMS pay 10 % income tax, those above 2 and up to 3 MMS — 15 %, then above 1 and up to 2 MMS — 20 %, then above 0.5 and up to 1 MMS — 25 %, and those with less than even 0.5 MMS pay whole 30 %s (but maybe are entitled to have free … euthanasia, if they wish)! Such thing I do not believe that can exists in our … galaxy, hence our model of relatively loading more the poorer citizens is the worst!
Well, this time I am surpassing all previous chapters, but there remains only to stress once more time on the point that we change drastically our ethnic composition, this is unquestionable. And why? Ah, let suppose that I make an error with the number of the Turks and Gyps, but this is hardly probable. They must be at least 2-3 times more than the members of their MRF party (Movement for Rights and Freedoms — nothing ethnical at all, right?), but it takes usually (for more than 30 years) from 10 to 15 percents of the votes, and also there is a big chunk of Turks abroad who vote for it (these are surely not ethnic Buls). But you just ponder a bit, will you? So our emancipated women, without families (acc. to the previous census 55 %, more than the half, of the newly born children are extra-marital — which were till a pair of decades called … bastards; but do not forget also that from the remaining children at least half of them will meet with future divorce in the family), so these women will normally give birth to 1 child (they do this even when there are or were families), some of them will probably produce even 2 children, but can you imagine that some alone-living women will have 3 children? I personally think that this will not happen even by mistake. Because such women must also work smt., make money (chiefly as sellers in some shop, but still, go to work), because the sustenance by the state for such mothers will never be enough (if such women exist, they are not more than a pair of %s, if they are real Buls).
(Ah, you look at my Essay about the population, from the Cynical ones, and there is said that not 2, but nearly to 3 children — 2.75, smt. of that order — are necessary in order to ensure zero growth; now, with the extra-uteral conception, this digit may fall down, yet not below 2.25, I think.) Yes, and now let us cast a glance at the Turks (and Ars) and the Gyps. Ah, they are not so emancipated, not they! So that they give birth to at least 3 children (yet to be on the safe side they produce on the average, in my estimation 3.5 children; and you can add also the Hebs). What is correctly tied also with the loading of the mothers, they have practically no free time for going to work, they work smt. before the marrying, and probably after 40. And now you compare the diapason of 1.5 to 2.25, with that from 2.25 to about 3.5 (but in no case less than 3.25), where the 1-st guaranties negative growth, while the 2-nd ensures positive one. Roughly speaking this means that the other ethnoses (with little exceptions) have higher growth then our dying as ethnos, the difference is in common about 2.5 times and probably more!
But the point is that this is not easy to be demonstrated, this composition is hidden, or latent (waiting for its time to awake). This can be proved only looking at the … masculine pricks, to be sure (there can exist only about a pair of percents circumcised Buls, which can be neglected), and the Gyps are easily recognizable. That is, people, barbarians or not, we are melting like last year's snow and in the middle of this century will be (as I have said) about 1.5 mlns out of about 5 living in Bul-ia, but in the beginning of the next one we will be surely not more than 1 mln, out of maybe 4 mlns in the country. Yet I beg you, my rare readers, do not cry about us but even exult, because we will be saved in the diaspora, what we are doing for more than 30 years! We will better world genetic banks, as I have said. And that being a civilized barbarian, like us, is a nice thing I will speak in the last chapter here. Now let me go to the Zionists.
3.09. About the communism and … the Zionism
As I told you, this is a new idea for me, from hardly 2 years, when I have fished from … the garbage (this time thrown out at one local library) a small booklet from one Bul immigrant in USA about some secret Heb Protocols. A clever booklet for a clever person (like me), told I myself, and it turned out to be practically so (when nobody wanted to read it). But, see, I don't like to give exact names, because this was smt. new for me, but not some discovery; and also I don't agree exactly with him, I simply interpret the facts in my (I suppose) more intelligent way. Yet the idea is interesting and worth knowing, and because I am rarely read I take it that when am read then this is by a relatively intelligent person, so that I decided to fill the gap here with it, and with some more judgments about the Hebs and the communism and the democracy; and, besides, as I mentioned this, the Buls are also clever people, like the Hebs, so that this will be a right thing here.
The core of the idea is that there were some very impertinent written papers as if from highest Heb sources, which explained the thesis that the Hebs not only must rule over the entire world, but that they are already doing this for centuries via the most powerful thing in the world, the gold! Id est this defends in the most shameful way the thesis for the Hebs as chosen race, where all victims (be them even mlns) are insignificant in the name of this goal. And this book was published as if illegally (because there was censure in those times, and the book was just ignominious) in various countries in an interval of about a dozen of years somewhere around 1900, but some of the Protocols were as if from several centuries back. Naturally it become very soon a kind of bestseller, and this was exactly before even the 1-st, but more important is that it was before the 2-nd World war, what explained many historical moments, i.e. the Hebs and their religion were shown in very bad light before the whole world and the people were really obsessed with hatred against the Hebs, and the Protocols were taken for unquestionable truth being their own! But let me go a bit deeper in the matter, having in mind that I am not at all fluent in these matters, and may make errors somewhere, but it is worth trying to inform the people in the world about this, as well as to make some future conclusions of my own.
So the Zionism has come from the hill Zion in the Jerusalem meant as the center of their faith and state and everything (smt. like the Red Square in Moscow). What is more or less a rule throughout the world, in all countries the big cities, the capitals, are built on some hills (this is so because it is unquestionable that the gods abide in the heavens), but the bad things come when this hill begins to be taken for higher than … Chomolungma, and it goes not only about a center of some country, but of all countries, of the whole world; i.e. it is not only "Rule Britannia" but "Rule Hebrewstan, and over the world"! And, people, it depends how one takes the words, where a Bul-n will usually take nothing literally, even a Rus-n may allow himself to doubt, but not a Ger-n or a Heb-w, such people are, like we say, like horses with eye-pads. Hence in this way it turned that these Protocols were smt. like … pornography shown to preschool children! And the facts from them, as well also the human history at least in the 20-th century, confirmed them, so that people have begun to believe in them like in, say, … the Zodiacs.
Because the Hebs are not only pushy, they not only want to clime the highest peaks in the working hierarchy, no, they want to use their places to conduct exactly the Zionism, and take decisions having in mind the goals of the Zionists, the ruling over the world, the enslaving of all nations, literally; and this was the purpose of those Protocols! In this booklet is said, between the other things also that the billionaire Rotschield has maintained relations with the very Hitler, and probably has helped (!?), or at least known what Hitler wanted to do with the Jews but has done nothing to prevent this genocide! Id est is expressed the thought that this "guy" has sacrificed the Ger Hebs in the name of future ruling over the world! This is related also with the Rus ruling Hebs (to what I am coming soon), but the idea is that the wealthy Hebs, like himself, have somehow succeeded to emigrate (in USA or Brazil etc. — paying for this, you know: Money makes the world go round!), and the poor Hebs are not interesting because they will not rule over the world (the goal justifies the means, you see!). Besides this Hitler will be sometime defeated, and the Hebs will become victims of the Nazis, hence the world will commiserate with them (but after the holocaust, not before it — so that they have played the role of agnus dei, in a way). Such silly guesses, which are not proven, but look quite plausible.
Yes, I have told you, people believe in everything, they imagine things, especially when they see that the Hebs, really, rule everywhere. This is so even now, but especially in the times in question, where at least in Ger-ny, but surely also in France, Russia, USA, and on and on, in nearly every shop presided the ubiquitous Hebs (even in the pawn-shops, when you come to them because have no money to buy your food), and in all key-instances like: lawyers, medicians, educational institutions, owners of homes, restaurants or casinos or whore-houses, and you name it. And they compete one with the other but they also help mutually, be this because they were persecuted for centuries (and even millenniums), be it because of their religion (and the goal to conquer the world), but they make business, unscrupulous and unswerving, and become richer and richer. Yet together with this they are just … nasty, haughty, conceited to every goy! Ah, but you surely don't know what this word means for them! (Not that I know even their new lang., to say nothing about the old one, but I have got feeling for the Indo-Eur words.) This is a thing which not a single person in the world knows before me (but I am read, say, 1000 times less than I should be), even they alone — ha-ha — don't know (but have similar feeling like me). So this is because the word goy simply must be related with Sl 'goitj' as fatten, make fat, feed animals, or with Bul. 'gusha' as gizzard (or Fr goitre), with your guttural, and other words (ultimately this comes from … pigeon's 'ghu-ghu') — hence they take all non-Hebs for … pigs!
Ah, surely, when I say that they are just nasty guys (yet I can't say the same about the girls) I mean it (and will give you a bit further some examples from my own experience). Their notions about treating the good one are at least paradoxical, come to think of this, because, for example, they think that the chickens are very nice things, kosher as food, as they say, and because of this they … kill and eat them, while the pigs are not kosher and must be left to live (and prosper, so to say)! So these are the Hebs: they look at everything from the position of their ego, and if smt. or smb. is not to their liking they just use it or him, or allow to perish! Yet they are clever guys (as it is well known), so that they live generally excluded from the goys (showing very different manners from the others, stressing on their own exclusiveness) but mix with them often and try to show themselves as very helpful and friendly. Yes, but this is an usual sellers trick or mimicry — if they are good to the others the latter will seek them (and pour money in their pockets), this is the always repeated in the shops "Thank you, call again!".
Probably related with this, as also with the successful business, is their even mania for secrecy, and they have built in all countries some hidden Masonic lodges, what is in order to make the other people wonder and envy them, and this is also the right behaviour of the ruler in the understanding of ancient folks (for this reason the root of the word master, if you ask me, is in the … mist, from where comes the mystery!). Yeah, but if these are little persons, just small sellers, they can be endured and even liked in a way, the bad moment comes when they happen to take some big post, to become big brass, because then they remember at once that must conquer the world, and show all their conceited behaviour, begin to feel themselves as gods! Yet do not become mistaken by the word "big", because it is meant in the sense of staying on some … bottleneck, and then they also begin to terrorize the others, what is fixed also in Bul saying that "The King allows, but the warden not" (yet I will not indulge in longer explanation why this is so, because it is psychologically well motivated)!
And now let me come to the Russ in the time of shortly after the October Revolution (before one century). This has to be well known, but the author of this booklet about the Protocols quotes stunning figures with the percents. Yes, he insists that more than even 95 %s of the leading communists were Hebs, not only Lenin, who has one grandmother Heb-w, and also Herr Generalissimus (one Joseph) has Heb-w wife, but also some Kamenev (some -stein) and Zinoviev (read with 'z' but maybe like the Zion, with 'c'?), and Trotsky (who immigrated in USA and was killed there, as far as I know), and many others; as if only Dzerzhinsky was a Pole but not Heb-w (yet I can't vouch for this) and one woman; and this was true also for Moscow Committee of the Party, and in some other places (and don't forget Herr Karl-king Marks). If 20-30 % may be taken for coincidence then 50 % is too much, to say nothing about 90 %, so that many Hebs (and there are quoted several big brass men from USA) accept with justification that the communism was, in fact, … Zionism! To what I will say: yes and no!
Hmm, how's this? Ah, it is so because (as I mentioned this several times) I am not a believer but a scientist and philosopher in my heart, and like just to compare and ponder. And, e.g., from the similarity of the pyramids in Egypt with these by the Am Incas I do not jump to the conclusion that some tribes have flown through the Atlantic ocean in ancient times, but first of all think that this may happen in parallel because of some common laws or ways of thinking, of structural characteristics, and so on; and what concerns the pyramids, they are natural structures (like also the numbers) and a kind of pyramids were also the zikkurats of Babylon. So that this really stunning percent of Hebs amidst the first and topmost Rus communists proves chiefly that the communism was at once taken as way of … ruling over the masses, surely, and from here also as place for rapid self-expression and turbulent activity especially of Hebs (and it is really so, when I personally, even a whole century later, defend its ideas, while spit at the defects of its realization!). Or take also the fact that very many, probably most of the half of all known musicians, are of Heb origin, yet not because there is smt. musical in their gene, but because they are simply very hard workers in whatever discipline. Ah, and there is another obvious error (at least for me), that for a Heb-w is counted every one who has smt. Heb in his (or her) ancestry, what gives superposition of the ethnoses, this is not a correct approach.
Yet there is smt. similar between the communism and the Zionism, at least this, that they accept as real ruling only some kind of autocracy, and in these Protocols on several places were expressed thoughts that the democracy is not a real ruling, it is rather a fakery of it, and this will in the end weaken the Western countries and make them fall in the hands of the chosen Hebs, who will just collect the gold (while the currencies compete). Because it is obvious for me that the purpose of the democracy is to weaken at least the already weak countries (like, say, Bul-ia), but also the stronger ones will unnecessary spend their energy. So that this Zionist idea about ruling over the world, with its open brutality and abhorrent cynicism (where my cynicism is simply realism) is the worst possible theoretical idea, and surely much more harmful than some unoffending barbarity. (Yet the things are related, like Bul barbarity with the simplest Sl lang., so also the Heb mania for ruling over the world with the great successes of their individuals.) This, if you ask me, goes hand in hand with their talent and reaching of top results in whatever area, so that here must be worked very carefully, trying to preserve the good and eradicate the bad. The way of Herr Hitler was wrong way, because with its cruelty, i.e. overdone level of strength, it has not reached the goal, the Hebs continue to live and prosper in the whole world (they save themselves, like the Buls also do now, under our anti-people's democracy).
The good thing is the … barbarity which has lied on the bottom, causing the appearance before several millenniums of the nasty Judaism as religion, which has reached, in a way, its goals, but has shown the Hebs in the worst possible light; the tiny Heb individuals are not bad or dangerous, they become such because of blindly believing in their religion. Or that the Hebs are good (as also every nation), but their religion is the worst possible. The only way to divide the one from the other is … not to allow to Heb individuals to take big posts in every state or private company, from now on and for at least half a millennium (because the religion is very strong)! And you see (I hope) that the Nazis have tried to prevent exactly this, and they could have succeeded somehow, had their Hit-ruler not be a madman. But the madness is quite often inseparable from the genius, as you know.
OK, and now I will give you some very succinct examples about my 2 encounters with Hebs playing the God almighty, in their own way. The one is with one Pasi, who can be called son (because his father was a known philosopher; yet he presided over the Editorial Board of our Academy, and no scientific book could have been published without his consent) who is interesting (if you ask me) at least with his family, because to pass is to give smt. to smb., and he has given our country to the (nasty) Ams! How this has happened? Ah, I know him, relatively good, because for about 1-2 years he has visited the room where I worked (not exactly me) every day and he was very helpful and communicative, but this was before he felt God in himself and began to command; with the coming of our democracy he has become a known politician, has built one Atlantic club for alliance with the Ams and NATO, has went once to the very … Antarctica on a military helicopter, then has succeeded to "fish" our uncrowned King from Spain and put him on the throne (yet not as king), he alone has become a Prime minister, has made us for zero time members of NATO — without whatever referendum (a god is God, you see, and people might have made an error if asked), and still continues to say his word from time to time (he is younger than me). Not a bad "guy" but pursuing his own mission on the way to conquering of the world.
The 2-nd example is from this very year and concerns one Am site where I have published (let me call it here "Smashed-potatoes"), and one person whom I will name Madboychic, who alone confessed me that was a Hebrew. So he has begun to hate me and wanted to make me stop publishing there (and succeeded in the end), because I was publishing (as you can well see) serious things but this was a company for selling of ebooks and chiefly to … teenagers (it turned out that only silly teens are ready to pay for ebooks, because not with their own money), and I was publishing for several years, and have under pair of pseudonyms about 250 ebooks in 4 langs (that would have reached the 300 after an year or 2), yet everything was a … failure because I have "won" by about only 5 (five) US$ yearly. Yes, but I have believed that they will preserve my works because can receive money for them, yet he has shown me that this is not so and I am now even thankful to him for teaching me and opening my eyes. Really, he has as if … pulled out an aching tooth, or (to make one much more serious comparison) like the Ams, with their thrown A-bombs over Hiroshima, had shown the Japs the right way to the effective conquering of the world — becoming the biggest car (and not only) producer in the world.
So what has happened? Ah, I have begun for probably 2 years to write on my emails about various questions related with the publishing of my things explicitly "Not for Madboychik", and this worked for some time, but the company should have fallen down in its winnings and later was bought by another one, so that on this place remained only this guy and I have to deal with him, but he did not want this, he wanted to play, as I said several times, the God almighty, searching (like a Bul saying goes) a calf under the bull. Yes, but I was not much cooperative and began to ignore his remarks (say, he invented some reasons not to include a given work in some official Catalog yet otherwise the ebook has gone through all automatic checks and was published correctly). Yeah, but the Heb "God" wanted me to obey, and feeling himself entirely alone to take decisions there he decided in the end to close my account with all published ebooks.
This was a nasty move, surely, yet I have very useful experience, I have reached to the thought that there can be not only Ger Nazis, no, there can be also … Heb Nazis! Yes, and I have even told this to this Madboychik, that with his evil-doing he shows real Nazi behaviour (and it was then when he confessed me to be a Heb-w), because: what is a Nazi? Ah, this is a person who has fixed ideas to be God almighty and forgets about all human rules accumulated during the history of humanity, when it goes about the hateful for him subject! And what is a Heb Zionist? Ah, this is a person who again has fixed ideas to be God almighty and forgets about all human rules etc., when it goes about the hateful for him goy-subject. That's it, and I am glad that have now the reasons to tell this before all my readers, namely that the Hebs are just inverted, as if built of anti-matter, Nazis, or v.v., but having in mind that the Hebs are older than the Gers I think that they are the cause for the cruel way in which they were treated by the Nazis. In any case the Gers were not so easy to be duped by the Hebs, like the Russ (the nature of the Slavs is more benign and endurable).
Well, with the pulled out aching tooth (vain efforts to please the silly audience) I felt much better and invented one natural, but applied by no other author, method of transliteration of all langs with only basic Lat chars, yet including also the necessary editing chars (like Headings, bold, italic, etc. — which I am using very actively), and have already begun to publish smt. here and there in this form, and feel strong increase of the readings (where I am read, of course). But you probably still do not understand why I am doing this, right? Ah, it is because in this, a bit ciphered way, I can publish everything in full, without much fears that will be easily copied and published somewhere else, and I have about 40 pretty big books, which have not yet published entirely, but they are also not for reading waiting on a bus stop, they have to be had by the reader at hand; so in this not nice but readable way they can be offered to possible readers. More than this I simply can't do, I don't need now money, really, and I have all the time worked for the people.
OK, and with this I finished at last this super-long (in my initial ideas) chapter about the good as persons but bad when taken in a group, especially if they occupy higher places in the hierarchy, Hebs, and all this because of their nasty and inhuman religion, in what concerns the other nationalities. Also I have made quite instructive parallels with the Rus communists, hinting pretty convincingly that, if there was smt. bad in the realization of the communism (because the idea about it is brilliant), then this can with clear conscience be attributed to the ubiquitous Jews.
3.10. About the niceness of civilized … barbarity
Ah, here I also have no idea about what will speak to you, but the barbarity, judging by the situation in Bul-ia, is such nice thing, that I don't doubt that will find smt. interesting to tell you; and, besides, I have to add smt. more about my relations with my — nice, surely — neighbours. Yet let me repeat again that under barbarity I understand the usual not believing in divine beings and avoiding to show interest (and help) in the affairs of the neighbours, but not performing of some cruel acts to other people, which are result of uniting and believing, conviction in their own rightness. In other words the barbarity in my understanding is some additional freedom! And it is a nice thing because, as smt. pre-religious or pre-civilized it is as if smt. … childish, isn't it, but we all like the children, and exactly for their natural and naive behaviour. So that, in a way, all other nations must just love us, what they do not even think to do, what means that they are showing pretty bad habits, methinks.
More than this, as I have said and stressed on this, we offer no danger for the other nations, but these other nations show, definitely, at least some of them, the most powerful ones, dangerous behaviour, like beginning invasive wars (not just defending their borders), or throwing nuclear bombs, or be it even endangering the others with their (be it peaceful, but, still) monopolizing role in some businesses. While we are absolutely incapable to show danger, being unable to unite even to produce some own brand personal cars (or computers, or, say, socks or chocolates or ice-cream or razor blades, or whatever); as I have mentioned this somewhere, in the contemporary overpopulated world the most important characteristic is to show no danger to the others. And we are also the best possible example in regard of the population, showing stable negative growth of 1 percent (what is simply the best and painless solution) for more than 30 years now, we must be written in some laudable book in UN, but the other nations are not informed about this positive contribution of us.
Or then I will offer you a new angle of looking at a big group of people: as to whether they sum the efforts of all citizens in one single direction building in this way smt. like a javelin, or chiefly cancel mutually the efforts of their members! Ah, it is surely better to build javelins yet not always! The moral people, led by their uniting religions, become stronger, but they become in many cases pretty dangerous for the others, especially if the religion (like I have shown this with the Judaism) is directly hostile to the other nations. This is more or less like the movements of … elementary particles, where exists the Brownian low of movement, which is smt. like our barbarian movement, i.e. the very God patronizes the "barbarity" of the particles, as well also of the nations, in a way! Don't forget this, this is in the sphere of the fables about the Babylonian tower, which is not looked with good eye by God (or Nature). So that we are, really, paragons, must be praised and helped to preserve our originality and not come to perdition!
OK, let me now move to some more concrete examples about my quarrels with the neighbours, which are eloquent enough as to the inborn barbarity of the Buls, as well also about rather comical effects, which our barbarity produces, comical and refreshing, but innocuous and pleasurable for God. Ah, say, the 1-st women-neighbour who wanted to collect money for a cleaning woman wanted from me to pay on an apartment basis, where I am living alone, but she exactly lives as 4 persons, what, if you multiply this by my usually 5 times less going out than the average (about 2 times weekly or 10 times monthly) already makes 20 times more than the right for me (yet a moral person would have taken into consideration also my 6 times less income). In the end I paid twice less but via a go-between (a richer owner, with a better … car — because this is what matters by us), yet nobody (not a single person) said that I am right, and the guilty women has demonstrated an utmost surprise, even as if has wept seeing my tiny remark on a small piece of paper thorn from somewhere that she is practicing with me, and this after about half an hour talk with her, a robbery in a broad day-light — what is obviously so (at least 20 times more than necessary), and proves unmistakably that we just like our barbarity! And this, with the silent approval of the others again proves that this nasty barbarity is really inborn in us, how you will see also in the nest confrontation with another nouveau riche woman more than 5 years later.
Well, she succeeded to take from me 2.5 times bigger sum for the same things, yet tried to cheat me whole — but you will never believe this — 100 times! Yes people, and I am not lying to you because am mathematician. So she tried to convince me that I have to pay only for the lighting in the staircase (which was not measured then directly) 2.5 Lv monthly, where — and this is even funny — she has changed the entire lighting with such that switches on and off by a sensor and in this process has also put a separate meter for these only lamps. And after some time it was seen that these lamps consume about 2 (two) Lv monthly (and this having in mind that they just switch all the time, day and night), but we are about 40 persons living in the entrance, and if you take for the correct consumption about 1 Lv monthly (how I have predicted already before years), and then divide this 1 Lv by 40 persons, this makes exactly 2.5 stotinki-cents, not so many Levs, what makes 100 times; yet have in mind also that if I go out at least 5 times less than the average, then this makes even 500 times more! Yes, but I have written a pair of times that the lighting must simply be adjusted to switch on only when it is dark, also that she must be changed as the biggest blackmailer I have ever met, and substituted with smb. else, yet everything continues in the old manner, and nobody pays whatever attention to my words, because I am the black sheep.
So that you see that the barbarity cannot be overcome with reason, it is a matter of … delusion with some fables, and we are just barbarians, and it is too late to become anew religious! (As you can also perceive well that I can not just … apply for another citizenship, because can not find a common language for understanding with my barbarous neighbours.) We are just doomed to perdition, as I said! Why? Ah, because this is the meaning of the folks, of the whole nation, surely, our entrance is a good enough representative sample of the nation, if you want also because here live chiefly peasants but they are the core of the nation, after all! When the masses like some situation it will never be bettered! Yes, but it is also funny, as I said, and there is nothing really dangerous; like also that brave Bul green-shop's owner who tried to choke me was a barbarian, but not, say, a Nazi, so that our barbarity can be endured! Id est, we are stupid, in many cases, but are with good hearts, ha-ha, and as I have said in other places, one can fight with dictators, but can not fight with the whole nation, hence, one can not fight with the democracy — it must just fade away by itself!
Yet there is another look at the matters, similar but different. We can as well take for granted that every alive being is not very satisfied with his environment and in many cases this turns to hatred, to alienation and rejecting of everything what is not like himself, yes. And then there are 2 kinds of reactions: either you endure this but begin to boil inside, and if smb. says you that this or that is the cause for some of your sufferings you all are ready to turn against this thing or person (-s); or you do not endure for long and begin to curse him, turn your back to him, and take revenge at him in some unorganized way! So did you get it? Ah, the difference is in this, is the revenge organized or not! But the religions or states always take revenge in organized way, where is formed this mentioned a bit before javelin that hits the goal, which may not be really guilty (but be either barbarous or just defending his interests), while the unorganized revenge is the coolest possible, where the efforts of the group are usually neutralizing themselves in a big extent, hence, again, the reactions of the barbarians are much better than those of some moral group! In this way it turns out that the barbarity allows easy and painless … leaving of the damp out!
Surely, what leads me to the thought to give idea about building of some monument to the barbarity! Yes, people, and such monument has to be raised at least before the UN building, and to look in this way: a truncated pyramid (let say with 7 sides), where on the top of it is put big locomotive … whistle! Ah, this is eloquent enough that the barbarity is some … safety valve, quite necessary in every state, especially in non-barbarous ones! Because this vox populi is not enough in religious countries, there everything is just conducted (like, say, in Nazi Ger-y); or else have to be taken measures for maintaining of some really representative sample of the nation, which must be controlled in some way via some senior chosen group of citizens (like I have proposed in the previous year with my Best Ever Party). And if we accept this terminology than the barbarians may be renamed to free damp leavers, or unorganized haters, or the like. Yeah, and then my nice she-neighbours are just leaving out their hatred to everything more intelligent than some nouveau riche peasants, but doing no real harm, while in some countries and in various times have happened real organized persecution of different from the majority layers of population, yet (as mentioned) not in barbarous countries like my nice Bul-ia.
Ah, it is now time to finish this year, because I have worked nearly a month over it, and am feeling pretty tired. I have to continue it for 2 more years, yet I have used all possible uniting themes, I have literally no idea about the next year; the last one may remain without such gluing topic like in my 0-th chapters, but for the next one I am nonplussed, yet this is not a worry for the moment. Here I am keeping in my pocket 3 final sentences as recapitulation of all said in this year, which you can quote before everybody, if will not forget to say my name as author of them. They are clear and do not need any other explanations, just tra-ta-ta, and waiting for applauses. But before this I have composed one little verse, which needs explanations.
And why? Ah, because I use there words from even 2 other langs. But they are not difficult and are as follows: Leute is in Ger and means people, questo far' niente means "this doing nothing" and has to be known to some of you as a heard phrase, and nella mente means "in the mind". With this parting verse I confess to you that I, being so different from the other common persons, just can't rest like the others, eating, drinking, f…, watching TV, etc., meaning that I am surely doing this, only without the TV (which I can't endure because of the ads, but also have no time for mere watching it, I prefer to listen to classical music and read smt., whatever, or compose verses), but I am doing this (how the communists have said) not as purpose per se, for resting and relaxing, but in order to keep myself fit for the work that I am still doing (and must do at least till the beginning of my 76-th year). OK, here follows the verse.
I'm ailing, Leute, I can not just sit
enjoying happy questo far' niente,
in this way with my life will not be quits!
I've never had consuming nella mente,
but every day to work, be it a bit!
And here follows the final accord.
The democracy is the God's way of … punishment!
The barbarity is the God's way of … selection!
The Bulgarians are … endangered species! Preserve us!
END OF THIRD YEAR