So, all modern states were created on the basis of a strategic treaty. This is not an elite contract, because before everything was kept on the balance of the aristocracy. The bourgeoisie, and we are talking about them when we mention the unarmed diplomats who seized this world modern states have taken shape at the expense of world trade. And the alliance was made up of small people, completely small and insignificant from a position of strength, they are also small bourgeois there have always been a lot of them, now they are the main planetary contingent. Without the strategic partnership of the «petty nobodies», not a single seizure of Indians, Africans, Asians and other savage territories in the opinion of these racists and chauvinists would have taken place. The whole of Asia is still trying to establish strategic alliances with the market nobodies, but nothing is working for the modern Asian elites (With the exception, perhaps, of Japan. But democracy for Japan is the path to annihilation, because it was through democracy that Japan lost the samurai spirit). All these elites, falling into bondage with the 7th-8th generation of bourgeois nobodies, begin to declare «commitment to democratic choice.» Of course, it is possible to convict these elites of their own plebeianism, because many Asian elites took place thanks to socialist revolutions (which were not invented by Asians at all. Socialism has raised the social bottom to a height, moreover. The children of the «working people» who «amazingly» turned out to be ungrateful they abandoned socialism, that is, they betrayed socialism when they achieved power and money.
Chapter 5
Kazakh Bolivar
Why is there a discrepancy between Asians and democracy?
The word bourgeoisie in Asia is completely inappropriate in the common sense of usage, as this word is used all over the world, because the bourgeoisie got its name in London and Paris, and not in Nanjing or Dhaka. No one has ever thought about equality in a strictly class environment, especially with the elite. So it was in Egypt since the time of the Pharaohs, so it was everywhere where the landed aristocracy was noticed (the landed aristocracy was everywhere) For example, in Japan, the bourgeoisie was the most despicable class until the Meiji era. The aristocrats of Japan themselves raised the start of their peddlers of nonentities for guidance, so that they were motivated: "if these nonentities won in Europe, maybe we will be lucky" (in the same spirit, Kazakhs call children by the names of other peoples to deceive the spirits. Japanese and Kazakhs are very similar in animism) They copied the West fanatically, because they copied some incomprehensible force. Before Japan, Europeans colonized all of Asia. Where did they get their power from? That's what the frightened Japanese were interested in.
In Asia, everything was decided and decided by the elite I ask everyone to remember this. Allied detachments opposed to some third force were considered partners. Another partnership is not possible. The strategic alliance extends only to blood ties through dynastic marriages (modern marriages of children of Kazakh officials and oligarchs are proof of this. We are Kazakhs, «yes, we are Scythians", we wanted to sneeze at the modernization of Russians and Communists. Self reflection cannot be deceived). Only a strategic partnership at the blood level, so that if you glue the two tops together, you get a horde against a third party. This can explain the fragility of the so-called states of the same nomads as in the past so now. Why nomads? Yes, because the nomads have full ambitions until now. (We are belligerent, close in energy to the Highlanders, northern Indians). Yes, because the nomadic states, like the medieval feudal lords of Europe, had a fluidity: there was a specific leader, a bright leader (an outstanding personality in different places with different common names). As a tribute, his colleagues tried to support his sons, and the sons tried to continue their fathers work little turned out. Somewhere the hereditary system was preserved, monarchical dynasties appeared, somewhere the sons could do nothing. Attilas empire collapsed immediately after the death of its founder because Attilas sons quarreled and fought. A barbaric partnership is impossible without subordination, without hierarchy. «Bolivar cant stand two..» If two candidates appear, even several this is an emergency. It follows from this: barbaric, pagan, feudal-monarchical, Asian-traditional partnership is possible only at the top among the elite. And this is not a partnership at all, but subordinated in a rigid hierarchy of its members. Nomadic so-called states cannot be called states in the European sense of the word. All the settled peoples of the so called farmers could cooperate at the lowest level, the cooperation of the peasants went beyond one family from the cultivation of the field to the cooperation of the whole people in the battles for harvests. Of course, there is still a Cosa Nostra in Sicily, and a Camorra in Naples as an indicator of family life. However, this is the south, the proximity of clan Africa also affected. Italy is an exception. Italy until then was European Asia, ito informally. Accept at least a thousand laws in Asia, where clan «legislation» rules, these official laws will not work. Attempts by nomads to imitate China with the involvement of Chinese officials was not work. Only in the khans bet it worked. (Kazakhs, too, are mostly guided by the informal laws of tradition, only the market element has involved all sorts of lawyers, lawyers and other rascals in this matter). Now I want to ask the most honest descendants of the steppe people: what kind of state can there be if the people are guided not by khans laws, but by informal law. If people ignore the laws invented by the bourgeoisie in the name of bourgeois property. Kazakhs have never had property in the European sense of property. Kazakhs had everything in common, at least it was considered common, even after the property distinction. What kind of states did the nomads have, all the nomads, even the blue Turks. It was a horde where the elite spread their power to keep everyone, or to show that these people were protected. Kazakhs are still not ready for a strategic partnership, except for the same blood unions dynastic marriages of the elite. A beggar Kazakh always will imitate a rich Kazakh a strange thing. To conditionally group the beggars, they must turn into an elite. Having become rich, they will be grouped only by dynastic unions, having outlived their elite children. Thats where the Kazakh «state» actually lives. In order for the Kazakh to group with the Kazakh on an ideological basis, it is necessary for a million Kazakhs to migrate sharply from villages to cities and meet market laws there in all the cynicism of their non-necessity and mockery. Corruption is a mockery not only of officials over the European tracing paper of the state in the form of a union of trading, very greedy nobodies with low taste and needs, accompanying these people throughout history. The Union of Kazakh Nationalists is a very interesting, one might say a rattling union of the impossible. People who are incapable of strategic partnership due to personal ambitions and cultural individualism should unite sometime (in theory), although no one has seen this union yet. «Bolivar cant take two.» Therefore, a nationalist party is never possible because of an unclear leadership criterion. Only in the form of force majeure, for a short period of the eruption of Mount Fuji when the enemy of my enemy is my friend and the prey is close and everyone sees it. No strategic partnership in Asia is possible, until today. Do not look at the declarations of Asian elites. Even Chinese Communists have their own party nobility. But the Han Chinese are not nomads. Moreover, the nomads are always scattered, they call natural separatism freedom. Such people are ready to break any association, especially the state, because of immanent anarchy.
Chapter 6
Where did the Kazakhs bourgeois come from
There are objective practices for the emergence of the bourgeoisie.
Conservative communities do not welcome the movement. The bourgeoisie appeared just from the movement of superfluous people because in every traditional family, ten children are born. Not necessarily every tenth of a litter of many children, having many children as a condition, as a guarantee of escape of folk: many descendants of the bourgeois appeared in the cities from landlessness, that is, from poverty.
In order for people to understand the need for cooperation, they had to live in a peasant community themselves. Both in rural areas and in cities, cooperation was a guarantee of survival. So in Europe, workshops appeared in medieval cities. Why couldn't Kazakhs create workshops?
Who among the Kazakhs in general could be the first to turn into the bourgeoisie, given that the Kazakhs did not like money. Like all peoples of the tradition, the Kazakhs loved glory. Thats just out of love for status and contempt for the worthless, however, this feeling is familiar to the whole world, all peoples, Kazakhs appeared candidates for the bourgeoisie according to the Western type of maturation. If we take into account that the nomads did not like cities where strategic cooperation of the Kazakhs could take place. We need to find the reason the Kazakh cooperation without relation to the main Kazakh attribute belonging to the Kazakh clan (ru). Poverty and rootlessness are the two main bourgeois assets. All the beggars and the rootless want to become famous, so that they are still respected it is fact.
If we remove the upper cooperation (in the revcon, this is called the upper dubbing, when the elite of the people is duplicated by another elite, necessary for the creation of a bourgeois class. Without the solidarity of former beggars who have turned into oligarchs, no modernization is possible. To create an industry, it is not at all a nomadic, not other primitive and feudal elite that is needed. All this traditional old elite should disappear. As practice shows, the primitive elite is destroyed by the new people themselves «in the name of progress». None of these people will change old habits. Im talking about the personal egoism of the feudal elite, about reforms changing the stereotype of the behavior of the whole people is out of the question. In order for new people to appear, a crowd of rootless people must appear when people do not remember their relatives. If people remember about pas kind, only external intervention is possible this is an external double of self reflection, when representatives of other peoples act as teachers), or you can immediately get into the prosak. Yes, these reform teachers are destroying the selfish feudal elite in the name of progress. The versions that the primitive elites themselves will go to voluntary poverty in order to turn into the bourgeoisie seem to be seditious devilry, market demagogy. Japanese samurai would never agree to trade in order to retain power. Those who claim that the Kazakh primitive elite would have shown miracles of selflessness in the name of the people, would have led reforms, that is, ruined themselves and butchered themselves to the head in order to look like beggars, for this the people themselves had to take place, that is, a crowd of rootless scoundrels demanding for self a couple of hundred sheep from them. The bourgeoisie is formed from dirt and shit. From dirt, from conservative shit! This dirt and shit should be eaten by all future oligarchs, as the most unscrupulous people for tradition.
Zhataks (recumbent men) poor Kazakhs, weeded out by Kazakh relatives for their inability to maintain movement could be the first to render in a foreign environment and in foreign cities, fate itself gives a chance to such all the poor. If they did not feel alienated from exactly the same generic dregs, some despicable Sarts should have felt contempt for exactly the same Kazakhs from other clans instead of being ready to cooperate. (Kazakhs do not let strangers, that is, not relatives Kazakhs into the Nauryz pagan wise holiday yurt even now! And they stuttering about the Kazakh strategic cooperation. This is an absent Kazakh feeling) It is they who could establish cooperation. If not for one thing that It is precisely that the Kazakhs all remember their kinds. With this memory they build their modern power. And at the same time they walk with the illusion that it is possible to build democracy at the same time. What each Kazakh has under democracy is a separate topic. And this topic does not go far from the Kazakh self -reflection.
Chapter 7
Why the American Indians lost. The Path of Big Wings
There are notes of Columbus about the meeting of Indians with Europeans. There he described them as resembling children. This is true, including in the matter of strategic cooperation. An Indian of any age is not authorized to meet an enemy or relative, but people whose strategic cooperation literally replaces the smell of blood: if their own blood, if thia man their tribe that man is a friend, if not their own blood, it is a member of another tribe. If the same Indians had been in the place of Columbus' sailors, the first Indians might have eaten them. As it was, their curiosity kept Columbus alive. He saw not children, but unauthorized Indians for such meetings.
When the settlers who arrived from the Atlantic side created settlement agglomerations for several generations, they began to penetrate deep into the American continent, the Indians showed their inferiority-complete incompetence. Apart from guerrilla tactics, they had nothing to oppose the white people. Of course, they created tribal alliances, but this was not enough for a strategic confrontation. White people surpassed the Aborigines not only in weapons and tactics, but most importantly, the whites had the ability to cooperate, to cooperate on the basis of the small interests of the small owners. The great Indian myths could not help them in any way because the Indians were not capable of cooperation, joint actions, except for the "warpath" based on the interest of blood. Without the most extreme need, the tribes are not capable of cooperation, in order for the Zerefs to have a strategic friendship this is only when there is a war and when on the edge of the abyss. In other cases, the Zerefs will look at you for a long time to come forward, or to trample you. All other meetings of the Zerefs outside their ancestral villages are a meeting of warriors and knight riders a meeting of two wolves, rather jackals. This policy is maintained until the very last moment. (When a Kazakh looks at a Kazakh, he does not just look at the "knight", he is a "cozben atada" (shoots with his eyes). Most likely, the Indians also looked at each other with heavy eyes without blinking at a chance meeting, creating a heavy look).
The Indian elite, Indian leaders, Indian shamans also could not do anything, could not help their peoples in any way. The fate of the Indians is sad. Too many tribes too many «states». They were with the elite also incapable of a strategic agreement. Let savages go the way of heroes. All tribes followed the path of tribal glory. No conservative people at the stage of «naturals» are able to survive if they are surrounded by small people who can win without blood, without a fight just by selling and buying. People came to the Indians who were able to unite for small gain, create punitive detachments. From the particular to the general. This is what distinguishes the petty bourgeois (zere, refags) from the generally wild people who shoot at each other all the time with their eyes. The «path of heroes», the «path of glory», which distinguishes all conservative peoples, dooms such an elite to death in the first place. These people would never have adapted to the «white» trick. Most of the people simply have to die after their own elite, because apart from curiosity, then complexes after the first realization of their impotence, these people are not capable of anything. This is the fatal tax of all conservative peoples until the savages assimilate the first skills of cooperation except kinship, except blood. This means that the entire older generation of the «curious» should also have gone to the valley of death, all barbarians are very persistent, stupidly stubborn when they try to retrain them even with the help of violence. The colonizers even had to import Negroes from faraway Africa to the plantations. By the way, African leaders sold young, physically strong people. For during a storm, swifts with medium wings survive. Those who have too big wings are carried away by the wind, those who have short wings, they themselves fall to the ground and break. So, in order to assimilate the Tatar tribe, Genghis Khan executed all adults, leaving only children who could pass under the cart.