The excess of useless or, at least, fickle knowledge has thrown Western postmodern man into an involutive and self-destructive spiral of pathetic contours. By moving away from the elementary principles of truth, represented by the Creative Wisdom of the Eternal, the Word, so to speak, the Logos  , and absorbing as sociocultural dogmas daydreams woven in pagan and proto-progressive surroundings, formatted by the heirs of the ancient satanic Babylonian, Egyptian and Greek traditions, sold to this West as the fundamental gnosis  , the alchemy of good or the foundation of knowledge, from which we should draw our ethical and moral guidelines, Western man dug his own existential grave, shot his identity as a divine creature with a deadly shot and opened the way for global disorder – which we agreed to call at some point the New World Order – to take over his senses and impose itself in such a way that, as predicted in the Judeo-Christian Holy Scriptures, the entire world would reach the state of “lying in the power of the evil one” ( I John 5:19  ). Everything was an enchantment. Logic and metaphysics. Sophistry and politics. And the Apostle Paul, through the Spirit, warned: “Professing to be wise, they became fools!” ( Romans 1:22  ). In the context in which Paul says this, writing in a Greco-Roman context, he immediately warns about the moral degeneration that inevitably accompanies the turning away from God and His Word. And he describes in detail the abominations and filth that we can see today in the media, in marketing, in business, in the arts, being imposed as the norm of a world that simply does not know how to deal with the situation and wastes its time asking empty and insipid questions like: “Are they crazy?” or “What do they think they will gain from this?” And the reason they do not know how to answer these questions? It is simple: they, the “wise men,” do not have the “intellectual tools” necessary to interpret these signs, because for them, these “tools” either do not exist, or are no longer valid, or are the fruit of superstitious or fundamentalist minds. They do not know that what they insist does not exist or is not part of the equation, is increasingly taking hold of their lives. Western pedantry has several fathers. Descartes is one of its main ones. He is the face of the postmodern Western thinker, endowed with a convenient and superficial pragmatism, who loses himself in the face of the transcendental/supernatural that governs the world through what we have learned to call – erroneously – “ideologies”. No one describes him better than the – indeed – brilliant Pascal: “I cannot forgive Descartes; he would have liked, in all his philosophy, to do without God, but he could not avoid making him give a flick of the wrist to set the world in motion; after which he no longer needs God”   (Pensamentos, Article II, 77). The Western opinion maker is too “intelligent” to “admit” God beyond what is protocol. He – man – acts as if he were saying to the Eternal: “I know you exist, but stay there, quietly on your throne, because my knowledge is enough to manage my life and the world around me!  ” Well, we are seeing how man is great at managing the world around him, which is exactly this world, this reality, which day after day slips through his fingers and is transmuted into a progressive nightmare of hideous colors, about which he, the pragmatic know-it-all, can do absolutely nothing, because he does not even admit a basic concept that has been respected since man learned to speak: the invisible governs the visible. His faith, or what he understands to be one, is submissive to everything that is lesser than it: philosophies, schools of thought and preconceived ideas of the world based on the environment in which they live, subverting the inevitable human immanence and throwing it at the feet of Freudian, Marxist and Rousseauian delusions, among others, which rolled out the carpet of human disorder to the West and were received with celebration by the status quo of the centuries that followed. That is why Western man, Western conservatives, have no way of stopping the ethical and moral degradation that is engulfing the world. Although strong in words, convinced in ideals and full of human knowledge, they lack the fundamental: the spiritual nobility of a warrior of God. And this is only possible when man understands his intellectual limitations and stops trying to explain what is generated spiritually using material language. Or does anyone think that the fact that all the great progressive/socialist thinkers chose the Judeo-Christian faith as their great adversary was by chance? The truly ridiculous part: all conservatives know this, but what do they do about it? They fall into the dialectical trap of Marx, Freud, Gramsci and others and, proud of their knowledge of aesthetics and Neoplatonism, they hit the tip of the boot of reality, which is having to accept down their throats a world that only exists in hysterical dystopias, with that melancholic air of someone who spends hours looking at the books on the shelf and doesn't know the best way to burn them. The system laughs at all this. It has finally found the target it always wanted: the man without God. A semi-worldly, ritualistic, superstitious Descartes, devoid of dogmas and in open rejection of the spiritual world. Who thinks, thinks and thinks, but cannot do more than that, because he is tied to the “regimental” bonds of an illusory pragmatism that will gradually suffocate him. A mockery of a man, devoid of power from on high, of ancestral identity, of spiritual depth. The type who even talks about ethics and morals, as long as they do not impose themselves on the human systems that he has been trained to obey. It is this man, pedantic, and whose spiritual alienation is a structural factor, who is largely responsible for the disaster that looms on the prophetic horizon of humanity. Help us continue publishing articles like this, participate in our virtual fundraiser  . Article published in the Knowledge & Citizenship Magazine   Vol. I No. 11 May 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

I used to love Carnival. Especially watching the samba schools. For 20 years, I frequented the Sambadrome, captivated by that spectacle of colors and sounds, hypnotized by the beating of the drums, which accelerated our hearts, and by the opportunity to witness one of the greatest shows on Earth. However, that magic has faded for me, and I will explain why. Today, Carnival has become a festival of excess, accompanied by violence, filth and degradation. The beautiful costumes have given way to vulgarity and nudity, the devil has come to be revered by several groups in their parades, drugs are consumed freely, even becoming an excuse for everything to be allowed. The streets have become dangerous and people feel vulnerable, as many crimes are committed with impunity. If the parades at the Sambadrome feature artists and celebrities, the street parties portray the degradation of ordinary human beings, who get drunk until they fall over and urinate anywhere (even on top of another human being, in an act known as golden showers). In these same parties, people are robbed and some are even raped. All of this saddens me. Modernity has normalized excesses, justifying many of the aberrations that surround us with clichés that have no connection to reality. So, the criminal who steals, beats and rapes is a product of “social inequality”. The couple who has sex in the street is “living sexual freedom”. The use of drugs everywhere comes from the “policy of drug decriminalization”. The artist who parades naked or plays the Devil is “representing his art”. There is a justification for everything. However, the excuses created to explain social chaos and disorder are not capable of preventing the terrible consequences of these behaviors that we often have to deal with. The return of many people to religion and moral and family values ​​has to do with the other side of this coin, a form of natural reaction to what one does not want to experience, to the place where one does not want society to go. Everything has a limit. There is a resurgence of strong conservatism all over the world, in the literal sense of the word: preserving what has worked for civilization, preserving moral values ​​and attitudes, which we cannot allow to perish, because what we are witnessing is a horror show that seems to have no end. We have advanced so much in knowledge, education, and technology, but we have regressed in values ​​and customs. It turns out that many societies have succumbed due to the loss of their most important values. Greek society. Ancient Rome. We have several examples of what we should not do, under penalty of perishing as a civilization. However, for better or for worse, human beings are always testing limits, stretching the rope, wanting more. There is nothing left that one can desire that is not legitimized in today's society. However, although we are free to do whatever we want, not everything that is allowed to us is suitable for us. It is urgent that we change the direction of the rudder of this boat we are all on, so that it does not sink. I no longer attend Brazilian Carnival for a simple reason: the values ​​that are being praised at this popular festival do not represent me. There we have the disorder and chaos of civilization at their maximum potential. In this tragic scenario that we find during the days of revelry, no one is spared. However, we are still given free will to decide whether we want to take part or not. Help us continue publishing articles like this, participate in our virtual fundraiser  . Article published in the Journal Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 51, February 2025 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

And the anti-Christian globalist ideologies that seduce the world When Nimrod began building the Tower of Babel, his intention and argument was: “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth”  (Genesis 11:4). This was the idea that was current among the men of that time. This was what Nimrod wanted them to think. Soon, the ambitious project gained adherents and captured the minds of his time. And so the tower began to be built. But Nimrod always knew that it would never be possible to build something that would touch the heavens. But he sold the illusion anyway. The devil is an expert seller of illusions. He knows how tempted we are to embrace fantasies and illusory projects, as long as we think that in the end, somehow, we will obtain some benefit. He has a method and is ancient. When he went to Eve, what did he tell the woman to convince her to disobey God and eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? That she – and Adam – would be “like God”, that is, equal to God (Genesis 3:5). Nimrod was the first prototype – so to speak – of the Antichrist who walked the earth since the fall of man. When we read Flavius ​​Josephus, a traditionally reliable source, we see him report that Nimrod, a brave man (a description that also appears in the Bible) convinced the men of his time that it was not God who was responsible for their victories and blessings, but rather they themselves, for their own individual capacity and value. Note the materialist discourse. It is the root of all Marxist dialectics, with an atheist and anti-Christian profile. A discourse polished, perfected and crystallized by the Germanic philosophers who today are a reference for thousands of Christians around the world. What diabolical irony, right? Then, still according to Josephus, Nimrod presents himself as “ the solution to all of humanity’s problems”  with the idea of ​​building a tower that, according to him, would protect men from another flood “threat.” Notice how God becomes the great and disturbing villain of the story. But Nimrod also knew that this was not true, because God had told Noah that He would no longer bring the flood upon the earth (Genesis 9:11). And this information was passed down from generation to generation. Nimrod used the lie in a populist way to promote himself, when in fact what he wanted was to hold power over all men. Familiar? When we say that the roots of communism/Marxism/socialism are satanic, this can be taken in two ways. In the first, the Devil planned all of this and passed it on to men. And in the second, men simply absorbed these principles after ages of devilish cults. In both cases, the end result will be the same and the modus operandi similar: the promise of a better world, as long as God is removed from the equation. By taking upon himself the responsibility of dictating the destinies of humanity, Nimrod tries to take God's place and, worse, presents himself as someone who can offer humanity a better world without HIM. Isn't this what Marxism preaches in the philosophical field? Isn't this what progressivism defends in the social field? Finally, Josephus brings one more piece of information. Destroying any sense of reality, Nimrod would have promised the people that, once the tower was finished and heaven was reached, he would avenge the deaths of all those who perished in the flood, which aroused the anger and wounded pride of their descendants. Nimrod wanted to make a revolution in heaven, enter the kingdom, dethrone the King, and then he, Nimrod, would take possession of the crown. All this after lying, distorting, manipulating and corrupting. Deep down, what he wanted was power outside of God. In order to distort the entire work of Creation. As an efficient messenger of Lucifer, gifted with a seductive tongue and a malicious power of persuasion, he made men fall in love with lies under the pretext of fulfilling their lowest and darkest desires. The promise of a better world without the presence of the one who gave life to them all. There is no better world without truth reigning. A society that benefits men is not possible without reality being lived in its entirety. There is no life without GOD. Note that this is what the Siamese twins (socialism/progressivism) preach. Note that everything they fight against is exactly what is in the light, on the side of good, of what is decent, ethical and moral. The “spirit” of Nimrod, or rather, the “spirit” that was behind Nimrod, has walked this earth for millennia, always with a Tower of Babel under its arm to offer us. But Babel means “confusion.” And GOD likes things, as Paul says, with “decency and order” (1 Corinthians 14:40). Communism and progressivism are spiritual, human, and social confusions. There is no possible Tower of Babel in any of the worlds planned by God. Even if it starts to be built, and may astonish many who see it rise, in the end it is GOD who decides what can and cannot be built. Today, we have a tower that is already quite tall. But do not be afraid. Soon the owner of the world will come down, and those who work on its construction will know who really rules over everything and everyone. Help us continue publishing articles like this, participate in our virtual fundraiser  . Article published in the Journal Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 11, May 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

The wisdom of ancestors can be observed in their culture and such legacy should always be invoked, as myths, fables, works of fiction or even thoughts would be of no use if not to give later civilizations ways to assimilate knowledge without having the sometimes harmful experience that their ancestors experienced. In the 21st century, the defense of totalitarian regimes, especially socialism, causes great astonishment, since the previous century should have served as an experience for humanity to immediately reject the idea that such regimes even existed. Nazism and fascism have deservedly been put in their rightful place, the reminder of what they are trying to avoid. However, socialism, which is broader and more adaptable, manages to survive in the imagination of crazy revolutionaries and, even worse, contaminate a large part of the unwary. It is clear that the aforementioned Nazism and socialism are the real ones, and do not encompass that false label that revolutionaries try to stick on anyone who opposes their nefarious intent. The revolutionary movement, which seeks to distort reality in an authoritarian and supposedly collectivist way, is the embryo of socialism which, due to its adaptability, gave rise to communism, Nazism and fascism. However, given the failure of the latter two, it tried to transfer them to the opposing spectrum, creating the fragile but constantly reaffirmed narrative that such collectivist ideologies would be in the political spectrum that values ​​individual freedom and the maintenance of traditions, which would be a contradiction, given the revolutionary need to break completely  with the status quo. History teaches us according to what was experienced and myths served to give examples even when dealing with a hypothetical experience, as in the case of the renowned works 1984 and Animal Farm by George Orwell, in which the British author presents two fictional experiences to illustrate the exacerbated surveillance of totalitarian regimes and how the revolutionary elite, when occupying positions of power, tends to become tyrannical, considering itself more than others. For this reason, it is always important to seek to learn from the legacy of those who came before us, whether through lived experiences or stories that present hypotheses. Revolutionary ideals should be promptly rejected by today's society based on both sources, since Nazism, fascism and socialism have shown themselves to be mistakes that we should not repeat. In the case of socialism, it is still possible that it will be considered an ongoing evil, therefore, the disapproval of such regimes should be a rule. On the other hand, works such as those mentioned above give us more than enough argumentative basis to resist such ideologies, given that the simple imagination of a world dominated by revolutionary collectivist totalitarianism should be seen as a warning of the danger that such regimes represent. Human survival and its values ​​depend on factors that are not superficially perceptible, and sometimes it is necessary to retreat in the face of evil that cannot be confronted for the time being, or else we will no longer be able to defend what we believe in. Martyrdom is indeed great and should be seen as an indispensable form of defense of values. However, the reckless martyr, who sacrifices himself without real need, will not be left with glory for his sacrifice, but rather the loss of his vain effort. Even if the ideals of those who face a stronger enemy are noble, if they do so thoughtlessly they will suffer a fruitless defeat, their martyrdom being nothing more than a foolish suicide, evidently without the rebuke that is intended for those who deliberately gave up the gift of life for weakness, in which case the sin is undeniable. The so-called foolish suicide is in truth a vain attempt to make one's name in history through a useless martyrdom. In Greek mythology there is the myth of Typhon, perhaps the strongest and most ferocious creature of all the tales of that civilization, which despite presenting different versions, teaches that there are evils that cannot be faced head on, being necessary to step back and analyze what to do before fighting it. Before the creation of such a mythological beast, the gods of Olympus, led by Zeus, faced the generation that preceded them, the Titans. The war between the allies of Cronus, leader of the Titans, and his descendants became known as the Titanomachy. According to legend, the gods of Mount Olympus and the Titans of Mount Ortis fought for approximately ten years, and in the end, the Olympians were victorious. The sons of the titan Cronus, now reigning over the universe, divided the heavens, the seas and the underworld among themselves, becoming their respective lords, Zeus, Poseidon and Hades, leaving the one who received the heavens as his domain to reign over all the other gods, thus occupying the throne of Mount Olympus. Zeus had become the lord of the gods and confined the titans in Tartarus, a place below the underworld to which only those who deserved punishment beyond life were sent. Tartarus is the name of a primordial god and also of the place where punishments are applied to the condemned, just like Hades who gives his name to the underworld and the deity who governs it, Tartarus can also be used in both senses. Unhappy with the fate of her children, the Titans, Gaia decided to take revenge on the Olympians, especially her grandson Zeus, by having a son with the primordial god Tartarus, lord of the lands where the Titans were thrown. From the union between Gaia and Tartarus emerged the most ferocious and strong creature they could conceive. Typhon was such a devastating figure that he remained locked away in his father's domain until he had enough strength to carry out the designs of his vengeful mother. The myth describes him as a monstrous figure capable of intimidating even the gods of Olympus, as it says that on his shoulders were a hundred heads of serpents, his arms touched the west and the east and he was so tall that he touched the stars. The first lesson of the myth of Typhon can be seen as the preparation of evil, in which the creature, despite being monstrous and of colossal proportions, remains hidden from the eyes of his enemies until he has enough strength to dethrone them, so that we can learn that true evil will remain in wait until it considers itself capable of subduing its opponents. Totalitarian regimes, as a rule, try to hide their authoritarian nature until they can force individuals to bend to their will, so their agents have tried to print a narrative that they are fighting against dictatorship or imperialism until they feel confident and advance on the freedoms of the people. The false defenders of democracy who wanted to establish a dictatorship that, also falsely, claimed to be of the proletariat, when in truth it was of a socialist elite that has nothing to do with the working class, using only the cliché of fighting for the oppressed to gain political strength. This is what the defenders of identity-based agendas do, who do not care about the schizophrenic desires of their hordes, but use them to climb to power and abandon them as soon as they realize that such a sect has lost its usefulness. When Typhon emerges from Tartarus, this creature is already in a position to confront the Olympians, but they are not given the opportunity to nip the evil in the bud, since they were unaware of the existence of such a great evil. Just like some forces that were conceived in secret, sometimes having their existence denied after someone denounces them, such as the Forum of São Paulo, as soon as it reaches the level that allows it to use its power, it will assume itself as the naturalness of those who never denied its existence, taking pride in its nature that was once hidden because it is something abject, but which, given the strength it had acquired in obscurity, can silence anyone who rises up to fight it. When Typhon finally heads to Mount Olympus, the home of his enemies, the gods, frightened by the threatening figure, flee to distant lands, leaving only Zeus, Athena and Dionysus. However, there are versions in which the last of them also leaves Olympus along with the other gods. It is not relevant to discuss whether Dionysus left or stayed, since in neither version does he oppose the creature. It is certain that in the version in which he remained on Olympus, Dionysus merely survived without defending the gods, and therefore ceased to be a problem for Typhon. Athena, who according to the myth was too fearless to leave Olympus, did nothing to confront the beast, leaving Zeus to fight alone in defense of his throne. However, in the first confrontation, Typhon emerged victorious, resisting the lightning bolts of the lord of Olympus and dismembering him as a form of punishment and, mainly, to establish his dominion, thus reigning over all things. The creature was unbeatable and no one but Zeus was able to confront it, but the lord of the gods was without his powerful lightning bolt and dismembered, therefore, unable to stand up against such a powerful evil. There are different versions that attribute this feat to Cadmus, however, most authors attribute the rescue of the lightning bolt and the limbs of the lord of Olympus to the god Hermes, messenger of the Olympians. According to the myth, in the version we will consider, the messenger god fled with his peers to distant lands, initially Egypt, leaving Zeus to confront the feared creature alone. However, Hermes used a trick in favor of the Olympians, fleeing at first and only later rescuing the remains of Zeus, as well as the powerful lightning bolt, giving the lord of Olympus the chance for revenge against his tormentor. If it weren't for Hermes's perspicacity, the Olympians would have been defeated and Typhon would have become the lord of the world, ruling over all things, since, according to the myth, he was a beast impossible to confront. It was the messenger god who actually gave the Olympian gods the chance, through the strength of Zeus, to confront the ferocious creature once again and, using cunning, defeat it. Hermes, like the other gods, could be treated in the myth as a coward who, in the presence of Typhon, preferred flight to confrontation, allowing evil to win at first. At the risk of being labeled as a weakling who runs away from evil instead of confronting it, the messenger god left his home, head down, like a weakling in the face of desolation. However, the courageous Athena did nothing more than instigate her father to face the monster, maintaining the posture of someone who does not retreat in the face of evil, even though she has in fact done nothing. By gathering together the shards of the most powerful of the Olympian gods, that is, Zeus's limbs and lightning bolt, Hermes had saved his peers from destruction or submission, for he knew when to retreat in order to act when the opportune moment arrived. Demonstrating great wisdom, Hermes waited for evil to triumph in order to overthrow it without the god himself having to wield the sword, merely rescuing the one who, although destroyed, could defeat Typhon in battle. Another point in the myth of Typhon that is not peaceful is how Zeus defeats such a creature, because for some the lord of Olympus defeats the beast using the force of his lightning bolts. However, there is a version that suggests that the master of the Olympians counted on the help of the Fates, creatures that controlled the destiny of men and deities, rarely getting involved in conflicts of any nature, since their neutrality was necessary so that destiny would not bow to the desires of anyone. Any similarity with a passive Judiciary removed from political issues is not a mere coincidence. The interference of the Fates should not be confused with a partial or even passionate action of a Power or body that should remain inert, under the claim that they were “saving democracy”, because as is known, the Fates did not unbalance destiny when there was a natural struggle between titans and gods for power, they only did so when the usurper was a beast that should not even claim the throne. As if the Judiciary or the Armed Forces acted against the dictatorship that was installed in Venezuela by force, in which case a reaction would be justified, given that the so-called institutional rupture had already occurred. In the version in which Zeus counts on the help of the Fates, these creatures offer poisoned apples to Typhon, who has his power considerably reduced, thus allowing Zeus to defeat him in a direct confrontation. Thus, with the perspicacity of Hermes and the external help of the Fates, the lord of Olympus had the opportunity to defeat the beast and regain the throne of the gods. Typhon was imprisoned on Mount Etna in Sicily, and the lava from that volcano is attributed to his fury. The second lesson from the myth of Typhon is that sometimes, the one who seems to be cowering, as Hermes did, is merely retreating to think of a counterattack, thinking of a future measure that could be more effective than a simple, reckless attack. Therefore, the messenger god cannot be treated as a coward, but as a strategist who gains time and returns in the future to defeat the evil that seemed invincible at first. On the other hand, Athena, who assumed a courageous stance, did nothing more than emulate an empty heroism that in no way helped the Olympians, being an action that, at most, earned her the admiration of those who could not see with greater sobriety what had really happened. Zeus, even though he did not retreat, was taught that there is a time when wisdom is more important than brute force, because, without the help of Hermes, he would never defeat Typhon, and he also had to rely on a period of exile in present-day Syria, when he recovered his strength, and the help of the Fates so that the powerful monster would weaken. Mythology teaches us that populist measures like Athena's may even signal courage, but they are ineffective in the face of great evil, since, although Zeus confronted Typhon because of his daughter's questions, it was not because of them that he emerged victorious. Furthermore, it teaches us that Hermes preferred not to directly confront the monster or instigate someone else to do so in order to prepare a rematch in which Zeus could have a real chance of victory. Finally, Zeus had to resort to the Fates to reduce his enemy's powers and, only then, defeat him. The current scenario is very similar to the myth of Typhon, considering that the evil that is intended to be fought is unequivocally strong. Perhaps the description of the monster serves to illustrate how powerful the revolutionary movement is, sometimes making it necessary to retreat and pick up the pieces to counterattack at a propitious moment. Of course, some preferred to pose as Athena, brave and useless in the face of the evil that was taking over Olympus, but there are those who know her true role and see that Hermes was the one who really saved the Olympians in that episode. There are times when heroism lies in retreating in order to advance when appropriate and other times when alliances need to be forged, however, what differentiates a hero from a coward is not renouncing, deep down, their values. When everything seems lost, we must remain calm to pick up the pieces and when we have the opportunity, fight with all our strength. “Those triumph who know when to shine and when to wait.” Sun Tzu – The Art of War. Help us continue publishing articles like this, participate in our virtual fundraiser   Article published in the Journal Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 50, January 2025 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

During the 1951 carnival, the march “Retrato do Velho” excited the people who filled the streets of Rio de Janeiro. The excitement of the population of Rio, as well as in many other cities in the country, was due to the election of Getúlio Vargas in the 1950 election. Once again, Vargas occupied the Palácio do Catete and from there he intended to continue his government project, interrupted in 1945 with his resignation. In fact, since his departure from office, part of the population has been asking for his return. Wantism moved the news and kept the flame of hope alive among a people already accustomed to the “father figure” who held the presidency. It is an indisputable fact that Vargas' long stint as president left deep marks on the popular imagination and on the way people understood what a president would be like. His governments, known in history books as the Vargas Era, were and continue to be the template for governments and rulers to this day. His political “exploits”, guided by populism, exacerbated nationalism, control of the media, censorship, arrests, deaths, civil disarmament and the cult of his self-image, are the archetype of fascism in its most genuine configuration. Fascism, a word so distorted today that, from a government regime with well-defined characteristics, it has become a mere instrument of verbal aggression, devoid of a true meaning. The return of the old man's portrait to the walls of public offices in 1950 represented the victory of a model country that had been born under the promise of restoring democracy and federalism, but which contradictorily, hypocritically, merely replaced one oligarchy with another. It structured and equipped the unions to serve the capillarization of state power, reaching the most remote regions. Now, what purposes did coronelismo and its colonels serve if not themselves? For the purposes for which they were initially used, unions were a new form of coronelism. With the aggravating factor of co-opting urban workers and rural workers, with labor benefits that hampered industrial growth, keeping the country completely out of any possibility of real competition for international markets. The granting of such benefits, compared to the ancient practice of panem et circenses ( bread and circuses ), it does not seem so absurd to us when analyzed in terms of its tacit objectives. If the population of Rome was content with the distribution of wheat in the Forum and rejoiced in the Circus Maximus, remaining peaceful in their dealings, in the same way the working class under Vargas remained peaceful, believing themselves protected by the State, living the illusion of being in a privileged situation. Driven by the unions, their ability to react to state numbness was kept practically null. His return to the head of state came with 48.7% of the electorate's votes. But this time his passage would be met with even more direct and fierce opposition from Carlos Lacerda. The journalist and his Tribuna da Imprensa daily undermined Vargas' self-constructed image, presenting complaints, promoting investigative articles that exposed the rottenness of the government day by day. Yes, there was a time when the press informed and did not distort public opinion. We had men of value in the national press who did not sell themselves to the petty interests of politics. The attack on Carlos Lacerda on August 5, 1954, carried out by Gregório Fortunato, head of the president's personal guard, was possibly the closing of the barrel of the gun that was aimed at Vargas' heart. On August 24 of that year, the culmination of a sequence of tragedies for the country occurred: the president's suicide, which removed him from life, but did not destroy his legacy, on the contrary, it strengthened it. Vargas' final act did not just represent his exit from life by suicide, but a kind of final ritual for his own mythification and perpetuation of his dictatorial project. The fundamental question in this article is whether the Brazilian people will allow (by default) the old man's portrait to be put back on the walls. This time, Vargas will not return, but his legacy remaining alive in leftist models of government maintains the threat of a return. The old man is now different, as cunning and rogue as his model, he doesn't come from São Borja, but from Garanhuns. Mr. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, ‘unconvicted’ for his crimes against the Brazilian nation, intends to resume his old practices. Defender of the giant State that has imposed so much delay and stagnation on the country; patrimonialism very much in the style of socialist matrices; social control through welfare and populist programs; from censorship to the right to free expression of thought; civil disarmament; among many other promises they have made in recent months. It is surprising that his proposals still find ears willing to accept them. If Vargas were still alive, he would be proud of the pupils he formed, the most obvious example of which is Mr. Lula, but we cannot forget Ciro Gomes who loses nothing in terms of his even more explicit and shameless fascism. A sad fate for a president who defends Christian agendas, family values, economic liberalism, the autonomy of his people and freedom in all its aspects. Sad and difficult is the journey of leading a country still structured and equipped under Vargas' fascist model, which has a large part of its political elite and civil servants supporting this retrograde and statist model. Old Lula's portrait, nor that of Ciro Gomes, can litter the walls of offices throughout Brazil. Returning to the past is a path of destruction for defenders of freedom, but equally so for the unwary defenders of fascism. Yes, those who today are plotting the gang's return to the site of their crimes will, at some point in the future, be possible victims of their guides. Criminals do not have friends, they have cronies, and this category betrays and corrupts the impetus of their personal interests. A model that for almost a hundred years has kept Brazil at a slow pace, with education, health care, sanitation, technology and industrialization rates far below the minimum expected, given the overwhelming volume of taxes charged. Taxes that, as we know, serve more to maintain the structure than its founding objectives. A system like this cannot be continued as it has already provided more than enough proof of its inefficiency. Brazil and its people deserve better portraits. The corruption that became institutionalized during the years of Lula and Dilma's governments, the government's spurious cronyism with the old press, public money serving the interests of other nations, all of this reminds us of the late voice of Lacerda, who should inspire our parliamentarians today. His words spoken in 1953 are as current as if they had been spoken today. “My friends, we set out on what appeared to be a crusade for freedom of the press and turned out to be a crusade for national liberation. And this did not happen by chance. that when you want to poison a nation, you start by poisoning the sources of public knowledge, you start by poisoning the sources of information, without which the people don't know what's going on, or, even worse, they only know wrong what's going on right. It is through the corruption of the press, it is through the intimidation of the press, that the people's own opinion is corrupted and intimidated. If it was set up in Brazil, it wasn't just a business for a group of power's godsons. It was not just a deal made at the expense of the misery and plundering of the people. It was also a business to destroy the people's trust in democracy. It was a deal made to make the people disbelieve in themselves, to make the people think that there was no point protesting in the public square, because the men in power would think for them and act for them from the beginning to the end. (...) Well, very well, Mr. Getúlio Vargas finally intends to punish corrupt people and corruptors! But where, where was he when corruption was rampant? What did he do when the doors of the Banco do Brasil opened to let out the money that a foreigner and an adventurer were busy with? May he understand! That he understands that if the relative majority of Brazilians gave him a respectable vote of confidence, since he cannot respond to that confidence, he should at least respond to his feeling of respect for himself, and not disrespect himself. We do not want to disrespect Mr. Getúlio Vargas as the President of the Republic. To do this, it is essential that he takes his son out of this mess! It is essential that he immediately punishes those who involved his son in this mess! It is essential that he stops holding his breath and that he, who had no qualms about tearing up a Constitution, rips up the 'Ultima Hora'!” With very small adaptations, this speech could be addressed to the old Lula. Faced with the cyclical repetition of facts, always involving the same ideals, we will not shy away from our duty to state: definitively, we will never put up the portrait of the old man again! Help us continue publishing articles like this, participate in our virtual crowdfunding. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 11 May 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

God's plan is a central concept in Christian theology, reflecting the belief that God, in His infinite wisdom and love, has a sovereign and benevolent purpose for creation and for each individual. This divine plan is often described as a path of redemption, salvation, and fulfillment that unfolds through human history from creation to the end of the age. According to the Christian faith, God's plan is progressively revealed in the Scriptures and is centered on the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. From the earliest moments of humanity, God charted a path to reconcile creation with Himself, restoring the harmony that was broken by the sin of Adam and Eve. This plan is both collective, involving the salvation of all humanity, and individual, reflecting God's care and purpose for each person. Through historical events, prophecies, and teachings, God's plan manifests itself in surprising and often mysterious ways. It includes promises made to biblical figures such as Abraham, David, and the prophets, and finds its culmination in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Furthermore, the divine plan continues to unfold in each person's life to this day, guiding them toward a future of hope and fulfillment. Reflecting on God's plan invites us to trust in His sovereignty, even in the face of adversity, and to find meaning and purpose in our own existence. As part of this plan, we are called to live according to the principles and values ​​that God has established, contributing to the fulfillment of His will on earth. This serves as an invitation to explore more deeply God's plan and how it reveals itself in history and in our personal lives. After the fall of Adam and Eve in paradise and the entry of sin into the world, God established some new covenants with his people. Thus, God chose Abraham to be the father of many nations, and through him, all the families of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12, 3). The promise to Abraham was the beginning of a divine plan that would culminate in the coming of Jesus. Advancing a little further in history, we come across David, or as he is known, King David. God's promise to David, that his throne would be established forever (2 Samuel 7, 1), found its fulfillment in Jesus, the descendant of David who would bring salvation to the world. This plan demonstrates God's faithfulness and sovereignty in fulfilling His promises and affirms his legitimacy as King of the Jews. And finally, for the coming of the Savior: Joseph and Mary. Although Joseph is prominent in genealogies, Christian tradition also recognizes the importance of Mary. Mary's lineage, although not explicitly traced, is often linked to Joseph's, showing the unity of the inheritances. The choice of Mary, a humble young woman, to be the mother of the Savior, shows that God sees beyond appearances and chooses those who are pure in heart. Mary was prepared by God for this mission from the beginning, demonstrating the perfection of the divine plan. Since the beginning of time, humanity has sought to understand the purpose and meaning of their lives. For those who believe, the answer is clear and comforting: everything happens according to God's Will. This vision invites us to see each event, whether big or small, as part of a greater divine plan, carefully woven by the Creator. Throughout biblical history, we see compelling examples of how God orchestrated events, people, and circumstances to accomplish His perfect will. From the promises made to Abraham to the birth of Jesus, every detail was planned with a specific purpose. Fulfilled prophecies, miraculous interventions and providential encounters serve as testimonies of divine care and intention. On this journey of faith, we are called to trust in God's sovereignty, even when the paths seem uncertain or difficult. Recognizing that we are living within God's dream brings a deep sense of peace and purpose. It means that our lives have value and meaning, not by chance, but because we are part of a loving and perfect plan. So, as we explore the perfection of the divine plan, we are invited to reflect on our own role in this grand scheme. How can we align our lives with God's dream? What divine purposes does He have in store for each of us? We are called to a deeper reflection on trust in divine providence and the quest to live according to what God dreamed for us. The Old Testament prophets announced the coming of the Messiah, detailing specific aspects of his life and mission. Isaiah, for example, prophesied the virgin birth and redemptive nature of the Messiah (Isaiah 7, 14, 53, 5). These prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in Jesus, confirming that everything was in God's plans. From the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, as predicted by the prophet Micah (Micah 5, 2), to the crucifixion and resurrection, every event in Jesus' life was in accordance with the divine plan. Nothing happened by chance; every detail was dreamed and prepared by God for the redemption of humanity. Jesus' lineage and the events that shaped his life are testaments to divine perfection and purpose. As we explore this ancestry, we realize that each name and each event are not mere coincidences, but part of a greater plan, orchestrated by God since the beginning of time. In this way, the origin of Jesus is a narrative of redemption, where God uses imperfect people to fulfill His perfect purpose. From Adam to Jesus, we see an unbroken line of divine grace and mercy. Each name represents a vital piece in the puzzle of salvation. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke present two distinct genealogies of Jesus. Matthew begins with Abraham and moves on to Joseph, the legal father of Jesus, emphasizing Jesus' Jewish and royal heritage, passing through figures such as David and Solomon. This gospel seeks to connect Jesus directly to the promises made to Abraham and David, highlighting Jesus as the expected Messiah. Luke, on the other hand, traces Jesus' ancestry starting with Joseph and going back to Adam, the first man. In doing so, Luke underlines the universality of Jesus' mission, showing that He came for all humanity, not just the Jews. The genealogy of Jesus Christ is one of the most fascinating and significant themes in the New Testament. Presented in the Gospels of Matthew (1, 1-17) and Luke (3, 23-38), it not only traces the earthly lineage of Jesus, but also reveals profound theological and historical truths that have resonated through the centuries. In the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 1, 1-16) the royal origin of Joseph is highlighted, linking him to King David through his son Solomon. Some of Joseph's closest ancestors mentioned in Matthew include: Jacob (Joseph's father), Matthan (Joseph's grandfather), and Eleazar (Joseph's great-grandfather). Although Mary's ancestry is not as explicitly detailed in the Gospels as Joseph's, Christian tradition and some interpretations suggest that the lineage presented in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 3:23-38) may be that of Mary, since Heli may be Mary's father. Thus, Mary's origin would also be traced back to King David, but through Nathan, another son of David. Some of the closest ancestors are: Heli, also called Joachim (Mary's father), Matate (Mary's grandfather) and Levi (Mary's great-grandfather). Jesus' genealogy is more than a list of names; it is a testimony of God's faithfulness to his promises. It reveals that, through generations of imperfect and flawed people, God was preparing the way for the coming of the Savior. It also highlights God's redemptive plan for all humanity, from Adam to Jesus, who came to restore communion between God and humanity. To explore this is to delve into a story of faith, hope and redemption. Every name, every generation, is a reminder that God works through history and people to fulfill his eternal purposes. Jesus' lineage is living proof that, regardless of our origins or imperfections, we all have a place in God's grand plan. Reflecting on the ancestry of Jesus and God's plan leads us to recognize the greatness and wisdom of the Creator. Every event, every fulfilled prophecy, confirms that God has a perfect plan for humanity, a plan that He has been executing since the beginning of time. As we consider the perfection of the divine plan, it is natural to reflect on our own place in that grand scheme. Just as each name in Jesus' genealogy had a purpose and meaning, we too are part of a divine dream. God dreamed of you before you were even born, and you deserve to exist. So, what did He dream for you? How can you live up to that dream and purpose? As you meditate on these questions, remember that you are a valuable part of God's plan, a living proof of His intention and love. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 50 January 2025 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

Despite not being a Spiritist, but a Catholic, I believe that the best way to correlate the three topics covered, is the concept below, named as Triple Aspect of the Spiritist Doctrine. Science, as many deny, is not an opposite of religion, but rather a complement. It’s common to hear things like “So people came from clay?” to criticize creationism, however, they forget that in evolutionism, or Darwinism, the first signs of life, both unicellular and multicellular, were in water, which includes salt water, mixed with earth, sand, and the like. Religion has its explanations of how life, the world, universe, and even more began, varying for each religion, but the value of a religion is not in worldly, physical, experimental knowledge, but rather in the creation of the individual's morals. The concepts expressed in the Bible, Quran, Torah, etc., result in the creation of a bond of belief, and through this, the ethics of that people are shaped, because with religion, social control can be achieved, positively or negatively. Aiming at the positive aspect, one can imagine that someone, devoid of faith, when thinking about committing a crime, will only be afraid of being discovered, what inhibits are the cases in which the penalties and risk are high, however, the being will still maintain his will, if he has a gap, he will do so without hesitation. However, if the individual is religious, he will know that even if he is unpunished in the court of men, one day he will be judged by someone who knows everything, which, subconsciously, inhibits him from perpetrating such a crime, given that, before he even considered committing the crime, he already knew about such a trial since he was little. After contact with religion from a young age, the individual is introduced to a school, where this will be the “science center”, while churches, temples, mosques and the like are religious centers, therefore, the school has no duty to shape their character, as this is already worked on with family and belief. The knowledge passed on at school should be detached from religion, or if they are correlated, say it openly, as there will be children there, and they do not necessarily share the same belief and are in the character building phase, which can confuse concepts and hinder their formation, therefore, the school presents physical knowledge, that which can be experienced, seen and described. This knowledge, later, when the character is already consolidated, and the material principles too, the being will begin to question itself, through philosophy, because, “Whoever knows others is intelligent. Whoever knows himself is enlightened. Whoever wins over others is strong. He who overcomes himself is invincible” – Lao-Tzu. In this way, philosophy is necessary for the individual's growth into adulthood, because knowing who you are, what you want, your goals, and most importantly, where philosophy and religion connect, what questions, examples, postures, concepts, morals, and the like, you will leave for others. The biggest question, and the one that you will never have the answer to still live, is, “did I fulfill my role?”, it is something philosophical, but directly linked to belief. The bond between philosophy and science is created when an experiment is not physical, but mental. As is the case with groupthink, that is, the way individuals think irrationally when grouped together is not physical – which is why people are so encouraged to be part of groups, but that is a topic for another time – but it is experimental, which is part of the method of science, however, it is a psychological fact, not seen by machines or the naked eye, but rather a fact portrayed in a logical way. Bearing this concept in mind, it is understandable why there is so much appeal to keep people away from religion, because science is written by those who have power, if all faculties are pro-vaccine bias with huge aluminum rates, with mRNA technology, completely unknown, since not even “scientists” know its effects and how they will worsen, science says it is correct, so people will accept it as such. The example was to demonstrate how malleable science is, in fact, it is a concept of men for men, it will always be open to lies, in the same way that philosophy falls apart, through social groups, you will not ask who you are, if you are always calling yourself an LGBT activist, Black Lives Matter, vegan – which is very different from vegetarian – and similar, to be accepted as a member of the group. The attack on beliefs by progressives or bad intentioned beliefs, is to retain control with oneself, whether a distorted belief or the lack of a well-intentioned belief, creates a gap for the total control of a people, because, even in a tyrannical regime, a “President” can never place himself as something beyond, a god or demigod, since the belief will be contrary to the imposition of the dictator, many will even refuse to accept it. directly, being able to lose his life, but not reject his faith. Therefore, defending religions is necessary, as is maintaining state and academic parity, as a distorted science also attacks religion, teaching terrible things to keep children away from the church, and closer to degenerate schools. The triple is the central point for the cohesion of the three elements, which support each other in a paired way, if one falls, the others will be prone to falling. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 11 May 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

Once a week I take my son, who is autistic, to his therapy sessions. Since he sees three professionals (a psychologist, a speech therapist and an occupational therapist) on the same day – and I don’t watch Globo, which is tuned to the television in the reception area – I decided to take a book to study. At the time, I chose “A revolução contra a vida” (The Conspiracy Against Life), by José Alfredo Elia Marcos, from Editora Estudos Nacionais. By persevering in reading it only once a week (so as not to mix it up with other materials that I am studying at the same time) I have made great progress, more than halfway through the work. It is a reading where I can calmly “savour” each comma and understand a lot about how the satanic idea of ​​anti-natalism came about. I won't be reviewing this book here – but I will be doing it on my YouTube channel soon – but I will be addressing a very important issue: the fallacy that the lower the birth rate, the better for the environment. For those who think this nonsense is new, they have no idea that it has been disseminated for over three hundred years. Thomas Malthus, Anglican clergyman, economist, mathematician and Enlightenment thinker, is considered the father of demography, as he was also the “father” of population control; he said that the improvement of humanity would be impossible without strict limits on reproduction. Malthus believed that the capacity for population growth would be infinitely greater than the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man. This is because, in his early essays, he presented a calculation in which, hypothetically, human populations grow, when not subjected to obstacles, doubling every 25 years. He stated that, while the means of subsistence grow in arithmetic progression, the population grows in geometric progression. To apply population control, Malthus advocated what he called “natural control”; in addition, he classified population reduction methods into two types: preventive – aimed at reducing birth rates; positive – aimed at increasing mortality rates. By being in favor of population reduction, he falsely demonstrated some kind of Christian value; he defended sexual abstinence and radically condemned prostitution, although he recognized that it could reduce the number of children. He also considered the use of contraceptive methods within marriage; it seems that Malthus foresaw what would happen two hundred years later: that contraceptive methods would contribute to promoting vice and promiscuity. Within the positive methods, Malthus advocated the promotion of wars, famine, epidemics and wars. “Hunger is not only a subtle pressure, but may be the most natural reason for people to be industrious and hard-working and to make the most intense efforts” “…we must encourage the other forms of destruction which we ourselves force nature to employ (…) we will prevent the cure of diseases.” “If population is prevented from increasing more than is convenient, one of the main incentives to offensive war will be suppressed.” Like every idea – good or bad – Malthusianism has undergone upgrades over the years; its followers have added the defense of contraceptive methods, the secularization of marriage (which would cease to be a sacrament and become a mere social contract, without the obligation of having children), the standardization of divorce and even the end of the traditional family, all with the flimsy excuse of reducing the population so as not to affect the environment. Since Malthus, the idea has been to reduce the value of human beings and deify nature. This movement gained strength in the 1960s with the sexual revolution, through the invention of the contraceptive pill; this disconnected sex from procreation and, at the same time, from responsibility towards others; because, with the solely sexual bond, the person is reduced to the status of mere object. And it is at this stage that sex becomes politicized. The hippie movement was one of the main causes of this problem; it was a collective countercultural behavior of the 60s. The movement, in its essence, proposes a critique of traditionalism and thus develops a new lifestyle that rethinks people's relationships with each other and with the world, coining expressions such as “Peace and Love” and “Make love, not war”, promoting “free love” without distinctions. This movement was one of the most used to promote the worship of nature in our days; mixing Eastern religions (Hinduism, Shintoism, Buddhism and others) and Celtic religions, its members practiced and promoted vegetarianism, rejecting industrialized products, consuming artisanal products, mainly in food the option for natural and organic products, with the practice of subsistence agriculture. The reader may wonder: what is the relationship between population reduction and the worship of nature? Let me explain: when you remove God, the Creator, from the equation, there is no one to obey, there are no limits; therefore, the human being, God's first creation, created in His image and likeness, can be easily reduced to anything. And this is exactly what has been happening for three hundred years with the spread of antinatalist ideas. But, with the grace of God, the more one studies, the clearer it becomes that the story “the larger the population, the lower the well-being of a country” is nothing more than a fallacy with the clear objective of population control. The list of good researchers is immense, requiring one or more full issues of our Journal to deal exclusively with them. So, let's deal with the two most important: Julian Simon and Norman Borlaug. Julian Simon was a professor of economics at the University of Maryland (USA) and a collaborator at the Cato Institute in Washington. In 1981, he published the work “The Last Resort”, dismantling the Malthiusian fallacy. Fallacy 1: Having fewer children allows you to save more while spending less They associate a better quality of life with luxuries (travel, expensive goods, etc.), when it is nothing like that. The reality shows that parents who have more children, even though they do not have luxuries, make more of an effort to provide the best for their offspring. It is proven that children give us a foundation and responsibility and motivate us to seek the best for our family. Fallacy 2: Larger populations consume more resources Excerpt from Simon's work: “Population growth does not hinder economic development, as Malthusian theory argues, but raises living standards in the long run.” A large population brings more opportunities; this explains the migration within our country of people leaving the North and Northeast and going to the Southeast, as this is the region where there are more resources. “Coincidentally”, this is where the majority of the Brazilian population lives. Fallacy 3: With a larger population, more pollution and a worse quality of life Recent history shows us exactly the opposite; after the Second World War, life expectancy increased, agriculture was modernized (allowing the population to eat more and better) and human beings, in their process of creation and modernization, use sustainability, also thinking about the environment. For Simon, human beings are the greatest asset on earth, as they are the ones who create, innovate, reinvent and adapt. “Human beings are not just additional mouths to feed, they are more productive and imaginative minds that help create solutions to human problems, thus leaving us better off in the long run.” Take a look at the home appliances created in the last 60 years and see how they have greatly improved the population's quality of life: air conditioning, personal computers, Walkmans (which evolved into cell phones, which today have almost a thousand and one uses), washing machines (which have done much more for women than feminism), microwaves, among others. In short: the larger the population, the greater the technological investment in improving and making life more practical. Norman Borlaug is considered the father of modern agriculture and is called “the man who saved a billion lives” because of his scientific work in Mexico, where he designed, multiplied and developed high-yield cereal varieties, mainly a disease-resistant type of wheat. In addition, he developed the technology needed to triple these crops. From a militant of the Malthusian cause to a defender of agriculture and the population, he said at the ceremony of inauguration as an honorary doctor at the University of Granada, in Italy: “I now claim that the world has the technology to feed a population of 10 billion people in a sustainable environment (...) The most pertinent question today is whether farmers will be allowed to use this new technology.” This is the central point of all pro-population researchers: they unanimously state that the problem is strictly political. In other words, governments have no interest in promoting improvements in quality of life. In order to solve “problems,” abortion is promoted, wars are allowed (especially civil wars that still occur on the African continent today), viruses “mysteriously escape” from laboratories. There is a joint effort to eliminate human beings. And after years and years of brainwashing to reduce population, the bill has arrived: according to data published by the consulting agency McKinsey, countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and the United States will have to double their productivity growth in the coming decades to maintain the living standards that were achieved in the nineties. The report highlights that two-thirds of the world’s population live in countries where birth rates per woman are below the replacement rate of 2.1 children, which is necessary to maintain a stable population. This problem is particularly evident in OECD countries such as Japan, Italy and Greece, as well as in China and several Central and Eastern European countries, where populations are already declining. Furthermore, the report calculated that in Western Europe, a decline in the proportion of working-age people could reduce GDP per capita by an average of $10,000 over the next 25 years. Such a decline would directly affect living standards, which have been a pillar of developed economies. And isn't it true that Julian Simon was right? Who would have thought, right? (Contains irony). There is no doubt that the population reduction project only aims to eliminate human beings. For those readers who don’t believe this, I recommend reading the continuation of this article in the next edition, where we will discuss reports from some climate conferences. What some people call a “conspiracy theory” we call reality. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 50 January 2025 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

Imagining how tragic it would be to lose your vision in a world in which you can no longer describe what surrounds you, you can't see anything other than a tragedy, however, perhaps it is equally frightening to live without being able to express what surrounds you. The loss of the ability to communicate would make us more animalistic, devoid of what made us evolve in an unquestionable way, since, through writing, we were able to preserve teachings and create, even in the field of fiction, world views that could inspire man. The word man, in the previous paragraph, refers to a human being, not restricted to those of the male gender. Such an explanation seems strange and unnecessary, in fact it is, however, I consider it a simple warning for the current scenario, in which the obvious, unfortunately, needs to be justified. Linguistics teaches us to recognize any things by their sign , which has a signifier and meaning. The signifier is the written or sound form of the word translated by our understanding of the world, while the signified is the universal concept of the thing. “The linguistic sign is a representative element that has two aspects: the meaning and the signifier. When we hear the word dog, we recognize the sequence of sounds that make up that word. These sounds identify with the memory of them that is in our memory. This memory constitutes a real sound image, stored in our brain, which is the signifier of the dog sign. When we hear this word, we immediately think of an irrational four-legged animal, with fur, eyes, ears, etc. This concept that comes to mind is the meaning of the dog sign and is also stored in our memory. When using the signs that make up our language, we must obey the grammatical rules agreed by the language itself. In this way, for example, it is possible to place the indefinite article one before the sign dog, forming the sequence a dog, the same would not be possible if we wanted to place the article one before the sign dog”. Once again it seems like the exercise of explaining what is evident, however, such understanding is necessary to observe the risk of so-called Newspeak , a term originating in the 1984 book by British author Goerge Orewell, in which language is adapted to the desires of the powerful. Returning to the sad point at which we have reached, not that of fiction but of current times, today we need to explain that the grass is green , and reaffirm this as many times as necessary so that consciousness is not kidnapped and the grass assumes, in people's minds, any other color that tyrants desire. Information became the most effective weapon and, early on, a way to enslave millions of people, even before the use of force. Reframing, which is nothing more than giving a new meaning to a word whose concept is already known, is a way of controlling people based on non-existent arguments, as fallacies will become irrefutable without counter-argument, which requires, as a rule, the use of words according to the correct concept. There is no way to dismiss an argument, even if it is false, without a debate in which the language is not known, even worse would be when known words start to have a volatile meaning, usually posted by the creator of the misinformation. I will pause briefly, as I will use a real example. When sharing a post from a group (WhatsApp), with the participation of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, on the theme called “ Matematiqueer ” (something about mathematics and the LGBT agenda, with public money), containing the text, “Check out newly arrived members at MatematiQueer”, I was surprised by the following comment, “I thought I was reading a post in French” , which caught my attention, as such a statement was something that worried me. I was in front of a publication with the seal of a higher education institution that should protect its history, since, although officially founded in 1920, it is the historical heir of the Royal Academy of Artillery, Fortification and Design, an institution founded by Queen D. Maria I of Portugal, in 1792, even before Brazil's independence. However, the more than bicentennial university threw its legacy into the mud in the name of a progressive agenda that intends to adulterate the Portuguese language to suit its nefarious desires for social control. One could feel regret at seeing a renowned, and costly, institution sinking in the dirt, perhaps the location of Cidade Universitária in the capital of Rio de Janeiro has more to say, given that Ilha o Fundão is surrounded by a veritable sea of ​​sewage. But it is not UFRJ that I intend to deal with, at least for now. The so-called neutral language is, without a shadow of a doubt, an evil that must be fought, just as any unhealthy distortion of language must be rejected or we will be slaves to those who dictate the rules, even if they are volatile. Giving the meaning that suits words, self-styled progressive groups, which is already a flagrant distortion, dominate the public debate and subject terms to arguments according to their abject interest. Abortion, which translates into the murder of human beings in their mothers' wombs, begins to be redefined as a reproductive right, when such an expression should lead, and does, to the understanding that a woman could not have curtailed her right to be a mother. It seems that defenders of women's reproductive rights are fighting against those infamous state impositions of the Chinese dictatorship regarding a limit on the number of children, when in fact, they want to kill babies during pregnancy. The distortion serves to deceive people who will understand an end other than that intended. Once again, I ask the reader's permission to create a hypothesis, in which an individual, knowing what it means to ask for someone's daughter's hand, does so, in order to have the right to amputate part of her member and remove it. It should be noted that, as strange as this example may be, there was no need to give new meaning to the words, just decontextualizing them, because, knowing that giving a hand leads to the understanding that it is a marriage proposal, the individual would have asked using literality, confusing the receiver of the message, unlike what is done by falsely self-styled progressives who, going further, invent meanings for words whose concept already exists to deceive. Distorting the lexicon on purpose is not harmful because it harms communication, since there is a sordid intention driving this process. These are not innocent mistakes, driven by ignorance or mistaken repetition of a term, month, dangerously, a conscious manipulation of words to dissuade individuals from allowing themselves to be guided by an abysmal agenda of social control. As mentioned, it is essential to know how to differentiate between errors and corruption, simply due to the fact that the first is caused by lack of knowledge or inattention and the second has a putrid purpose, so that those who make mistakes can and should be corrected, with due education, just so that they understand the correct use of their language, however, those who deliberately distort the meaning of something must be combated, as they seek the evil result that leads to such action, even if acting unconsciously, a hypothesis in which it will serve a foreign purpose, but equally clumsy. Changing language in a preordained way is not natural, therefore, it serves the purpose of inserting or modifying concepts that are not covered by the term, thus, it can cause the receiver of the message to have a false impression about something, triggering a trigger or preventing them from knowing the real meaning. There are countless people who repeat lying mantras planted by a group that, in an artificial way, reframes words to attack, silence or even criminalize their opponents, sometimes posing as victims when in fact they are executioners. Terms such as public opinion and civil society give a generic idea that the people, in a broad and unrestricted way, think in a certain way and act together, when in fact, both are misleading premises, since they were unduly appropriated, or coined, with the aim of deceiving those who seek the most obvious meaning of such terms. The so-called public opinion , an expression that makes the individual believe that it is the opinion of the majority, is actually the editorial line of the mainstream media , causing individuals who disagree with such positions to find themselves isolated in a given society because of a lie. When believing that a topic is seen by the majority from a certain angle, those who have a dissonant view end up seeing themselves as a small exception and remaining silent to support, democratically, the position of the majority, the so-called spiral of silence , thus succumbing to the dictates of a group that controls the media . On the other hand, the expression civil society , in turn, has a specific meaning, being, in fact, a group of people who come together to participate in public issues even if they are not part of the State, so that its meaning is honestly represented in the dictionary, however, there is a hegemonic vision that ends up considering that certain groups are worthy of recognition and others are not, as well as, causing the leaders of such groups to be equally considered acceptable or not. At first, it seems fair to consider that the association of people in defense of identity groups is beneficial, however, it is enough for such a faction to contradict progressive agendas, another fallacious expression, for it to be rejected, hence the great difficulty for feminist leaders to position themselves against the inclusion of men in women's sports, as this would imply the infamous accusation, even if false, of being transphobic . In practice, when the participation of civil society is defended, what is seen in a more in-depth analysis is the legitimization of preordained groups that act as monopolizers of the debate on a topic, excluding those who oppose it, to create political hegemony. Civil society, in real life, is much closer to soviets than to a bunch of neighbors who seek improvements for their neighborhood, as they try to instill in the citizen's head. The distorted resignification also serves to, in an unfounded way, promote accusations and even aggressions, when the fascist tag is placed on any individual who dares to disagree with the political elite, it legitimizes, in the minds of those most devoid of knowledge, the aggression against those who have been untruthfully identified as being members of a detestable political spectrum, even though the same aggressors are blatantly defending socialism, as such a system, perhaps even more deadly, manipulates the so-called anti-fascists at the same time. time when he claims to be a human rights defender (it sounds like a joke, but it's not). Some distortions that seem insignificant to us, or even joking, can bring a trap within them, as progressivism is a viper, it will always have poison in its fangs, everything it proposes to do is, at best, a way of lowering the opponent's guard. So-called resignifications are no exceptions. Subtly, pretending to value women in politics, they tried to distort the name of the highest position in the nation using the term “president”, disregarding the fact that the word president is common to both genders, yes, there are only two. Around that time, a renowned federal school in the capital of Rio de Janeiro started calling its students “alunxs”, once again tearing up the lexicon of the Portuguese language. Then came the cry called neutral pronoun, which aims to deconstruct language in favor of a surreal identity agenda, based on the will of individuals who try to lead groups by labeling them to teach them not before “patenting” their creation, since, by subdividing the two real genders, they create several “subgenres” to satisfy their niche of power. Fractionating as many times as necessary to control, steal control or embarrass those who do not fit into the new subdivision as a possible tormentor of the newly emancipated, the figure of the trans “woman” emerges in the female gender, in fact a man who considers himself a woman, with those who do not fit in being required to accept such a view under penalty (in some countries, real) of being accused of homophobia, however, the group of trans “women” can give rise to a fraction of lesbian trans “women”, who are nothing more than men who define themselves as women and have relationships with women, in short, a heterosexual man who dresses like a woman. If this seems complicated to you, it's because it doesn't make any sense. Imagining that someone has lost their vision and needs a description of an individual, but their interlocutor uses “neutral language”, the poor blind person will be even more lost, as their mind will not be able to form an image based on the meaning of what is said to them. It becomes a herculean task to explain that a gay trans “man” got pregnant and the father is a lesbian trans “woman”, when it would be simple to describe that a woman is pregnant and the father is a man, despite them dressing differently than normal. Such a grotesque scenario would also occur if a detailed description of an individual was necessary, be it a lost person, a victim in the possession of criminals, an accident victim or the perpetrator of a crime, bearing in mind that the act of describing people and objects is nothing more than presenting their characteristics. The corruption of the lexicon is even more complex when it comes to abstract nouns, since with concrete ones we can compare the change and reality, so that men do not get pregnant or menstruate, no matter how much certain women want to be called men, this is a fact that can be used to ward off the desire. The real risk of resignifying a word that addresses a concrete noun is when there is a coercive force , also corrupted, which will seek to make individuals deny reality, criminalizing the truth in search of a narrative. When it comes to an abstract noun, in the sick progressive mind, it is enough to give the “pseudo-meaning” and repeat it for them to believe it is real, the term progressivism itself is fallacious, given that, progress is presumed, the advancement of a certain point, when, in truth, revolutionaries seek to destroy a society to recreate it in their own way, there is no idea of ​​evolution, progress, what occupies the mind of the revolutionary is the construction of the world in an artificial, therefore dysfunctional, way, to satisfy their madness for the control of humanity and, perhaps even worse, for believing they can occupy the Throne of thrones. They have given new meaning, in the minds of the weakest, to words such as democracy, fascism, genocide, disinformation and so many others that we could treat them separately, but the important thing is to observe how people end up assuming that such narratives are true, agreeing with unilateral freedom of expression, a democracy belongs to those in power and that institutions are more important than the people they must serve. The so-called anti-democratic acts are those directed at people who want to protect themselves, however, the criticism against the nation, including in other languages ​​(seeking international outcry) is treated as a mere individual opinion. The world becomes truly dangerous when man cannot see where he is going, being cowardly attacked by the shadows, therefore, changing the meaning of racism to treat it as a unilateral tool of persecution, as well as creating more and more ways of criminalizing opinions, coercively silencing truth and conscience, to criminalize everyone by making them need the leniency of those who can judge, is sickening, as it creates legal uncertainty only seen in the worst dictatorships. The Constitution and the entire legal system are transformed into a moribund patchwork in order to satisfy the progressive intention, everything that does not please the agenda is summarily removed or is transfigured to conform to the desires of those who placed themselves above all. What was built by tradition, built with difficulty, is destroyed and swept away by people who, far from their mission, insist on conducting an artificial process. With regard to neutral language, something grotesque and meaningless, the insistence of revolutionaries to insert such a corrupt neologism into the lexicon of our language is not something fleeting, because, as mentioned, it has a special purpose, namely, to create in the subconscious that there are no definitions of gender and that concepts will bow before the dictates of those in power, just as justice contorts itself to satisfy power, ceasing to be fair and becoming an instrument of persecution and control, meaning, in revolutionary mind, can be freely altered to suit the nefarious intent of the center of power . As much as it is attractive for us to make fun of neutral language, we must face it as the viper that it is, as it serves the greater evil that will corrupt not only the lexicon of the Portuguese language but will take with it the conscience of the entire society. Just as our grandparents told us not to confuse freedom with libertinism, assuming the use of terms like “todes” to bring together men and women, when it is known that the word todos already does so, is, at best, giving up the linguistic legacy that was left to us by the Portuguese, even the Romans. Unfortunately, the world is not made in the best of times, and submitting to so-called neutral language is allowing yourself to be enslaved by a group that deliberately uses distortions of meaning to lead everyone, not “everyone”, to the precipice. The agenda will advance by determining how each individual should express themselves, preventing those who do not agree from expressing their arguments due to lexical deficiency. It would be enough to say that the so-called neutral language, in itself, will fail, since, artificial and without real practical application, it would be doomed to disuse, however, as mentioned, universities and other educational institutions, uncommitted to their mission of training due to having imbibed the viper's venom, try to insert such an aberration into the context, making their students assimilate the language to repeat it as a mantra of their dystopian tribe. The attempt to communicate with terms disconnected from reality ends up being vexatious, however, we can imagine that in the near future the adherence by a large group will lead language users to the false belief that it is something normal, therefore, what is the exception will be the rule, causing the artificial to cover the natural communication that evolved with civilization, that is, by revolutionizing the lexicon we will have a rupture between the civilization now constructed that will serve as the basis for the destruction and the construction of a new order. world, whose forms of communication are edited from the top of the power pyramid. It is important to highlight that the imposition lacks legitimacy, even if false, to convince the majority, therefore, the inability to understand the concept of something will result in the impossibility of questioning such legitimacy, thus, a man who cannot investigate whether the person he intends to marry is a man or a woman, will not be able to question why his relationships do not result in children. It seems and is crazy, but even the concept of man and woman could be lost, and then chance will be the father of future generations. In the search for the legitimacy of neutral language, educational institutions have strived to instill it in education, forcing future generations to assimilate it. It is still necessary to corrupt some institution capable of contaminating in a more incisive way, as in the case of the legal system, in which, going beyond the walls of universities, courts and other bodies were contaminated, ultimately rigging the highest court of the Judiciary, which made it possible to twist Justice in favor of the revolutionary agenda. Behold, the dangerous appointments of revolutionary agents to the Brazilian Academy of Letters are not limited to unfortunate choices to please friends, since, in fact, the institution's equipment aims to legitimize the purposeful and artificial resignification of the lexicon to lead life through language. For those who forget that the German Government stated that Nazism was on the right-wing spectrum , when the post of Chancellor of that country was occupied by a politician who began her public life in the extinct East Germany, that is, for the less enlightened, it is enough for a left-wing government, from the country that was under the yoke of the Nazis, to point out that such a nefarious system finds a place on the right and that will be the case. The Brazilian Academy of Letters has a strong influence on language, being a reference for research and even debate about the evolution of the lexicon, therefore, equipping such an institution aims to legitimize the resignification of words so that it meets the progressive agenda. Former presidents José Sarney and Fernando Henrique Cardoso, as well as avowedly progressive writers such as Merval Pereira and Paulo Coelho, are already immortal, which, with the entry of actress Fernanda Montenegro and singer Gilberto Gil, demonstrates a clear inclination for the institution to increasingly adopt an aggressive stance in order to advance revolutionary agendas by falling into discredit or legitimizing the absurd. For those who think this is impossible, a simple reading is enough : “Native Brazilians, with published works of recognized cultural value, can apply to the Academy. ABL has significant importance in society, as it creates vocabularies and dictionaries for the Portuguese language; studies and evaluates grammatical or spelling changes; publishes unpublished works or anthologies by national writers; in addition to distributing literary prizes”. As the revolutionary agenda does not come close to reality, it does not matter how much blood will be shed in the name of its social experiment, which will fail, but at what cost. For this reason it is necessary to resist the actions   of self-proclaimed progressives even though it means placing the Brazilian Academy of Letters in a framework that respects its history, relegating it from the values ​​it once had. Progressives of the highest rank consider themselves lords of everything, believing themselves to be gods, which is why they are doomed to fall, like the one who tried to raise his throne above the stars   and equate themselves with God, however, revolutionaries do not mind dragging as many souls as they can into the abyss, fueled by greed and envy, they will always be eager to do and spread their evil throughout the world. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 10 April 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

The term "pícaro" and its variations, such as "picareta" and "picaretagem", have historical and cultural roots, particularly linked to 16th century Spanish literature, more specifically to picaresque novels. These terms have evolved over time, but they all share a common link with the figure of the cunning, often marginal, individual who uses artifice and deception to achieve his goals. The origin of the term "picaro" goes back to the figure of individuals who, during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, were seen as adventurers, often ragged and hungry soldiers, from Picardy, a region in northern France. Although the connection with Picardy is a theory and not a historical certainty, the term came to be associated with people in precarious situations, who wandered through society without a defined position, but who possessed survival skills, often based on cunning and deception. In picaresque novels, such as Lazarillo de Tormes (1554), the "picaro" comes to be characterized as a figure of lower social class, often described as a servant, kitchen assistant or low-level worker, who uses artifice, dissimulation and malice to achieve his objectives. The "picaro" is a character who, despite his precarious condition, displays a sagacity and a lack of scruples that make him capable of manipulating and deceiving others to ensure his survival, often using lies and cunning strategies. The term "pickaxe", derived from "picaro", began to be used to refer to people who act in a dishonest, deceptive and cheating manner, thus being associated with the practice of "picking", which describes the activity of deceiving, defrauding or taking advantage of situations through artifices. Today, "scam" and "picking" are popular terms to describe fraudulent or deceptive actions in a variety of social contexts, especially in commercial, political, and personal relationships. Scams such as the famous financial pyramids, the sale of tourist attractions or even the promise of picanha, bring to light the most basic characteristic of scammers and their scams: they take advantage of the good faith or ambition of the unwary to achieve their objectives. A very joking expression is popularly known that says that “every day a scoundrel and a fool go out on the streets, when they meet there is business”. Sometimes they don't even need to go out on the streets. Now that we know the origin of the words, let's look at four stories of great historical pranks. Only four, as the volume of cases would possibly fill a library and we certainly don't want to tire readers. Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, whose work needs no further introduction, was, in his early years, a beginning and still unknown artist. In 1496, with the aim of boosting his career and gaining visibility, he created a sculpture of Cupid sleeping. The representation of Cupid was not something particularly original, being a common theme among artists of the time, and even more irrelevant coming from an unknown. Therefore, this work would have little value on the art market. To increase its chances of sale, Michelangelo resorted to a trick: he treated the sculpture with acidic earth to make it appear older. With this, he managed to sell it to a dealer called Baldassare del Milanese, who, in turn, resold it to Cardinal Riario de San Giorgio. However, the cardinal soon discovered the fraud and demanded a refund. When Michelangelo asked for Baldassare's sculpture to be returned, Baldassare refused, stating that he would rather destroy it than return it. The relevance of this story, however, lies not only in the fraud itself, but in the fact that the Cupid sculpture was responsible for attracting attention to Michelangelo's talents as a sculptor for the first time, marking a turning point in his career. In 1920, Charles Ponzi, an Italian-American, won over a large number of investors by promising 50% profits in just 45 days. His scheme involved purchasing postal coupons from other countries, which were then exchanged for stamps in the United States at higher prices. However, the expenses and time required to convert currencies compromised any possibility of real profit. Even so, advertising from one client to another fueled demand, and for a time Ponzi was able to pay the older investors with the money of the new entrants – all the while keeping a substantial portion of the proceeds for itself. When the coup collapsed, it became clear that, to keep promises of profitability, 160 million postal coupons would be needed. However, there were only 27,000 units available on the market. After being convicted and serving his sentence, Ponzi moved to Rio de Janeiro, where he lived his last years in extreme poverty, passing away in 1949. His name was forever linked to the famous "Ponzi scheme", which would become one of the best-known scams in the world. One of the largest financial pyramid schemes in Brazil involved Fazendas Reunidas Boi Gordo, which attracted around 30,000 investors and resulted in losses estimated at 3.9 billion reais. The proposal was tempting: profits of 42% in a year and a half, leading many to invest their savings. The company, founded in 1988, began its operations in the market, but it was in the 90s that it began to sell collective investment contracts (CICs), creating a facade of agricultural activity focused on fattening cattle and raising calves. However, the true basis of the scheme was not livestock farming, but the continuous recruitment of new investors, who financed the payments promised to the old ones. For a decade, Boi Gordo grew, and even tried to go public to regularize its operations, something that did not prevent the collapse of the business model. The company also invested in advertising, with ads starring actor Antônio Fagundes during the airing of the soap opera Rei do Gado, which helped attract more participants. However, in 2001, Boi Gordo began to face serious financial problems and no longer had the resources to honor the redemptions requested by investors. In 2004, the company was declared bankrupt, but the legal process surrounding the case is still ongoing, with efforts being made to try to recover assets and compensate creditors. Regarding the responsibility of those involved, the criminal case against founder Paulo Roberto de Andrade was closed in 2009 by the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), although he was fined by the Securities and Exchange Commission (CVM) in 2003 in more than 20 million reais and banned from acting as an administrator of public companies for 20 years. The bankruptcy and attempts to recover investor losses exposed the fragility of the system, characterizing it as a typical pyramid scheme, in which the entry of new participants was essential to sustain payments to older ones. Well, these are really impactful cases. The first, because who would suspect that Michelangelo would carry out a ‘mischief’ like the one in 1496? The second, because Charles Ponzi popularized and lent his name to one of the most famous scams still practiced today: the financial pyramid, which takes advantage of the ambition that many harbor within themselves. The third, because it brought the financial pyramid scheme to television, invading Brazilian homes and demonstrating that, from famous to anonymous, everyone can be victims of their own ambition. But, since we're talking about oxen, let's move on to the fourth and final stratagem. The then candidate Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula) made a statement about voters eating picanha again. The declaration took place on August 6, 2002, during a campaign event in São Bernardo do Campo, in the state of São Paulo. At the time, Lula was addressing his supporters and made the following statement, which became famous: “We're going to get together with the family again on Sunday and we're going to have a barbecue and we're going to eat a slice of picanha with some fat dipped in flour and have a cold beer. Then, man, the people go crazy because that’s what the people want.” . The promise apparently boosted votes for the candidate. Obviously, it was not just that promise rich in protein and saturated fat that made Lula the 39th president of Brazil, but a set of factors that we will not risk explaining in this article. The fact is that that promise awakened the ambition and appetite of many, who, even though they did not have the means to buy the much-desired picanha themselves, saw the possibility of benefiting. A mental trigger that hijacked the little rationality of many, giving way to the most primitive impulses. Offering undeserved or excessive advantages, awakening ambition and desire without the need for compensation, promising what cannot be guaranteed. These are all elements that we can find in many scams and frauds, even electoral ones. Just as in Hosea 4:6, the people continue to perish for lack of knowledge. The popular classes still vote with their stomach, they are still driven by instincts and not by noble feelings. If the mentality does not change even through suffering, all we can do is abandon vanity and admit that we have always been, are and will be dependent on God's mercy, because we don't even know how to ask. “You ask, and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures. Adulterers and adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity against God? Therefore, whoever wants to be a friend of the world constitutes himself an enemy of God.” James 4:3." Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 50 – ISSN 2764-3867

Philippians 2:4 – “Do not consider each one’s own interests, but each one also consider other people’s interests.” It's truly spectacular how texts written millennia ago manage to remain current. And this is one of the fundamental aspects that place the Bible on a level above any other work: it is not tied to the temporal constraints that normally stamp any compendium that deals with contemporary socioeconomic aspects as 'outdated'. Even classic authors praised for generations, if they were still alive, would have to witness the updating, correction and, in certain cases, the complete disuse of their masterpieces, such as, for example, Plato, Marx, Nietzsche and others. What's more, the Word of God not only remains current but also seems immune to all the attacks made against it day after day by the armies of liberality and relativism, enraptured by the contradiction of an irrationally subtle criticism that, using the mask of supposed “progress” and “development” (euphemisms for progressivism and other destructive agendas), brings in its depths a brutal discomfort in having to live with the truth translated by the will of God, the primary source of human wisdom. Let's look specifically at the verse mentioned above. It was written in the first century of the Christian Era. It could have been written yesterday. It could be printing t-shirts in peaceful protests against the mistreatment that the population receives from their governments. Or even to complain about noisy neighbors or people who throw trash in the street. In clear and objective words, the apostle says that, at the same time as we take care of our interests, we must understand that others also have theirs, in a statement that gains popular echo by reading between the lines that 'my right begins when the neighbor's rights end', and vice versa. He speaks nothing strange to the heart of the Creator God, who had already said something in the desert that points to this “(…) but you will love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18). Jesus reaffirms the expression in Matthew 22:39. In other words, I must treat how I would like to be treated. I must respect what is not mine as if it were. And this is a fundamental point in what we would like to call civilization. Let's take, for example, the case of the rulers of a nation. The way they deal with the three most important issues of a society, namely: education, health and security, exactly in that order. Their immediate concerns (“What is properly yours”) are – redundancy – immediately resolved as soon as they come to power. New car, depending on the position, armored car, new house, new school for the children and health plan with international coverage. And so, here's the question. Once they relax in their new comfort zone, “What belongs to others” falls into oblivion. In this case, “What belongs to others” is about the health of others, the education of others, the safety of others. We saw this a lot recently in the draconian decisions of managers preventing people from coming and going, from working, from seeking support from their loved ones, while they were safe in their carpeted offices without lacking anything. The rulers we have, most of whom are socialists and progressives, are not sincerely concerned about the nation. At least not on this side of the Equator. His main concern is to remain in the spotlight during the right period with a view to the next election, in order to continue with “Own yours” at a high level. A senator once thought of proposing that all those who were elected enroll their children in public school. A delusion indirectly referred to Thomas Moore which, being so dreamlike, was perhaps the only way out of our destroyed, humiliated and fragmented education. How about if we extended the idea to other sectors? What if all politicians depended on public defenders to speed up their processes? Would we have so few public defenders for such a large number of cases that were stopped due to lack of available manpower? What if our authorities had to use the public health network, the ineffable SUS? Would we or would we not have hospitals equipped with the minimum necessary to carry out the most basic exams, available medicines and doctors on duty? And that's the problem. A problem that mixes culture with impunity. Without knowing exactly which came first, but being sure that one complements the other. The idea that I can manipulate public opinion to stay in power is easily supported by the lack of political-social knowledge of a large part of the population, originating from the disguised – but successful – policy of not allowing the population to have access to quality education. Which means that the population, ignorant of their rights or powers, so to speak, remains alienated from the process, satisfying themselves with crumbs that are thrown at them from the top of the carpeted offices of the Federal Capital. She – the masses – doesn't care if the person she puts in power doesn't care about her. And those in power know this, and work to ensure that everything stays that way. Paying attention to what belongs to others, according to Paulo, is inserted in the context of giving up something smaller for a greater good. In this case, the apostle follows, Jesus Christ gives up his divine royalty in favor of an unprecedented work: the salvation of humanity. Once the intention has been carried out, the sacrifice proves redemptive. He – Jesus Christ – is revealed Lord, and to him all honor is due. Here's the question. Who will sacrifice themselves for the greater good if it is easier to act blind and deaf? This only becomes possible when we have God-fearing men and women in power, although this statement sounds anachronistic and retrograde today. It doesn't matter, the truth is only an anachronism in seared minds that already feel comfortable calling mistakes a right. Leaders who recognize divine authority above all and are not ashamed to carry the flags defended by the Judeo-Christian tradition will always be the best option for maintaining the West's civilizing message. They are "antidotes" against the diabolical agendas disseminated by common sense distorted by countless destructive theories. Finally, in general, the ethics of the Gospel do not apply only to constituted authorities. It applies to everyone who aspires to live in a civilized society. In developed countries, leaving dog feces on the sidewalk generates a fine. And why? Because someone (the ‘other’) can pass by and step on. If the pet owner wants to leave his house full of dog feces, that's his problem, but when it becomes a problem for others, he must have a civilized attitude. Civilization implies organized society, egalitarian laws, freedom of expression. Elements that are slowly being put at risk every day as the world becomes more modern. It seems like a paradox. And it is. In the end the Bible was right. Always has been. It always will be. Brazil above all. God above all. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 10 April 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867

Donald Trump will be inaugurated on January 20th as the 47th President of the United States of America. Since he won the last elections, in a historic and overwhelming way, his return has generated several effects around the world and I believe it will continue like this until the end of his term. Trump beat Kamala Harris, with the USA plunged into inflation and the world consumed by wars, which bring enormous risks to all of Humanity. Another challenge for the president will be identity agendas and ideologies, which have taken over the global stage. However, winds of change have already begun to blow. In terms of wars, there is a real possibility of putting an end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and a ceasefire agreement was signed in Gaza, with the release of hostages and permission for humanitarian aid to enter Palestinian territory. When the topic is woke policies and their consequences, which have caused large companies to change their stance, regulating social networks and producing content aimed at groups that demand “equality”, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckeberg and Jeff Beezos have become allies of Trump, modifying his speeches and adopting concrete measures in his companies, to stop the advance of this ideological discourse, with Musk being appointed as a member of the administration, in the administration that begins now. In the economy, the dollar and the stock market reached record prices, demonstrating that the financial market trusts Trump and his policies. There are promises to reduce inflation and lower interest rates, improving the lives of Americans and, consequently, impacting the rest of the world. There is also the promise of an effective fight against growing crime and illegal immigration, which generates the entry of those convicted of crimes and drug traffickers, as well as members of terrorist groups, into American territory. And the resignation of Justin Trudeau, after plunging Canada into drugs and violence, with his far-left policies of total drug liberalization and decriminalization of theft. All of this happened before the inauguration, making us believe that many other transformations are to come. But you need to understand what your ability to make a difference is due to. Donald Trump is not a superman, a semi-God or someone capable of performing miracles. However, he is a successful businessman, a businessman with a firm grip and the right ideas in his head, controlling the greatest world power and without fear of facing his opponents. And the world desperately needs someone brave. Many detest his arrogant manner, his figure and his language. However, it cannot be denied that Trump is one of those players who arrive to define the match, not being content to watch his opponent's victory from the bench. After the catastrophic Biden administration, which is senile and wandering, unable to resolve conflicts and make bold decisions, there was a desire for a strong presence that makes an impact. With the world on the brink of a world war and on a precipice of values ​​and moral principles, Trump – who was slandered, defamed, suffered attempted impeachment, convictions and two attacks during his campaign – remained steadfast in his speech and display of his virtues and defects publicly: he does not hide who he is and what his purposes are. This makes all the difference, humanizing him to his voters. In the freezing cold, Washington waits for its president, praying that his presence can help the world get back on track again. As my friend Roberto Motta says, most of the time, what is expected is simply the defense of the “right ideas”. Go Trump! Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 50 – ISSN 2764-3867