The victory of Donald Trump, elected 47th President of the United States of America, contains several lessons that the world needs to learn before it is too late. Above all, about the paths we have chosen as a civilization, in the face of so much polarization. Trump came to prove, with his expressive vote, that the sealing and woke agenda, full of ideologies and “deconstructions of the world as we know it”, has become unbearable and threatening, for ordinary people, who work, raise children, go They go to church, take care of the house and have been subjected to all kinds of bizarre things, listening to the speeches and narratives and seeing transformations that pop up everywhere. The truth is one: tradition, religion and family matter, and no matter how much we try to destroy these three pillars of civilization, at some point, things will explode, because it is not possible to live in a world where there are no rules. and values. Freedom, as Ronald Reagan said, is just one generation away from extinction, if we are not aware of what really matters and needs to be preserved. Trump, since his first term in 2016, has established himself as conservative in morals and liberal in politics, defending free competition, lower taxes and state intervention in the economy, lower inflation and measures that encourage the growth of the USA, as a nation and power. He was also a fierce critic of the social transformations that the progressive agenda wants to promote, as he always understood that the common citizen does not want to live with the madness and excesses that various minorities try to impose. In fact, conservatism is growing stronger all over the world, as well as the Catholic Church, as a result of the abuses that have been spread everywhere, and the submission of left-wing governments to these agendas, making their countries extremely vulnerable to the changes that, in the future they will prove to be demolishing. An example is Canada, with its policies of total liberalization of abortion and drugs, free immigration and tolerance of crime. Now, at a point of no return, where drug addicts have invaded the streets of big cities and threaten the safety of residents, immigrants from all over the world have taken the country by storm, increasing unemployment and crime and generating a serious housing crisis. and the birth rate has plummeted to extremely worrying levels, attempts to take measures to restrict the evil that was implemented by the government itself, without much success. There are aid grants for drug addicts and immigrants, free and indiscriminate abortions and the terrible feeling that there is no short-term solution. Stores are looted in broad daylight, due to the policy of non-punishment for petty crimes and low-value thefts, and the population has become hostage to the monster that the Canadian government has created. What Donald Trump signals is everything the left wants to hide: perverse ideologies do not work in practice, and only unscrupulous politicians and armchair and air-conditioned researchers, who live in a bubble and will not experience the changes they advocate, believe that this might work. And, unfortunately, they are capturing the population with their fanciful speeches. However, the average American got tired of this, because he felt firsthand and in his pocket what the democratic party did to his country. Kamala Harris, a hallucinated unprepared woman, who would succeed a senile and wasted president, was unable to convince the American people that she would have the pulse and competence to govern the greatest power in the world. With the advance of Chinese and Russian communism, the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East and rampant immigration, the realization that difficult times call for extreme measures and that only Donald Trump can help stop this and protect the United States, gave him a landslide victory in the electoral colleges and in Parliament, as well as in the popular vote. I wish President Donald Trump an excellent government, with prosperity, peace and success in all the delicate measures he will need to take, which will not only make America great again, but also protect the rest of the world from the dangers that lie in wait. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. III No. 48 – ISSN 2764-3867

In the last film of the classic trilogy The Godfather, the protagonist, Michael Corleone, decides to confess to a cardinal, although he has committed several crimes, his greatest need was to ask forgiveness for the death of his brother Fredo, which he ordered the murder, in the previous film, after the death of both their mothers. Michael knew he couldn't do it while his mother was alive, however, he had in mind that Fredo conspired for her death and, therefore, considered fratricide justified and useful to keep him in power. Just as he had done with his brother-in-law, Carlo Russo, responsible for the death of Sonny, the first-born of Michael's parents, the family leader considered that eliminating him was necessary, so, as soon as his mother passed away, he tried to put an end to Michael's life. Fredo, however, even though Michael had a considerable list of victims, some of them the result of his direct action, considering that Fredo was his blood, the son of his parents, the head of the most powerful mafia family in that work. fictional, I was aware that it was a sin with greater weight. Faced with a member of the clergy who inspired him with confidence, since the protagonist of the trilogy perceived in that priest someone who truly kept the faith, Michael decided to confess, in particular, for having ordered Fredo to be murdered. The past idea, at least for those who understand the Sacrament of Confession or Penance, is that the mafioso, despite being a cold and violent criminal, could not bear to live with the guilt of fratricide. For someone affected by moral relativism, as is the case of revolutionaries, it is impossible to understand the meaning of the confession, since, when being recruited among the different hordes that march according to the drumbeat of the revolutionary elite, it will be necessary to renounce the reality, therefore, the most common motto among such groups is the fallacy that “truth is relative”, being, therefore, conditioned by the point of view, therefore, it is necessary to note that every revolutionary is a relativist, since, seeking impose his detached view of reality, whether on purpose, when it comes to leaders, or out of ignorance, when in the lower layers, confusing reality with the point of view, becoming incapable of assuming that he is spying on the facts from the angle that best suits them. suit your intent. In that maxim that a six can be a nine, depending on the angle from which he observes, the relativist will see the number that is most convenient to him, therefore, the attachment to statistics that serve his desire, shamelessly disregarding any others that point something that contradicts them. For a revolutionary, lying will be the alternative to repentance, transferring responsibility to other individuals or factors beyond their control. Confession has as essential elements the recognition of guilt and repentance for the transgression, therefore, the one who makes it needs to accept his weakness, his error, and seek forgiveness, not for social convenience, but for real repentance in the face of the evil that caused. For someone who believes that morals and faith are volatile according to their “conscience”, there is no need to admit a mistake and seek forgiveness, unless this has a specific purpose, such as avoiding rejection or the consequences of their actions, such as that figure who, caught deviating, goes public to expose, through a clearly artificial speech, a kind of regret, when, clearly, he seeks to reconcile with those he believes can harm him. In the shoes of Michael Corleone, a relativist would simply limit himself to blaming Fredo, who in fact conspired to kill his brother, thus avoiding taking the blame or begging for the Cardinal's forgiveness. Moral degradation turns repentance into a mere signaling of staged virtue, so that confession, along the lines of Catholicism, would never make sense, as it does not enjoy the advertising character of an apology on a social network. The priest is prohibited from exposing what is said in the context of confession, a prohibition accepted even in the national legal system which, at least for now, guarantees the person who confesses the confidentiality of what is said during confession and protects the priest against authoritarian outbursts. who try to dissuade him from revealing something that he learned as a confessor. Allowing any authority to have the means to force the priest to expose the content of a confession would seriously harm the sacrament, given that it would undermine the relationship of trust between the faithful and the Church, therefore, it cannot be ruled out that , under the allegation of the secular State, the sacraments are relegated to a status of insignificance, removing such protection within the scope of national law. It is imperative to remember that secrecy also applies to professionals such as lawyers and psychologists, however, although they are not reached by the argument of state secularism, we can imagine that a relativist could suppress lawyers' prerogatives regarding secrecy, since they admit so many other violations to the category, as well as to psychologists in the name of defending a “greater good”, as in the case of persecution of professionals who defended what they called “gay cure”, and, finally, we have the doctors, who were openly persecuted for opposing the crazy measures during the collective experiment episode of the recent pandemic, in addition to those who defended the so-called early treatment or warned about the unrestricted risk of the experimental technology called Gene Therapy . In practice, when it comes to relativists, figures who even fight against nature, all kinds of madness can be the next step, however, considering that the most diverse violations are, in the revolutionary mind, justified in the search for power, expecting that destroy a sacrament in the name of their sick quest for utopia is the least we can do. At least in the West, protecting the confession, as well as the professionals mentioned above, is part of the trust between the person who confesses and the person who has the duty not to disclose what they learned due to their profession. The sacrament of confession must be protected and what revolutionaries call a secular State is, in fact, a State that seeks to destroy the basic religion of Western society, therefore, Christianity, with a special focus on Catholicism. Therefore, any declaration of hatred towards Christians is solemnly ignored by authorities who pretend that only some religions can be protected, with the same false pretext as those who incessantly seek to unilaterally criminalize racism, just to stir up racial conflicts. and the idea that a certain sect deserves privileges in exchange for their total allegiance to the powerful. If, on the one hand, the revolutionary despises the Catholic Church, vowing to destroy it or infiltrating it to corrode it, on the other, he is incapable of recognizing the importance of confession as a self-examination of man's own flawed nature and, consequently, the seeking forgiveness and strengthening through penance, learning from mistakes to become an increasingly virtuous individual. Stripped of honor and humility, the relativist believes that he can always escape the consequences of his actions, however harmful they may be. There is no way to expect individuals who openly preach the destruction of everyone who stands in the way of their totalitarian desire to do an honest analysis of conscience, something they apparently do not have, to admit that they made a mistake and seek sincere repentance. A socialist leader will never care about third parties, being able to exterminate as many lives as necessary to obtain what he wants, however, once pressured, he may simulate regret or, as in most cases, transfer responsibility to third parties. As they did with German National Socialism and fascism, which, even though all the elements fit them into the collectivist spectrum, were quickly transferred to the opposite political aspect, being treated as forces linked to liberalism and conservatism, only for their bad fame was transferred, unjustifiably, to what is known in the political field as the right. Subsequently, the Chavista dictatorship that consumes Venezuela was also labeled as being on the right, which was not a successful movement due to the decentralization of information provided by the internet, something that relativists fight to destroy, as well as culture. “woke” was treated in an isolated article, but which serves as a rehearsal for future proposals, as something embryonic on the right, a narrative quickly overturned by, once again, the merit of decentralized information. It is practically impossible to imagine how many atrocities revolutionaries covered up before the advent of the internet, remembering that such abject figures deny the Holodomor with all their might. Denial has two reasons in particular and the first, as we can easily imagine, is the lack of regret on the part of those who consider morality as relative and the second, the inability to admit their mistakes and face their consequences, seeking to exempt from responsibilities, deny or omit their faults or turpitude, which, in fact, is useless, given that reality, sooner or later, will knock on the door. When confronted by the truth, the revolutionary will be left with suicide, denial or sacrifice of the part he considers less essential, however, he will never confess his crimes, as repentance is not a quality of the psychopath or of those who follow him, therefore, morality of the relativist is null, given that he needs to lead his followers to the abyss if necessary or, when in the lower layers, swear unhealthy vassalage in exchange for crumbs. A member of the German People's Court or a high-ranking officer of the Schutzstaffel could follow the Führer's fate, insist that they did humanity good in their search for the Aryan race or, simply, point to part of the group as a “bit of a bitch”, who sacrifices themselves for others, to escape the consequences of their actions, however, they would not confess to their atrocious crimes unless this were the means offered to escape a more serious punishment. We cannot expect anything less from all the tyrannical leaders who today occupy positions of power, but who fear, one day, being confronted and held responsible for the evils they cause. The example of the Venezuelan dictatorship, which insists on maintaining itself despite the blatant defeat in the electoral process, since it is possible to audit votes individually, shows that the revolutionary clings to power, precisely, so as not to face the consequences of his actions, openly denying its loss of legitimacy, if it was ever legitimate, to guarantee its impunity. Maduro, knowing he is a tyrant out of control, remains in power by force so as not to be held responsible for the evils he has caused, hoping to die in the Miraflores chair, as his predecessor, Hugo Chavez, had done. Because he does not believe in something greater, divine justice or the duty to do something for others, Maduro aims for the fate of despots who died in power, such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Fidel and many other beings who would never confess, because they were proud. too much to submit to God. Adolf Hitler preferred suicide over condemnation and, in Brazil, we have the example of Getúlio Vargas, who also preferred eternal damnation to those who do not repent, claiming that he was leaving his life to go down in history, when in fact, he was trying to cover up his putrid nature with an act that imitated martyrdom. Likewise, the revolutionaries who today occupy the most diverse thrones, such as Maduro himself and the Nicaraguan dictator Ortega, insist on denying their guilt, since they are nothing more than leaders devoid of conscience, willing to undermine anyone who challenges them or simply bother them. In the recent episode of totalitarian outbursts during the health pandemic, several examples of abuses could be cited, however, their artisans seek, by all means, to avoid being held responsible for the evils they caused, not confessing that they applied unreasonable measures, such as welding doors to businesses. commercials, sealing supermarket shelves and even curfews, without any justification, given that the duty to repair the damage they caused will remain clear. There were also those who fought against so-called early treatment, persecuting anyone who dared to preach in defense of such medicines, even when it came to health professionals, however, they openly denied any responsibility. “Crying is free”, became a “stay at home if you can”, without the slightest shame and the media, which counted deaths and coordinated news in a true cartel, which it dubbed the press consortium, as custom, he washed his hands of his actions and did not accept the harm he had caused, something that also applies to so-called “bigtechs”, such as the Meta and Google groups, which openly acted to suppress or reduce the reach of any dissonant voice from that orchestrated international press cartel. In some countries, those with a greater democratic tradition, processes and investigations are already underway to hold accountable those who, in some way, acted in bad faith during the period. However, people under the command of totalitarian despots still suffer the actions in silence. From the same tyrants of that time, in some cases, the compulsory administration of gene therapy to children is still demanded, just to maintain the narrative that such an experiment was or is necessary. The central aim of those who insist on an experiment that proved to be disastrous, whether due to the various cases of devastating side effects or the need for subsequent unforeseen doses, seems to be, not the search for immunization, but the preservation of the authorities who insist on not confessing the atrocities that they consciously, or not, put into practice. Another way of not confessing your actions is the judicialization of politics, in which smaller groups start to govern in a kind of society with the Judiciary, which, because it does not place itself under the scrutiny of the people, does not suffer the consequences of its decisions, at least directly. , thus being able to change the direction of politics at will without suffering a setback at the polls. Using unlimited hermeneutics, the Judiciary can be called upon to assume any aspect of the State, because, if it acts shamelessly, it can interfere in any matters claiming to be in the name of a greater good. Even more serious would be, in rare cases of hypertrophy of the Judiciary, this being able to act even without the provocation of interested parties, initiating actions with consequences, which undermine other powers and which will never be put in the confessional, as in some environments, like courts and newspaper offices, it seems that repentance is not natural. There are beings who flatter tyrants, who, even today, don't mind serving as sniffer dogs for powerful totalitarians, demeaning themselves in a despicable way in exchange for crumbs, such creatures are even more miserable than their masters and have denied their actions. When confronted, therefore, they will try to omit their crimes, confessing to them only if exposed and, even then, they will only do so in search of earthly forgiveness, not truly repenting. The vassals of evil will be worms even in hell. Revolutionary leaders are left with a fruitless struggle against reality, seeking only to hide themselves as a form of protection, not against their enemies, but in relation to the consequences of their own actions, as their crimes are unconfessable. “Those whose sins you forgive will be forgiven, and those whose sins you retain will be retained” (St. John 20:23). Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 49 – December 2024 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

Last week, Finland, Sweden and Norway distributed leaflets on how to stock up on supplies and create bomb shelters at home, warning the population about a likely ramification of Russia's war with Ukraine to border countries. Until the middle of this year, my son Felipe was on exchange in Denmark, and the garage of the house he lived in had already been transformed into a storehouse of non-perishable food, water and toilet paper, for when the war came. The whole of Europe is following with apprehension the latest statements by President Vladimir Putin, the United States and the trio of England, France and Germany, in order to seek to avoid the escalation of the conflict and a peaceful solution. Joe Biden, at the end of his Presidency, left a bomb for his successor, Donald Trump, to defuse, allowing Ukraine to use American-made and handled missiles against Russia. Putin has already spoken out publicly, declaring that he feels legitimized in moving against the powers that supplied long-range missiles and mines to Ukraine, of their own manufacture, for use against the opponent. The embassies of several countries in Kiev were evacuated for fear of attacks. The truth is that the nations arm Ukraine because they themselves do not want to start a war against Russia, which would culminate in a conflict of global proportions. Everyone is afraid of Russian nuclear power and the impetuosity of its President. Thus, they are giving full powers to Volodymyr Zelenski, as their leaders do not want to live with the eternal stamp that they caused the 3rd World War. Today's global scenario is very similar to that before the First World War. There are the same tensions between powers, disputes over territories and natural resources, arms races, difficulties in joint understanding and the creation of parallel pacts between powers, such as Russia, China and North Korea, a bloc completely aligned with communism. On the other hand, the UN and other global organizations such as NATO are sinking in deep waters, completely unable to mediate disputes of interests and existing conflicts. This week, in yet another isolated and controversial decision, which has already been the target of criticism and non-compliance by several countries, the ICC – International Criminal Court based in The Hague, issued arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu and the former Israeli defense minister, at the same time that it issued the same type of warrant against the leader of Hamas, placing the three of them on the same measuring stick (if that would be possible or acceptable), for committing the crime of genocide, in another immensely dangerous and challenging situation unfolding in the Middle East. With Iran and its nuclear capacity lurking, sponsoring Hamas and Hezbollah, who kidnapped 240 Jews more than a year ago, in Israeli territory and killed another 1400, in a surprise attack, carried out in October 2023, brainless young people scream “ Free Palestine” and support for Islam out there, little imagining that what they are defending is the spread of terror, torture, mutilation, social restrictions and prohibitions of all kinds, murder of homosexuals and women, sponsorship of armed terrorist groups and the end of the Western world as we know it. The last barrier in the Middle East for Islam to advance over the West is Israel. And the world is moving fast towards the culmination of this situation, without knowing for sure what will happen, leaving it to Europe to answer the same question that hovered over this continent, in the two great wars of the 20th century: how will they survive this conflict, if they are not able to provide for their own subsistence, being eternally hostage to imports from other countries, of all types of goods and merchandise consumed within the European community. History is cyclical and repeats itself. Humanity did not learn much from the wars of the 20th century and its millions of dead and maimed people, amidst poverty, hunger and despair. Today, the nuclear capacity of countless countries is immense. It was very costly, after the Cold War, to bring peace back. But easy times breed weak man , that create difficult times again. The future will tell. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 49 – December 2024 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

Albert Einstein once said that his political ideal was democracy, so that every man should be respected as an individual, and none venerated. In recent times, the word democracy has come to resonate in countless discussions, especially when the subject is a supposed crisis between powers. Much is being done, including the departure from clear constitutional norms, with the justification that such actions would be to defend democracy. Hence the question in the title: who really defends democracy? Well, for starters we could respond with a big and resounding NOBODY! Impersonality must be the rule in a democratic republic, so that no one would claim to be a defender of anything. What would supposedly guarantee something, in democracy, would be institutions. However, in these dark legal times, what we see is an extreme personalization of institutions, which reverberates not only in the directions that such institutions take, but mainly in the people they reach, including not only members of these institutions, but also popular people. And it is about these personalizations that we return to the question in the title. The answer, which should be on the tip of any citizen's tongue, appears to be extremely tormenting in this turbulent and turbulent constitutional environment in our country. To better explain to those who are not in the legal field, we must first analyze what democracy is. To be very simplistic, we quote the concept of democracy brought by Wikipedia: democracy is a political regime in which all eligible citizens participate equally — directly or through elected representatives — in the proposal, development and creation of laws, exercising the power of governance through universal suffrage. Democracy is, basically, the political regime in which sovereignty is exercised by the people. As in the current social context direct democracy (where the people themselves personally exercise their sovereignty) remains impossible, representative democracy has become the rule. In representative democracy, power continues to belong to the people, but is exercised through their elected representatives: Mayors, Councilors, State, Federal and District Deputies, Governors, Senators and the President of the Republic. You don't need to be an expert in politics to easily conclude that, in democracy, the will of the majority is reflected. In this area, where is the Judiciary Power? Now, if we were to coldly analyze the concept of democracy, the Judiciary – regardless of its extreme necessity, importance, and integration into the tripartition of Powers from the Montesquian perspective – would not be a democratic institution. Let us not confuse the concepts of Constitutional Power – which, undoubtedly, the Judiciary Power is – with a democratic institution. Despite being in a simplistic field, just to explain one point of view, we are fully aware that the discussion is much deeper and, evidently, in a principled and practical analysis, we could well conclude that, due to the indispensability of the Judiciary for the maintenance of democracy , somehow we have to consider it as a democratic institution. Porém, temos casos claros de situações onde o Poder Judiciário, muitas vezes por situações anômalas, é partícipe de governos totalitários. Let us remember the year 1933 when, shortly after assuming total power in Nazi Germany, Hitler began to purge members of the Judiciary who did not align themselves with the new regime, extirpating from public life those magistrates who, due to their origins or positions, showed themselves to be adherents to the application of normative precepts that were not in line with the understanding of the head of the nation. From then on, the German Judiciary began to behave as a mere extension of the regime, which facilitated not only the approval but also the full application of the upcoming legal diplomas that became known as the “Nuremberg laws” (1935). , which included the “Reich Citizenship Law” and the “Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honor”. The result is known to everyone. In 2016, the Turkish State simply removed 2,745 judges for allegedly participating in plans to depose President Tayyip Erdogan. Did the remaining judges continue to have full freedom to act? A more recent case can be seen in Venezuela, where judges are dismissed from their positions and arrested for the simple fact that they do not conform to what the Executive Branch wants, and there is even news of judges being arrested for simply deciding in a way that does not please the President. In fact, it is worth highlighting that in 2017, among the 33 members of the Venezuelan Supreme Court, eight lived in embassies of Latin American countries. We finish the example with the situation in Afghanistan, where after the Taliban regained power, the Islamic Courts returned as an extension of the regime. Such examples demonstrate that, sometimes, the Judiciary can be a mere instrument for maintaining totalitarian governments. The same can be said about the Armed Forces. Now, there is no member of the armed forces, in practically any democratic regime, who is somehow elected by universal suffrage. However, the same Armed Forces that, in some regimes, are the guarantors of democracy, can be anomalously used to maintain non-democratic regimes. It all depends on the context in which they are used. And we go further: the police bodies themselves can also be considered as sometimes guarantors of democracy, sometimes as maintainers of exceptional regimes. Thus, the consideration of an institution as “democratic” goes far beyond its mere legal configuration, depending, umbilically, on the context in which it is positioned in a given nation, at a given historical moment and, mainly, on the behavior of its members. But, one moment! If we have already had the opportunity to say that impersonality should be the rule and that personalization is not consistent with democracy, how can we maintain that the behavior of members of a given institution can shape its democratic character? This determines the maturity or not of a given democracy. In a sufficiently mature democracy, the undemocratic action of a member of any institution immediately turns on the defense mechanisms of that democracy. These mechanisms include, internally, the attribution of responsibility for possible undemocratic acts, as well as the extreme punishment of extirpation from public life. When such internal control mechanisms do not work, the system of checks and balances comes into play, and it is up to other Powers, which monitor and control each other, to return to the limits imposed by the Constitution and Laws. If this system still fails, there is the possibility in our Constitution of intervention by the Armed Forces, which have the primary function of guaranteeing constitutional powers and, also, Law and order. Therefore, not only powers, from this perspective, must be considered as democratic institutions. Even if we consider this, we cannot forget that, due to the lack of popular legitimacy, the Judiciary Power is, among the Powers of the Republic, the least democratic. Now, the Judiciary, mainly through its Supreme Court, is recurrent in describing itself as counter-majoritarian. In doing so, it further delegitimizes its democratic quality. How can we expect that a Power exercised by unelected members, which goes against and departs – repeatedly – ​​from the will of the majority of the population embodied in the laws approved by their elected representatives, can be considered democratic? In the view of Thomas Jefferson, one of the main authors of the United States Declaration of Independence, the Judiciary was only responsible for guaranteeing rights, but never for granting benefits. The former North American president believed that the concept of law was umbilically related to negative benefits on the part of third parties, or even the State itself. To assert the right to life, for example, there would be no need, as a rule, for any positive performance (action) on the part of any person or institution. It would be enough for these people, acting negatively, not to harm anyone's life. What, in theory, required a positive provision (an action itself) could not be seen as a right, but rather as a benefit. This is the case, for example, of the Brazilian Federal Constitution, which grants everyone the “right” to health care. To achieve this “right”, there is a need for the State to maintain an entire assistance structure (basically, the single health system – SUS) at the expense of the citizen’s hard-earned taxes. From a Jeffersonian perspective, such a “right” would not, strictly speaking, be a right, even if provided for in Law. This would be a benefit. In this context, it would be up to the Judiciary only to defend and ensure rights, acting peremptorily so that no one – citizen or State – violates or takes away any right provided for in Law and, mainly, in the Constitution. It is the Judiciary, as a State Power, that guarantees the application of the Law. It is from this perspective that the Judiciary Power can be considered as a democratic institution. However, it would not be up to this Power to grant, expand or create benefits, or even create abstract and general laws. In doing so, regarding the will of the majority embodied in the approval of laws enacted by their elected representatives (or even in the omission of the approval of a certain law that does not reflect the popular will), the Judiciary is acting as a non-democratic institution. Even more undemocratic is when the Judiciary itself, the ultimate defender of the Constitution, acts in disagreement with it. This is where the limits of jurisdiction lie. Evidently, this discussion, brought here in a simplistic way, is much deeper, as between rights and benefits there is an immense gray field. The article, however, does not allow for this deepening. But it is clear that the Brazilian Judiciary, through loud judicial activism, finds itself repeatedly acting in an undemocratic manner. Therefore, we cannot answer the question in the title if the reader expects the answer to relate to a person or an institution. The maintenance of democracy occurs when the people, maintaining their power – even if merely representative – establish the full possibility of eliminating from public life those agents who do not act as expected. The health of a democratic normative system is closely linked to the full and immediate possibility of using control systems. Therefore, there is no specificity in imputing only a specific person or institution to defend democracy. Democracy, as the ideal of a nation, must be alive and pulsating within the minds and hearts of the people. A truly democratic nation does not need to entrust the guarantee of maintaining its democratic freedoms to anyone. The real danger is when a people, numbed by ideological discourses, move away from the concept of democracy to try to impute to a silent majority the inclinations of a noisy minority. This “dictatorship” of the minority, enhanced by institutions that act in an undemocratic manner, does not in the least comply with the concept of democracy. Precisely for these reasons, there is a pressing need for the people to use the greatest of the prerogatives that democracy allows them – the exercise of voting – to maintain this very prerogative. Benjamin Franklin once said that “those who give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” We can make an analogy to this phrase, to say that those who give up complying with the Constitution in the name of Democracy, deserve neither the Constitution nor Democracy. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 10 – April 2022 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

The bloody Green Wave that promotes murder The Colombian Constitutional Court appears to have drawn from the same source as its Brazilian counterpart, authorizing by judicial decision the practice of abortion up to twenty-four weeks of pregnancy, six months, under any conditions. You didn't read it wrong, the decision allows the murder of human beings up to six months old. There are several points that must be addressed, such as the way in which legalization occurred, the lie behind “safe abortion”, the life that the procedure will destroy, whether legal or illegal, the morality of the mother who is capable of killing his own son and the groups that organize themselves to promote this practice. First of all, treating abortion as a form of murder is not a mistake, either from the human aspect, after all an innocent life is being taken, or from the legal aspect, since the aforementioned crime is included in the list of crimes against life in our legal system. legal. In Brazil it must be taken to the Jury Court, at least until an Olympian decides that such an atrocity is convenient for him, which brings us to the first point to be faced. The killer maneuver To understand the strategy used in Colombia to allow murderers of their own children to go unpunished, just observe, here in Brazil, how LGBT activism managed, through a decision by the Federal Supreme Court, to create the crimes of homophobia and transphobia without the parliament had done. Even the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the greatest law that governs the nation, being clear with regard to crime, must have a law that defines it, which requires the creation of a norm by the National Congress, this requirement is repeated in the first article of the Penal Code, the so-called principle of legal reserve. Creating a crime or changing it, in Brazil, is a prerogative of the Legislative Power, so the publication of a criminal rule by a body of other powers should not be allowed, whatever the justification. However, in the case of the crimes of homophobia and transphobia, not only the Constitution, but the entire essence of the concept of democracy were shamelessly thrown into a latrine to meet the desires of groups and delusions of power. This is not a mere formal violation, therefore, it is not necessary to check whether such a principle is recognized in the Colombian legal system, unless that country is admittedly a dictatorship, like all other countries juristocracy is. The judicialization of politics and judicial activism do not take away from parliamentarians the power to legislate or from the ruler to direct the public machine, in fact, it takes away the will of the people by handing over to others the ability to choose for citizens, the true victim of such a nefarious practice is precisely that which grants a mandate to members of the legislature to express their will, as well as doing so with the ruler, hoping that he will adopt the public policies that are dear to them. Using false premises, a certain group imposes its dictatorship over the population, in a true anti-democratic act, now defeated political agents and magistrates who share their worldview, even if dystopian, shamelessly usurp the mandate of others by calling themselves as a supra-human sect that has the power and duty to guide the direction of the nation. The idea of ​​elected representatives in a democracy lies precisely in the fact that they must represent the will of the people, the real sovereign, so that, when a certain practice is disapproved in a society, in theory, norms are created to prohibit it. On the contrary, behaviors considered desirable are encouraged. For this reason, a bill that is not approved reflects, except in distorted cases, what citizens expect from their representatives, since, if they do not meet these expectations, they will suffer rejection in a future electoral election. A norm that is not successful in the legislative process, in principle, is not welcome in the legal system, its forced entry into this being an attack on democracy, considering that in such a model the people are not, merely, an element of the State, but the reason for the existence of the State, as it is a servant of the former, not being, under any circumstances, its holder. Of the elements that make up this figure, the territory in which sovereignty is exercised is indispensable, however, speaking of democracy itself, the people are the masters of the State, and not the other way around. The fact that the Legislative Power seeks to reflect the will of the true sovereign, in itself, is the fatal obstacle to the judicialization of politics and judicial activism, because, as an example, we can deal not only with abortion, but with homophobia itself, which legislators were unwilling to, respectively, allow and prohibit such practices under penalty of not representing their voters. The aforementioned list can also include the release of narcotics, which despite a massive favorable campaign, does not find popular support, which results in the impossibility of decriminalizing the use and sale of drugs. Of course, there may be some distortion of the popular will, as flagrantly occurred in the approval of measures that restricted the trade and possession of firearms in our country, considering that the people expressed themselves directly in one direction and the National Congress decided to legislate in the opposite direction, but it is known that this was a time when part of the parliament negotiated with the Executive Branch the approval of projects in exchange for undue advantages, literally, betraying those who delegated to it, through voting, the ability to decide in the name of the people, It was the episode known as “Mensalão”. For this reason, what was done in Brazil, in the case of homophobia, and in Colombia, in the recent liberalization of abortion, is not a mere formal violation, since the people of both countries did not elect politicians who defended such practices, assuming that the citizens of these nations are contrary to such norms, however, a minority incapable of approving, within the scope of the legislative process, what is in their interest, in a tyrannical way, takes advantage of a Judiciary that constantly nods in favor of your guidelines to force the nation to bow to their will. In Argentina, abortion was approved through the legislative process, which does not make it any less reprehensible, however, the people of that country chose terrible representatives, since they still see themselves deluded by caudillismo, which can be observed in the state of affairs that took over the nation, not coincidentally, misery and authoritarianism befell Argentines, not by a trick of fate, but by the result of their fateful choice. Colombia did not choose to murder its future generations, such a harmful practice is due to a group that, despite being a minority, occupied what should have been the house of justice and took away the right to choose from its citizens, the blood of innocent people is dirty the hands of the Argentine people and the robes of some Colombian magistrates. There is no safe abortion One of the biggest lies told on the subject is that women who have an abortion illegally subject themselves to something dangerous when, if it were legalized, the procedure would pose no risk to the woman. There are three factors that must be observed to realize that such a narrative is decontextualized. The first, and simplest, is the fact that every abortion results in death, the nature of the procedure is nothing more, nothing less than taking a life. This would be enough to put an end to the theory of a humane abortion, as there would be no more inhumane conduct than purposefully taking the life of an innocent person even before birth. Regarding women's health, as strange as it may be to worry about the health of a criminal when he commits a crime, there are in fact those who argue that the police should act without lethality even when faced with a criminal who puts the life of the victim at risk. police or a third party, the abortion procedure is invasive and medications capable of inducing pregnancy termination have considerable side effects. Interestingly, in Brazil, people who ignore the possible damage that such medication can cause, recently stated that a not so aggressive drug, which could be used to prevent a certain virus, was almost a suicide pill. In addition to the medication used for this purpose having side effects, it is necessary, in most cases, to perform a so-called scraping to remove the remains of the murdered fetus. Even if it is carried out in a hospital with infrastructure, such a procedure puts the life of the pregnant woman at risk, that is, it will result in the death of the innocent child and could result in a fatal outcome for the mother, if it is appropriate to call such a person a mother. Finally, there is a fanciful allegation, based on Marxist delusions of class conflict, which points out that abortion is more dangerous for poorer women, presenting the following point of view. The richest could carry out this procedure in a clinic, which is clandestine in prohibited countries, as in the case of Brazil, while the poorest would need to use non-clinical methods, introducing objects into the uterus or similar actions. In a country whose murder, in question, is permitted, the difference between social class would also imply different conditions for carrying out the procedure, since the poorest would depend on the public network, and the richest could do it in health units. well-structured, that is, coming out of hiding and practicing this abysmal conduct with greater fanfare. The poor ones, as always used as a trick, would not be given the benefit, as they would do so, as a rule, in health units in terrible conditions, or even, in the same way as they do in countries where it is prohibited. Anyone who believes in safe abortion is looking at an illusion, but to assume that the public system, in Brazil the SUS, will be able to carry out procedures of this type with due safety, is, at the very least, mentally alienated. Perhaps, with the speed with which Brazilian public health operates, by the time the abortion occurs, the real victim is already in college or in military service, leaving criticism regarding the delay in life-saving procedures aside, there is no way to demand Public health dedication to actions that aim to kill innocent people without diverting efforts that could, and should, be used to save lives. Health resources must be intended to improve the quality of life or save them, never to reap them, the use of public resources to kill innocent people, especially without the consent of those who will bear such costs is abominable, especially because it takes away from that who needs medical attention for an abject purpose. Prevented from even trying It seems like a cliché phrase, but we will never know how many geniuses humanity could have lost or, in fact, lost to abortion, since we are left to wonder if great personalities could be victims of such crimes, or even how many others would have been born to change the world. The only thing that is wrong with such a premise is to imagine that personalities who stood out in history are more important compared to anonymous ones, therefore, the correct thing to do would be to question how much humanity lost due to such a practice, since each one did part of the construction of the present, having its role, for better or worse. The vile practice of abortion takes away the chance for a human being to experience what life would offer them, as well as for humanity to have a chapter in their history. Ignoring questions of faith, as it would be unacceptable for someone who spies on a soul in man to seek to prevent it from fulfilling its mission, life is a right that must be guaranteed, especially in the case of an innocent and defenseless being, therefore, It would not be acceptable, even for an atheist, to accept abortion. An individual who rejects the idea of ​​having a soul, that is, of having something divine or special in their being, considering themselves to be just a pile of cells (it is important to keep this expression), should be even more firm in combating abortion, In view of this, believing that human existence would be summarized in its material life, beginning at conception and ending with death, in a way that would deny the existence of its victim. By not believing in the existence of something greater, which would be the salvation of the soul deprived of living, or in reincarnations, which could be a future chance for its victim, the practice of such an infamous act would be even more serious. Reducing the human being to a pile of cells, thus disregarding his life as something divine or special, an atheist who defends the practice of abortion should not demand respect for life from others, that is, he could not question the trivialization of the murdered person, any whatever, as it would give a fictitious value to the human being who does not believe to exist. This is not to say that the lives of atheists do not matter, or even that they do not care about human life, but if they see value in existence, they should not admit selectivity when protecting it, simply by denying that there is something special in each person. , as well as, for not believing that there is divine salvation for that being deprived of living. By a logical analysis, admitting that there is no experience of atheism, it would be correct to state that an atheist who values ​​human life as the only translation of existence, summarizing everything to the material plane but considering that some legal assets require greater protection, would have to disapprove of abortion for the fact that it prevents such an existence, being the only one of that being, on the other hand, one who considers an embryo or fetus as a mere set of cells, could not agree with any protection for human beings, considering, no exist special end in creatures, not even their own lives should enjoy guarantees. There is also the fallacious expression “my body, my rules”, which is so mistaken because it simply ignores the fact that there is another individual's body in the mother's womb, therefore, “the rules” do not apply to the body of a third party, with the former having the protection in relation to the right to life. The theory that before birth, or even the formation of the central nervous system, we are reduced to a pile of cells, must consider that any one is alive, therefore, from fertilization, the prohibition would be the fairest. For those who believe in something beyond the material, such an act is even more reprehensible, because if there is divine justice, accountability will be held for such murder, being certain that it usurps the will of the created and interrupts the mission of a child of God It's too unhealthy. The so-called place of speech must also be faced, despite this resource, being useless, as its sole purpose is to remove others from the debate simply because it is considered that experience is necessary to discuss a certain topic, being a shield used to silence arguments that cannot be overturned. Claiming that a man does not have legitimacy to deal with the issue is just a stupid artifice, as it translates into the dishonesty of those who want to avoid opposing arguments. Simply refuting the allegation that a man could not deal with abortion, by simply stating that only a fetus or embryo could deal with the issue, after all, the life that is intended to be taken is not that of the woman or man already born, in short, it can- It would be said that “if you have not been aborted, you have no place to speak to debate abortion”. Trying to exclude men from the debate, claiming that the harmful practice is affecting women, makes other mistakes, such as ignoring that experts speak out on the subject according to studies, and for this reason, their opinions must be taken into consideration. On the other hand, parents also have their lives affected due to abortion, since their children are murdered, so that the mother unilaterally decides, in addition to a cruel attitude against the one who is about to be born, deprives the father of the power and duty to protect her son's life, asserting that, indirectly, there is another victim of barbarity when only the woman can give her opinion. Anyone who defends abortion must, obligatorily, fight for a man to have the “right” not to recognize a child and, in doing so, be released from any duties towards him, given that abandonment by the father It is also the fact that an individual does not take responsibility for his actions and avoids his obligation to his descendant. It would be simple to compare abandonment to abortion to treat them equally, both are reprehensible behaviors, but in one of them, the ascendant literally kills his child, therefore, the deliberate murder of innocent people is much worse. No one can defend a parent from abandoning their children, however, there is no denying that killing the child would be even worse. Reading sick sentences like: “While abandonment refers to the lack of responsibility for children" , the second is restricted to a woman's right to decide about her own body. With due respect, only a psychotic person could consider that a father or mother who does not take responsibility for their children is worse than the one who kills them and still calls them the right to decide over their own body, as if the body, and the life, of the child was not being destroyed. To address the topic, the journals present stories of abandoned children  by their ancestors, but they forget that in the case of abortion, there will not even be life, there will not be a single chapter for that being, just a book with all its pages torn out and the person who removed them is, precisely, the one who should love it , guide you and help you write your story. Vile as the worst of tyrants Speaking of abandonment, there are many tyrants in the history of humanity who failed to recognize their children or left them to their fate, however, even among despots, the reports of parents killing their children are considerably reduced when it comes to murder, that is, few reached the point of acting against their own blood, destroying the one they helped give life and would continue their legacy. Killing one's own children is, indisputably, an atrocious conduct worthy of the worst human beings, especially given the mission of parents towards their descendants and, in the case of abortion, being an innocent person, someone who had done nothing to justify violence. defensive, Cases such as the girl Isabela Nardoni or the boy Henry Borel are examples of perversity, however, trying to minimize abortion as being a less vile practice than these is to create a factoid for legitimate deaths of innocent people to be allowed or minimized to meet the desires of an abject agenda that destroys everything it touches. We would be facing the “murder of good” in the blurred vision of a sick society, because whoever exterminates their child in the womb is in no way different from the one who does it in childhood, yes, I am stating that in the field of morality, unfortunately the law does not give the same treatment, anyone who performed an abortion is no better than little Isabela Nardoni's father or anyone else who murdered his innocent son in a cowardly way. Honestly, even if he were an adult deserving of such a sentence, it would be difficult for a parent to have the capacity to end his child's life, and could even allow his own to be taken away so as not to have the blood of his offspring spilled for him. There is no way to mitigate the evil that is capable of taking the lives of those who have not yet been born, especially when it comes to your own child. Not taking responsibility is unhealthy, but killing for that is far beyond, as well as making light of a life in order to ease the conscience of the irresponsible and dissuade them from doing evil among those who should love unconditionally is the worst of crimes and makes an individual a being as nefarious as the genocides in history, it cannot be denied that a being capable of killing his child, if he had the power and motivation, would do so with as many as he deemed necessary. Abortionist sects The defense of abortion is not limited to the actions of a few, there is an entire association orchestrated to promote and try to legitimize the murder of innocent people, a kind of contemporary worship  to Molech , who sees in the death of children a way to propagate his unhealthy faith in a false god, corrupting people's souls, since, human degradation It is a way of weakening the individual and the key to controlling them. It may seem silly to talk about Moloch for some, but the way that progressives seek to confront the Christian faith can lead those less informed to accept him as a revolutionary figure, who in the imagination of those who have been indoctrinated becomes liberating, by way of illustration, a statue of Molech  was erected in the Coliseum. We only have to look at who the artificial actors behind abortion are in the world to understand who the practice of killing children in their mothers' wombs serves. A quick search takes us to the blog Article 19, false defender of freedom of expression, or opposes a possible CPI whose objective would be to discover who finances pro-abortion NGOs, it is observed that it is nothing more than a subsidiary of the international Article 19, which has as donors , for example the Ford Foundation, Open Society Foundation, as well as several governments and other entities, what a surprise. On the front of the fight for the legalization of abortion, we find other entities such as Azmina, which has in its list of financiers , Google and, again, the Open Society Foundation. It seems that we already have enough to dispel the argument that it would be a conspiracy theory to believe that there is a large global pro-abortion network, but we have arrived at the Anis Institute , que recebera considerable amount  from the Workers' Party and defends abortion and constantly opposes the current government, nothing is by chance. Abroad, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation  finance the Planned Parenthood Federation , which is nothing more than an NGO defending the murderous practice. Curious how revolutionaries claim to fight against oppression while lying in the beds of the powerful, a relationship that, in itself, should call into question the “good intentions” of these people and open the eyes of their lower clergy followers, but they seem to be unconscious vassals, or even worse, knowing that their speech is empty and only serves to hypnotize the most foolish. The so-called Big Tech stands alongside this agenda, to maintain unilateral communication, turning what should be a debate into a true pro-abortion monologue. As a rule, they treat the supposed right to kill children in the womb using expressions with a certain air of euphemism, as they know the seriousness of what they are dealing with, they use arguments such as reproductive rights or they try to treat it as a health issue, when in fact it is a matter of murder. . The so-called Green Wave, a movement that originated in Argentina, spreads across Latin America seeking to quench their thirst for the blood of innocents, they are treated as defenders of human rights, when they are against the grain, as their intent is expressly opposed to article 3, from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In truth, this is a sick agenda, like so many others promoted by revolutionaries, to degrade society, since, as mentioned, an individual who was capable of murdering his son, will become devoid of morals, being , at best a servant only of the law, we know that norms can be enacted to meet the will of those in power, even in disregard of formalities, so that such a human being, stripped of humanity, nothing more Will a vassal relay the will of his masters. Desiring not to bow to the law, will be reduced in rags  who are a group of bewildered people, constantly used because they are, in the mentality of the powerful, disposable and ignorant, which perhaps explains the inability to see how much the side that claims to fight against a system is controlled, protected and financed by those in top of the same system they swear to fight. However, pro-life groups have risen up against tyranny and their fight against the horrendous practice of abortion is increasingly gaining strength. May the lives of innocents be sacred, may parents recognize the importance of their mission and may future generations have values ​​as their greatest legacy so that they can live in a better world. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania Vol. I No. 07 March 2022 edition - ISSN 2764-3867

Learning from Jonah, the fugitive prophet The Bible tells the story of a stubborn prophet, a prophet who did not want to do the right thing, what God told him to do; This is the prophet Jonah. “The word of the Lord came to Jonah, son of Amittai, saying, Get ready, go to the great city of Nineveh and cry out against it, because its wickedness has come up to me. Jonah got ready, but to flee from the presence of the Lord, to Tarshish; and when he had gone down to Joppa, he found a ship going to Tarshish; So he paid his fare and got on board to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the Lord. But the Lord sent a strong wind over the sea, and a great storm arose on the sea, and the ship was about to be broken into pieces. Then, the sailors, filled with fear, each cried out to their god and threw the cargo that was on the ship into the sea, to relieve it of its weight. Jonah, however, had gone down to the cellar and lay down; and slept soundly. The master of the ship came to him and said to him: What is the matter with you? Caught up in your sleep? Arise, call upon your god; perhaps, in this way, this god will remember us, so that we do not perish. And they said to one another, Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know because of whom this evil has befallen us. And they cast lots, and the lot fell on Jonah. Then they said to him, Tell us now, because of whom this evil has come upon us. What occupation is yours? Where are you from? What is your land? And what people are you? He answered them: I am a Hebrew and I fear the Lord, the God of heaven, who made the sea and the land. Then the men were filled with great fear and said to him: What is this you have done! For the men knew that he fled from the presence of the Lord, because he had declared it to them. They said to him: What shall we do to thee, that the sea may be calm for us? Because the sea was becoming more and more stormy. He said to them, Take me and throw me into the sea, and the sea will be calm, for I know that this great storm has come upon you because of me.” (Jonah 1.1-12) Many Christians have come across this text at some point in their lives, but today we will do it in depth; My objective in writing this article is to bring the reader to a deep reflection on their calling before God and that there is no point in running away, He finds us (even if it is in the belly of the whale). Those who do not delve deeper into the text reach the point of judging the prophet: “Ah, he is a disobedient man, he wanted to escape”; What exactly was Jonas running from? He was called to preach in Nineveh; today, Nineveh is Mosul, an Iraqi city; Mosul was under the control of the terrorist group called the Islamic State (IS), which occupied it in June 2014 and declared it its capital on Iraqi soil. In mid-October 2016, the Iraqi government (supported by the Kurds and for a international coalition ) launched a major military offensive to regain control of Mosul and neighboring regions. The city was recaptured by Iraqi forces on July 10, 2017. The radical spirit of the Islamic State did not only occur during this period, but came from a long time ago; Sennacherib, king of Assyria, the same one who sent a letter of affront to King Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 32.1-23), made Nineveh an imposing city; in stone sculptures on the walls of his palace he made a point of displaying his victories and how he subjugated enemy peoples: scenes of battles, impalement and scenes of Sennacherib's men parading the spoils of war before him. Now we have an idea of ​​why Jonas fled: he did not have the slightest appreciation for those people; the Ninevites were cruel, wicked. For Jonas, they did not deserve forgiveness. And the prophet's anger didn't stop there: Jonah knew that, by preaching, those people could repent and be saved! And one more aggravating factor for the reader to understand Jonah: of the twelve tribes of Israel, he belonged to the tribe of Zebulun. Throughout the history of the Hebrew people, Zebulun was the “Elite troop”, a kind of Bope, who always took up arms to defend their nation. In other words, Jonas wanted to escape so he wouldn't have to kill someone. All of this made him flee (how deluded!) from the presence of God three thousand kilometers. Jonah boarded a ship leaving Joppa (which was in Samaria) towards Tarshish. This was a port city located in southern Spain; it was considered the longest sea voyage. The image below shows the distance from Joppa to Tarshish It is possible that the reader, upon reaching this point, will ask themselves: “But then, why did God call Jonah to this very difficult mission?” It’s because he was what we popularly call “thick skinned”; God knew Jonah could handle it. And isn't that what we do today? In order not to fulfill God's call on our lives as a whole, we try to run away! We run away from profession, marriage, parenthood, responsibility, education, regimented life, discipline and so many other things. We act as if God doesn't know what he's doing! It becomes a sin, because we are, with our attitudes, saying “I know more than the Lord”. And that's when the storm comes and the whale swallows us. Why did God stop Jonah? Couldn't he call someone else to carry out the mission? It even could. But there are situations that we have to confront, and until we go through this, we will not be healed in our emotions nor will we be fulfilled, because true joy comes when we fulfill our mission. It was God saving Jonah from himself! Imagine being swallowed by a whale! It must be pretty disgusting, right? But it was the only way for Jonas to be interrupted in his escape and to be placed, literally, in a “corner of thought”, from which he could not leave. In the darkness, in the dark, in the impossibility, Jonas had to reflect on what would be less costly: fulfilling the mission or running away from it. In this last edition of the year of the Magazine I want to challenge the reader to do a self-analysis: “Was everything I experienced in 2024 a desperate attempt to escape what God called me to do? Could it be that God didn’t close the doors so that I could make amends?” When the storm came, the sailors asked Jonah: “What occupation are you?”; in other translations it is “What is your mission?”. In other words: what is your calling? What are you running from? Remember: you were not born to escape, there is no point in buying the most expensive ticket to get out of this, your mission is irreplaceable, there is only happiness in fulfilling the mission that God gave even if it is difficult. The one you chose is with you and knows your ability. Don't run away, face it! Happy 2025! Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 49 – December 2024 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

Your biggest enemy will always be yourself There is no point in analyzing the consequences of an imminent third great war, if it ever occurs, or of a second cold war, which seems to be more palpable, since the artifices of such a confrontation are creatures willing to bluff or kill for power. On the one hand, we have Russia's direct action on Ukrainian territory, leaving aside a proxy war, that country exposes itself as an aggressor towards its neighbor, which, in theory, would justify a reaction from other countries. From another perspective, it is clear that the Russians, even though they are supported by the Chinese dictatorship, know that they would have no real conditions to win a physical war against NATO, and it is natural that the confrontation will have greater consequences in the diplomatic field. In a military confrontation, the Russian government knows that its possible adversaries are clear favorites, however, the situation would be more serious for the Eurasian country in the event of a trade war, even though it has sought rapprochement with Brazil and has China on its side, The Kremlin will have great difficulty maintaining control of a country plagued by shortages, aware that it has fewer reserves than its would-be opponents. Now many will imagine that everything is just a bluff, that Vladimir Putin's only objective is to divert the attention of his people so that his image, already worn out, becomes that of a proud ruler capable of facing the world, but nothing is so Simple as that, everything indicates that the leader who has imposed his will for more than two decades would not risk an armed confrontation just for his reputation, which still guarantees him to lead his homeland. Apparently there is something much bigger behind the Russian movements in the territory of its neighbor and sister, Ukraine. Two expressions already present in the text must be extracted so that we can understand such action by the Russians, they are “Eurasian” and sister Ukraine”, as this leads to a deeper understanding of what Eurasianism would be and the understanding that the Russian and Ukrainian peoples are just one, such a relationship will apply to the Chinese and Taiwanese, but we will deal with such a situation at the right time. To better express what the theory of Eurasianism, for some neo-Eurasianism, it is necessary to point to the conception of the philosopher Alexandre Duguin or Dugin, who understands that the Eurasian people have the power-duty to liberate what he defines as the “center of the world” and guide the rest towards a world vision in which there will be a rescue of tradition, freeing it from globalism. It remains evident that President Vladimir Putin's actions are based on the vision of Dugin's so-called Fourth Political Theory, considering liberalism as the enemy, with the first theory focusing on the individual and having defeated the others. The second would be Marxism, which is guided by class war and the third would be fascism, which treats the nation as its essence. There is no direct opposition to socialism or fascism by such a theory, which will be called Eurasianism, in fact, it believes that both failed and were defeated by liberalism, that is, that the individual prevailed over the class and the nation, so that , only the recovery of tradition will overcome such a system. Seeking to understand Vladimir Putin's actions seems impossible, but if observed as the materialization of Alexander Dugin's thoughts, everything makes sense, since the aforementioned ruler tries to put into practice the ideals presented by the thinker. Starting the war against globalism through a revolution. Everything suggests that this is a war between East and West, perhaps a rerun of many others, since, since ancient times, such cultures have clashed. But everything indicates that this is not a remastered version, as the confrontation involves two new forces, even though they feed their discourse on the old rivalry. The key to Eurasian movements on the board are based on the vision of Alexander Dugin, who proves to be an astute thinker, therefore, there is nothing better than invoking a great mind to counter his dystopian perspective of reality. According to Prof. Olavo de Carvalho , “The prof. Alexandre Duguin, at the head of the Russian intellectual elite who today shapes the Putin government's international policy, says that his nation's grand plan is to restore the hierarchical sense of spiritual values ​​that modernity has buried. For religiously minded people, shocked by the brutal vulgarity of modern life, the proposal may sound very attractive. But the realization of the idea goes through two stages. First, it is necessary to destroy the West, the father of all evil, through a world war, fatally more devastating than the previous two. Then the Eurasian World Empire will be established under the leadership of Holy Mother Russia.” As abject as globalists are, and they are, believing that the theory of a Eurasian World Empire would be salvation is choosing one of the ways in which the individual will be slaughtered, a choice between Scylla and Charybdis , decide among the evils which would be the lesser. It is worth remembering that Olavo de Carvalho had made this prediction more than a decade ago, demonstrating such wisdom that it explains why his detractors, unable to depreciate him, try to jokingly attribute to him the gift of an unbalanced and mythical vision of world. Now, they will insist on denying that he was a misunderstood genius, but that he had the ability to narrate a reality like no one else, which for many still seems blurred, more than ten years in advance. The great Brazilian thinker continues, “Now the professor. Duguin promises to save the world by destroying the West. Honestly, I'd rather not know what comes next. The revolutionary mentality, with its self-postponing promises, so ready to transform into their opposites with the most innocent face in the world, is the greatest scourge that has ever befallen humanity. Its victims, from 1789 to today, number no less than three hundred million people – more than all epidemics, natural catastrophes and wars between nations have killed since the beginning of time. The essence of his speech, as I believe I have already demonstrated, is the inversion of the meaning of time: inventing a future and reinterpreting in the light of it, as if it were a certain and archival premise, the present and the past”. This section deserves great attention. Revolutionary thinking is an evil that must be avoided and fought, even if internally, it creates an illusion to reach a perfect imaginary end, a forced distortion in reality to reach a false promise of an ideal world, however, There will be destruction in search of a utopian lie that will feed delusions and take lives, since we do not live in an imaginary world or a reality that can be bent according to will. The imposition of a theory on the real world, forcing facts to adapt to narratives is the opposite of existence and will have its price taken when the truth can no longer be sealed by the imposition of the will of tyrants, whether by force or their lies . This unnatural flow, which reverses the direction of time, requires dawn to occur in the west and the waters of the rapids to go upwards, as this will not happen, inevitably, the fate will be even more bitter than any predictions. He concludes the thought by alarming the danger of a world government, “The Eurasian Empire promises us a world war and, as a result of it, a global dictatorship. Some of its followers even call it “the Empire of the End”, a clearly apocalyptic evocation. They just forget to note that the last empire before the Last Judgment will be nothing other than the Empire of the Antichrist”. Revolution will never be the solution for humanity, for the simple fact that, by destroying in order to rebuild, it has the mandatory effect of repeating past mistakes, leading society to practices that have already proven to be wrong and the search for desperate solutions that, Naturally, they will result in a new immediate action, that is, a new revolution, causing a cycle of periodic destruction. The failure of Eurasianism arises precisely from its imposing vision of tradition, not something that flourishes from the union between individuals, but radiating from “enlightened” minds capable of defining the paths that humanity, even if compulsorily, must follow to reach the plane of utopian perfection, I would dare to call them blind guides , who believe they know the path to their “ Bifrost ” imaginary. Alexander Dugin, despite being considered by many as a conservative, is a revolutionary who believes there is a preordained solution for the world, centralizing in his motherland, coincidentally, the salvation of humanity, not far from the socialist and fascist dictators who preceded. No matter how much someone defends a line that embraces conservative guidelines, in the case of the Eurasianist thinker, the preservation of the traditions of what he considers his people, there is no way to reconcile the idea of ​​revolution and conservatism, as evolution depends on a historical basis, therefore, power It would be admitted that the ideal is to build using the foundation achieved by our ancestors and correcting any mistakes they made, the structure must follow the natural path. The revolution, on the other hand, rejects the legacy as a foundation, creating a hypothesis and forcing its existence, even if incompatible with reality and ignoring the flaws or giving them a random appearance, hence Dugin's reason for asserting that Bolshevik socialism and fascism went wrong due to some points that can be corrected, ignoring that, by subjugating the world to the Eurasian empire, it will be transforming its dream into a nightmare for all humanity, except for the few tyrants who will inhabit the imperial palace. There is no denying that the Eurasian advance is only the harbinger of a war, which will take place in a bellicose way or not, however, it is natural that the three global elites they would converge in search of power, but they would face each other for it when they believed that their hand was close enough, or even, realizing the weakness of the other aspirants to the “throne of the world”. All three aspects will seek to subjugate or annihilate the others to occupy their long-awaited leadership position, there will necessarily be confrontation, even if it is punctual and reduced, but it is a fact that there is no place for a condominium between tyrants , thus explaining the motive of Nazis and Bolshevik socialists, despite species of the same genus , have faced each other. To assume that revolutionary Eurasianism will bring a greater good or free humanity from other wounds that compete with it for power is to be too naive to realize that the Eurasian elite will not promote harmony between the culture of a Eurasian empire, which will bring light to the world, and the one that defines as the Altlantis Empire, which translates into the West that has the individual at its core. It is clear that Eurasianism preaches the destruction of culture, therefore, of the Western people, there is no sense in a euphoric reaction to the advance of dictator Vladimir Putin. Having pointed out how harmful the wind that seems to come from the Ural Mountains is, it is essential to analyze the others involved in the theater of events, but not before observing Russia's Eurasian partner and supposed brother, a nation that has in power a group that manages to show its abysmal face without the slightest shyness, the avowedly communist China, which maintains concentration camps, affectionately called re-education camps, as well as constantly threatening the sovereignty of Taiwan, an affront still coarser, given the relationship between the two. Different relationship between Russia and Ukraine, countries that can be called brothers given their historical origin, I would dare to say that Taiwan it is not a sister country to China, precisely because it is a fragmented part in which the nationalist government removed from power by the infamous cultural revolution took refuge and created a kind of rebellious territory of the communist continental mass. China itself is not a nation of one people, being the result of the annexation of different ethnicities. Not limited to the much coveted island, the great tiger has plans to expansion which include the South Sea and influence in several countries, it would not be absurd to believe that the sovereignty of all Indochina nations would be at risk, due to Beijing's ambitions. The similarities between the vision of the Russian and Chinese governments seem striking, and they are, so it is important to stop looking at those who run these countries and look at the mind behind Eurasianism, Alexander Dugin. Eurasian expansionist behavior is what led Olavo de Carvalho to consider him as one of the three global elites. The issue of Ukraine involves another globalist elite, which is called the New World Order, much more defragmented, this aspect is not easily identifiable, as it is not limited to one ethnic group, permeating the so-called free world with greater ease but seeking to be present everywhere. Subtle as a viper, the New World Order is not an association of people who simply conspire for power, but all those who find themselves in its radiation zone, so that a small group can serve the nerve center without having the conscience of its existence or even sincerely believing that it is a conspiracy theory. The use of such jargon as a repellent of arguments is curious, although most of such conclusions have been confirmed over time, we can mention the São Paulo Forum, a daydream that proved to be real, now we have Eurasianism exposed and, honestly , it is difficult to believe that anyone is still capable of doubting the existence of the New World Order. For the most skeptics and hypocrites, it is enough to analyze the recent episode of the pandemic, in which words such as “new normal”, “denier” and “genocidal” were orchestratedly used by the main media, as if inspiration struck everyone in the same way and at the same time, a kind of mental rapture, a collective awakening, which is nothing more than the repetition of a central command, even if it is not known by the propagandist of the expressions coined by the controlling elite. For the most skeptics and hypocrites, it is enough to analyze the recent episode of the pandemic, in which words such as “new normal”, “denier” and “genocidal” were orchestratedly used by the main media, as if inspiration struck everyone in the same way and at the same time, a kind of mental rapture, a collective awakening, which is nothing more than the repetition of a central command, even if it is not known by the propagandist of the expressions coined by the controlling elite. There is no denying that the mainstream media and public authorities seem to act in complete harmony, following a uniform line that does not seem to be a consequence of chance. However, the so-called progressive elite, the term liberal also becomes inadequate, the correct term being libertine, has used its influence to impose its agendas in a despotic and, at times, exacerbated way. They turn laws into macabre instruments to distort reality and the coercive power of courts so that individuals abnegate their nature as a symbol of submission to the powerful. It forces nurses to renounce their existence and advertise themselves as enlightened beings with a monopoly on virtues, and can even confiscate or confer merit on those who prostrate themselves and assume irrational allegiance. This globalist elite is represented in governments by so-called progressive politicians, citing its main figures we have the decrepit Joe Biden, the pitiful Emmanuel Macron, cowering tyrant Justin Trudeau, the demoralized Boris Johnson and the inexpressive Olaf Scholz, replacement for the far from missed Angela Merkel, as well as many others. Noting that Canada should not be included in the list, but the authoritarian, disingenuous and cowardly actions of its ruler made him stand out on the list, since such a disgusting stance reflects the modus operandi of the New World Order, always alternating cowardice and lies and abuse. Hoisting the most diverse flags, permeating various fissures and providing a veneer of kindness, this globalist elite intends to carry out its revolution through the degradation of culture and the imposition of ideas capable of subjugating the individual to niche collectivism, contemporary soviets, the so-called identity agendas. It is important to highlight that the mainstream media, BigTech and large corporations metacapitalists are part of the New World Order, maintaining an orchestrated narrative to deceive people through a network of disinformation that is spread unilaterally, a monologue , competing with the control of information, there is a tangle in which identity groups receive incentives from large corporations or state-owned companies, as well as counting on the “sympathy” of the judiciary, which is also part of the system. The New World Order is a tangle that is intentionally camouflaged, which is why it is so dangerous, and can become unite with other forces , or even subdivide  in the search for control. The great difficulty in perceiving the actions of this global elite is precisely the fact that its revolution is fragmented and silent, at least until it is too late, not revealing itself to the world until it has enough power to supplant its possible opponents. Similar to what the São Paulo Forum did. A group capable of infiltrating power, taking the reins of the largest international organization and the largest military force, which remains pseudo-anonymous, given that only those who don't want to see can deny the evident promiscuous relationship between politicians, the press and an entire oligarchic network that supports the most diverse organizations, is, without a doubt, the most dangerous creature of all. The tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party , of “president for life” Vladimir Putin and many others, but when it comes to a Canadian ruler , which holds back with the approval of the judiciary, a euphemism for robbery, donations for a peaceful demonstration and adopts many other measures without being labeled a tyrant, we can also mention the case of the government of land of kangaroos, which does not receive the same treatment as the Chinese for keeping people in isolation camps, we can see how strong the New World Order is. Among the three global elites, this was the one that benefited the most, dealing with the escalation of power, the Covid-19 pandemic, carrying out numerous successful social control tests and the reins of a new faith that they call science, dealing with any scientist who dares to stand up like a criminal conspirator worthy of ostracism, we almost watched doctors and researchers being burned in the public square for questioning such volatile science. I have no doubt that many would applaud such Dantesque spectacles. They took the opportunity to create an open persecution of those who resisted submitting to the excesses, just as German National Socialism had done with the Jews at the beginning, the New World Order, openly, treated any individual who refused to be a guinea pig as a human being. abominable deserving of any evil. We arrive at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a union of countries that forms the largest military force on the planet, once created to prevent an advance by the extinct Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, this alliance remains as the armed wing of Western leaders and, in fact, it has acted in an expansionist way when it comes to attracting new members. A parenthesis to counter the theory that the end of the USSR, and consequently the resolution of the Warsaw Pact, should result in the natural extinction of NATO, in principle this should be the reading, however, admitting that communism fell with the Berlin Wall is be too naive, just note that Russia still maintains great influence , perhaps more than that, over a large part of the former Soviet republics and, like China, at least dubious relations with other socialist countries  around the world. It would not make sense to dissolve NATO if there are still signs of a threat from what is “remaining” of socialism, or to put it bluntly, the alliance makes sense given the existence of the Eurasian expansionist project and Islam. Having a defense alliance still seems to be relevant, on the other hand, it does not mean subverting its existence to become what it should fight, a military force of colossal strength used to spread the influence of the New World Order. NATO has become an army of titanic proportions, the real version of the mythical monster Typhon, which ends up serving the despots who carry out policies of degradation of society  As long as they take over human consciousness, there is nothing free here. In the struggle between the Eurasian Empire and the New World Order there are no heroes, the focus being a clash between two tyrannical forces, the first defending some values ​​but bringing about a revolution that intends to subject the world to a totalitarian center capable of causing destruction for reconstruction, even if it needs to trigger a third great war, and, on the other side, a nefarious association that seeks, through narratives and impositions of identity and other agendas, to constrain humanity into a state of submission irrational, shadows that shine a charming shine for fools who fight against a system and enlist in the ranks of the army of vassals of such a creature, identity activists, for example, seek a golden el for their imaginary human subspecies that will, inevitably, be your slaughterhouse. Speaking briefly about Ukraine, the current board for the games of the “lords of the world”, the people of that country, after being freed from the greatest plague that has ravaged humanity, at least believed they had freed themselves from socialism, but this plague is more mutant than his pet virus, found himself in a nation corroded by corruption, like any other that global elites get their hands on, having decided to get rid of its old politics, alternating between corrupt Western partners and puppets of “Mother Russia”. As an act of rejection of their former leaders and a cry for freedom, Ukrainians made a dangerous bet, they elected the comedian with no political experience Volodymyr Zelensky , a promise of a government free from the web of corruption that ruled the country. However, bets are risky actions and the country would pay dearly for the choice, not that the other options would lead to a destiny very different from the current one. In truth, the worst election for the Ukrainian people was the one that took place on the other side of the Atlantic, in which a tyrant with signs of senility have taken hold the most important seat at the geopolitical banquet and, on purpose or not, disastrous withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan was the dose of courage anyone needed to challenge Uncle Sam's much-feared army and, consequently, NATO. Making a comparison, it would be like a lion showing itself weak in the face of other predators, everyone in its pride would be in check, in this case, the President of the United States of America is accompanied, in his constant demonstration of weakness and incapacity, by the other leaders of your gang. The increasingly fragile figures of the political masters of the New World Order, sneaky and cowardly, like those already mentioned, give them a falsely docile aura but incapable of brandishing a sword and leading their people into battle. These “weaklings” who govern the West, undermine their passivity by considering it a virtue that must be instilled in people's minds, have created a generation of sheep so fragile that they cannot bear the truth and consider as criminals those who dare to oppose them in a debate, a pathetic horde that threatens their enemies but screams when faced with venomless insects. This makes them dependent on the powerful, who in times of pandemic made it clear that they did not dirty their delicate hands, but did not shy away from unleashing their packs, or even their packs, against those who oppose their desires. Their intentional fragility is an example of the culture they intend to establish, labeling those who are not reduced to a pile of toxic cells or terms that have an air of repulsion. Virility has become abject and honor dispensable, moral corruption has turned Western civilization into a bunch of toothless predators, incapable of wielding a weapon, wanting others to defend them, so that their sensitivity will not be shaken. They call for socialist ideals without being aware that the red paint on that flag is made of innocent blood spilled. The Ukrainian President, in turn, is the result of this society eaten away by a euphoric vision of a colorful world, whose global constitution is music Imagine de Jonh Lennon.Unfortunately, the world was not made of weak and fiberless men, our civilization was not forged by cowards, as one of the greatest Brazilian intellectuals would say “jelly men” . Still, Volodymyr Zelensky, in a lapse of courage or madness, no matter what, having received Joe Biden's offer to leave his homeland leaving his peers to be crushed by the Russian army, had the dignity to decline the invitation of a coward and behave like a man. He proved to be more valuable than the masters of the New World Order, who deceived his country by pretending that they would fight for his people while using his land to confront the Eurasian Empire, as well as a respectable opponent to Russian expansionism. Responding to the head of the largest armed force in the world with the following sentence, “I need ammunition, not a ride” , the President of Ukraine exposed the cowardice of the New World Order and left his status as easy prey so that, even though he knew he was at a total disadvantage, he faced the opportunistic predator and stated that the cowardly lion of the West is just an exploitative being who pretends to defend his gang but abandons its own at the first sign of danger. The weakened being who seemed defenseless found the courage to fight for his country, without the protection of NATO's false prophets, at least for him, a great achievement. The conflict may have unmasked the intentions of the Eurasian elites and the New World Order, as well as asserting the split between the two, which is not a bad thing, since the Eurasians have declaredly become a force that will oppose the the identity, environmental agendas and all those that were a control instrument for the NOM. On the other hand, Ukraine has the chance to free itself from both influences and, in the long run, become a free and strong nation. It is important to observe what the third global elite has done, Islamic expansionism has achieved great success and its peaceful penetration into Europe, perhaps realizing the fragility of Western culture. Currently we can consider the Latin American socialist narco-guerrilla as a fourth global elite, since it has already achieved a certain autonomy in relation to the New World Order, but explaining in detail what this aspect would be will be a task to come. It is important to understand that our country is still unable to deal with such a disease, so that it is not capable of cleaning up its own room and, therefore, trying to take on a relevant role in the fight between two faces of the hand, Eurasians and NWO, who pretend to be representatives of the West and East, when they are tyrants, would be too harmful for us. Brazil was against  Russia's actions, but had the wisdom to keep our combat boots out of this mud. Returning to Eastern Europe, it remains to be hoped that Ukraine will truly see itself free from both sides, not submitting to Eurasian intentions and progressive agendas that corrode everything they touch, as they saw that disarming was a mistake and entrusting their protection to someone else ended up costing him too much. The war will bring different narratives, but a revolution, whatever it may be, will not bring the solution, as its ideal of the future lies in the history of a people, it is not appropriate to adopt the crazy ideas of a recycled czar or, even worse, of relativists libertines and weak of character. The Ukrainian people will need to build their future based on their experiences, however painful. There were so many who, abandoned by the cowards of the West, had the courage to take up arms to face a much stronger army, that, with the courage of such heroes, that country could create its true independence, without needing an easy solution or the false promise. Humanity deserves, and needs to fight for, freedom, but it will not come through the hands of madmen, tyrants, fakers or comedians, it will come through the actions of every free man who understands that there is no imaginary solution and that each freedom achieved is a victory that must be celebrated and each totalitarian advance must be resisted wisely, that a people morally strengthened  is stronger than an army of degraded people. Global elites will still cause a lot of suffering, but every time tyrants arise, history will give birth to as many heroes as necessary, we can never lose faith. “From the fair and hard Pedro is born the mild one, (See nature's confusion!) Remiss, and without any care, Fernando, Whom the whole Kingdom put in a lot of trouble: Who, when the Castilian came devastating The defenseless lands, was close to destroy the Kingdom completely; That a weak King makes strong people weak.” Luís Vaz de Camões – Os Lusíada, Canto III Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 06 February 2022 edition - ISSN 2764-3867

On December 14th, we were not taken by surprise when we learned of the arrest of retired general Walter de Souza Braga Netto. Four-star general, former national secretary of Institutional Relations of the Liberal Party, former federal intervenor in public security in Rio de Janeiro, former minister of the Civil House, former minister of Defense in the Bolsonaro government and former candidate for vice-president. president on Bolsonaro's ticket. Unfortunately, few things have surprised us recently. What would have motivated the arrest? Supposedly, Braga Netto would have been one of the masterminds of the coup attempt on the fateful January 8, 2023, in Brasília. In this way, the reserve soldier — who did not command any troops — would be considered the intellectual mentor of a coup that, in practice, did not happen for several reasons. The main beneficiary of the success of the “intentona” — Bolsonaro — did not want it to come to fruition, according to statements taken by the Federal Police. Furthermore, participants in the movement would not have been able to get taxis to travel around Brasília. A large part of the crowd that gathered in front of public buildings and could be used as a "driving force" for the coup entered, in good faith, on buses "invited" by the military itself (in the service of the government), and was subsequently arrested . From the State's point of view, Braga Netto was arrested for planning preparatory acts for a revolt that attacked the democratic rule of law. We do not want to go into the merits of the issue, discussing whether the arrest was morally or legally correct, let us leave this thorny task to Brazil in the future. As we read on social media, never in the history of Brazil had a four-star general been arrested. But has a soldier of such high rank never been arrested in this tropical Republic? It was not a general, but an admiral with a glorious record of service to Brazil, who was also arrested. Who? Admiral Custódio de Mello. Why? For participating in a revolt that attacked the democratic rule of law. Do we have a historical precedent here? It will be? Custódio José de Mello was born in Salvador, Bahia, on December 9, 1840. Son of João Custódio de Mello and Rita de Mello, he became an aspiring midshipman on March 1, 1856. From a young age, he demonstrated great aptitude for a naval career, excelling in his studies and in various missions assigned to him. During his career, Custódio de Mello participated in important naval missions, being quickly promoted for his merits. In 1858, he was appointed midshipman and, already as first lieutenant, he played an active role in the Paraguayan War (1864-1870), standing out in several naval battles. His performances brought him recognition and promotions, reaching the rank of frigate captain in 1874. After the Proclamation of the Republic and with the resignation of Marshal Deodoro da Fonseca, Custódio de Mello was appointed Minister of the Navy on November 23, 1891, on the first day of Floriano Peixoto's government. He implemented several reforms and modernizations in the Navy, bringing it into line with international standards at the time. He is best remembered for his participation in the Armada Revolts, two naval rebellions in the early years of the Republic. Custódio de Mello, promoted to rear admiral in the government of Deodoro da Fonseca, initially being a supporter of the government, ended up supporting the rebels and participated in the first rebellion. The roots of the first Armada Revolt can be traced back to November 1891, when Marshal Deodoro da Fonseca, Brazil's first president, closed the National Congress after failing to negotiate with the benches of São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Minas Gerais, states coffee producers. Led by Rear Admiral Custódio de Mello, Navy units rose up and threatened to bomb Rio de Janeiro. Deodoro resigned on November 23, 1891, and vice-president Floriano Peixoto assumed the presidency, but did not call presidential elections, as provided for in the Constitution, being accused of illegally occupying the presidency. Thus, Custódio de Mello rebelled alongside his peers to defend the democratic rule of law. In 1892, a group of 13 general officers released a manifesto demanding that elections be called. President Floriano Peixoto declared a state of siege and ordered the leaders arrested. On September 6, 1893, Custódio de Mello led another rebellion, starting the first Armada Revolt in Guanabara Bay. The revolt included intense fighting, such as the bombing of Rio de Janeiro forts and clashes in Niterói and Ilha do Governador. In December 1893, Custódio de Mello tried to join the federalists in the south of the country, but faced significant defeats. The São José Fortress was destroyed, and the rebels, with little ammunition and food, were defeated. The capital of the state of Rio de Janeiro was transferred to Petrópolis due to the bombings. The federal government acquired warships to confront the rebels, and with the support of the Army and the São Paulo Republican Party, the Armada Revolt was put down in March 1894. The rebels took refuge in Portuguese ships, ending the revolt. The Federalist Revolution continued in the south, where Custódio de Mello joined forces with Gumercindo Saraiva. They took the city of Lapa, but government troops continued to advance. On April 16, 1894, the battleship Aquidabã was torpedoed. Custódio de Mello tried to disembark in Rio Grande, but was defeated, taking refuge in Argentina. As we know, when you want to analyze historical events, there is nothing better than consulting the primary sources, that is, reading the narrative first hand, directly from the pens of those who participated in it. Well, let's read what Custódio de Melo had to say about the revolt he led. The text follows in its original wording: “In the manifesto that I addressed to the Nation I allege the unconstitutional conduct of the Vice-President of the Republic and his anti-patriotic and bloodthirsty policy in the States, mainly in Rio Grande do Sul. All ships and naval forces from this port are they placed it alongside the Constitution, which I defend. The only fraction of these forces that had hesitated, the fortress of Vilegaignon has just informed me that it has decided not to harass me and has declared it as such at the armada's headquarters. The entire population of the Federal Capital is in favor of our cause, which is the national cause. The land garrison itself, which, out of class spirit, seems to support the Vice-President, is tacitly divided, and only those who do not have an exact knowledge of the spirit of the ruling class in the national navy and of patriotic traditions, can doubt that their ideal conduct in the face of the violated Constitution. Your resolution to imitate the noble and patriotic resolution of the fortress of Villegaignon will take away from the Vice-President of the Republic the last pretext to continue to remain illegally in the government of the Nation. Under these conditions, I decided to invite you to speak out between the Constitution and its violator, between the continued bloodshed of brothers and the pacification of the Brazilian family, reiterating here the declaration I made in my manifesto that I do not want power . I am waiting until this afternoon for your resolution to serve as my government.” (Custodio José de Mello, Gazeta de Notícias – September 8, 1893). The Armada Revolt ended with the death of Saldanha da Gama in June 1895. Floriano Peixoto governed until November 1894, being succeeded by Prudente de Morais, the first civilian president of Brazil. Decree No. 310, of October 1895, amnestied those involved in the revolutionary movements, allowing Custódio de Mello to return to Brazil. He arrived in Rio de Janeiro in November 1895. However, this was not yet the definitive solution to Custódio de Mello's problems. During Campos Salles' government, the rear admiral was assigned to take on a military commission in the state of Amazonas. This order, coming from the head of the Armed Forces, could not be disobeyed. However, these were not Custódio's plans. Upon his refusal, his arrest was ordered, and he was taken to Ilha das Cobras (RJ). Although he remained in prison for a short time, his refusal to obey an order from the legally elected president did not go unpunished. So we had a rear admiral arrested in our story. Ah the historical precedents! Custódio José de Mello is remembered as a dedicated military man and a man of principle, who fought for what he believed to be the best for Brazil, even if his actions led to direct confrontations with the government. His trajectory illustrates the tensions and challenges faced by the young Brazilian Republic in its search for stability and legitimacy. The trajectories of the two soldiers, Custódio de Mello and Braga Netto, are marked by good services provided to the nation, but they separate due to the reasons for their arrests. Subject to due proportions and events, the actions of one are under the example of the other. Braga is under Custódio, however, while the first was arrested for his actions (refusing a legal and direct order from his superior), the second was arrested for what he supposedly intended to do (but never actually accomplished). In both cases, they sought to defend, not undermine, the democratic rule of law. Here we have in front of us a Brazil of stories worthy of a Salvador Dalí painting: surreal stories. “Freedom is never more than a generation away from extinction. We do not transmit it to our children through blood. We must fight for it, protect it and hand it over to them to do the same.” (Ronald Reagan, 40th president of the United States). Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 49 – December 2024 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

The saddest of prisons The slave chained and surrounded by bars is much freer than the one who is imprisoned by his own conscience. Individuals with imprisoned minds find themselves reduced to a subspecies, a being more worthy of pity than contempt. The logic behind slavery is servitude, therefore, no one will have a vassal for whom they do not envision a mission, the one who serves must be useful, even if they do not know the end of their miserable existence. Those enlisted by the legions of so-called minorities, march blindly and obediently towards the abyss, guided by despots or other blind people. The minority trap is a substitute for the one coined by Karl Marx that culminated the disaster called socialism, since those defined as proletarians at the time, workers in general, for the most part, stopped believing in the lying seduction of the revolutionaries, they became necessary to captivate other masses to sustain the sick power plans. The simple formula of pointing out one group as responsible for the misfortune of another was what brought revolutionary forces to power at the beginning of the 20th century, Bolshevik socialism in the, not at all nostalgic, Soviet Union, German national socialism, as well as fascism. Italian, everyone who spread misfortune around the world, targeted a group that should be sacrificed so that their revolution could lead humanity to salvation, which in fact only existed in the speeches of their leaders. The idea that the State, always totalitarian, would be the only means capable of elevating society to better levels, in some cases, even promising a utopian existence without the State itself, was the fuel for abject beings to take control of nations. and covered the earth with human blood. With the colossal failure of such regimes and the considerable improvement in the living conditions of workers in general, it became imperative for revolutionaries to enlist other masses for their uprising in search of power. Minorities, some of them artificially created, quickly began to appear as political capital desired by despots, with the emergence of segments capable of co-opting unwary, ignorant or greedy victims. They did not abandon the proletariat, maintaining their union structure to influence and try to control such individuals, however, it was essential to gather even more troops to bleed in the name of their messianic dementia, since the essence of such sociopathy is to believe oneself as the one who has the mission of guiding others, ignoring that the only path they are capable of taking is that of destruction. It is worth noting that the leaders of the so-called minorities are beings who lead groups in the service of revolutionary desires, like their unionist counterparts. The insatiable hunger for power is capable of blinding its creators in such a way that they truly believe that their ideology justifies any sacrifices, including those of the most innocent beings , since they have lost their ability to see reality, and, at times, become they believe they are powerful enough to shape it as they please. Capturing legions of vassals is a complex task, which is why so-called social engineering was created, allowing the most diverse groups to be enticed, albeit unconsciously, to serve in the ranks of revolutionary forces. The selection will admit as many as are necessary for the spurious purposes of the revolution, whether they are criminals, rejected, insecure or even deluded by a narrative of victimization, anyone who can be useful to the desires of abject leaders will be welcomed, regardless of whether the future holds for them the discard, they are called useful idiots. In the desire to recruit personnel, branches are created so that different groups can be reached, fomenting hatred between people, to, through segregation, subdivide the revolutionary army into regiments, battalions, companies and platoons, the well-known teaching divide and conquer (“Divide et impera” or “Divide et Vinces”, coined by Emperor Julius Caesar)”. Everyone going their own way, apparently uncoordinated, towards the abyss. Class or minority leaders are responsible for leading their flocks according to the wishes of their superiors, coordinating the mass in favor of those who once herded them. They believe they can manage their lives, but they serve as soviets to legitimize an artificial representation with no relevance beyond joining the ranks of the enslaved horde. The subservience that revolutionary groups have with the highest caste is increasingly clear, especially when observing the largest corporations allied with the so-called minority agendas. Since the expression useful idiot was mentioned, a being that blindly serves the worst intentions, therefore, they are even more harmful than if they were useless, it is impossible not to mention the group that best symbolizes subservient idiocy, the self-styled Antifas (Antifascists). The tragedy lies in the fact that they do not even recognize the force behind their actions, being a group guided by the parameters, albeit controversial, of the Tolerance Paradox theory. Firstly, it is necessary to identify what fascism would be, to understand what type of force Antifa would be opposing, given that the conceptualization of fascism places it as a totalitarian, single-party regime, capable of repressing individual and economic freedoms for collectivist satisfaction, with revolution at its core. “Commonly, fascism is considered part of the extreme right, mainly due to its notable opposition to socialism. Fascist experiments enjoyed broad support from bankers and industrialists , both in Italy and Germany. Fascism, however, was also opposed to liberalism, especially in defending the strong State and mass interests to the detriment of individual interests. According to Norberto Bobbio, the divergences between Italian fascism and German fascism appear when it is noted that the first had a revolutionary and radical left-wing character, while the second was essentially reactionary and radical right-wing ”. There is a great discussion about the political spectrum of fascism, even in the text above Italian fascism is considered revolutionary and German national socialism is considered radical right-wing. Explaining that National Socialism belongs to the left spectrum is quite simple, this topic has already been explored and overcome, making it clear that I consider Nazism to be nothing more than a branch of socialism. Fascism, in turn, being a totalitarian and revolutionary State, a priori, also finds rest on the spectrum of the left, which cannot be dismissed under the childish allegation of banker and industrialist support for the regime, simply by observing the case of the left current, who lives a more than stable relationship like the elite. It is no coincidence that the richest man in Brazil participated and sponsored an event held recently outside the country to promote ideas from the left, self-styled progressive, including the presence of magistrates who threw their impartiality into the mud when one of them called the elected Head of State directly by the enemy people, democracy proclaimed itself and divided the arena by a politician elected by a party that is part of the Socialist International, which has currently migrated to the Brazilian Socialist Party. Antifa will try to argue that it fights against the so-called neo-fascism, which is nothing more than a narrative created to place conservatives as the natural heirs of fascism, even though conservative thought is manifestly contrary to the revolution, especially with regard to the totalitarian State, the monopartisan and government intervention in religion, individual freedom and culture. In practice, the so-called Antifa is serving the desires closest to fascism when it tries to silence opposing voices, in the same way that those who claim to fight against a dominant elite, prostrate themselves in service to those who represent the will of the elites, as in the case of the progressives and their metacapitalist sponsors. It seems unbelievable that an individual, without being affected by some serious mental illness, can voluntarily join a movement that fights precisely what it is, but such a dilemma is easily overcome when we observe that there is a resignification of what we have, the ill-fated social engineering, to do makes the fool assume that he is fighting real fascists by attacking elderly women with Brazilian flags while subjecting themselves to territorial control by organized crime or considering it natural for a politician to claim that a mob “ bothering ” relatives of politicians is a democratic action. Tragic to see people joining the Antifa movement, with bizarre sayings like “anti-fascist teachers” or “anti-fascist police”, without knowing what they are opposing, being true hostages of their false leaders, who, obviously, had an idea of ​​how to benefit from it. , and they did so, even though they knew they were taking advantage of their peers. These puppets, controlled by the leaders of self-styled anti-fascist movements, join the movement because they are led by collective thought, since they belong to a group and fear being rejected in the event of an insurrection, becoming slaves of their own will, since the Fear of ostracism in a community that they believe has welcomed them is enough to swear allegiance. A North Korean does not know what awaits him beyond the borders and therefore may end up accepting to submit to that country's nefarious regime. As for the leaders, they are nothing to be pitied, they are parasitic beings who pose as merchants of the group's consciousness who are capable of maneuvering, taking political advantage of their flocks. The despotism of such elements makes them just like or worse than the elite they serve, a kind of captains of the bush, in the worst sense of the word, they organize their tribes to conquer a place in the shadow of the white towers, participating in the banquet in exchange for the task of dealing with the mindless mass. Other movements such as the so-called anti-racist, feminist and gay activism, which is called LGBT to bring together more groups, use different rhetoric to capture their members, are the so-called identity agendas, in which they observe a niche of people with common characteristics, nurture in individuals a weakening and encourages their false union to fight an executioner, even if imaginary. No one denies that racism exists, but there are points that must be made about such an abject practice. The first point is that not restricting yourself to a certain race, of course the term race is inappropriate, but it makes the issue easier to understand. Any race can be the target of such practice, therefore, protection must extend in all directions, not allowing an individual to cause harm to others solely through hatred towards what they consider to be a different race, in other words, due to would treat attacks against different races with equal rejection, therefore, it is equally abject to pass over white people for job vacancies based on their skin color, as a retail chain in Brazil did. Many claim that affirmative actions seek to repair a historical debt, which is a lie, since this debt occurred at one time and there is no sense attributing it to race, given that a large part of the process of slavery was promoted by black people, the sick fallacy of historical debt, if taken seriously, should be faced by all civilizational advancement. That the ancient civilizations that used slave labor should compensate the descendants of those they exploited, still without any proof of relationship. The first fallacy of historical debt is to ignore that slavery occurred regardless of skin color, including that imposed in Brazil, since Europeans bought individuals from black people who, for different reasons, were already deprived of their freedom. The racial issue is supervening on slavery, for this reason Zumbi dos Palmares made slaves , which does not make him a racist, however, in theory, he would place his descendants on the list of debtors, not creditors. This narrative does not identify the supposed relationship between debtor and creditor, attributing only a generic story to skin color, ignoring that not all black people who landed in Brazilian lands arrived on slave ships and not all Portuguese were plantation owners, many blacks and whites arrived in Brazil after the Golden Law, so their descendants did not participate in the historical moment that generated the supposed debt. Another misinformation is the so-called structural racism, which attributes to society and depersonalized organisms a kind of hatred towards a certain group of people to justify so-called affirmative policies, disregarding the individual action that actually exists and is reprehensible, and feeding a purposeful imbalance, which although it promises bringing balance, aims only to privilege individuals so that they attract more and more followers in search of their own benefit. There is nothing fair about identity quota policies, there is just a shameless purchase of support from those who benefit from them. Organizations that literally rely on racism do not fight to end it, as these are two sources of existence, which also applies to government bodies. Black Lives Matters, for example, takes advantage of a commotion to support itself, even in a luxurious way , as it did in the famous case of George Floyd, in which a black man was killed by a white police officer in the USA, however, the The idea that the crime was motivated by racism was planted in unsuspecting minds, as many do not know that both parties involved knew each other, so that the police officer's personal motivation is believed and not a case of racism . But for black activism it was necessary that the death was motivated by a hate crime, thus, others would be enlisted to act in their interests, given that they were taken by a bestial frenzy that prevented them from reasoning, in the same way as is done with the self-styled anti-fascists, the horde is fed with irrational hatred and a narrative is created for them to attack. It is not uncommon to make false statements that security forces in Brazil deliberately choose to kill black people, decontextualizing cases of death due to resistance against security forces. The very name of such crimes is purposely distorted to give the false impression that police action is illegitimate, but that is for another time. Feminist leaders follow the same modus operandi, presenting fallacies as unquestionable truths, among which the most common are that women receive lower pay for performing the same role, which is illegal in Brazil, or that only women are victims of domestic violence. Creating a distorted form of measurement to cover up their lies, the feminicide type was created for this, they fail to report that the number of men murdered due to domestic violence is greater than that of women, because, without such a specialized network, male deaths are placed in the “common grave”. It is easy to see that they use narratives to distort the reading when, for example, they point out percentages of men and women killed in their homes, disregarding absolute numbers. Using the study presented by the periodical, it seems disproportionate that 39.2% of women have been victims of homicide in their homes, but in the case of men, this percentage is 15.9%, however, what is not clearly stated is what percentage does this mean of the total, since 91.8% of homicides in general have men as victims and 8% women. A simple calculation leads to the conclusion that 15.5% of all murders are of men in their homes, while deaths of women in the same conditions reach 3.1%. They ignore a percentage of 15.5% of all homicides to overestimate 3.1%, just to justify the implementation of affirmative policies for a group that they intend to co-opt, therefore, they create an entire specialized system, such as police stations and courts to assess such cases. crimes, ensuring that there is a specific and dissociated collection of data, extracting 3.1% of the total and ignoring the 15.%%, in addition to giving such bodies the essential task of tackling such crimes, therefore, it exists precisely because greater efforts are needed to combat domestic violence. An unhealthy relationship is born between the existence of an institution and the evil that justifies its creation, thus, governmental organizations or not, which parasitize a certain group, make target individuals believe that it is necessary to maintain such beings in order to implement policies aimed at so-called identity minorities, resulting in a cycle of interdependence between the existence of the parasite and the narrative that feeds victimization. Both non-governmental organizations and public bodies can exploit such minorities, either as a way of existing, such as Black Lives Matters and DEAM, to direct certain policies in their own interest, such as quota cases, as well as to occupy thematic niches, as experts. empty. LGBT activism movements follow the same principles, as well as environmental, vegan and many others that can be used to captivate minds in favor of social control, they are nothing more than unions of identity minorities. Unions act in the same way, pretending to be class representatives, they recruit workers from a certain sector to, using their appeal, obtain political strength and make themselves necessary for their category, when in fact they parasitize it. Class leaders are equally sneaky, defending their own interests and making the groups that follow them believe they are represented, however, what happens is only the approximation of their directors with power and the distribution of crumbs to the great mass that believes he is part of a larger movement. In fact, this part ends up being true, many of the class leaders serve something bigger than what can be seen and only build a bridge, with a very expensive toll, between lords and vassals. We are faced with a paradox when there is a blatant clash between identity agendas, because, if it is not a blatant conflict, it will be solemnly ignored. So, only when one of the minorities is clearly overlooked by another will there be a clash between them. When feminists preach for more spaces for women to the detriment of men, the fact that such a position should make them defenders of enlistment, even if it is mandatory for women, but because it is something that is not convenient for them, in a covert way, they do not seek this “ right” for women. Some claim, lyingly, that they are against mandatory military conscription for everyone, including men, but they do not speak out against and openly defend totalitarian regimes. However, the silence of feminists when they watch men, self-declared women, take their place in sports and even sharing cells with inmates, seems shocking to us, but it is necessary to observe which masters the leaders serve, to understand that feminists are not willing to face their masters, therefore, they will remain silent in the face of any abuses that are in line with the ideas of their superiors. This is not a prerogative of feminist leaders, since black activism remained silent when a snack bar posted a poster prohibiting black people from entering the establishment in China, there was no considerable revolt against the fast food chain or the dictatorship other than complaints on social networks. LGBT activism, in turn, also behaves timidly when we refer to the Chinese dictatorship or the Islamic caliphate. The problem with identity minorities is that they use the so-called feeling of belonging to co-opt their members, but they need to divide themselves to meet the desires of members dispersed within the group, thus creating internal divisions that can, and will, be exploited by those capable of fit into the subdivision. It appears that as many subfactions will emerge as it is necessary to allocate new leaders, either so that they can occupy a space that can be explored or because they seek independence from their immediate superior, causing the split to give rise to their own minority. Because they are created based on narratives, identity minorities end up clashing with each other or presenting edges that deserve to be trimmed for the “proper functioning” of the web of power, and, as lies are not conducive to creating a plot, they end up because they do not fit together, making it naturally impossible to connect them without causing a shock. What is usually resolved by leaders simply diverting attention, as in cases where feminist and gay rights activist groups ignore the treatment of their supposed representatives in the Eastern world while blaming the West for using natural adjectives or personal pronouns of appropriately. The solution to the paradox of minorities is to free oneself from the identity fence and realize that humanity is not fragmented into identity groups guided by masters. Recognizing that the fiefdom is a prison and that ostracism does not mean a loss but rather the release of a corral in which the foreman prepares his slaves to serve as meat at the banquet of the true enemies. In truth, the hordes of followers will be dismissed like old pine cones once their energy has been drained, just as were all those who helped tyrants in their climb to power. When the sand castles collapse, despots will build new ones without caring about the buried ones. The useful idiot is an even more tragic being than the useless idiot, since serving evil is a worse fate than serving no purpose at all. “The success of tyrants lies in the happiness of slaves in their own slavery.” Thucyds, Greek Historian, 420 BC Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 09 – April 2022 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

The inconvenient truth There is no way to ignore a tragedy that occurred in the last century, the Holocaust, but it would be simple to say that the National Socialist German Workers' Party  He deceived the people to the point of carrying out the massacre without being noticed. In reality, the German people openly defended the extermination of Jews, either through Nazi propaganda or, even worse, because they believed that jews deserved such a fate. When we do such an analysis, observing the current context, we can assume that German citizens were servile or cruel enough to applaud people being exterminated because of their ethnicity, or even because of their faith. Some credit such atrocity to an isolated episode in human history, however, if we observe the Four Plagues Campaign  which was implemented in China, when the communist government caused birds to be exterminated due to propaganda that attributed food shortages to them. Let us reflect briefly to try to understand how bird defenders would have been treated at the time. They would probably be called deniers or promoters of disinformation by the party and probably killed or arrested. Reading an interview given by astrophysicist Mario Lívio , which we cannot adjective, given that our legal system guarantees subjective honor to the most abject of human beings, it is clear that the interviewee, associated with the periodical, completely inverts the relationship between those who silenced Galileo and those who are currently silent. The painful article disregards that Galileo, as well as those that the interviewee calls deniers, was forcibly prevented from defending what he believed, that is, in the context of the time Galileo was the denier, not those who silenced him, since they had the power of silencing a scientist who wants to present his thesis and confront hegemony. In fact, astrophysicist Mário Lívio acts as a defender of a “court of inquisition” that considers anyone who contradicts him crazy and unworthy of expressing his vision. We can remember the case of Father Giordano Bruno, who before Galileo had openly defended the heliocentrism theory, being burned in a public square on February 17, 1600, in the city of Rome. But when we talk about science, not about a group that considers itself to be the owner of scientific truth, we should disregard an individual who is capable of defending that scientists are forced to remain silent for the sake of science and still uses Galileo to justify his theory, therefore, it is imperative to quote part of the Geneva Declaration. “I will maintain the utmost respect for human life; I will not use my medical knowledge to violate human rights and civil liberties, even under threat.” We also invoke the Hippocratic Oath, which is sworn by doctors. “I will apply the regimes for the good of the patient according to my power and understanding, never to cause harm or harm to anyone. I will give no one for pleasure, neither deadly medicine nor advice that leads to loss. Likewise, I will not give any woman an abortive substance.” When you manage to convince people that the most appropriate thing is to silence those who present arguments contrary to what you want to implement, we are not facing a scientific construction, but just an association of tyrants willing to impose, even if irrationally, their will. under people, depriving them of information so that they cannot leave a kind of mental corral, imprisoning anyone who is considered inferior and exterminating anyone who tries to rise up against the wishes of such a group. A real hunt for witches is created, who must be silenced, imprisoned or even exterminated because they are dissonant voices. When thinking about Giordano Bruno, a reflection would be in order. Doctors who currently denounce what they consider a health risk could suffer the same fate as the priest, so that in the future their theories would be confirmed, leaving yet another dark chapter in the history of humanity. If the comparison with Nazism or any other totalitarian regime capable of exterminating anyone who dares to speak contrary to its views, even if abysmal, seems appalling, I quote an excerpt from the brilliant decision of the Judge of the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro Paulo Rangel. “Another person who knew well how to instill fear of enemies in the people was HITLER, who, through Nazi propaganda, instilled in the population a fear of Jews and gypsies. It was necessary to annihilate them to defend themselves.” The magistrate continues. “Hunger, war, the vision of plague as punishment, bringing as a counterpart the election of those guilty (Jews, lepers, foreigners, criminals), the hunt for sorcerers and witches (the hunt for the Salem Witches in the 1690s, today murderous children), all always in the name of a collective fear of the enemies chosen by the system of the time. Everything is always very well engineered, politically. Who is today's new enemy in the 21st Century? THE UNVACCINATED. They want to force people to get vaccinated and in the name of this kindness, they restrict public freedoms, arrest people on the streets, in squares, close beaches, establish lockdown. I never imagined I would see the abuse I saw.” It was left to the Mayor of the capital of Rio de Janeiro to try to disqualify the decision, using irony as a subterfuge to confuse people. “Sometimes I wonder how some people can accept that smoking is prohibited in the office, shopping mall, subway… and also accept that it is mandatory to wear seat belts! Do these people not feel restricted in their individual freedoms? Just to reflect.” We started to reflect on the following: people know that smoking in closed places causes physical discomfort to third parties, therefore, they consider such prohibitions normal, therefore, when smoking in such places, the individual knows that it bothers and harms third parties. This does not happen with the unvaccinated, since the vaccinated must be protected by vaccines. With regard to the use of seat belts, one could ask what harmful consequences the use of the belt can bring to the user, as well as why such a device, if it actually protects lives, is not required in collectives? Remembering that buses do not have airbags in the passenger seats. It would also be up to the Rio Chief Executive to explain how mass transport contributed to the, so important, social isolation. Are we facing a selective disease or a mutant science? Maybe in the samba circle the virus won't spread. The judge's decision was overturned by the Federal Supreme Court, which later, in a monocratic decision already revoked by the same speaker of the decision, establishes the exile or banishment in Brazil, something that is prohibited even for criminals in our Constitution ( art. 5º, XLVII, d ). We can imagine that perhaps a criminal in Nazi Germany would receive more humane treatment than a Jew, which seems to be the same concept applied to the unvaccinated. It seems that the biggest crime in a country taken by madness is to manifest oneself in a way that goes against the owners of power, or even just trying to live outside the reach of their baton. Once again the reader may believe that this is an exaggeration or a figure of speech, but just look at the Bill No. 5555 of 2020 , in which a Senator of the Republic proposes a sentence of up to 8 years for not submitting to vaccination, forcibly subjecting their children to the experiment, and to be even more senseless, the rule, if approved, will allow punishment with the same penalty for “ who, in any case, discourages vaccination.” Analyzing the proposal, we can conclude two alarming things, namely the legitimization of human hunting. The first point that causes great astonishment is the maximum penalty, which can be seen in crimes such as reduction to the analogous condition of slavery, human trafficking, constitution of private militia and attack on sovereignty. So that the unvaccinated would be treated as dangerous criminals. The second extremely worrying factor is when the project criminalizes those who discourage vaccination, because, at this point, the legislator tries to criminalize someone for their opinion, even if it is true. Just read to finish. “§ 1 - Anyone who creates, disseminates or propagates, by any means, false news about vaccines in the national immunization program or their effectiveness, or anyone who, in any way, discourages vaccination” incurs the same penalty. Note that he separates the part in which he deals with “fake news”, an extremely controversial term, from that which discourages vaccination, since, in the case at the end of the paragraph, someone is punished who disseminates true information, that is, by remaining silent under penalty of imprisonment for anyone who tells the inconvenient truth. The Senator, who presides over the infamous CPMI of fake news, seems to have a natural inclination to persecute dissonant voices, even though they are telling the truth, a real danger to freedom. This bill, once approved, will allow the open persecution of everyone who does not submit to vaccination, allowing the marking of the people with the seal of submission, called a health passport. Health professionals who see vaccines as a risk to their patients must remain silent, under penalty of imprisonment. Groups like the Doctors for Life , which has been exposed to unfounded attacks by the mainstream media and some crazy authorities, would be considered a type of criminal organization, for the simple fact that they alert people to a risk that they perceive as alarming. The so-called denialists, people who the powerful want to silence because they are unable to dismiss their arguments, will be treated as marginalized, although the marginalized are increasingly benefiting. It may be that the relaxation of conditions for criminals is so that the chains are aimed at the unvaccinated and denialists, the new Jews. The Province of Formosa in Argentina has been an example of what an authoritarian State can do to those who do not bow to totalitarian measures, but there is a curious case in Australia, in which a newspaper claims there are no concentration camps , but it cannot remove the excessive totalitarianism of the actions of agents in that country. “The woman states that the rules don’t make sense and the employee responds that they don’t need to make sense, since all places need to have rules and those are the ones there.” Honestly, I confess that I imagined the Australian employee wearing a uniform from Schutzstaffel , considering the argument he presented. But the brand of denialist will fall on the interlocutor of the henchman of the totalitarian elite. According to the newspaper, Australia does not distinguish between vaccinated or unvaccinated, keeping everyone in isolation for around fourteen days, but during this period the treatment is very close to that of a concentration camp. The practice of locking people up based on their opinion or what they believe has been reestablishing itself all over the world, just look at the treatment given by the Chinese Communist Party to those in re-education camps de Xinjiang . Such abuses have been normalized and the pandemic has undoubtedly contributed to accelerating the process of curtailing freedoms. Trying to silence doctors who warn of possible evil and even coercing people into being guinea pigs in an experiment, without presenting arguments that could convince them, but by the force of a State taken over by tyrants, should be an attitude considered strange or abominable, but the panic that was created by the pandemic, not by the number of deaths invoked incessantly in the media, but by the restrictions on freedoms imposed, measures that terrified citizens to the point of monitoring other citizens, even denouncing parties in family. Conditioning people to hand others over to tyrants becomes even easier when fear is instilled in their minds, leading them to collaborate with the system, no matter how bad it is something typical of totalitarian countries. A device also widely used was the purposeful creation of the so-called “new normal”, causing freedoms, including the feeling of freedom, to be suppressed in an accelerated way, sometimes gradually, plunging people into an emotional prison from which they wanted to escape. freedom at any price, reducing critical sense and forcing us to accept rules for being rules, even when they didn't make sense. Let's say that the Australian agent only translated into a few words what several governments put into practice. Once imprisoned, the citizen can give up something that is dear to him to be free, just look at how many prisoners confessed crimes they didn't commit . For this reason, the mental prison in which everyone found themselves weakened the morale of many who simply bowed to the tyrants because they were eager to regain their lost freedom. Therein lies the secret, such freedom should not be returned, as the central objective was to capture it and not health. Making a parenthesis, I remember an old cartoon that in Brazil was called Caverna do Dragão, based on the RPG Dungeons & Dragons (original name of the cartoon in English), the series portrays a group of young people who get involved in countless adventures trying to return home, not debating the message of the drawing, but the fact that they never achieve the much-desired return, since there is always an obstacle that is only noticed at the moment they are about to reach their goal. The name of the cartoon series is commonly associated with a place that is difficult to leave, that is, there will always be obstacles that make it difficult to leave. The citizen, assimilating the “new normal” that was imposed as just a term but resulted in several restrictions, hoped to free himself from this artificially created reality by submitting to the whims of the same tyrants who stole his freedom. Continuing on the “way back home”, accepted the masks without questioning what protection was given, remembering that many were done at home without any filters, being just a symbol of submission. He avoided human contact, stopping seeing his relatives and getting together, but used mass transport. They agreed to give up religious services and had their activities suspended, some lost jobs and others went bankrupt, in return, they watched the press describe themselves as essential, as if each person's livelihood was not essential. A mayor who was welding store doors was caught in a crowded football stadium in the capital of the neighboring state, the same destination where the Governor of his state was enjoying a pool and sun, but imposing restrictions on citizens. On the other hand, questioning vaccines rewards anyone with the title of crazy, even though a famous actor died after being infected by the virus after the second dose of the vaccine, as well as a well-known singer was diagnosed with the disease after the third dose . Vaccines were the hope, not scientific, but social, as they would free anyone who agreed to collaborate with the experiment, but, again, there were obstacles, so that those vaccinated could not leave the masks, continued to suffer restrictions and were subjected to the so-called dose of reinforcement, a third dose not foreseen at the beginning of the experiment, having accepted the constant change in the position of “science”, it is enough to see that at first the Government of the state of São Paulo refuses a third dose and, a few months later, it is already applying this booster dose. In Chile there is already talk of a fourth dose, however, in the USA the understanding is that a fourth dose should not yet be used, without knowing the results of the third in terms of immunization, in Israel, a country whose government seems to treat vaccination as a international dispute, worrying about being ahead of the others, the fourth dose becomes a reality, even though there is no data to justify it. “Science” among the powerful can be quite volatile, but anyone who dares to question it is considered a denialist and could soon be a dangerous criminal. The main question that surrounds the human mind is how people have bowed to so much tyranny, given the number of explicit contradictions that are deliberately ignored by most people, even the mixed of vaccines is being assimilated, even though some vaccines have different technologies, people have understood that one vaccine can be reinforced with another, thanks to studies carried out by people directly involved in the manufacture of vaccines, bringing information that it would be even more effective to mix vaccines. Recently, the Chamber of Deputies imposed the collection of health passport to employees, visitors and journalists, but did not require parliamentarians to be vaccinated, making it clear that this is a power relationship and not a health relationship. On the other side, the one that the mainstream media does not want to see and the entire elite needs to remain silent, are doctors and relatives of victims of the side effects or natural effects of vaccines, who seek to alert people so that they are aware of the adverse results of an experimental technology. According to some warnings, messenger mRNA vaccines would, in fact, gene therapy . The biggest question to be asked is precisely why they try to silence any statement that is dissonant, that is, if something is not said in accordance with the wishes of the “owners of science”, the voice that was raised must be silenced at all costs. The amazing thing is seeing people accept this naturally. I bring here an episode for readers to reflect on, which we can consider as yet another, at the very least, dubious interpretation on the part of those who wish to cover up any undesirable speech, even from the Director General of the World Health Organization. In the video, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus reportedly said the following, “Instead of what we are seeing, some countries are using them as booster doses to kill children ”, Twitter removed the video with subtitles claiming it violates the platform's rules. However, even more daring was a Yahoo Sports website that made a contortionist move to give its interpretation of the WHO Director's speech, tragicomic, but its crude version will be established as the undisputed truth in a few days. Trying to justify that an erroneous interpretation was given to the WHO Director's statement, the " checkers ” they make the amazing construction. “The WHO told AFP on December 23, 2021 that Adhanom hesitated on the first syllable of the English word “children”, “crianças” in Portuguese. According to the WHO, at the press conference on December 20th, “when [Adhanom] pronounced the word ‘children’, he hesitated on the first syllable, ‘chil’, and then it sounded like ‘cil / kil’”. “Then he uttered the same syllable immediately afterwards, and it belonged to ‘cil-children’. Any other interpretation other than this is 100% incorrect,” the organization added.” Note that they mention a screenshot from December 23, 2021, however, the original speech took place on December 20, the organization could have corrected what was said. At the time of his speech, the WHO Director was not reading a note, as at the beginning of the video. The supposed hesitation in the pronouncement is not seen in the video, as well as the pronunciation of the first syllable of children is very far from the word kill, which is surprising when the person who would have hesitated got his master's degree at the University of London and a Ph.D. at the University of Nottingham, which means he has good English pronunciation, which is noticeable in the rest of the video. To expose the adverse effects of vaccines, or gene therapies, and what is behind their early approval, there is nothing better than bringing in a professional in the field who is willing to face giants to defend life and warn about the risks people are facing. running. There is a clear prohibition, including on health professionals, regarding warnings against harmful effects of vaccines, whether desired or not. While supporters of the experiment are allowed to speak, censorship is imposed on those who oppose it. Therefore, it is important to know all the arguments, including those that are being silenced, so that the decision is the best possible. The Ômicron variant, which has low lethality index , became the justification for applying new restrictions, or even a fourth dose, which cannot be contested, even if Portugal have high vaccination coverage and increase the number of infected people. This strain became the obstacle to returning to normal, extending authoritarian practices, preventing those who bowed to tyrants from being able to leave the “dragon's cave”. They have not yet understood that there will be as many doses as they deem necessary to break the human spirit, that restrictions will be placed until the will is dominated, and that narratives have emerged to instill fear and despair in people, enslaving them. New restrictions, or the same ones with new accessories, will be imposed in several countries, the requirement for health passports and isolation measures will be put into practice, even though they have not prevented the expansion of previous strains and causing various losses. It seems that France's problem is not the Ômicron strain, but its President, Macron. On another spectrum, the “unquestionable owners of science” try to criminalize the Brazilian government for "threaten” disclose the names of those responsible for approving vaccines, it appears that the Advertising Principle , although carved into the Constitution, it became anti-scientific and denialist, having the same fate as parliamentary material immunity , the judiciary's trash can. In fact, not disclosing the names of the technicians would be omitting highly relevant information, for two reasons, since the person responsible for endorsing a product endorses its quality, therefore, the better the qualification of the professional in the eyes of the recipient of the product, more reliable would be the same. On the other hand, it allows you to assess whether the person responsible for approval has interests other than the common good that could bias their decision. There is no reason to hide in the shadows. For anyone who might accuse the Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania  of only bringing one side's version, the answer is simple, the other side's versions, even if of a purely emotional nature, are exposed throughout the mainstream media. A worrying case is that of Dr. Robert Malone , one of the inventors of mRNA technology who was treated as a liar by checking agencies, entities that deserve to be unmasked, as not being the inventor, in addition to disseminating false news on the subject. Such agencies fail to mention that he has been dealing with the issue since 1988, when gene therapies were not widespread. The scientist was persecuted and became the target of attacks for alerting risks of early therapy. “The researcher has more than thirty years of experience in the field of vaccines. He discovered RNA transfection and explained that while at the Salk Institute in San Diego in 1988, he invented mRNA vaccines. His research continued the following year at a pharmaceutical company called Vical, and between 1988 and 1989 Malone wrote patent disclosures for mRNA vaccines. After giving multiple warnings about the dangers posed by the RNA technology used in COVID-19 vaccines, Malone was removed from Wikipedia and temporarily removed from LinkedIn in July 2021.” Before it becomes criminalized to tell the truth, I think it has already happened, let me read Dr. Maria Emília Gadelha Serra's lecture, remembering that the professional is constantly attacked by the media and, in other times, she could be arrested or burned at the stake. We hope that such days will not return. Reflecting and seeking diverse information is extremely necessary these days, which is why they try to control who can speak and what is the truth. Let us fight and pray for better days. Text published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania Vol. I N.º 02 Vol. I No. 02 – December 2021 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

The inversion of reality as a progressive tool. A theological analysis The concept of “Natural Law”, that ray of light that spans the ages, connecting them intellectually with each other, albeit in a way that is both supernatural and transcendent, walks along the paths of what serves as the foundation for reality. When saying that “However massive and immense this world may be, its existence depends, at any moment, only on a single and very thin thread: the consciousness in which it appears”, Schopenhauer looks at the metaphysical root of all reality as something limited to the man's conscious senses. “Cogito, ergo sum”, said Descartes, not the traditional “therefore I am”, but the correct one: “therefore I am”. In the depths, paths that cross nowhere, because they understand, in the same way as Protagoras, that “Man is the measure of all things”. It is not surprising that every day, the manipulation of the sources of training and information of a mob that actually believes in these concepts, finds itself in an existential vacuum where its own life loses its reason for being in the face of a reality that they insist on. in deconstructing as a way of adapting to the reference status quo produced by those who pull the strings. “Natural Law”, a term widely used by C S Lewis to designate the powerful “collective unconscious” of humanity, what Chesterton called the “dictatorship of the dead”, what the Easterners call “tao”, is completely at odds with what which – obviously – defies the natural order of things. Note that the nomenclatures are not random. In an antagonistic position with the “Natural Order of Things” there is always a “New World Order”, and they continue to fight a battle since Eden for control of the human species and its resources. As Pascal said, “Nature has placed its truths, each in itself”. In other words, in a dangerously simplified way we can infer that “Natural Law” is the first representation of truth for humanity. And why is it like that? Simple: because we arrived here. “Natural Law” was established by the Creator. And his first value judgment determined the limits that would subsidize the other value judgments (and rights) that would be made by humanity. He said, “And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness” (Genesis 1:4). From this first assertion we have the first truth and also the first premise of the “Law”. This is what Krishina calls in Gitã “Spiritual Truth”. Its primary source: The Lord God of Israel. Already in Eden, the elements of the “Natural Order of Things” begin to be established, and its first manifestation from a civilizational point of view was called “Family”. The family as the embryo of humanity, along the lines established by Yahweh Adonai, is the first “Natural Law”, it is the starting point for the “Natural Order of Things”. The attack on the family is the attack on the truth. And the attack on truth is the attack on “Natural Law”, which in turn is the attack on civilization itself. That is why C S Lewis states that “Natural Law” is “the only possible source of all value judgments”, because it, in itself, is the representation of a single possible reality. When we reject a single value, he concludes, the others will be rejected in the same way. So what did we have in Eden, a priori? Two elements, one spiritual and one material. The first focused on the relationship between Adam – and then Eve – with God, the first relationship that man had since he was created. And the second spoke of Adam's relationship with his wife. In the “Natural Order of Things” we have these two relationships as the basis of a society that intends to subsist on its own. Faith and family are, therefore, the essential bases of what you want to move forward, of what you want to preserve. It was what God planned for the world, and what he preserved in all his Law (now the written one, not the natural one) that he gave directly to the Hebrews and later to all humanity until he revealed himself in the person of his Only Begotten Son and completed it. there. What progressivism wants is to create an inverted reflection of all this in a broken mirror that is in the hands of Satan, and sell this distorted image of creation as being the best of all worlds, using, for this, the weeds planted in the mind of humanity by anthropocentric fables developed by men since the fall, always along the same lines as the dialogue between Eve and the serpent, digresses, questions, plays with sophisms and fallacies, and in the end is convinced, in an anthropological and intellectual fraud that has been going on for millennia, moving men away from the truth, from the “Natural Law”, from the “Natural Order of Things”, and always throwing them, from time to time, into insane vortexes of wild revolutions woven in the obscurity of the shadows, where lies are disguised and adorned to appear as truths, benefits and advantages for those who believe in them. Progressivism needs, at all times, to create virtual worlds, caricatures of the truth, so that it can sow its seeds of destruction and chaos. Without lies there is no progressivism and vice versa. The only way to combat the deconstruction of a healthy society is to prevent those in power or in control of the media from manipulating truth/reality as they please, and this must always be done under two banners, the original ones: faith and family. The Truth says that “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are abominations to the Lord, both the one and the other” (Proverbs 17:15). For progressivism to exist, Solomon's statement must be annihilated, that is, the truth must be annihilated or, at least, inverted. Why does this happen? Because in a progressive world, all laws instituted by the Creator since Eden must be subverted in favor of values ​​that inevitably contradict any sphere of value that one wants to accept as legitimate, be it the Word of God, the “Natural Law”, the “ Spiritual Truth”, the “Tao” or “The Natural Order of Things”. What progressivism seeks is a kind of social self-destruction, a break with all divine parameters, which would lead humanity, if it – progressivism – won, to complete extinction. It is almost impossible not to admit a supernatural component in all this, that constant of the Creator's first value judgment. Or is it that when we read that He saw the light as good and separated it from the darkness, do we not realize that He is talking about even deeper things? It seems obvious. The Creator of the universe is the real expression of what He wants from us. When in Malachi 3:6 He says: “I, the Lord, do not change”, He means “Don't try to change me” or “Don't try to change my Words”, because it will be worse for you. And then He shows us the “Natural Order of Things”: creation itself. Caterpillars do not become butterflies until they have passed through the cocoon. That's it, or we'd never see butterflies. Progressives want to destroy the family, but they cannot explain how a world would be possible in fifty years if there were no more families, feminists took over society and no longer gave birth, and men stopped behaving like men. What the hell would be left? Therefore, we see that behind progressivism there is an evil influence inducing society – just like Eve – to challenge the “Natural Order of Things”, and thereby compromising its own existence. Faith and family. The biggest stones in the high heel shoes of those who cannot stand reality as a way of life. Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. I No. 09 – April 2022 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867

Nothing! It is very common for people at the end of the year to ask each other: What to expect from next year? The question reveals exactly the behavior they will have in the next cycle of opportunities, exactly, opportunities! Why yes, each cycle is actually the arrival of a new opportunity, and knowing this makes all the difference in relation to the mentality we will have in what many call “just another year”. A main idea in this text is to awaken an awareness of self-management, which will certainly make the new period one of attitude and not of waiting. An example of this was the emergence of this magazine in which I am honored to write. In the face of passive behavior in which many simply complained about the lack of a space where conservative content could be found. Our editor-in-chief and his team then decided to open this space, which, by the way, has been a small but important spark to ignite the hearts of those who share conservative values ​​with us. We understand that when we find a deficiency, lack or weakness, whether in people or institutions, it is time to take action towards resolving the problem. So, the ideal is not that we expect something from next year, but that we have the necessary protagonism, and that if not in our society, at least in our own lives. In the mission of being bearers of values ​​that give life to a more just and fraternal society, let us be like the sun, which even on cloudy days, rain or even a storm, it is there, above the circumstances waiting for an opportunity to manifest itself. . He will certainly not push the envelope for the storm to disperse, but he will calmly wait for the moment to offer all his content that, although people are focused on the storm, they have in him everything that is fundamental for life to continue on its course. . Another main idea in the text is that, if we expect something, we will have to receive what comes; We have no control over this, so we will be like victims of a greater force that will give us whatever comes... While we could make all this power act in our favor. For example: Opportunity is a very powerful force, but if it is not properly observed it can ruin us (if, for example, we miss an opportunity to cure a disease). In this sense, a new year is a year full of opportunities. In conclusion, I want to present the third and final idea: Come what may, powerfully and naturally, if we know how to position ourselves, we will reap the fruits that, if not harvested, could even become the reason for an accident, and all because instead of having a positive attitude towards what nature has given us, we wait for the fruit to come to our hands, like when it falls to the ground. Here is a bit of mythology in this text: The great traditions of the past always celebrated the new year because they understood the chance of great opportunities that would come and understood that as in the action of an immutable law, nature during spring would give them flowers , coming after the flowers, the fruits that would be in the summer, that is, they knew that they would harvest in the summer, in the next year, in the next cycle, everything they planted during the spring; Therefore, let us know that consciously or not, we will reap the fruits of the flowers that nature gave us in the summer in the spring. Therefore, with this lesson, the message is that for next year we must be aware of having more positive, more intelligent attitudes, better placed in the face of the great opportunities that will come to us, knowing that today we are reaping what we once sowed. Therefore, if we want a better future, let us start building that future now. That's why in the title of this text I say that it's better not to expect anything from next year, but rather that we offer next year our attitudes, our sacrifices, our efforts so that this year becomes, in the face of our actions, in the face of our work, Before our focus, before our intelligence, a better year, because if we don't do it, someone else will and we will reap the fruits that others have planted without us even knowing the character and intentions of those others. I invite everyone, then, to think about what actions we will take next year so that we do not receive what comes, but rather the result, the fruit! As a reaction to our actions so that we have a year with something to actually celebrate. Let us remember that whatever happened during this year 2024, was the result of actions many employed and others despised, but they were the fruits of actions!! If we are not satisfied, let us replace the actions that do not benefit us, with actions that benefit not only ourselves but also the entire society. A happy new cycle of opportunities for all of us! This in all aspects of our lives, in the fields, political, social, family, professional, in short, let us employ our best actions, making them a clear and concrete message to our creator, and believe me: He will hear us! I leave you with a text from the Holy Bible for reflection. "If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land" (2 Chronicles 7: 14) May God bless our journey!!! Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania   Vol. IV No. 49 – December 2024 Edition - ISSN 2764-3867