Kazakhs and Turks

Kazakh Bolivar

Why is there a discrepancy between Asians and democracy?

The word bourgeoisie in Asia is entirely inappropriate in the common sense of usage, as this word is used worldwide because the bourgeoisie got its name in London and Paris, and not in Nanjing or Dhaka. No one has ever thought about equality in a strictly class environment, especially with the elite. So it was in Egypt since the time of the Pharaohs, so it was everywhere where the landed aristocracy was noticed (the landed aristocracy was everywhere). For example, in Japan, the bourgeoisie was the most despicable class until the Meiji era. The aristocrats of Japan themselves raised their peddlers of nonentities for guidance so that they were motivated: «If these nonentities won in Europe, maybe we will be lucky» (in the same spirit, Kazakhs call children by the names of other peoples to deceive the spirits. Japanese and Kazakhs are very similar in pagan animism, and they copied the West fanatically because they copied some incomprehensible force). Before Japan, Europeans colonized all of Asia. Where did they get their power from? That’s what the frightened Japanese were interested in.

In Asia, everything was decided and decided by the elite – I ask everyone to remember this. Allied detachments, as opposed to some third forces, were considered partners. Another partnership is not possible. The strategic alliance extends only to blood ties through dynastic marriages (modern marriages of children of Kazakh officials and oligarchs are proof of this. We are Kazakhs, «yes, we are Scythians…", we wanted to sneeze at the modernization of Russians and Communists. Self-reflection cannot be deceived). Only a strategic partnership at the blood level, so that if you glue the two tops together, you get a horde against a third party. This can explain the fragility of the so-called states of the same nomads as in the past and now. Why nomads? Yes, because the nomads have full ambitions until now. (We are belligerent, close in energy to the Highlanders, northern American Indians). Yes, because the nomadic states, like the medieval feudal lords of Europe, had a fluidity because there was a specific leader, a bright leader (an outstanding personality – in different places with different common names). As a tribute, his colleagues tried to support his sons, and the sons tried to continue their father’s work – little turned out. The hereditary system was preserved, monarchical dynasties appeared somewhere, and the sons could do nothing. Attila’s empire collapsed immediately after the death of its founder because Attila’s sons quarreled and fought. A barbaric partnership is impossible without subordination, without hierarchy because «Bolivar can’t stand two..» If two candidates appear, even several – this is an emergency for us. It follows from this: brutal, pagan, feudal-monarchical, Asian-traditional partnership is possible only at the top among the elite. And this is not a partnership but subordinated in a rigid hierarchy of its members. Nomadic so-called states cannot be called states in the European sense of the word. All the settled peoples of the so-called farmers could cooperate at the lowest level; the cooperation of the peasants went beyond one family – from the cultivation of the field to the cooperation of the whole people in the battles for harvests. Of course, there is still a Cosa Nostra in Sicily and a Camorra in Naples as indicators of family life. However, this is the south, and the proximity of clan Africa is also affected. Italy is an exception. Italy – until then, it was European Asia, informally. Accept at least a thousand laws in Asia, where clan «legislation» rules, these official laws will not work. Attempts by nomads to imitate China with the involvement of Chinese officials did not work. Only in the Khan’s bet did it work. (Kazakhs, too, are mostly guided by the informal laws of tradition; only the market element has involved all sorts of lawyers and other rascals.) Now, I want to ask the most honest descendants of the steppe people: what kind of state can there be if the people are guided not by Khan’s laws but by informal law? If people ignore the laws invented by the bourgeoisie in the name of bourgeois property. Kazakhs have never had property in the European sense of property. Kazakhs had everything in common; at least, it was considered common, even after the property distinction. What kind of states did the nomads have, all the nomads, even the blue Turks? It was a horde where the elite spread their power to keep everyone or to show that these people were protected. Kazakhs are still not ready for a strategic partnership, except for the same blood unions – dynastic marriages of the elite. A beggar Kazakh will always imitate a rich Kazakh. Is this a strange thing? No. To conditionally group the beggars, they must turn into an elite. Having become rich, they will be grouped only by dynastic unions, having outlived their elite children. That’s where the Kazakh «state» actually lives. For the Kazakh to group with the Kazakh on an ideological basis, a million Kazakhs must migrate sharply from villages to cities and meet market laws there in all the cynicism of their non-necessity and mockery. Corruption is a mockery not only of officials over the European tracing paper of the state in the form of a union of trading, very greedy nobodies with low taste and needs, accompanying these people throughout history. The Union of Kazakh Nationalists is exciting, one might say a rattling union of the impossible. People who are incapable of strategic partnership due to personal ambitions and cultural individualism should unite sometime (in theory). However, no one has seen this union yet because «Bolivar can’t take two.» Therefore, a nationalist party is impossible because of an unclear leadership criterion. Only in the form of force majeure, for a short period of the eruption of Mount Fuji, when the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and the prey is close, and everyone sees it. No strategic partnership in Asia has been possible until today. Do not look at the declarations of Asian elites. Even Chinese Communists have their party nobility. But the Han Chinese are not nomads. Moreover, the nomads are always scattered; they call it natural separatism freedom because of intrinsic nomad anarchy; such people are ready to break any association, especially the state.

Where did the Kazakh bourgeois come from

Why Kazakhs will never build democracy is just dancing with property. Kazakhs will always resemble the Mongolian army.

There are objective practices for the emergence of the bourgeoisie.

Conservative communities do not welcome the movement. The bourgeoisie appeared just from the movement of extra people because, in every traditional family, ten children are born. Not necessarily every tenth of a litter of many children, – having many children as a condition, as a guarantee of escape of folk: many bourgeois descendants appeared in the cities from landlessness, that is, from poverty, will be bourgeo.

In order for people to understand the need for cooperation, they had to live in a peasant community themselves. Both in rural areas and in cities, cooperation was a guarantee of survival. So in Europe, workshops appeared in medieval cities. Why couldn't Kazakhs create workshops? Why did the Kazakhs need them? Kazakhs didn't need them.

Who among the Kazakhs, in general, could be the first to turn into the bourgeoisie, given that the Kazakhs did not like money? Like all peoples of the tradition, the Kazakhs loved glory. That’s just out of love for status and contempt for the worthless; however, this feeling is familiar to the whole world; to all peoples, so Kazakhs, appeared as candidates for the bourgeoisie according to the Western type of maturation. Suppose the nomads did not like cities where strategic cooperation with the Kazakhs could occur. We need to find the reason for the Kazakh cooperation without relation to the main Kazakh attribute – belonging to the Kazakh clan (ru). Poverty and rootlessness are the two main bourgeois assets. All the beggars and the rootless want to become famous so that they are still respected; it is a fact.

If we remove the upper cooperation (in the Revcon, this is called the upper dubbing when another elite duplicates the elite of the people, necessary for creating a bourgeois class. No modernization is possible without the solidarity of former beggars who have become oligarchs. To create an industry, it is not nomadic; no other primitive and feudal elite is needed. All this traditional old elite should disappear. As practice shows, the primitive elite is destroyed by the new people themselves «in the name of progress.» None of these people will change old habits. I’m talking about the personal egoism of the feudal elite, about reforms – changing the stereotype of the behavior of the whole people is out of the question. For new people to appear, a crowd of rootless people must appear when people do not remember their relatives. If people remember the past kind, so only external intervention is possible – this is an exterior double of self-reflection when representatives of other peoples act as teachers), or you can immediately get into the prosak. Yes, these reform teachers are destroying the selfish feudal local elite in the name of progress. The versions that the primitive elites themselves will go to voluntary poverty to turn into the bourgeoisie seem to be seditious, devilry, and market demagogy. Japanese samurai would never agree to trade to retain power. Those who claim that the Kazakh primitive elite would have shown miracles of selflessness in the name of the people would have led reforms, that is, ruined themselves and butchered themselves to the head to look like beggars; for this, the people themselves had to take place, that is, a crowd of rootless scoundrels demanding for self a couple of hundred sheep from them. The bourgeoisie is formed from dirt and shit. From dirt, from conservative shit! This dirt and shit should be eaten by all future oligarchs, as the most unscrupulous people for tradition.

Zhataks (recumbent men) – poor Kazakhs, weeded out by Kazakh relatives for their inability to maintain movement – could be the first to render in a foreign environment and in foreign cities; fate itself gives a chance to such all the poor. If they did not feel alienated from exactly the same generic dregs, some despicable Sarts should have felt contempt for the same Kazakhs from other clans instead of being ready to cooperate. (Kazakhs do not let strangers, that is, not relatives of Kazakhs, into the Nauryz pagan holiday yurt even now! And they stuttered about the Kazakh strategic cooperation. This is an absent Kazakh feeling) It is they who could establish cooperation. If not for one thing, it is precisely that the Kazakhs all remember their kinds. With this memory, they build their modern power. And at the same time, they walk with the illusion that it is possible to build democracy simultaneously. What each Kazakh has under democracy is a separate topic. And this topic does not go far from the Kazakh self-reflection.

Why did the American Indians lose? The Path of Big Wings

There are notes from Columbus about the meeting of Indians with Europeans. There, he described them as resembling children. This is true, including in the matter of strategic cooperation. An Indian of any age is not authorized to meet an enemy or relative, but people whose strategic cooperation literally replaces the smell of blood: if their blood, if this man is their tribe, that man is a friend; if not their blood, it is a member of another tribe. If the same Indians had been in the place of Columbus’ sailors, the first Indians might have eaten them. As it was, their curiosity kept Columbus alive, and he saw not children but unauthorized Indians for such meetings.

When the settlers who arrived from the Atlantic created settlement agglomerations for several generations, they penetrated the American continent deep. The Indians showed their inferiority and complete incompetence. Apart from guerrilla tactics, they had nothing to oppose the white people. Of course, they created tribal alliances, but this was not enough for a strategic confrontation. White people surpassed the Aborigines not only in weapons and tactics but, most importantly, the whites could cooperate based on the small interests of the small owners. The great Indian myths could not help them in any way because the Indians were incapable of cooperation or joint actions, except for the «warpath» based on the interest of blood. Without the most extreme need, the tribes cannot cooperate in order for the Zerefs to have a strategic friendship – this is only when there is a war and when on the edge of the abyss. In other cases, the Zerefs will look at you too long to come forward or trample you. All other meetings of the Zerefs outside their ancestral villages are meetings of warriors and knight riders – a meeting of two wolves rather than jackals. This policy is maintained until the very last moment. (When a Kazakh looks at a Kazakh, he does not just look at the «knight»; he is a «cozben atady» (shoots with his eyes). Most likely, the Indians also looked at each other with heavy eyes without blinking at a chance meeting, creating a heavy look).

The Indian elite, Indian leaders, and Indian shamans also could not do anything and could not help their people in any way. The fate of the Indians was sad. Too many tribes – too many «states.» They were with the elite, who were also incapable of a strategic agreement. Let savages go the way of heroes, and all tribes follow the path of tribal glory; no conservative people at the stage of «naturals» can survive if they are surrounded by small people who can win without blood, without a fight – just by selling and buying. People came to the Indians who could unite for small gains and create punitive detachments. From the particular to the general. This is what distinguishes the petty bourgeois (Zere, Refags) from the generally wild people who shoot at each other all the time with their eyes. The «path of heroes,» the «path of glory,» which distinguishes all conservative peoples, dooms such an elite to death in the first place. These people would never have adapted to the «white» trick. Most people have to die after their elite because, apart from curiosity and complexes, after realizing their impotence, these people are incapable of anything. This is the fatal tax of all conservative peoples until the savages assimilate the first skills of cooperation except kinship, except blood. This means that the entire older generation of the «curious» should also have gone to the valley of death; all barbarians are very persistent and stupidly stubborn when they try to retrain themselves, even with the help of violence. The colonizers even had to import Negroes from faraway Africa to the plantations. By the way, African leaders sold young, physically strong people to them.

So. During a storm, swifts with medium wings survive. The wind carries away those who have wings that are too big; those with short wings themselves fall to the ground and break. So, to assimilate the Tatar tribe, Genghis Khan executed all adults, leaving only children who could pass under the cart.

Top dubbing

My books are not voluminous – a maximum of 200 pages. The main idea can be said in one chapter. But this will not give understanding, so the «understanding» stretches to 120 pages. The remaining 80 pages remain in reserve – for new discoveries on the topic.

Three books have been selected for the manual so far: «Kazakhs and Arabs,» «Kazakhs and Japanese,» and Kazakhs and Turks,» because Arabs, Japanese, and Turks are successful nations today. (Which cannot be said about the Kazakhs yet). Arabs, Japanese, and Turks have their own history, their own way, and their own choice; these three nations are chosen to show where we are. Ordinary people don’t like difficult situations. Therefore, instead of a complex «self-reflection», a mirror no one wants to look into, another tactic was chosen – looking at yourself against the background of successful Arabs, Japanese, and Turks. Why do they succeed in the end, but the Kazakhs do not? If Confucius said, «If it seems to you that the goal is unattainable, do not change the goal – change your plan of action» – this is just right. Tactics have changed, but the strategy remains.

The main argument of the Kazakh nationalists: «If it were not for the Russians, if it were not for the Bolsheviks, we, the Kazakhs, would be at a high level.» A lot of biased material has appeared. It is populism. Betting on arguments that contradict the facts is always the way to nowhere. «Fanatics can seize power. But they will never hold the victory. From fanaticism get tired» first of all, the audience gets tired, to whom fanatics prepare the fate of sacrificial sheep. It is enough to look at the speech of patriots in the parliament of one belligerent republic of the former USSR. No one listens to anyone there. But everyone comes to the podium and spews patriotic mantras and curses. Patriotic mantras and curses have already led these people to war, but spewing mantras and curses in 404 is a very profitable occupation. These parliamentarians themselves live happily ever after. At this very time, the people wash themselves, as they say, with blood. Why is there so much cynicism in 404? Why did we, the Kazakhs, lag behind them? Is it good, or is it bad? Our «backwardness», more precisely, our conservatism and «shukur» save us.

To not repeat the state of Ukraine’s path under top scammers’ leadership, you need a little honesty and logic. It would be best to look a little in the mirror of facts.

Revcon has the concept of upper and lower dubbing.

Lower dubbing is when people with low status and reflection perform the tasks of noble people. For example, the communist ideology proclaimed the dictatorship of the proletariat. The proletarians began to play the role of the aristocracy. Kazakhs are not interested in what came out of it. The supposed Kazakh reaction will be this: we had our elite. If the Alash elite had been preserved, we would have lived at the Japanese level. The Russian Bolsheviks prevented us. But is it so?

As we can see, the whole fate of the people rests on the concept of the elite.

Arabs, Japanese, and Turks have preserved Arab, Japanese, and Turkish – generally, their elite. Kazakhs did not rule Kazakhs. Although for 30 years, Kazakhs have been ruled by Kazakhs, and the results are medieval against the background of modern technologies. There is no gap beyond the words «kazaksha soyle» (you must speaking by kazakh). In addition to mineral resources, Kazakhs have put singers and boxers on the world market (now even a chess player lady has appeared).

Although the current regime continues the tactics of a low double, it recruits managers «from the people,» who, as they say, are «still there.» There can be no other way. A low double was always at hand for conservative dictatorships. It was the Communists who brought the conservative double to the level of holy dirt (although this has nothing to do with the Communists, Marxism itself, the Marxists themselves treated the tradition arrogantly, but the ideology of Marxism itself is a pure lower dubbing).

In all regimes before communism and before the 20th century, all traditional elites used a below double to create assistants for themselves without violating the current hierarchy. The feudal lords could choose from the people and protect the most talented children of commoners. Commoners understood that they were commoners and did not infringe on conservative orders.

What is the difference between a high dubbing and a low one with the general similarity of the procedure.

With a high dubbing, the initiative comes from above; the feudal lords select oprichniks and officials, and with low double, conditional slaves sweep away the system. A people from the bottom, from low double, will always be weak and flawed because it has nothing but primitive material desires. These are the same fanatics as Zeref’s. (Look around. Who shouts «kazaksha soyle» (speake by Kazakh) the most? These people want a good take to replace professionals in all spheres, to amuse their self-esteem, and to enrich themselves, but this is not beneficial to the Kazakh people themselves) The conservative people after the revolution, that is, after the bifurcation, will still return to the upper dubbing. So, Russian communism ended with Stalin and his people. Very mediocre people – all the older children of Russian peasants turned into the red elite. Still, they never got rid of the inferiority complex: they carried their dirt in genetics until they abolished all red hypocrisy in 1991. Low dubbing is always a failure of people’s memory and practice. It’s just timelessness and the absence of a real natural elite. Who feeds the modern fanatics and scammers so that they scream the loudest? Yes, we should never forget: if you don’t see the elite at home, your elite, then someone else’s external elite is working. This external elite will support the lower dubbing of the aul revolutionaries to destroy the people, in any case, for a long time to take all the resources till all are admiring the Kazakh singers boxers to the cheers of the narrow-minded philistines because non-professionals will always carry inferiority complexes, but at the same time they will always shout the loudest)

So.

The upper double is the most basic in human practice because the rabble never had the knowledge of priests, and in general, the egg did not teach the chicken.

Of the Japanese, Arabs and Turks, it is the Turks who have kept their double the most, so they have the best prospects.

The upper double is divided under external indirect control. This is when the elite seems to be national, but it is controlled from outside, at least by economic and financial laws. Outwardly successful Saudis fall into this canvas. The Saudis are thriving because no one has shot Arab princes. This prosperity of the Emirates drives the Kazakhs to long for their pre-revolutionary bais (feodal rich men). I repeat, with a low red dubbing, the feudal elite is not able to survive because this is a revolution, a popular uprising (and no rich Kazakh is willing to voluntarily give a place of honor to another Kazakh even now. Kazakhs do not have strategic cooperation because of this. Every Kazakh sells and buys everything now. Yes, modern Kazakhs are now repeating Western practices. But any new rich «Kazakh» from the mud will behave exactly like his predecessor – Kazakh feodal buy. This indicates a persistent, low, tribal reflection. Any modern Kazakh can be thrown into the past, and he will not be lost there, and vice versa: any Kazakh from the past can be thrown into our time and changed – no one will notice the substitution. Kazakhs with a lag of 500 years are identical cultural twins. And this even though the Bolsheviks educated three generations of Kazakhs).

Despite the Japanese miracle, the Japanese are also in a state of grogginess. Kazakhs would dream of reaching the level of the Japanese. Still, the Kazakhs did not even pass the Japanese stage of Kamakura and Muromachi: this is when the Japanese samurai got tired of their slaughter and recognized the shogun’s power. Kazakh philistines are so fucked up that they want democracy right away… Even though every Kazakh is the same Kazakh from the 500-year-old past, overflowing with ambitions and not wanting strategic cooperation, that is, not having a high reflection.

Turks and Kazakhs

In 545, the union of tribes that came out of Altai defeated the people of the Zhuzhans, their patrons, and ten years later they captured Sogd. In 575, the Göktürks, we are talking about the Turkics, already controlled the Northern Black Sea region, the Crimea, and the North Caucasus; that is, in 30 years, the Göktürks passed and began to control the entire steppe zone from the Crimea to Manchuria. How could this happen? The seizure of territories so unimaginable in size in such a short period. In 555, that is, ten years after they left the Altai, they had already reached the Volga and controlled Transoxiana. Yes, the Göktürks forged iron for the Zhuzhans. But this is not the most important thing. Iron has nothing to do with it. They defeated the Ephthalites, that is, the ancestors of those very Parthian cataphractaries.