Khan

Why did the Kazakhs dislike the cat

Democracy is a system for migrants, for people without roots, to build a hierarchy on a new basis – on the basis of money.

Nomads are migrants, too, of course. But the nomads never had property. Besides, they were moving constantly, so they didn’t seem to care, like, well, who are you – we’re all equal. In fact, nomads are not democrats at all, and they know their place from birth. For the nomads to turn into democrats, all the steppe outcasts should gather in one place – then all the nomads would be Democrats in the Western manner. And then it’s not a constant movement. Nomads always have a place to rest while cattle graze around. These are the most abundant meadows. Disputes between the clans could arise over these places. But each family knew its route and did not cross paths with others. If it is a constant movement, then it is a relative constant. If it’s a life on the road, it’s a very stalled life. This slowness does not allow you to forget who is who and refreshes your memory if someone has forgotten and drunk a lot of fermented mare’s milk.

It seems impossible to have yourself in such a state, except for the nobility and elders. Therefore, the nomads have no principles but the power of words. Taking a place in the family hierarchy, everyone catches up with the owner of indescribable Kazakh ambitions. It can be said that nomads could compete in the pride of posture with each other if they could take off their robes. But one confident pose is enough; one can present arrogance, an expensive robe, a few words confirming his rightness, so that any conditional weak opponent – with a slightly crooked posture, barely noticeably uneven – still bends and concedes an invisible stranger to the lists. There seemed to be a dispute between the Kazakhs, but no one noticed. Any inconspicuous detail, maybe his robe is cheaper, maybe his boots creak or squeeze, perhaps he has nothing to say in response. But everything that is there must be in plain sight. It seems that appearance bothers all people: appearance is obliged to tell more about a person than he speaks. How he says and what kind of posture he will have depends on the robe (how many horses, how many sheep, the herd size). «I carry with me all that I have». It could be called imitating the ancient Greek (a modern meme on this subject, a Kazakh without show – offs is a loser. What kind of principles are Kazakh ambitions? Uh, who are you (Sen Kimsin?) – this is usually such a question to settle down any impudent person who has forgotten his place as an upstart. In this sense, any intellectual, a passing example of a petty bourgeois and a descendant of a fugitive European, could trump only with his knowledge. Kazakhs do not need knowledge. They have not been honored in the past. No amount of knowledge will help a modern upstart, either. In the past, a Kazakh had to know his place: to name his family, his father’s name, and only if they considered him worthy of a conversation and an invitation – who his ancestors were by name and what they did. Kazakhs do conduct side discussions about the weather or fashion, as if they do not keep any unnecessary cats in their portable housing. If this is a relative, at the beginning, they will ask how the health of that one is, how he feels, if he is ill, how he looks; they say last time he was cheerful and healthy – give him greetings from us. Nomads are also interested in the weather, but it is not attractive for walking or love meetings in the open air, but only for the «well-being» of feeding livestock. These are the Kazakh principles of life.

If they are reinterpreted in the European manner, then there is no state here (or any other ideology other than kinship and neighborhood with other people). Kazakhs, even modern ones, are not interested in an abstract state. Kazakhs respect witnesses. It is almost the same as the weather in the past: it is interesting purely for applied purposes. The state is fascinating for surprising relatives and friends, for example. To make the posture straight again, they look confident and arrogant (this phenomenon of straightening posture and the appearance of a voice can be traced to modern officials. Usually, officials recruit a contingent that is not quite suitable, frankly speaking, for management. It can be said that it is not suitable at all, but calm, quiet, unquestioning, humble. The first local boss knows that after a while, the neophyte will have everything: a lot of money and a lot of opportunities, which means expensive clothes and a commanding voice. The most important boss -an autocrat among them can cheer up a newcomer, a regional akim: «You’ll be fine soon. Be patient a little bit.» What does he mean by that? Of course, material well-being. After all, it is the officials who are the richest here.

That is, to add knowledge to ambitions and status, in addition to the father’s name, for example, the conditions are not ripe for this.

Kazakhs still value professionals little, but officials, that is, people with opportunities, love, adore, and at least publicly show it in every possible way as if all the officials’ fathers were noble, rich, and worthy. But this is not the case. Therefore, all officials do not waste time in vain – as long as there is time, while they hold office, they multiply their authority. And there is also little talk about the weather at the parties. They are mostly bragging. And among themselves, they talk about the case in a narrow circle. And the state is here again like some cat. And Kazakhs have never kept cats.

We can say that Western migrant Democrats also talk about the case first. Before the case, they show each other white teeth – signals. In addition to dental services (these services are expensive in the West), they also show expensive watches and, of course, suits by themselves. These descendants of European burghers are most likely (although our burghers are no different) Americans who don’t seem to care at all. Some rich people literally wear rags – a family habit. Carelessness has not disappeared anywhere, but dress codes are still mandatory for them. It’s sacred.

They also have a lot of respect for professionals, in the sense that they could bring them money.

And money is a deity for all migrants.

For nomads, money also coming out on top.

But still.

For a proud Kazakh posture, money alone is not enough. They want something else. Although Kazakhs are nomadic migrants, money has never made the weather for nomads. Only nobility! Therefore, all rich Kazakhs are concerned, literally, about their past. The money came to them for a reason, but after a centuries-old struggle of their ancestors (it seems, the current officials fought like their ancestors also), There is also an ideological device. When the Kazakhs were taken all together in the form of a selected nation, we all fought to have new, famous Kazakhs reign over us. Conservative people have always been very imaginative. But knowledge has also been added here. In the name of what? To justify the new wealth of the new nobility.

That is, we nomads have jumped over everything and everyone again.

These Western migrants, to turn into Democrats, first had property. That is, their ancestors landed on the ground. These ancestors didn’t work out. They didn’t bequeath a name. They didn’t make any money. So the descendants fled to America. And there, they began to compete with money. If you’re so bright, why not be rich?

What have we done?

Why are we embarrassed to repeat after the Americans in our way? If we are so smart, why not the Akims of the regions?

Because we don’t really like money in the depths of the Kazakh (teren halyk) soul. The mind and principles are not necessary for a modern Kazakh career at all. And the state has nothing to do with it. And there is no state without principled people (and cat lovers).

So.

We immediately switched to money. And famous ancestors were invented. It’s not complicated. We love tall tales.

The whipDo we only love Khan? We love strength

There is no ideology in attacking neighbors. This is a banal robbery (barymta. Idealism was invented by French enlighteners somewhere in the 18th century. However, the ideology can include religious warriors, the Reformation, and the Crusades. Also, the moral and ethical principles of the Roman Stoics and Republicans. The nomads did not have anything like this. Nomads have always fought for leaders. Tribe with tribe, an alliance of tribes with another horde, Genghisids with Genghisids, tsarevichs with tsarevichs. There was no idealism in the European style). The leader led to the seizure of foreign lands or organized resistance. Both attack and defense had the leader’s name, and then the prominent tribe was called, on which the elite relied. All the back-and-forth movements are linked by the name of the leader.

There was nothing nameless. Consequently, all nomadic principles, if this blood connection with the leader can also be called principles after idealism, are tied to the leaders. Hence, no European bonds between nomads and former nomads are valid. You can imitate European stoics, reformers, enlighteners, socialists, democrats, and progressives as much as you like, but personal devotion comes out anyway. But first of all, hypocrisy and ostentation. Ostentation and hypocrisy due to feelings of inferiority and complexes. Everyone understands and feels this is not what is happening; something unreal is happening. But they can’t do anything. And they smile in a defiantly disgusting way, imitating the Americans. They try to smile officially at diplomatic events. At the same time, ordinary people can walk and move around completely sullenly, not smiling at all, competing with each other who will buy something more expensive before rudely ripping off their kind (robbery in a democracy has received an ideology everywhere called business. And the rougher the people, the harsher the robbery. Due to adherents’ cultural carelessness and unwillingness, business can cover the entire society from the bottom up. Even such an elite can show you how to rob. If kindred feelings are more potent than civilians, you can deny everyone because no one will say anything anyway. There will be fewer and fewer literate people and more and more corrupt businessmen. There will come a time when you can point a finger at anyone and say – you are a businessman. He will respond in response: «Yes, I’m a businessman.» That’s how imitation of someone else’s experience, someone else’s culture based on local culture, goes sideways. It’s like pouring low-octane gasoline into a technological mechanism. (Or how in Melanesia the aborigines made airplanes out of straw).

What is missing here? And what do I want to say?

There is an evolutionary line. Darwin was the first to introduce the evolution of species. It takes time for something to come out of the dark, sometimes millions, at least several thousand years.

But man is a smart creature. Easily retrained. Adapts quickly. Easily picks up other people’s skills (if they can be useful. During the Meiji period, the Japanese assembled a replica of a Russian ship with a steam boiler that accidentally sank off the coast of Japan in a year. The Japanese are generally the real champions of the 20th century in modernization. However, in the 21st century, for some reason, after the last breakthrough, they fell into «apathy», stagnation for 30 years).

There are two ways to upgrade. By themselves or through the «occupiers»

It will be a little more difficult and insulting for ourselves. Modernization will require its super dictator. Especially if the people have long since lost their elite, they are ruled all the time by disciples and imitators of other nations. (The fact is that the «occupiers» do not select all their friends and interpreters into the squad. They choose the most diligent. So that they would then be completely devoted to the occupiers; therefore, they gather people from the very bottom into a new elite: those who have nothing will have everything, both money and authority, and will be obliged to the «occupiers.» This case does not exclude the fact that such candidates, when they are ripe for management, will not rob. For such people, they need control all the time. Suppose they stop being afraid and start governing. In that case, they will have a lot of self-will, as if they belonged to a noble family, so two clearly defined qualities can appear at once: the love of power and the insatiability of commoners.