CARMO AFONSO

 .

Aprender a viver

O futuro, ainda mais que o presente, é incerto. Devemos fazer previsões e planos mas deixar uma rubrica para "desvios" superior à do costume. Os prejudicados de sempre podem mesmo alterar o rumo da história

𝙷𝚊́ 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚎𝚋𝚒𝚍𝚘. 𝚂𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎 𝚊 𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊. 𝙲𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚎-𝚜𝚎 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚞 𝚎 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚒𝚛𝚊́ 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛. 𝙵𝚊𝚣 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚋𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛-𝚜𝚎 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚛𝚐𝚎𝚖 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚗𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚟𝚒𝚘𝚜, 𝚌𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚞𝚌𝚊 𝚖𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚕𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚍𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊 𝚏𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚊𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊𝚕 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚕𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚎̂. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚛𝚐𝚎𝚖 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚟𝚒𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚟𝚘𝚌𝚊𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝙰𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚕𝚎𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝙲𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚘𝚖𝚒́𝚗𝚒𝚘 𝚜𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚌𝚕𝚞𝚒́ 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚞́𝚕𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚘𝚛𝚍𝚎𝚖 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚜: “𝙾𝚞𝚝𝚛𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚞𝚗𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚎”. 𝙰𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚙𝚊-𝚜𝚎 𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚋𝚒𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚎́𝚖 𝚟𝚒𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚞𝚖 𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚕𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚛 – 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚞𝚖 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚋𝚕𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚘𝚛 𝚍𝚊 𝚒𝚕𝚞𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎́𝚍𝚒𝚘 – 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚛𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚟𝚊̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚛 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚊𝚞𝚝𝚘́𝚗𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚖 𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚟𝚊𝚒 𝚖𝚞𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚌𝚞𝚛𝚜𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚕𝚎𝚒𝚊.

𝚂𝚎 𝚘𝚕𝚑𝚊́𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚍𝚘, 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚊 𝚑𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚊, 𝚗𝚞𝚗𝚌𝚊 𝚖𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚒́𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚜 𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚊 𝚌𝚊𝚋𝚎𝚌̧𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚒𝚜 𝚎́ 𝚊𝚋𝚜𝚘𝚕𝚞𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚑𝚘𝚞𝚟𝚎 𝚐𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖 𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚊𝚙𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚊̀𝚜 𝚜𝚞𝚛𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚊 𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊, 𝚌𝚑𝚊𝚖𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜-𝚕𝚑𝚎 𝚞𝚖 𝚗𝚘𝚖𝚎 𝚜𝚞𝚊𝚟𝚎, 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚛 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚊 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚘𝚞 𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚖.

𝙱𝚊𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖, 𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚊́𝚜, 𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚒𝚜. 𝙾 𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚛 𝚘𝚞 𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚊𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚏𝚒́𝚜𝚒𝚌𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚎́𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚊𝚖𝚊 - 𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚗𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚞𝚊𝚟𝚎, 𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚛𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚊 𝚖𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚎 - 𝚖𝚞𝚍𝚊𝚖 𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊 𝚒𝚛𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚜𝚒́𝚟𝚎𝚕. 𝙸𝚖𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚒́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚟𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚛 𝚜𝚎𝚖 𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚑𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚜𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚏𝚊𝚕𝚊𝚛.

𝙰𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚞-𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊. 𝚃𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚖𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚑𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚘. 𝙰𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚕𝚊́ 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚎𝚋𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚟𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚜𝚊𝚒𝚛 𝚍𝚎𝚕𝚎. 𝙾 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚖𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚑𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚘, 𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚝𝚛𝚊́𝚐𝚒𝚌𝚘, 𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚞𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚞𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚜𝚞𝚊𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚎 𝚊𝚝𝚎́ 𝚍𝚎 𝚋𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚣𝚊. 𝙽𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚊 𝚟𝚎𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊𝚜 𝚘𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚞𝚗𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘 “𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘” 𝚍𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚘𝚞𝚟𝚎 𝚏𝚊𝚕𝚊𝚛 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚎𝚋𝚎 𝚋𝚎𝚖. 𝙵𝚊𝚕𝚘 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚕𝚒𝚌̧𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚊𝚜.

𝙰𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊: 𝚎́ 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 “𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎́ 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚜𝚊𝚞𝚍𝚒𝚗𝚑𝚊”, 𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚞 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚕 𝚊 𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚊 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚎 𝚊 𝚏𝚛𝚊𝚐𝚒𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚙𝚘, 𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚞 𝚜𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚌𝚕𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚊 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚊 𝚟𝚞𝚕𝚗𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚘́ 𝚊 𝚏𝚒́𝚜𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚊 𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊 𝚎 𝚊 𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚕. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚒 𝚖𝚞𝚒𝚝𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚊 𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚊. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚖 𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚊. 𝚂𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚓𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚕𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚎̂𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚕𝚞𝚐𝚊𝚛 𝚗𝚘 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚝𝚊: 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚘 𝚍𝚘𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚊́-𝚕𝚘 𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚌𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚛 𝚊 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚊 𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚞𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚘𝚜 𝚕𝚒𝚖𝚒𝚝𝚎𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎, 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊 𝚎𝚡𝚙𝚕𝚒́𝚌𝚒𝚝𝚊, 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚟𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚊 𝚖𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚛 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚖. 𝚃𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚎 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚞𝚖 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚟𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚘 𝚎 𝚌𝚊𝚙𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚣𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚎 𝚎𝚖 𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚞𝚕𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚛𝚘𝚜 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚗𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚕𝚘́𝚐𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚜𝚗𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚕, 𝚊 𝚕𝚘́𝚐𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚘́𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚘 𝚟𝚒́𝚛𝚞𝚜. 𝙽𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚊́ 𝚞𝚗𝚊̂𝚗𝚒𝚖𝚎. 𝙼𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚛.

𝚅𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊̀ 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎.

𝙴𝚖 𝚖𝚎𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚓𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚊𝚗𝚘 𝙿𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚞𝚐𝚊𝚕 𝚏𝚘𝚒 𝚗𝚘𝚝𝚒́𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚕, 𝚏𝚘𝚒 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚞, 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚘 𝚙𝚒𝚘𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚒́𝚜 𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚝𝚊𝚡𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚏𝚎𝚌𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚛 𝚖𝚒𝚕𝚑𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚑𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚜. 𝙳𝚎 𝚏𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚘 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚛𝚎𝚞 𝚋𝚎𝚖. 𝙼𝚊𝚜 𝚕𝚎𝚛 𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎́𝚛𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚒𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚏𝚘𝚒 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚎. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚞𝚛𝚘𝚞 𝚖𝚞𝚒𝚝𝚘. 𝙲𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚊́𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚎 𝚊 𝚜𝚒𝚝𝚞𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚕𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚘𝚞-𝚜𝚎 𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚌𝚊𝚕𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎. 𝙿𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚜 𝚘𝚞 𝚝𝚛𝚎̂𝚜 𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚒́𝚝𝚞𝚕𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚞𝚍𝚊𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊: 𝙿𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚞𝚐𝚊𝚕 𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚎 𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 (𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚗𝚜 𝚍𝚒𝚣𝚒𝚊𝚖 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚛) 𝚙𝚊𝚒́𝚜𝚎𝚜 𝚊 𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊 𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊 𝚟𝚊𝚐𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊. 𝙴𝚗𝚏𝚒𝚖. 𝙽𝚎𝚖 𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚛𝚎𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚏𝚞𝚝𝚎𝚋𝚘𝚕 𝚟𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚋𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚊𝚕 𝚊 𝚋𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊, 𝚘𝚞 𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚞 𝚒𝚗𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚜𝚘, 𝚎𝚖 𝚝𝚊̃𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚞𝚌𝚘 𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚘. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚖𝚎 𝚕𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚛𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚟𝚎𝚛 𝚗𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚞𝚎́𝚖 𝚏𝚎𝚕𝚒𝚌𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚛-𝚜𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚒𝚜𝚜𝚘. 𝙴 𝚊𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚋𝚎𝚖. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚌𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚗𝚘𝚝𝚒́𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚜, 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚎 𝚎𝚖 𝚟𝚎𝚕𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚕𝚞𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎, 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚊́ 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚛𝚌𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚎 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚛𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚊𝚖 𝚗𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚞𝚎́𝚖 𝚍𝚊 𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊.

𝚁𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚖𝚊𝚜:

𝙴𝚖 𝚖𝚊𝚛𝚌̧𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚊𝚗𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚟𝚊-𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚎, 𝚜𝚎 𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚊́𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜, 𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚛𝚊𝚛𝚒𝚊; 𝚍𝚊𝚒́ 𝚙𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚊́𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚜: 𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚘 𝚘 𝚙𝚒𝚌𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚋𝚛𝚒𝚕 𝚎 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚘; 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚏𝚘𝚒 𝚘 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚗𝚊𝚕𝚝𝚘: 𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚒𝚛𝚒́𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚞𝚖 𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚑𝚊𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚊 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎, 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚛𝚊 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚋𝚘𝚊 𝚜𝚒𝚝𝚞𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚛𝚊 𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚖 𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚘; 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚞 𝚊 𝚌𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌̧𝚊 𝚗𝚘 𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚒𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚌𝚊𝚕𝚘𝚛 𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚗𝚊 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚙𝚊𝚐𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚟𝚒́𝚛𝚞𝚜 (𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚘𝚋𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚘𝚜, 𝚗𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚊 𝚊𝚕𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚊, 𝚘 𝚎𝚡𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚕𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝙰𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚛𝚊́𝚕𝚒𝚊 𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚟𝚊 𝚌𝚊𝚕𝚘𝚛 𝚎 𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚘 𝚟𝚒́𝚛𝚞𝚜 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚟𝚊 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚓𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚜); 𝚍𝚎𝚙𝚘𝚒𝚜 𝚘 𝚜𝚞𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚎 𝚍𝚊 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊: 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚞 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊? 𝙴 𝚕𝚘𝚐𝚘 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚘 𝚘𝚙𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚚𝚞𝚎, 𝚌𝚊𝚛𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚊, 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚟𝚊́𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚎 𝚎𝚖 𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚘 𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚍; 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚌̧𝚊 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚜: 𝚏𝚞𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚖 𝚘𝚞 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚟𝚊𝚜 𝚟𝚊𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚜? 𝙴 𝚊𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚌̧𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚜 “𝚊 𝚂𝚙𝚞𝚝𝚗𝚒𝚔 𝚛𝚞𝚜𝚜𝚊 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚌̧𝚊” 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚌𝚕𝚊𝚛𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚎́; 𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚛𝚊 𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚞́𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚊 𝚎𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚊́𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚗𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘: 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚞, 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚘𝚜, 𝚘𝚜 𝚐𝚛𝚞𝚙𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚘? 𝙰 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚞́𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊 𝚎𝚡𝚌𝚕𝚞𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚒́𝚜𝚎𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚙𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘 𝚛𝚒𝚝𝚖𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚟𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚜. 𝙰𝚜 𝚍𝚞́𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚖 𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚍𝚘, 𝚊 𝚕𝚘́𝚐𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚕 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚏𝚊𝚣 𝚗𝚎𝚗𝚑𝚞𝚖; 𝚍𝚎𝚙𝚘𝚒𝚜 𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚖 𝚍𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊: 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚝𝚎𝚟𝚎 𝚟𝚊́𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚊𝚝𝚊𝚜 𝚊𝚗𝚞𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚎𝚗𝚑𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚎́ 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚊; 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚊𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚊𝚜 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚛𝚙𝚎𝚜 𝚎 𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚜, 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚒 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚜𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚘. 𝙰𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚝𝚒́𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚎 𝚊 𝚘𝚋𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚞𝚌𝚎𝚍𝚎𝚖-𝚜𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊 𝚝𝚊̃𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚞𝚕𝚝𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚕𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚛 𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚕𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘. 𝚀𝚞𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚜𝚎 𝚕𝚎̂, 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚞𝚜𝚘 𝚜𝚎 𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚊. 𝙰𝚜 𝚘𝚜𝚌𝚒𝚕𝚊𝚌̧𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎 𝚊 𝚟𝚘𝚕𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚊𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚒𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚎𝚣𝚊.

“𝙼𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘”, 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝙲𝚑𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘𝚙𝚑𝚎𝚛 𝙽𝚘𝚕𝚎𝚗, 𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚒𝚛 𝚍𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚘 "𝙼𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝙼𝚘𝚛𝚒" 𝚍𝚘 𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊̃𝚘, 𝙹𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚗 𝙽𝚘𝚕𝚊𝚗, 𝚛𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚝𝚊 𝚊 𝚑𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚞𝚖 𝚑𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚖, 𝙻𝚎𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚛𝚍 𝚂𝚑𝚎𝚕𝚋𝚢 𝚘𝚞 “𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢” (𝙶𝚞𝚢 𝙿𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚌𝚎) 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚌𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚊𝚖𝚗𝚎́𝚜𝚒𝚊, 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚎𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚘𝚞 𝚗𝚞𝚖 𝚖𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚛 𝚊𝚘𝚜 𝚞́𝚕𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚗𝚣𝚎 𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚞𝚝𝚘𝚜, 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚊 𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚛 𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚘 𝚑𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚗𝚘𝚞 𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚖𝚞𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚛. 𝙿𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚌𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚒𝚣𝚊𝚛 𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚍𝚎𝚒𝚡𝚊 𝚙𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚜 𝚊 𝚜𝚒 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚜𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚕𝚟𝚊𝚛 𝚍𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚒𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚘. 𝙴́ 𝚊𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚟𝚎́𝚜 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚒𝚗𝚜𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚌̧𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚝𝚊𝚝𝚞𝚊𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚙𝚘, 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚕𝚊𝚛𝚘𝚒𝚍𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚕𝚎𝚐𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚖 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚝-𝚒𝚝𝚜, 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚊 𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚗𝚣𝚎 𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚞𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚕𝚘𝚌𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚣𝚊𝚛 𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚕 𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚍𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚊 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛. 𝙾 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎 𝚕𝚎𝚟𝚊-𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚏𝚞𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚘́𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚝𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚗𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚜𝚎 𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚞𝚖 𝚗𝚊𝚛𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚛 𝚘𝚖𝚗𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚒𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚘𝚞 𝚞𝚖 𝚝𝚒𝚙𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚗𝚊𝚛𝚛𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚒𝚝𝚊 𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚊𝚛 𝚜𝚎 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚘 𝚎𝚖 𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚖𝚘𝚟𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚘𝚞 𝚜𝚎 𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚞𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚒𝚜. 𝙰𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚋𝚎𝚖. 𝙴́ 𝚜𝚘́ 𝚞𝚖 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚘 𝚊𝚟𝚒𝚜𝚊𝚛 𝚍𝚎 𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚎, 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊, 𝚎́ 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚊 𝚘𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚞𝚗𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚎𝚡𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎́ 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚒𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚖 𝚜𝚊𝚋𝚎𝚛 𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚗𝚞𝚖 𝚍𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚜𝚒́𝚝𝚒𝚘 𝚘𝚞 𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚕𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚛 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚐𝚞𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚋𝚊́𝚜𝚒𝚌𝚊. 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚍𝚊, 𝚕𝚎̂ 𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚘 𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚒𝚌𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚞 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚏𝚊𝚕𝚊𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚊𝚋𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚜𝚎 𝚘 𝚏𝚊𝚣 𝚋𝚎𝚖. 𝙲𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚎𝚕𝚎, 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚊𝚋𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚊.

𝙾 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚌̧𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚌𝚕𝚞𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚜𝚊̃𝚘: 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚖𝚊𝚝𝚊 𝚞𝚖 𝚑𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚖 𝚗𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚟𝚒𝚌𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚝𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚑𝚘𝚖𝚒𝚌𝚒𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚖𝚞𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚛. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚊𝚋𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚜𝚎 𝚎𝚛𝚊. 𝙾 𝚑𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚖, 𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚘𝚛𝚛𝚎𝚛, 𝚒𝚗𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚛 𝚟𝚒́𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚍𝚘𝚎𝚗𝚌̧𝚊, 𝚍𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚘𝚒𝚊. 𝙼𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚝𝚊𝚛𝚍𝚎, 𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚞́𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚖𝚙𝚕𝚒𝚊𝚍𝚊𝚜.

𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚞𝚖 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎 𝚕𝚒𝚗𝚎𝚊𝚛. 𝙽𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚕 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚜𝚎 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚊𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚎𝚖 𝚍𝚎 𝚕𝚊́ 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚌𝚕𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚛 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚒𝚍𝚘 𝚊 𝚖𝚎𝚖𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚟𝚊́𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎. 𝚂𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚊𝚜𝚒𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚜, 𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚙𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚐𝚎𝚖 𝚊 𝚊𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚗𝚘𝚟𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚜. 𝙳𝚊́ 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘. 𝚅𝚎𝚛 𝚘 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚖𝚎 𝚎́ 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚊 𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚙𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚏𝚎𝚣. 𝙾𝚜 𝚎𝚡𝚙𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚝𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚊 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚍𝚞𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚘𝚞 𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚛𝚐𝚞𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚜. 𝙳𝚊́ 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘. 𝙴 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚊𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚕𝚑𝚊: 𝚘 𝚖𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚎𝚋𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚛𝚊̃𝚘 𝚝𝚎𝚛 𝚜𝚒𝚍𝚘 𝚊𝚍𝚞𝚕𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚘́𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚘, 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚝𝚎𝚐𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚊 𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚜𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎 𝚊 𝚖𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚖𝚞𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚛. 𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚛𝚊́ 𝚝𝚎𝚛-𝚜𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚊𝚘 𝚌𝚞𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚕𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚛𝚒́𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚜𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚞𝚙𝚊𝚛 𝚊 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚞𝚛𝚊 𝚎 𝚜𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚕𝚎𝚜. 𝚁𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚓𝚊𝚖. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚍𝚒𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚕𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚛𝚊𝚖. 𝙽𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚞𝚎́𝚖 𝚜𝚎 𝚕𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚘 “𝙼𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘”.

𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢, 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚛𝚒𝚣𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚊 𝚒𝚗𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚞 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛, 𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚌𝚊 𝚣𝚎𝚛𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚜 – 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚕𝚊 𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚖 𝚎𝚛𝚊 𝚗𝚎𝚖 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚟𝚊 𝚊𝚕𝚒 𝚊 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚘𝚞 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚑𝚊 𝚒𝚍𝚘 𝚊𝚕𝚒 𝚍𝚊𝚛 – 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚊𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚊 𝚊 𝚟𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚛.

𝙴𝚕𝚎 𝚜𝚘𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚗𝚘́𝚜.

𝙾 𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚊𝚟𝚊𝚕𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚑𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚛𝚘𝚊 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚊𝚖𝚗𝚎́𝚜𝚒𝚊: 𝚊 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚜. 𝙼𝚊𝚜 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚒 𝚊 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚎 𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚕? 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚒𝚊. 𝙳𝚎𝚒𝚡𝚊𝚖𝚘-𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚊𝚛 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚝𝚒́𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚎 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚜 𝚎𝚡𝚙𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚜 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚖. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜. 𝙰𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚘́𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚘 𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎, 𝚊̀ 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚛𝚞𝚒𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚒 𝚊 𝚗𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎, 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚌𝚊𝚕𝚖𝚊 𝚎 𝚊𝚕𝚐𝚞𝚖 𝚏𝚊𝚜𝚌𝚒́𝚗𝚒𝚘. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚒𝚝𝚎-𝚘; 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚛𝚞𝚊𝚜, 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚜𝚊𝚗𝚐𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚝𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚜𝚘̃𝚎𝚜. 𝙴́ 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚞𝚖 𝚋𝚘𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚊 𝚗𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚎 𝚘 𝚊𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊𝚝𝚘 𝚎 𝚊𝚜 𝚜𝚞𝚊𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚜.

𝙻𝚎𝚗𝚗𝚢 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚟𝚊 𝚗𝚞𝚖 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚌𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚕. 𝙽𝚘́𝚜 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚗𝚞𝚖 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚌𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚛 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚞𝚖 𝚜𝚎 𝚊𝚓𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚊 𝚎𝚕𝚎 𝚊̀ 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚊́ 𝚍𝚊𝚒́, 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚎 𝚊𝚓𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚕, 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚟𝚒𝚛𝚊́ 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚜𝚘𝚕𝚞𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚕𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚊 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛 𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚒𝚛𝚘-𝚖𝚎 𝚊̀ 𝚜𝚞𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚎 𝚊̀ 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚊.

𝚂𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝙾𝚛𝚐𝚊𝚗𝚒𝚣𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝙸𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚕 𝚍𝚎 𝚃𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘 (𝙾𝙸𝚃) 𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚊𝚏𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚘𝚞 𝚜𝚎𝚒𝚜 𝚖𝚒𝚕𝚑𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚒́𝚜𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘 𝚜𝚞𝚕 𝚍𝚊 𝙴𝚞𝚛𝚘𝚙𝚊. 𝙾 𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚘 𝚗𝚘 𝚜𝚞𝚕 𝚍𝚊 𝙴𝚞𝚛𝚘𝚙𝚊 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚘 𝚙𝚒𝚘𝚛 𝚊 𝚗𝚒́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚕. 𝙰𝚒́ 𝚊 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚟𝚊𝚕𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚊 𝟸𝟻𝟻 𝚖𝚒𝚕𝚑𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘 𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚟𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚕𝚎𝚡𝚘 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚝𝚛𝚘 𝚟𝚎𝚣𝚎𝚜 𝚜𝚞𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚛 𝚊̀ 𝚍𝚊 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎 𝚏𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝟸𝟶𝟶𝟾. 𝚄𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎 "𝚜𝚎𝚖 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚍𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚜". 𝙽𝚘𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚚𝚞𝚎, 𝚗𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚜 𝚛𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚜, 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘𝚕𝚑𝚊𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚘 𝚗𝚞́𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚏𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚊, 𝚙𝚘𝚛 𝚍𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚘, 𝚗𝚊 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚞𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚏𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚎𝚕𝚘 𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘.

𝙼𝚞𝚕𝚑𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚜, 𝚓𝚘𝚟𝚎𝚗𝚜 𝚎 𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚘𝚛 𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚕𝚘𝚓𝚊𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚞𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚊𝚏𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜. 𝙴 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚊 𝚌𝚞𝚕𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚊. 𝙳𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚛 𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚞𝚖 𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚒𝚐𝚘, 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚞𝚖 𝚕𝚒𝚟𝚛𝚘, 𝚞𝚖 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘.

"𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚗𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚛𝚞𝚣𝚒𝚕𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚊. 𝚄𝚖 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚊𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚑𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚞𝚣 𝚊 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚞𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚜𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚕, 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚞𝚊𝚕, 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚌𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚞𝚊𝚕𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚋𝚒𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎, 𝚎 𝚊̀ 𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎𝚜. 𝙾 𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚛𝚘 𝚏𝚘𝚌𝚊-𝚜𝚎 𝚗𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚞𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚘𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚝𝚛𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚖𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚛, 𝚍𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚘 𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚘, 𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘, 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚝𝚎𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚕, 𝚍𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚎 𝚍𝚒𝚊́𝚕𝚘𝚐𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚕. 𝚂𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚞𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚌𝚕𝚞𝚜𝚒𝚟𝚊, 𝚜𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚎 𝚍𝚞𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚞𝚛𝚊, 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚌𝚊𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚑𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚕 𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚙𝚘𝚕𝚒́𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚖 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚛-𝚜𝚎", 𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚕𝚊𝚟𝚛𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝙶𝚞𝚢 𝚁𝚢𝚍𝚎𝚛, 𝚍𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚘𝚛-𝚐𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚕 𝚍𝚊 𝙾𝙸𝚃.

𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎́𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚜. 𝙲𝚘𝚖 𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚘 𝚟𝚎𝚖 𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚣𝚊, 𝚊 𝚖𝚒𝚐𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘, 𝚊 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎 𝚜𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚕 𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚊́𝚛𝚒𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎 𝚕𝚎𝚟𝚊𝚛 𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚟𝚞𝚕𝚜𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚘𝚞 𝚊̀ 𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚊𝚞𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊̃𝚘 𝚙𝚘𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚐𝚘𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚘𝚜.

𝙾 𝚏𝚞𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚘, 𝚊𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎, 𝚎́ 𝚒𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚘. 𝙳𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚜𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚎 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚒𝚡𝚊𝚛 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚛𝚞𝚋𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 “𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚟𝚒𝚘𝚜” 𝚜𝚞𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚛 𝚊̀ 𝚍𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚞𝚖𝚎. 𝙾𝚜 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚓𝚞𝚍𝚒𝚌𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚖 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚊𝚕𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚛 𝚘 𝚛𝚞𝚖𝚘 𝚍𝚊 𝚑𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘́𝚛𝚒𝚊. 𝙻𝚎𝚖𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚖𝚘-𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚖𝚞𝚕𝚝𝚒𝚍𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚗𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚊 𝙰́𝚏𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚊, 𝙴𝚞𝚛𝚘𝚙𝚊, 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚄𝚗𝚒𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚎 𝙰𝚖𝚎́𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝙻𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚊, 𝚗𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝟸𝟶𝟶𝟾 𝚎 𝚍𝚊 𝚖𝚞𝚍𝚊𝚗𝚌̧𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚐𝚞𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚗𝚊 𝚕𝚞𝚝𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚕𝚒́𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚊.

𝚂𝚎 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚓𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚛𝚊? 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘. 𝙲𝚘𝚗𝚟𝚞𝚕𝚜𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚜𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚙𝚘𝚒𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚎́ 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚙𝚘𝚒𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚒𝚛 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚌𝚞𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚒𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚒𝚟𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚊 𝚊𝚕𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚟𝚒𝚍. 𝙼𝚊𝚜 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎 𝚗𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚏𝚘𝚛 𝚏𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚘 – 𝚊 𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚌𝚛𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚎́ 𝚒𝚜𝚜𝚘 - 𝚎 𝚎́ 𝚙𝚛𝚞𝚍𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚎 𝚏𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚓𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚘.

𝙴́ 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘 𝚖𝚞𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚞𝚖 𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚛𝚘𝚞𝚡𝚎 𝚊𝚚𝚞𝚒 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚕𝚎𝚟𝚘𝚞 𝚘 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚝𝚊 𝚊̀ 𝚋𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚊𝚙𝚜𝚘. 𝙴́ 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘 𝚘𝚞𝚟𝚒𝚛 𝚎 𝚊𝚐𝚒𝚛, 𝚙𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚊𝚛 𝚎𝚖 𝚗𝚘𝚟𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚕𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚘́𝚖𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚜. 𝙾 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚒́𝚗𝚒𝚖𝚘 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚟𝚎. “𝙾𝚜 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚖 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚛 𝚟𝚊𝚕𝚘𝚛 𝚒𝚗𝚟𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚎 𝚒𝚗𝚘𝚟𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚛 𝚗𝚘𝚟𝚊𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚎𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚗𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚟𝚒𝚌̧𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚞́𝚋𝚕𝚒𝚌𝚘𝚜 𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚙𝚞𝚕𝚊𝚌̧𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚟𝚞𝚕𝚗𝚎𝚛𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚒𝚜” 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝙼𝚊𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚊 𝙼𝚊𝚣𝚣𝚞𝚌𝚊𝚝𝚘, 𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚘𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚗𝚍𝚎 𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚏𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚊𝚙𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊. 𝙰 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊 𝚏𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚊𝚕, 𝚊 𝚗𝚒́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚐𝚕𝚘𝚋𝚊𝚕, 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚎𝚌̧𝚊 𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚊𝚙𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚕 𝚗𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚍𝚞́𝚣𝚒𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚄𝚗𝚒𝚍𝚘𝚜, 𝚎́ 𝚞𝚛𝚐𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎. 𝚂𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚞𝚛𝚐𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚊 𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚕𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚖𝚎𝚍𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚝𝚎𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚌𝚒𝚊𝚕 𝚎 𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚞𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎 𝚛𝚎𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚌̧𝚘 𝚍𝚘 𝚊𝚙𝚘𝚒𝚘 𝚊̀𝚜 𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚐𝚊𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚖 𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚘 𝚊𝚘𝚜 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚟𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚊 𝚜𝚞𝚊 𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚕𝚊𝚙𝚜𝚊𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊. 𝙴́ 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘 𝚛𝚎𝚙𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚊𝚛 𝚊 𝚕𝚘́𝚐𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚖𝚘, 𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚝𝚘𝚌𝚛𝚊𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚎 𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚒𝚖𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚒𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚜 𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚘́𝚖𝚒𝚌𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚎𝚡𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎 𝚞𝚖 𝚗𝚞́𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚘 𝚌𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚘𝚊𝚜 𝚊 𝚟𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚛 𝚎𝚖 𝚙𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚣𝚊 𝚎𝚡𝚝𝚛𝚎𝚖𝚊.

𝙴́ 𝚌𝚕𝚊𝚛𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎, 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚊𝚜 𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚜 𝚗𝚘 𝚍𝚒𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚙𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚜, 𝚎́ 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚘𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚞𝚗𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚞𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚏𝚞𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎, 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚖 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊, 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚛𝚊 𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚘𝚗𝚑𝚘. 𝙰 𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚐𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚌𝚕𝚒𝚖𝚊́𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚊 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚟𝚊 𝚊𝚒́. 𝙽𝚘́𝚜 𝚎́ 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚒́𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚛𝚊 𝚊 𝚜𝚎́𝚛𝚒𝚘. 𝙴́ 𝚝𝚞𝚍𝚘 𝚊 𝚜𝚎́𝚛𝚒𝚘. 𝚀𝚞𝚎 𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚜𝚒𝚛𝚟𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚊𝚌𝚛𝚎𝚍𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚙𝚒𝚘𝚛 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚊𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚛.

𝙴́ 𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚛𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚊 𝚜𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚘 𝚏𝚞𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚘 𝚎 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊 𝚊𝚌𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚛. 𝙴𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚛 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎́ 𝚟𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚛. 𝚁𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚍𝚊𝚛 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘. 𝙴́ 𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘 𝚕𝚞𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊 𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚞𝚊𝚕 𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚎 𝚜𝚎 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚜𝚏𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚎 𝚗𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚜𝚒́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚜𝚊𝚕𝚟𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘; 𝚗𝚞𝚖 𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚓𝚞𝚜𝚝𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚒́𝚗𝚑𝚊𝚖𝚘𝚜. 𝚂𝚊̃𝚘 𝚘𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚟𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚖 𝚍𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚞 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚘, 𝚊̀ 𝚎𝚜𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚛𝚍𝚊 𝚎 𝚊̀ 𝚍𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚒𝚝𝚊, 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚖 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛. 𝚂𝚒𝚖, 𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚊𝚙𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚕 𝚖𝚊𝚝𝚊𝚛𝚊́ 𝚊𝚜 𝚙𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚎𝚗𝚊𝚜, 𝚊𝚜 𝚖𝚎́𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚜 𝚎 𝚊𝚝𝚎́ 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚊𝚜 𝚐𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚜 𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚊𝚜. 𝙴𝚜𝚝𝚊 𝚕𝚞𝚝𝚊 𝚝𝚘𝚛𝚗𝚘𝚞-𝚜𝚎 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚊𝚖𝚙𝚕𝚊 𝚍𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊𝚜 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚑𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜, 𝚊 𝚕𝚞𝚝𝚊 𝚍𝚎 𝚌𝚕𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚎𝚜 𝚎́ 𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚛𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚒 𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚕𝚎𝚝𝚊𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚍𝚘 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚎 𝚊𝚐𝚘𝚛𝚊 𝚒𝚗𝚌𝚕𝚞𝚒𝚛 𝚙𝚊𝚝𝚛𝚘̃𝚎𝚜. 𝙿𝚊𝚛𝚝𝚎 𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚊𝚝𝚛𝚘̃𝚎𝚜 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊́ 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚜𝚎 𝚝𝚊̃𝚘 𝚟𝚞𝚕𝚗𝚎𝚛𝚊́𝚟𝚎𝚕 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚘𝚜 𝚜𝚎𝚞𝚜 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜 𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚛𝚛𝚎 𝚘 𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚘 𝚍𝚎 𝚜𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚎𝚟𝚘𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚛 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚐𝚕𝚘𝚋𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚣𝚊𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚌𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚊. 𝙾 𝚌𝚊𝚙𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚖𝚘 𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚘𝚕𝚍𝚎𝚜 𝚎𝚖 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚑𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜, 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚘 𝚝𝚘𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚘𝚜 𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊𝚜 𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚜, 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚋𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚛𝚊́. 𝙲𝚊𝚋𝚎-𝚗𝚘𝚜 𝚙𝚎𝚗𝚜𝚊𝚛 𝚎 𝚕𝚞𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚙𝚘𝚛 𝚞𝚖 𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚖𝚊 𝚖𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚛 – 𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘, 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚟𝚎 𝚘 𝚟𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘 𝚌𝚘𝚖𝚞𝚗𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚊̃𝚘 – 𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚊𝚛 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚜𝚒𝚌̧𝚊̃𝚘 𝚜𝚎𝚓𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚌𝚒́𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚊. 𝙴́ 𝚝𝚊𝚖𝚋𝚎́𝚖 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊 𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚘 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚟𝚎 𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚕𝚒́𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚊.

𝚄𝚖𝚊 𝚌𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚎 𝚌𝚎𝚛𝚝𝚊. 𝙽𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚊 𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚊𝚛𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚎𝚖 𝚖𝚘𝚍𝚘 𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎̂𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚊 𝚊̀ 𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚊 𝚚𝚞𝚎 𝚊 𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚊 𝚍𝚒𝚝𝚊 𝚗𝚘𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚕 𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚎. 𝙿𝚘𝚍𝚎 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚛𝚎𝚐𝚛𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚛. 𝙴 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚛𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚊 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚍𝚊𝚍𝚎 𝚚𝚞𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚘 𝚊 𝚙𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚊 𝚊𝚌𝚊𝚋𝚊𝚛. 𝙿𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚎 𝚖𝚊̃𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝙱𝚛𝚊𝚐𝚊𝚗𝚌̧𝚊 𝚎 𝚙𝚎𝚍𝚒𝚛 𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚊𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚘𝚜 𝚎 𝚘𝚜 𝚏𝚒𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚜 𝚍𝚎 𝚟𝚘𝚕𝚝𝚊. 𝙻𝚊𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚘, 𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚜 𝚓𝚊́ 𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚖 𝚘𝚜 𝚖𝚎𝚜𝚖𝚘𝚜. 𝙰𝚚𝚞𝚒 𝚎́ 𝚖𝚊𝚒𝚜 𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚎.

𝙴 𝚙𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚖𝚘𝚜 𝚏𝚊𝚣𝚎𝚛 𝚞𝚖𝚊 𝚝𝚊𝚝𝚞𝚊𝚐𝚎𝚖 𝚌𝚘𝚖 𝚞𝚖 𝚎𝚜𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚝𝚘: “𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚑𝚊́ 𝚟𝚘𝚕𝚝𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚟𝚘𝚕𝚝𝚊”. 𝙾𝚞 𝚖𝚎𝚕𝚑𝚘𝚛: “𝚗𝚊̃𝚘 𝚊̀ 𝚟𝚘𝚕𝚝𝚊 𝚍𝚊 𝚛𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚟𝚘𝚕𝚝𝚊”.

* Advogada

IN "EXPRESSO" - 01/03/21
.