FERNANDO ROSAS

 .

O milagre da economia 

sem política

Na sequência da polémica suscitada em torno da intervenção de Nuno Palma na reunião do Movimento Europa Liberdade (MEL), o historiador Fernando Rosas rebate as teses do professor da Universidade de Manchester na área da História Económica.

𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘶𝘮 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪́𝘤𝘪𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘥𝘢𝘨𝘰́𝘨𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘳 𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘴𝘵𝘢̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 (𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭) 𝘯𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘔𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘢 𝘓𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 (𝘔𝘌𝘓) 𝘰𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘢 𝘩𝘢́ 𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘴. 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘻𝘢, 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘶𝘮 𝘰𝘢́𝘴𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘰𝘶 𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘴, 𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘭𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘫𝘢𝘻 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘮 𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘢̀ 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘢́𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘦.

𝘌́ 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘣𝘴𝘵𝘢́𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰𝘴. 𝘖 𝘥𝘢 𝘦𝘳𝘶𝘱𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘢̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘰́𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘮 𝘤𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘨𝘢𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘦́𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘴, 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘧𝘢𝘳𝘤̧𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘶 𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘴𝘰 𝘷𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘣 𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘦 “𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘰́𝘳𝘪𝘢” 𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘣𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘢𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴. 𝘌𝘮 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘭𝘶𝘨𝘢𝘳, 𝘢 𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘰𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳-𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘤̧𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘥𝘢 𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘮 𝘨𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢 𝘰𝘴 “𝘷𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘰́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰”. 𝘍𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘢 𝘭𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘢 𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘢 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘥𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘴𝘰́ 𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘢 𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘮𝘢. 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘢 𝘤𝘳𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘢𝘭𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘮 𝘢 𝘤𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘤̧𝘢. 𝘌 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘪́𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘦́ 𝘰 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘮.

𝘈 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘦…

𝘚𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘮 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘪, 𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘢 𝘯𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘻𝘪𝘶 𝘯𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘦́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘮𝘦-𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦: 𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘪, “𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘰”, 𝘶𝘮 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 “𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘢́𝘷𝘦𝘭”, 𝘮𝘢𝘴, 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰, “𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘶 𝘢 𝘶𝘮 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪́𝘰𝘥𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘳𝘢́𝘱𝘪𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘢 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘢 𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘭”. 𝘈 “𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘢” 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘰 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘪́𝘴 𝘢𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 “𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘻𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘈𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘭” 𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘪́𝘥𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰́𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦 𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘶𝘴 “𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘪́𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘰𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘪𝘴”. 𝘐𝘴𝘵𝘰 𝘦́, 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘢̀ 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦, 𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘶𝘮 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘩𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘦 𝘢𝘵𝘦́ 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘰 𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤̧𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦́𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘶𝘮𝘢 “𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶́𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘱𝘢𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴” (𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭) 𝘥𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘷𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢 𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘢́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢.

𝘌́ 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘗𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘰 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘳𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘮 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢 𝘢 𝘳𝘢𝘻𝘢̃𝘰 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘨𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝟧 𝘥𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘯𝘩𝘰 (𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭) 𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭: 𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘵𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘰 𝘦́ 𝘴𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘳 𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘳 𝘢 “𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢” 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘶 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦 𝘶́𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦. 𝘚𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘢́, 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘶𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘰, 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘮 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘪𝘹𝘦 𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢 “𝘰𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪́𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢” 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘭𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰-𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘮 𝘣𝘦𝘮 𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘩𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘢 “𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘢́𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢”. 𝘖 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦́ 𝘴𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘳 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘰́𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘢. 𝘈 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘢 “𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢” 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘪́𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘢 𝘦́ 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘪́𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢́ 𝘢𝘪́ 𝘣𝘦𝘮 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘶́𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘰. 𝘖 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘳 𝘦́ 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘦́ 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘪́𝘷𝘦𝘭.

… 𝘌 𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪́𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘦

𝘋𝘦 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢 𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘢 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘮 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘢-𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘣𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴.

𝟣. 𝘖 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 𝘴𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢́ 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰, 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘢 𝘷𝘪𝘨𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘢 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘪𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝟣𝟫𝟥𝟥, 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘶 𝟦𝟣 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘴. 𝘌 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘢 𝘶𝘮 𝘵𝘢̃𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪́𝘰𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘴, 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦́ 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪́𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘥𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘶𝘮 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘮𝘶𝘵𝘢́𝘷𝘦𝘭. 𝘌́ 𝘴𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘥𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘴 𝟤𝟢 (𝘚𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘻𝘢𝘳 𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘢-𝘴𝘦 𝘰 “𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘤̧𝘢𝘴” 𝘦𝘮 𝟣𝟫𝟤𝟪) 𝘦 𝘰 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘐𝘐 𝘎𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢 𝘔𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘦 𝘶𝘮 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘪́𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘦, 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘰𝘴 𝘷𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘴 𝘤𝘢́𝘭𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘢𝘹𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘦́𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘰 𝘗𝘐𝘉 𝘢 𝘷𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘮 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝘰 𝟣% 𝘦 𝘰𝘴 𝟤%, 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘥𝘢 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘪𝘴, 𝘱𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘻𝘢 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢, 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘰, 𝘵𝘢𝘹𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘧𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘮𝘢 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝟦𝟢% 𝘦𝘮 𝟣𝟫𝟧𝟢, 𝘤𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘪𝘴. 𝘌𝘴𝘴𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘶-𝘴𝘦 𝘢 𝘤𝘪𝘳𝘤𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘢̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘷𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘰𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘰𝘴 (𝘎𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘦 𝘋𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝟣𝟫𝟤𝟫, 𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘭), 𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘮 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢: 𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘰 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰, 𝘢 𝘧𝘶𝘨𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘢 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘯𝘢 𝘉𝘰𝘭𝘴𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘓𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘶 𝘯𝘰 𝘪𝘮𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰 𝘯𝘰 𝘉𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘭, 𝘢 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦 𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰, 𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘰 𝘰𝘣𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘴, 𝘦𝘵𝘤… 𝘖𝘶 𝘴𝘦𝘫𝘢, 𝘦́ 𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘰 “𝘴𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘳” 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘻𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘳𝘢 𝘰𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘰𝘴 𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴, 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘳 𝘯𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴. 𝘈 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘻𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘦́ 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢́𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦́𝘨𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴 𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘮.

𝟤. 𝘋𝘪𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰, 𝘦́ 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘰́𝘴-𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢, 𝘴𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘥𝘰 𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘳 𝘥𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘴 𝟧𝟢 𝘢𝘵𝘦́ 𝘪𝘯𝘪́𝘤𝘪𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘴 𝟩𝟢, 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘶𝘮 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘮 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴. 𝘚𝘦𝘳𝘢́, 𝘯𝘢 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘪́𝘴, 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘷𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘦̂𝘮 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰, 𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪́𝘰𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘰𝘶 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘢𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘹𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘦𝘮 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘢̀𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘖𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘦𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘶. 𝘌𝘴𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘰, 𝘯𝘰 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘰, 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘶𝘮 𝘵𝘪́𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘢, 𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰 𝘦́, 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘮 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘴𝘦𝘮 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤̧𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘮 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘻𝘰. 𝘈 𝘢𝘤𝘶𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘱𝘶́𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘥𝘢 𝘧𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢 𝘷𝘪𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘰𝘶 𝘢 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪́𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘰, 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘨𝘳𝘶𝘱𝘰𝘴 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘳𝘰𝘴, 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘪𝘹𝘰𝘴, 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘰𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘯𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘱𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘢𝘴 𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘢𝘴, 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦-𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘭, 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘴 𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶́𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘮 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘱𝘰́𝘭𝘪𝘰 𝘰𝘶 𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘰𝘱𝘰́𝘭𝘪𝘰 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦́𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭. 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘪𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘢́𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘶 𝘯𝘢 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰, 𝘯𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘱𝘶́𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴, 𝘯𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘰𝘴, 𝘯𝘢 𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘦 𝘯𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰́𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘪𝘱𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘰𝘶 𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢. 𝘈𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢, 𝘢 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢́ 𝘯𝘰 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦.

𝘗𝘰𝘳 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘮𝘰, 𝘰𝘴 𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘴𝘰́ 𝘰𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘴 𝘯𝘶́𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪́𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘮. 𝘈 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘦́ 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘰𝘶 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶́𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘪𝘴, 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘰𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘪́𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘌𝘍𝘛𝘈, 𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘣𝘢𝘪𝘹𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘰 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘰 𝘢̀ 𝘰𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘯𝘰𝘭𝘰́𝘨𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘢𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘧𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘰 𝘦 𝘢̀ 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘮𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘢, 𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘶 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘭 𝘧𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦. 𝘔𝘦𝘴𝘮𝘰 𝘯𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘴 “𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶́𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦”, 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢, 𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘦́ 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘴. 𝘖 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘰 𝘦́ 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦 𝘨𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘢́𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘥𝘰 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦́𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭, 𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘢𝘭, 𝘥𝘰 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘰, 𝘥𝘢 𝘎𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢 𝘊𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘦 𝘥𝘢 𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘩𝘢 𝘱𝘦́𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰. 𝘘𝘶𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘰𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘢 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦 𝘥𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘩𝘰, 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘰 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘦́𝘳𝘪𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶 𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰́𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘱𝘢𝘪́𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴, 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘢́𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘧𝘰𝘪 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦̂𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢 𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢, 𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘰-𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘰 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰-𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 — 𝘫𝘢́ 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘴 𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘎𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢 𝘊𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘦 𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘢 — 𝘳𝘶𝘪𝘶 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘶𝘮 𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘩𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘴, 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤̧𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘢 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘢 𝘯𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦.

𝟦. 𝘔𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘦́ 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘕𝘶𝘯𝘰 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘶𝘮 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰-𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘤̧𝘢 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦́𝘴 𝘥𝘢 𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘱𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘭 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪́𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴. 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪́𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘢 𝘦́ 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘵𝘰 𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘶 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘰𝘴 𝘯𝘪́𝘷𝘦𝘪𝘴, 𝘴𝘰́ 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢́𝘷𝘦𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘻𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰́𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦. 𝘈𝘰 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳 𝘢 𝟣𝟫𝟩𝟥, 𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰 𝘮𝘦́𝘥𝘪𝘰 𝘯𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘦𝘳𝘢 𝟤𝟧% 𝘥𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘢̃𝘰, 𝟤𝟫% 𝘥𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦̂𝘴 𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘩𝘰𝘭; 𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘪́𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘴 (𝟦,𝟫 % 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘰𝘵𝘢𝘭) 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘮 𝘶𝘮 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘳 𝘨𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭; 𝘶𝘮 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘤̧𝘰 𝘥𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘪́𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘱𝘶𝘯𝘩𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘮𝘪́𝘯𝘪𝘮𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘧𝘢𝘻𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘴; 𝟥𝟨% 𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘫𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘩𝘢𝘮 𝘭𝘶𝘻 𝘦𝘭𝘦́𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝟦𝟣% 𝘯𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘱𝘶𝘯𝘩𝘢𝘮 𝘥𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘢́𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘰. 𝘈 𝘵𝘢𝘹𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘷𝘢 𝘰𝘴 𝟧𝟢%𝟢 (𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘮) 𝘦 𝘦𝘳𝘢 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘢 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘢. 𝘊𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝟤𝟫% 𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘧𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘰𝘴 𝘦𝘮 𝟣𝟫𝟩𝟢, 𝘗𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘰́ 𝘦𝘳𝘢 𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘛𝘶𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘢. 𝘌𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝟣𝟫𝟨𝟢 𝘦 𝟣𝟫𝟩𝟥 𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘶𝘮 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘩𝘢̃𝘰 𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘪𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘴, 𝘧𝘶𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘰 𝘢̀ 𝘱𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘻𝘢 𝘰𝘶 𝘢̀ 𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘢. 𝘕𝘢̃𝘰 𝘴𝘢̃𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘤̧𝘰̃𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪́𝘰𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢́𝘳𝘪𝘰. 𝘌́ 𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘢 𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘳 𝘶𝘮𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘢́𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢́𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢.

𝘈 𝘶́𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘳𝘢 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘪 𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘪 𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤̧𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘰. 𝘈 𝘶́𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢 “𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘮𝘰”, 𝘢 𝘥𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘢𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘢́-𝘭𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘢́𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤̧𝘢́ 𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦́𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪́𝘤𝘪𝘰 𝘥𝘢 𝘴𝘶𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘤̧𝘢̃𝘰. 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘰 𝘴𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪́𝘷𝘦𝘭, 𝘱𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘩𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘢, 𝘴𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘳 𝘢 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘢 𝘥𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘻𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘥𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢 𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘰𝘣𝘳𝘦 𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘪́𝘴 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘪𝘰 𝘴𝘦́𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘦́𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘰 𝘟𝘟.

* Historiador, professor universitário, activista político.

 IN "PÚBLICO" - 20/06/21

 .