.
23/05/2022
LXI- MEGA MÁQUINAS
6-Super Aviões
O título da rubrica MEGA MÁQUINAS não se conforma apenas com as enormes dimensões de algumas que temos exibido, abrange todas as que têm MEGA INFLUÊNCIA nas nossas vidas.
*
As nossas séries por episódios são editadas no mesmo dia da semana à
mesma hora, assim torna-se fácil se quiser visionar episódios
anteriores.
FONTE:
Visão do Mundo - Documentários
Visão do Mundo - Documentários
ANA RIBEIRO
.
SE É MULHER OBRIGATÓRIO LER
SE É HOMEM TAMBÉM DEVE LER
SE O GÉNERO É OUTRO IMPERDÍVEL LER
MAIS QUE OBRIGATÓRIO DIVULGAR
A comunidade científica
continua a ignorar
o assédio às mulheres
Orgulhosa por conseguir um lugar num programa doutoral num instituto de
investigação científica de renome em Portugal, não imaginava que a
escolha que pensei ser o caminho para uma carreira de sucesso me abriria
as portas para um pesadelo. Vivi quatro anos de desrespeito,
humilhação, abuso psicológico e constante questionamento da minha
inteligência e valor profissional.
𝖠 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗈́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝗂𝖺-𝗌𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗂 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝗎𝖾̂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗆𝖾. 𝖠𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗉𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗃𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗈́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌, 𝖽𝗂𝗓𝗂𝖺-𝗌𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗏𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝗈, 𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗈 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗏𝖺 𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗏𝖺 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖺𝗋, 𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈. 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺́𝗏𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝟤𝟢𝟣𝟣 𝖾, 𝖿𝖺𝗌𝖼𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗎𝗆 𝗅𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗂𝗍𝖺-𝗁𝗈𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖽𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈, 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗂 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗍𝗋𝗈 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗈 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖼𝗎𝗃𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌.
𝖲𝖾𝗆 𝗈 𝗌𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋, 𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗂 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝗎𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗎-𝗆𝖾 𝖺𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾́𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗅𝗈: 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈, 𝗁𝗎𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈 𝗉𝗌𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗀𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗇𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅.
𝖠𝗈 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗌, 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖽𝗈-𝗆𝖾 𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺, 𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗅𝗎𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗍𝗈. 𝖮𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗎́𝖽𝗂𝗈. 𝖤, 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝖼̧𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝗁𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝖻𝗎𝗋𝖻𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗏𝖺. 𝖢𝗈𝗆𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗂 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝗂𝗓.
𝖠𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝖼̧𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗇𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗏𝗂 𝗏𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝖾𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗌𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗎𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗋𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗂, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗆 𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾 𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖺 𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗓𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝖿𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈. 𝖮𝗎𝗏𝗂 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖽𝖾 (𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝖾𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗌𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖿𝗎𝗀𝗂𝗋) 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝗎𝗂 “𝖺𝗏𝗂𝗌𝖺𝖽𝖺” 𝖾, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈, 𝖺 "𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗉𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆", 𝗊𝗎𝖾 "𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝗈́ 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺".
𝖤𝗎, 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗎́𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖻𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅, 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝗎𝗇𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗑𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗈𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖺𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋, 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝗇𝗁𝗈𝗌, 𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗋 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈. 𝖲𝖾 𝗈 𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖿𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗏𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝖺𝖼𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂́𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗎𝗌𝗂𝖺𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖾 𝖾𝗏𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗀𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖾 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋.
𝖳𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗂 𝖽𝖾𝖻𝖺𝗂𝗑𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋 (𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 “𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝖺́𝖼𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝖺!”), 𝗈𝖻𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝗆𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́-𝗅𝗈𝗌. 𝖥𝗎𝗂 𝗋𝗂𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖺𝗆𝖾𝖺𝖼̧𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂-𝗅𝖺, 𝖿𝗎𝗂 𝗁𝗎𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈̃𝖾𝗌, 𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂-𝗆𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖿𝗋𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺, 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗈 𝗏𝖺́𝗅𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾. 𝖳𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖾𝗂-𝗆𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈́𝗆𝖺𝗍𝗈.
𝖮 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗎 𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗆, 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖺 𝗅𝗎𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗇𝗈𝗆𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺𝗌, 𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈. 𝖥𝗎𝗂 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖺́𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗎, 𝖽𝖾𝖻𝖺𝗂𝗑𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌, 𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗆𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗀𝗂𝖽𝖺, 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗋, 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗌. 𝖮 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗎-𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗌𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗂 𝗈𝗌 𝗎́𝗅𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝗉𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌.
𝖳𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗂 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂́𝗈𝖽𝗈 𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖽𝗎́𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗆𝗂𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗂́𝗏𝗂𝗈 𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗀𝗈𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗏𝖺𝗂 𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗎 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗎. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝗎𝗂 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝗂𝗌𝗈𝗅𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝖻𝗌𝗍𝖺́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗀𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝗍𝖺𝗅𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗁𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗆 𝖾𝗆 𝖻𝗈𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗇𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾.
𝖭𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺, 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝗂 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗈 𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝖺𝖼𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗏𝖺. 𝖠𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗆𝖾𝖺𝖼̧𝖺𝗌, 𝖺𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗌𝖾 𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖺𝗋𝖺́ 𝗈 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆, 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆-𝗌𝖾 𝖺 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗍𝗈𝗑𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖺 𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖾 𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺.
𝖤𝗎, 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈, 𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗅𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂́𝗈𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈𝗎: 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈, 𝖾́ 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗂́𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗂𝗌.
𝖱𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝖺𝖿𝖺𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗂-𝗆𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 “𝗆𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋” 𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗃𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗈 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖾𝗂 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺. 𝖬𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗉𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈.
𝖴𝖬 𝖲𝖨𝖲𝖳𝖤𝖬𝖠 𝖵𝖨𝖢𝖨𝖠𝖣𝖮 𝖤𝖬 𝖯𝖱𝖤𝖢𝖠𝖱𝖨𝖣𝖠𝖣𝖤
𝖭𝗈𝗌 𝗎́𝗅𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗎 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗀𝗎𝖺𝗅𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗌𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖺̀ 𝖼𝗈𝗏𝗂𝖽-𝟣𝟫. 𝖮 𝖾𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗂𝖺 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝗈𝗎-𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗋𝗈, 𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗇𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾, 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖻𝗋𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗂𝗍𝖾.
𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗎 𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌, 𝗌𝖺𝗅𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖻𝖺𝗂𝗑𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌. 𝖠𝗅𝖾́𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖺𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖼𝖾𝗉𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝗎́𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖼̧𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗋𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖴𝗇𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖭𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖫𝗂𝗌𝖻𝗈𝖺, 𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈.
𝖥𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗆-𝗇𝗈 𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝗈𝖼𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾́𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝗎𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗂𝗀𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋. 𝖤 𝗌𝖾 𝖾́ 𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 “𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖺 𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈” 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈, 𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖻𝖾́𝗆 𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺.
𝖠𝗅𝖾́𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖺𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖼𝖾𝗉𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝗎́𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈. 𝖠 𝖻𝖺𝗌𝖾 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗌 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖾́ 𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺.
𝖲𝗈́ 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝗆 𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖺 𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅. 𝖭𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺̀ 𝖠𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖺 𝟣 𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝟤𝟢𝟣𝟫, 𝖬𝖺𝗇𝗎𝖾𝗅 𝖧𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗋, 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖢𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝖳𝖾𝖼𝗇𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗀𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖤𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋, 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 “𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗃𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗅𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺𝗌” 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗋 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 “𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗈𝗋𝖽𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈" 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝖾𝗇𝖿𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝗏𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾 𝖺 𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝖺.
𝖮𝗋𝖺, 𝖺 𝖻𝖺𝗌𝖾 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗌 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖾́ 𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗈́ 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆, 𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝖺, 𝟥𝟪 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺 “𝗃𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗆”. 𝖤𝗑𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝟤𝟢 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖺 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝗃𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗇𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌-𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗌 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌, 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾.
𝖯𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗆𝖺̃𝖾𝗌, 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈̃𝖾-𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗌 𝖺𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖾𝖿𝗂𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺̀ 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝗈 “𝗆𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈”. 𝖢𝗈𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺-𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗈, 𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺-𝖺𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺̀ 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗈 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺, 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗓𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗁𝗂𝗉𝗈́𝗍𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺. 𝖯𝖾𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗈, 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗆𝗂́𝗅𝗂𝖺 𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝗈𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗈́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗅𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗓𝖺.
𝖤𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅, 𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗉𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝖺 𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾. 𝖰𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗓 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖿𝖺́-𝗅𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝗂́𝗇𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗅 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗅, 𝖿𝖺́-𝗅𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗈 𝗈𝗎 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖾𝖿𝗂𝗇𝗂𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅.
𝖠𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗓 𝖬𝖺𝗇𝗎𝖾𝗅 𝖧𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗋, 𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈: 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗆 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗎𝗃𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌. 𝖠𝗅𝖾́𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗁𝖺́ 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺 𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗁𝖺́ 𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗌𝗂́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗈 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗀𝗇𝖺, 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺-𝗌𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝗈𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗓. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖺𝗅𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌, 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗎𝗆 “𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗌𝗂́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗎𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈” 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗆𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈. 𝖡𝖺𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝗈𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗋 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖺𝗉𝖺𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝗆𝗂́𝗅𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺. 𝖲𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅, 𝗇𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗆𝖺𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌.
𝖲𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗈𝗎 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗇𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝗂𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗈 (𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗓), 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖺 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾𝗎 𝖺𝗍𝖾́ 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗋 𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝟣𝟢𝟢𝟢 𝖾𝗎𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾. 𝖠𝗅𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆 𝗃𝖺́ 𝗈𝗎𝗏𝗂𝗎 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗀𝖾 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗎𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝖺𝗅𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝖻𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗍𝖾́ 𝖺𝗈 𝗆𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈? 𝖯𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝗌 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 (𝗉𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅), 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝗂𝖼̧𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺́-𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗈.
𝖲𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗈𝖼𝗋𝖺𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝖺𝖽𝖺, 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗓𝗂𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾. 𝖠 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝖻𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖾 𝗉𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺̀ 𝗏𝖾𝗅𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗅𝗎𝗓 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝗎𝗆 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅, 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗋𝗈𝗌𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺. 𝖤 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝗌𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗈́𝗌.
𝖭𝖺 𝗎́𝗅𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾́𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺, 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝟤𝟢 𝗆𝗂𝗅 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅. 𝖲𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈́𝗌-𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗀𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖺𝗓𝗈. 𝖯𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝗂́𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈, 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗈𝗉𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺, 𝗈 𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋. 𝖠 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖺̀𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖻𝖾𝗇𝖾𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝖺𝖽𝖺, 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗎𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖺𝗆, 𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗂𝗑𝖺𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝖿𝖾𝖼𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌.
𝖢𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖻𝗎𝗋𝗇𝗈𝗎𝗍, 𝗇𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖺𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝖻𝖺𝗂𝗑𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾. 𝖴𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾́ 𝗎𝗆𝖺 “𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾”; 𝖾́ 𝗈 𝖺𝗆𝖻𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗅𝗎𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋, 𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗅, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗌 𝗇𝖺 𝖠𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗂𝖺. 𝖤 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗌𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖺 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗅 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝖿𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌.
𝖠𝗉𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈 𝗀𝖾𝗇𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌, 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝖺 𝖿𝖾𝖼𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌, 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈, 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗎 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗃𝗎𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗎 𝗈 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗌, 𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗓𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋, 𝗈 𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖾 𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝖺̀ 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 - 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈 𝖾 𝗇𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗅. 𝖮 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗆𝖾́𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝖿𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗎 𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅, 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌.
𝖠𝗈 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗆𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆-𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗏𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖾 𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀, 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗏𝖾 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝖺̀ 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌.
𝖬𝖴𝖫𝖧𝖤𝖱 𝖤 𝖢𝖨𝖤𝖭𝖳𝖨𝖲𝖳𝖠
𝖤𝗇𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖺𝗈 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝖾́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈 𝖷𝖷 𝗆𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗏𝖺 𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗂́𝗌, 𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗈𝗌. 𝖠𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗉𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖺𝖿𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗋𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈, 𝗍𝗈𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗓𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗁𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗋 𝗇𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌.
𝖤𝗆 𝟤𝟢𝟤𝟤, 𝗈𝗎𝗏𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖫𝗎𝗂́𝗌 𝖣𝖾𝗅𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝖲𝖨𝖢 𝖭𝗈𝗍𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖣𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗌𝖺, 𝖧𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗇𝖺 𝖢𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌. “𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝗏𝗂 𝗈 𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗋𝗂́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺, (...) 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗋𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈𝗎 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝖾𝗓 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗌 (...) 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗌𝖾, 𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖣𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗌𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗉𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗋𝖺́𝗉𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗌𝗂𝗍𝗎𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌”, 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋. 𝖠 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖾́𝗆 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝗇𝖺, 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈̃𝖾 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋.
𝖠𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾́ 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗁𝗈𝗃𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋, 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺, 𝖾 𝖾́ 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗓𝗂𝗋. 𝖯𝗈𝗋 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈 𝗅𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖾́ 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗌𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝖾́ 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 “𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖿𝗂𝗅 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝗈” 𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝗉𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗆𝗂́𝗅𝗂𝖺. 𝖰𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈𝗉𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗌, 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗉𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝗋𝗂𝖺. 𝖤́ 𝗈 “𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈" 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖼𝖾𝖽𝗈, 𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾.
𝖢𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖺𝗍𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌, 𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝗃𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝖺 𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗅 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖾 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝗃𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗆 𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌. 𝖤́ 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗇𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗓𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺.
𝖣𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖾́ 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗎𝗋𝗈𝗉𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂́𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾́ 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗋 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗉𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗈 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗂𝗈. 𝖠 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾́ 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗑𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈. 𝖲𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗌𝗂𝗏𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅?
𝖠 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅? 𝖠 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗎𝗂 𝖺̀ 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌: 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝖿𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝟥𝟢%.
𝖠𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖺𝗈 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈, 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗉𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺: 𝗁𝖺́ 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗈-𝗁𝗎𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗂́𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗌, 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌, 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝖽𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅. 𝖢𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈, 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗏𝖺𝗂 𝖽𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌: 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝖿𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝟥𝟢%, 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗌𝖺𝗅𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖻𝖺𝗂𝗑𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝖺̀𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌. 𝖮 𝖺𝖿𝖺𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝖿𝗂́𝗌𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖾𝗇𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗎𝗍𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺́𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗓 𝖺 𝖺𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌.
𝖠𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾́𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖾́𝗅𝖾𝖻𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖲𝖺̃𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗈𝗇𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗎𝗃𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝖻𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗈𝗅𝖽𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈 𝗉𝗎𝗌 𝖺𝗅𝗂 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗋 (𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗋) 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖾. 𝖠 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝖻𝗎𝗌𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗓 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌, 𝗁𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗏𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺, 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗆 𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌𝖺𝗌, 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌.
𝖠 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗉𝗂𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝖾𝗆𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗃𝖺𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗂𝗎 𝗌𝗈𝗓𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺. 𝖢𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗎𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗅𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖼̧𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅 𝗌𝗎𝗋𝗀𝗂𝗎 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝗎𝗃𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗆𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗌𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆. 𝖥𝗈𝗂 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗎 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗃𝗎𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗌, 𝗈 𝗎́𝗇𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈. 𝖬𝖺𝗌, 𝗌𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺, 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾̂-𝗅𝗈, 𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈? 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈𝗌. 𝖮 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺 𝖺̀ 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆.
𝖣𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝗇𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗓 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗈 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈, 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖽𝖾 𝖺 𝖦𝗋𝖾́𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺 𝖺𝗍𝖾́ 𝖺̀ 𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾. 𝖲𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗈𝗌. 𝖡𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗂 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗅𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾́𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗂́𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗈̃𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺𝗋. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝟣𝟤𝟢 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝟫𝟢𝟢 𝗉𝗋𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖭𝗈𝖻𝖾𝗅, 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝟧𝟪 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗂́𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌.
𝖲𝖾 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝗂𝗋 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺, 𝖺𝗅𝖾́𝗆 𝖽𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝖺𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖻𝖾́𝗆 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝖻𝗌𝗍𝖺́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗀𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗍𝖺𝗅𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈. 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈, 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗁𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖻𝗈𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺. 𝖣𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗑𝗂𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗇𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖦𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗅𝖾𝗎, 𝖭𝖾𝗐𝗍𝗈𝗇, 𝖤𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗇 𝗈𝗎 𝖳𝖾𝗌𝗅𝖺, 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝖾.
𝖴𝖬𝖠 𝖢𝖴𝖫𝖳𝖴𝖱𝖠 𝖣𝖤 𝖵𝖨𝖮𝖫𝖤̂𝖭𝖢𝖨𝖠 𝖲𝖨𝖲𝖳𝖤́𝖬𝖨𝖢𝖠
𝖮 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈. 𝖤́ 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝗂𝗈𝗌𝗈 𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗈́𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾. 𝖤𝗆𝖻𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗈𝗀𝗂𝗇𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗃𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺, 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗈 𝖺𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗏𝗎𝗅𝗇𝖾𝗋𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖺 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋.
𝖠𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗃𝗈 𝖿𝗂́𝗌𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗏𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺, 𝗈 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗉𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝖾𝗋𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌𝗈 “𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗏𝗈 𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈”, 𝖺 𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖺̀ 𝗋𝗈𝗎𝗉𝖺 𝖾 𝖺̀ 𝗆𝖺𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖾 𝗈 𝗇𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈, 𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖻𝖺𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗌𝗂𝗏𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗈́𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖺 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗆𝗈𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝗌𝗈𝗋𝗋𝗂𝗋 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝗎𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈. 𝖨𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂, 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺, 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆 𝗋𝗎𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗌𝗈𝗌, 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖺.
𝖠𝗅𝖾́𝗆 𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈, 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝖻𝖺𝗂𝗑𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗁𝗂𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗋𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖺 𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗋𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗈 𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝖽𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗈𝗎 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝖿𝖾𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗈𝖻𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖺, 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈 𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗀𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗅 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝗀𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾 𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗎𝖺. 𝖬𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗅𝗆𝗈𝖼̧𝖺𝗋 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝖾𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝗈𝗓 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗀𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋, 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖺.
𝖯𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝗋𝗎𝗉𝗈 𝗈𝗎 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗀𝗋𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗆𝖻𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝖾𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗉𝖺, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖻𝖾́𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆, 𝗈𝗎 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗆 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌. 𝖨𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗁𝖾𝗂 𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂́𝗈𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈, 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗆𝖻𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗀𝗋𝗎𝗉𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗋 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌.
𝖤, 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝗂𝗈𝗌𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾 𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗇𝖺-𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋 𝗈𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝗈 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈. 𝖮 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈? 𝖡𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖾 𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾́𝗀𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝖼𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋 (𝗈𝗎 𝗈 𝖼𝖾́𝗅𝖾𝖻𝗋𝖾 “𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗌, 𝗃𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖺-𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗌”).
𝖠 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾́𝗆𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗌𝗈𝖻 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗆 𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖺𝗎́𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗂́𝗌𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌. 𝖣𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝖻 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗋, 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗋 𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗓𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋, 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗂 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗁𝗈𝗌𝗉𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗂𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌, 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾 𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝗂 𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂́𝗈𝖽𝗈.
𝖴𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖭𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖠𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗂𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝖿 𝖲𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗌, 𝖤𝗇𝗀𝗂𝗇𝖾𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖬𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗇𝖾 𝗉𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝟤𝟢𝟣𝟪 𝗆𝗈𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 ⅔ 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝖺𝗈 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌. 𝖨𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖴𝗇𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌, 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝗌𝗈𝖻 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗎𝗍𝗂́𝗇𝗂𝗈 𝗁𝖺́ 𝗃𝖺́ 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗋 𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗋 𝖺̀𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗇𝖺 𝖠𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖤𝗆 𝟤𝟢𝟤𝟢, 𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖯𝗂𝖼𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝖲𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍 (𝖺𝗀𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝗇𝖺 𝖭𝖾𝗍𝖿𝗅𝗂𝗑) 𝖿𝖾𝗓 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗈 𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝗏𝗈𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗍𝗎𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖾𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖾-𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗌, 𝖾 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗎𝗅𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝗈𝗎 𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖻𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗎𝖺𝗅𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌.
𝖤𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅, 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾́ 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗆, 𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖾 𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌. 𝖰𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆, 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗎́𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝗇𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝗂𝖼̧𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈. 𝖠 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺̀𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗎́𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌: 𝖺 (𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗌𝖺) 𝗌𝗎𝗋𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 “𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗋 𝗇𝗈 𝖿𝗎𝗍𝗎𝗋𝗈, 𝗍𝗈𝗆𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌!”.
𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝖾𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗍𝖾́ 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗈 𝗈𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝖾𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗈́𝗆𝗈𝖽𝗈 𝖾 𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖺𝗈 𝗍𝗈𝗆𝖺𝗋 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺. 𝖳𝖾𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾́𝗀𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗉𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗈𝗅𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗂𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾̂-𝗅𝗈. 𝖨𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗈́𝗑𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗈 𝖼𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖿𝗂́𝗌𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝖾𝗆𝗈𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺. 𝖮 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾́ 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗎𝗆𝗂𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺.
𝖳𝖾𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾́𝗀𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗉𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗈𝗅𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗂𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾̂-𝗅𝗈.
𝖲𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗈𝗎 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈. 𝖯𝗈𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗇𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗎 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗂́𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝖾 𝖺𝗆𝖾𝖺𝖼̧𝗈𝗎 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗃𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗎 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈 𝖿𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾. 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈 𝖿𝗂𝗓 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗌𝗈́ 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗆𝖾𝖺𝖼̧𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗏𝗂.
𝖠 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗏𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖺 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝗌𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗁𝗂𝖾𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝖽𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝗂. 𝖤𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖻𝖾́𝗆 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗉𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺, 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗁𝗎𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗉𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌, 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗃𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗌.
𝖠𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝖾𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝖿𝗋𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌, 𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗎𝗆 “𝖿𝗋𝖺𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗈” 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗌𝗂 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗊𝗎𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝗀𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗌𝖺𝗎́𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗂́𝗌𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅. 𝖤́ 𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗅𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 (𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾) 𝗌𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗌 𝖺 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖺𝗓𝗈.
𝖰𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾́ 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝖽𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾 𝖿𝖺́-𝗅𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗑𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 (𝗈𝗎, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗈𝗎𝗏𝗂 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝖾𝗓𝖾𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 “𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗋 𝖺̀ 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗈𝗅𝖺"), 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗂𝗋 𝖺𝗈 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖿𝖺́𝖼𝗂𝗅 𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌. 𝖤 𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈! 𝖮 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 “𝗋𝗈𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗁𝖺𝗆𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗋”, 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗋𝖾𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗇𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝖺𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈.
𝖥𝗋𝖺𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 "𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝖺𝗌 𝗈 𝗌𝗎𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾” 𝗈𝗎 “𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖿𝗂𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺” 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗈𝗎𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖫𝖾𝗆𝖻𝗋𝗈-𝗆𝖾 𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗆 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗎́𝗅𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾, 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖾 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗓𝗈, 𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗀𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖾 “𝖨𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗅𝗂𝗑𝗈".
𝖰𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝗏𝗈𝗓 𝖽𝖺 𝖢𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝖳𝖾𝖼𝗇𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗀𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖤𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋, 𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖤𝗅𝗏𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖥𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗈, 𝖽𝗂𝗓 𝗊𝗎𝖾 “𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗏𝖾𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗇𝗈𝗌𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖺̀ 𝗇𝗈𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗂𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈”, 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗈́ 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗀𝖺𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾̂ 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝖻𝗌𝗍𝖺́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗆. 𝖬𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝖾 𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗅𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖺̀𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗆, 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗈𝗎 𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺. 𝖲𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗂𝗑𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗃𝗎𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗆𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗎́𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖾́𝗇𝖾𝗋𝗈.
𝖮 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗓𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖾́ 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗂́𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗑𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈. 𝖯𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝖻𝗎𝗌𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗓 𝖽𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗏𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺 𝗋𝗈𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗐𝗈𝗋𝗄, 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝗈 𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝖼𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗈 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺, 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝗀𝗋𝗎𝗉𝗈 𝗁𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝗈.
𝖯𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝖽𝗎𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗋 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗅𝗂́𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗁𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝗍𝖾́𝖼𝗇𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗀𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌. 𝖯𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗋𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗓𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗎𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖺 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖺 𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗈̃𝖾𝗆 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗈 𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝖺 𝗌𝖺𝗎́𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗂́𝗌𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖾 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌, 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖮 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗌𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈𝗎-𝗆𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝗎𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗋 “𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖼𝖾𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺” 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗈́𝗇𝗂𝗆𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖻𝗈𝖺 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝖾 𝖻𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝗁𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺.
𝖮𝗌 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝖾 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝗂́, 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂́𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗓𝖺 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝗈 𝖿𝗎𝗍𝗎𝗋𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝖼𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝖼𝗂𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖾 𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆.
𝖤𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅, 𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗓-𝗌𝖾, 𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈 𝗉𝗌𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗎́𝗉𝗎𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗆 𝗎𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗋 𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗂𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅. 𝖮 𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗂 𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖿𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖼𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖻𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗌𝗎𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗈𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂 𝖽𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗎 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗏𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗅𝗂𝗏𝗋𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗏𝗂 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌.
* Bióloga, cientista, formadora e recrutadora de cientistas. Sempre na luta por uma comunidade científica mais ética, justa e equitativa. Mãe, mulher e feminista.
.
Portugal bem português
XVII - A PIDE antes da PIDE
1-O Arquitecto da PIDE/1
*Agostinho Lourenço, diretor da Policia Internacional em 1931, primeiro diretor da PVDE (1933) e da PIDE (1945) foi um dos homens-chave do regime salazarista. O homem que comandou durante 25 anos os serviços secretos portugueses e uma temida máquina de repressão politica, sustentada na tortura e nos informadores, era o "anjo negro" de Salazar.
Um nome temido dentro do regime mas um rosto (ainda hoje) praticamente desconhecido de todos os portugueses. No primeiro episódio da série relatam-se as investigações para descobrir o espólio e o passado do capitão Agostinho Lourenço.
Procura-se saber qual a origem do seu poder político. A biografia dos primeiros anos de vida do temido diretor da PIDE acompanha os inícios da carreira militar. Lourenço fez parte do primeiro contingente militar português que em 1916 fez os treinos militares em Tancos e nos inícios de 1917 partiu para França para lutar nas trincheiras da Primeira Guerra Mundial. A vida do primeiro é aproveitada, neste episódio, para narrar também as origens das organizações que em Portugal exerceram a repressão politica desde os tempos da monarquia até à República.
Explicam-se também as razões históricas do golpe militar que instaurou em 28 de Maio de 1926 o regime da ditadura militar.
No dia 28 de Maio de 2016 passam 90 anos do golpe militar liderado por Gomes da Costa e que instaurou em Portugal uma ditadura de 48 anos. Nesse mesmo ano de 1926 foi criada a primeira polícia política destinada a proteger o regime (que ficou conhecido como a Situação) que governava Portugal. Um dos principais legados do autoritarismo foi sem dúvida a cultura do medo, o clima de suspeita, a desconfiança do outro, alimentados durante 48 anos pela polícia politica e ainda com fortes resquícios na cultura portuguesa.
Em Portugal usa-se o nome de PIDE para referir a polícia política da Ditadura e do Estado Novo.
Mas PIDE é o nome mítico e lendário pelo qual ficaram conhecidas todas as polícias que desde 1926 se ocuparam da repressão política em Portugal. Quando a PIDE (Policia Internacional de Defesa do Estado) foi criada em 1945, Salazar procedeu apenas a uma mudança cosmética de nome procurando dar uma imagem para o exterior de abertura do regime na sequência das derrotas dos fascismos no fim da Segunda Guerra Mundial. A PIDE continuou a funcionar na mesma sede, na Rua António Maria Cardoso, com os mesmos agentes e directores, onde já funcionava a polícia política desde 1926. Mudou várias vezes de nome. Foi Polícia de Informações de Lisboa (PIL); Polícia de Informações do Porto (PIP); Polícia de Informações do Ministério do Interior (PIMI); Policia Internacional Portuguesa (PI); Secção de Vigilância Politica e Social da PSP; Policia de Defesa Politica e Social (PDPS) e depois foi a PVDE até 1945. Os diretores que em 1945 ficaram encarregues de dirigir a nova instituição chamada PIDE, formada em 22 de Outubro 1945, já tinham fundado não só a PVDE, em Setembro 1933, mas também a instituição antecessora, a Policia Internacional Portuguesa em 1931. Estes homens iniciaram um reinado de poder antes mesmo do próprio Salazar. Trata-se de gente com vidas quase desconhecidas e cujos nomes hoje já praticamente ninguém conhece no país.
FONTE:
** Se pensa que sabe muito da História de Portugal constate também nesta série a sua enorme ignorância, não é uma crítica, é um convite.
*** Esta é uma compilação de séries pelo nosso país não apenas pelas perspectivas histórica ou social mas pela recolha de vídeos interessantes de várias origens, actividades e sensibilidades, com diferentíssimos temas que reflectem o nosso quotidiano de modo plural.
Desejamos muito que seja do vosso agrado.
.
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)