Interesting and Humour - page 2972
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It doesn't. That's the main motif of the book. There's also '47 - socialist camp + rampant socialist sentiment everywhere. In the USA at that time something was going on, at least according to M. Wilson's book "Life with Lightning". It seems to me that a work of fiction doesn't have to be one-sided. But generally speaking, we don't have much of a choice: either or. Both choices are wrong. Where is the middle ground? It seems to me like a ball at the top of a mountain. The equilibrium is highly unstable.
You're not surprised that Pelevin's Omon Ra was printed under the Soviet regime.
Tex. Then what's good about it and what answers it provides. What I don't understand even more is the following.
Many businessmen, and not only businessmen, regard it as almost the Bible. This includes people from our part of the world, such as Chichvarkin and others. Many of them already have money, which is a horrible cry about the lack of democracy, which prevented them from doing even more.
Since we found out that who has the power is right. So why do they yell about democracy, while at the same time praising works that talk about its absence (indirectly of course).
At the same time they prefer not to have the right to decide for others in their own country, but they do not oppose to others having that right. From my point of view, it is precisely because they would have earned more money if they had no rights in their homeland.
The 47th amendment does not matter, such ideas are written for decades to come. They are also read today because there are universal ideas that are suitable for any time. Only examples have become obsolete, and that is...
The essence in monumental works and consists at the level of ideas, most of them always unrealizable in principle, for which there is a twist of what is needed. And orders for such works which are written more than one year are very prolific for the customer. However, for the writer as well.
About Omon-Ra. In Soviet times, at the end of the Soviet regime, to be precise. And Omon Ra describes a lot of things indirectly. There were films, books and even cartoons that indirectly mocked some things in the USSR. But nevertheless they were tolerated.
Anyway, I don't understand what Omon Ra and that book has to do with it. I think you have a different take on Omon Ra, or my post above. Atlantus-suspiciously loyally describing the ideas of the top entrepreneurs, who are influential to this day more than anyone else. And Omon Ra-which is a standalone work about that time, which is from a different realm altogether.
Why I should be surprised by Omon Ra in this respect I do not understand. And I wasn't writing about Omon Ra at all. It is just a saying, in one of Pelevin's books, which was topical both before and now, alas. Which could have been in any author and in any book.
OK, time to call it a day, I think we're getting over each other.
What a touching concern for citizens, Ukraine is also starting to muddy the waters...
They do not care about citizens. They must have counted up how much money passes their pockets and are starting to fidget.
....
How are they going to do it? They are going to make Forex brokers request their clients to produce a 2NDFL certificate, when most Forex brokers have no Russian jurisdiction.
Are you suggesting that the kitchens will not be in the Bahamas, Cyprus, etc., but "in our country", or that Russia, like the Americans, will create its own offshore.
What I'm implying is...
I believe in the integrity of the President
And in the integrity of the police,
And thebank's concern for its customers...
I believe in mermaids, I believe in housekeepers.
I believe that prices will go down,
That the country will grow,
That my beloved wife won't cheat on me
My beloved wife.
I trust the fortune teller on the cards
She'll tell me for money
That I'll soon be rich
And I'll be doubly happy.
I believe that the teacher at school
♪ He won't take a bribe at all ♪
That he will teach the children in good faith
That he will teach them in good conscience.
I believe the insurance company
Where the clerks say
That if I'm ever in trouble,
I'll be reimbursed for my losses.
Of course, I trust the MPs,
And all the politicians, yeah,
The prime minister and his boys
The country stripped naked.
I believe that all the injections
And all the pills they give me
"Will only strengthen your willpower
And only do good.
I have faith in these people
That they put me here
That they're the only place I'll be happy...
Where? Ward six.
OK, it's time to call it a day, I think we're losing sight of each other.
I actually know what you're talking about. And I agree with a lot of it. However, I have not read the preface, and I don't know what Chichvarkin thinks there either. Only it seems to me that you pay attention only to one of possible interpretations. I, for example, would not be surprised if by the end of the book our protagonists had built the society they wanted to see, and, by the same token, not much would have changed, only the scenery would have changed. Say, like in Shvartsman's Dragon. It's probably not in the style of an American novel, though.
It is neither a novel nor a fiction book, it is based on a philosophical direction. It is quite man-made. No one is building anything there, the construction is assumed in the future consciousness of those to whom it is rubbed in. It's just that the "writings" have examples from those times. It's not the first, it's not the last, it's grounded in the existing realities that were created before it. Like custom scientific paradigms (not all), philosophical ones too (not all), are born in the context of realities already created by someone. In the end, it is strange that the scientific basis turns out to be subjective rather than objective, but it is presented as objectivism.
I make no claim to the truth.
... Like commissioned scientific paradigms (not all), philosophical ones too (not all), born in the context of realities already created by someone else. In the end, it's strange that the scientific basis turns out to be subjective rather than objective, but it's presented as objectivism.
I make no claim to the truth.