Znakhars are self-interested while exploiting the society on the basis of their knowledge, and they wittingly cultivate the ignorance and perverted knowledge in the society exploited.
And this is the difference between zhrechestvo and znakharstvo.
The harmony of society, its culture and Earth biosphere needs the global level of responsibility and of CARENESS about the well-being (not only a material one) of all nations on the Earth. English is today the most popular for international communication. So we take care of that you, English speakers, understand that what we want to say you but not what the masters of “false horses of enlightenment”[5] want to give you as our opinion.
Russians don’t need such words as “conception” – we have the word “жизнестрой” (“Life organization”), and English can also find some its old roots to avoid the dead Latin.
Our opponents must understand that their monopoly on the knowledge is over. Using imagery: We pour our “spring water” into their “old wine-skins” for their “skins” split: we don’t like their “skins” and their stupefying narcotic “wine”.
Introduction. From Editors to a Reader
1991: it was the time, when the majority of Russians displayed interest in current conflicts between different political parties, either within the society or within CPSU, for giving the reforms this or that orientation. That’s why that part of the society, who regarded themselves as not indifferent to the future of Russia, watched TV regularly and bought and subscribed to numerous newspapers, where they could find out quite contrary opinions and agitations. Many of those publications written by authors, who felt themselves uncontrolled by CC[6] and KGB any more, contained some profound thoughts, but there was also lots of rubbish, because of the increasing commercialisation of mass-media, when publishers sought to get larger circulation – and income – by attracting readers with various preposterous and “exotic” things. It was the sign of time.
On Friday evening of June 28, 1991, a company of friends were driving to the country for the weekend, anticipating a moment of respite far from city bustle and a quiet exchange of opinions about the current events and the main political trends. Along with the usual country chattels, they brought some newspapers that remained unread during the week. Among them it appeared to be a Leningrad weekly “Chas Pick” (“Rush Hour”), dated by June 24, 1991, № 25 (70). This issue attracted their attention by a page full of drawings named “The Historical Picnic in a Name of Artemis”.
The first thought was: “What’s that? Do they have nothing better to fill their pages with?” But other, more urgent affairs vied for their attention and the question “What does it mean?” was dismissed – “We’ll see later…”
Later, on August 13, someone brought another issue of that very weekly “Chas Pick”, from August 5, №31 (76), where even two full pages were occupied with similar texts and drawings under a generic title “The Defence Picnic”. Again a question arose: «If “Picnics” have become a system in the “Chas Pick”, what this “system” might be and what could it express? » Then, on August 19, 1991, “a putsch broke out”, and “Chas Pick” with its “Picnics” was forgotten for some time. They surfaced later again, after the conspiratorial Treaty in Belovezhskaya Puscha, on the pages of the magazine “Molodaya Gvardiya” (“The Young Guards”), №1-2 of 1992, where the pictures of the “Historical Picnic” were supplemented with some commentaries under the title: “Masons knew all about the putsch beforehand”.
After that, they always remembered the “picnics” and other seemingly senseless publications (though senseless, if understood only in a direct sense rather than allegorically). Moreover, different people exchanged opinions about them, either in Russia or abroad. And it’s remarkable, that some readers got intrigued by those mysterious publications in the Mass Media on their own quite independently from us.
Meanwhile the third “Post Historical Picnic” appeared in the same weekly – “Chas Pick”, August 17, 1992, №33 (130), as if on purpose, on the eve of the putsch anniversary.
The conversations about those “strange” pictures and texts went on. And at last Victor V. Pchelovod[7] (this is his surname; but his profession is hunting “rats in the attics” and driving them out from there), getting tired of the endless oral discussion of all the same drawings and apparently senseless texts, within his spare time, unoccupied by his principal job, decided to render the materials of general oral discussion in writing. The result of this work is offered to the judgement of the reader.
The author’s original text, representing the results of observations, reflections and collective creative activity, was supplied with footnotes added by editors. They offer some explanations of different circumstances and terms.
December 16, 2001.
The second edition differs from the first one, published in December of 2001, with the additional errata correction and new interpretation of the questions about vectors of aims and vectors of deviation of ruling inversion within different conceptions of ruling and about the appropriate changes of the negative feedbacks to the positive and vice versa, which were left in reticences in the first edition. New footnotes were added. Moreover, quality of some defective illustrations was improved.
June 1, 2002.
Part I. Holmes and Watson
Saturday morning. September 22, 2001. London
That damp and misty September morning my good fellow and neighbour-tenant Mr. Sherlock Romero Holmes was particularly taciturn. We had scarcely exchanged a few words during the breakfast, set by Mrs. Hudson with her usual prim and proper punctuality at 8.45 sharp. In the recent years, we both got used to have our breakfast late in the morning. Overcharged with work, often we had to sit up well past midnight, and the disgusting climate and polluted streets of London in the beginning of the third millennium were hardly encouraging to have an early walk or a picnic. I do not want to sound grumpy, but the last century took its heavy toll on London, the same way however as on the other world capitals.
After the breakfast, yet for a good half an hour, Holmes was studying a whole pile of newspapers, puffing on his favourite cherry-tree pipe. I leafed swiftly through my morning issue of “Daily Telegraph”, scanning headlines superficially, garish, as usual, and discouraging from reading, and stopped for a while in the section of puzzles, cross-words and chess problems. Reading newspapers has long ago become an empty and bothersome habit of mine, nothing but a traditional morning rite, inherited by some accident from our idealistic ancestors, who once had naively believed in its exclusive usefulness. So much the more astonishing was the rapt attention of Holmes studying newspapers lying before him. At last, he leant back in his armchair and, blowing the rings of bluish smoke from his pipe, got lost in that state of aloof pensiveness and semi-consciousness, which always accompanied his incredible, almost Socratic, concentration of thought. I hated to interrupt him, but my curiosity won after all and I couldn’t help asking him:
You’ve found something interesting in the press today, dear Holmes, haven’t you?
It all depends on a reader, old chap Watson, – he answered enigmatically, looking at me askance and became lost in his thoughts again.