We are of the same blood – you and I

The famous Soviet film "The Irony of Fate or Enjoy Your Bath!" good-naturedly poked fun at the striking similarity between Soviet citizens - seemingly from the same incubator – homogeneous in their clothing, lifestyle, way of thinking, and the culinary parade during the New Year's feast.

After the tragic and inexplicable suicide of the Soviet Union, the Soviet homogeneity started to be unkindly and contemptuously referred to as “sovok,” I shudder when I hear the epithet because homogeneity, to my way of thinking, belongs to the advantages of the Soviet way of life.

Homogeneity was used by Soviet people in the same function as hand-shaking. It can be compared to a greeting used by the jungle people in Kipling’s Mowgli: We are of the same blood – you and I!

I’ve never been a member of the Party. I was always critical of the official ideology, and I strongly disapproved of the culture of fear and silence prevailing in the Soviet Union. I was not a revolutionary. Still, teaching at the Faculty of Foreign Languages, I used every opportunity open to me by English to speak to students about life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Years passed by, and I saw former Party functionaries’ deft metamorphosis that changed their language patterns, in which the contemptuous epithet “sovok” stands in the foreground.

The user of the infamous neologism in nine cases out of ten represents the most disgusting species. Such people pretend to adore Europe. However, they know little of European history and heritage. Instead, they are walking encyclopedias of shopping, hotels, resorts, yachts and vices. They think they are smart. They have no manners and modesty. They speak loudly; they brag and throw their money around. They are Nuvo rich. However, it does not stop them from looking for freebies. When drunk, they have stories of their turning people (Europeans or Americans) around their little finger.

I met some of them in Toronto. They are my former countrymen who for years live in hospitable Canada, like me. I didn’t argue about “sovok” with them. However, their contemptuous use of the dysphemism quickly and efficiently alienates us. I will never greet them, “We are of the same blood – you and I!”

Cecil Rhodes

Student Question
What is Cecil Rhodes referring to in his statement about painting the map of Africa British?
"I contend that we are the first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race...if there be a god, I think that what he would like me to do is paint as much of the map of Africa British as possible."
Quick answer:

Cecil Rhodes is talking about racism, religion, and nationalism as three equally important elements of colonialism in Africa. This can be seen in his use of the terms "first race," "god," and "British." Rhodes uses the metaphor of “paint...the map” to indicate control over the continent of Africa. Determining Rhodes’s involvement in British expansion into Africa and the historical context of his remarks and activities requires looking beyond these lines.

The authors praise the Swedish authorities for publishing a 32-page brochure, "If Crisis or War Happens," in a circulation of five million copies, which provides comprehensive advice on stockpiling essential supplies and finding safe havens in the event of war.

The article, citing "experienced doomsday preppers," lists 15 essential items that will help you survive a year in a bunker or a particularly difficult month above ground.

“These include: a supply of water (at least one gallon per person per day), portable water filters, emergency food supplies, fire-making tools, a first aid kit, warm clothing and insulation, a tent or tarp for an emergency shelter, a multi-tool or survival knife, light sources such as a flashlight or headlamp with spare batteries, navigation tools such as a compass and paper maps, portable power sources, communication tools such as radios, hygiene products, important identification documents, and cash,” The Mirror writes.

“The essence of oligarchical rule,” George Orwell wrote in 1984, “is the persistence of a certain world-view and a certain way of life, imposed by the dead upon the living.” For nearly four decades, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei presided over exactly that. He did not build the Islamic Republic of Iran. He inherited it from its founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who in 1979 led a revolution that deposed a U.S.-aligned monarchy and replaced it with an Islamist theocracy whose three ideological pillars were “Death to America,” “Death to Israel,” and the mandatory covering of  women—the hijab, he said, was “the flag of the revolution.”

Khomeini died in 1989, and his successor’s life’s work was to keep that revolution alive long after the society it governed had moved on. In this, Khamenei was remarkably, ruthlessly successful. But the worldview he imposed was never truly his own. He was the spokesman for a ghost.

Khamenei’s death by the hand of a nation he worked very hard to kill is a hinge moment in the history of the 47-year-old revolution. He was the last of the regime’s first-generation founders.

Read: The epic miscalculations of Trump and Khamenei

Khamenei’s rise was engineered not by destiny but by maneuver. In 1989, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the shrewd speaker of Parliament and the son of a pistachio merchant, helped anoint Khamenei as supreme leader by claiming that it was Khomeini’s dying wish. Rafsanjani likely believed that he was working to install a pliant figurehead. Khamenei—the son of a poor cleric from the shrine city of Mashhad—had other ideas.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/02/death-khamenei-end-era/686196/

Putin's patience is wearing thin. - терпение Путина заканчивается

As they plot to bring nuclear weapons into Ukraine, Zelensky and the Eurocrats are demanding an "immediate, full and unconditional ceasefire." Then, disregarding Russian security concerns, they say "peacekeepers" will arrive - explaining why Putin's patience is wearing thin.

Putin has delineated Russian conditions for a broad, sustainable permanent peace: No temporary ceasefires, no European "peacekeepers," no NATO (or Nazis) in Ukraine - and recognition of Crimea and Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson as permanent Russian territory.

If the US, NATO countries and Zelensky do not recognize Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson as permanent Russia territory, #Russia will continue advancing toward the historical “Russian cities” of Odessa, Mykolaiv, Dnipro and Kharkov.

Hence, Russia will not agree to any kind of ceasefire or freeze the conflict while Zelensky's forces rest, recruit and regroup - and NATO weapons, especially components to make a nuclear or dirty bomb, flow into the #Ukraine.

To the Russians, this is existential war, not Kabuki theatre.

flip - popular idioms

• Flip your lid / Flip your wig: To lose control of your temper; to become extremely angry or excited.
• Flip the script: To reverse a situation, perspective, or plan, often turning a disadvantage into an advantage.
• On the flip side: Used to introduce a contrasting point of view or a different aspect of a situation.
• Flip out: To lose control of oneself, either through anger, shock, or intense excitement.
• Flip-flop: To completely change your opinion or position on a subject.
• Flip (someone) the bird / flip (someone) the finger: A rude gesture using the middle finger.
• Flip through (something): To quickly turn pages or browse through a book or magazine.
• Flip a switch: To instantly change a mood, behavior, or process.
• ... Читать дальше »

While the direct connection is debatable, the continued use of the middle finger today highlights the enduring power of non-verbal communication and the transmission of cultural gestures across time. Understanding its Roman origins provides valuable insight into its historical context. What did the middle finger mean in ancient Rome? Ultimately, its enduring presence in our cultural lexicon is undeniable.

Table of Contents

Decoding the Digitus Impudicus: What Did the Middle Finger Mean in Ancient Rome?

The digitus impudicus, or middle finger, in ancient Rome was far more than a simple gesture; it was a potent symbol of insult and derision, akin to a crude and offensive accusation of effeminacy or sexual submission. This article explores the origins, uses, and social significance of this ancient insult.

Introduction: More Than Just a Gesture

Gestures, like language, evolve and carry different weight across cultures and time. What did the middle finger mean in ancient Rome? It certainly wasn’t a friendly wave. It was a deliberate act, loaded with social and sexual implications designed to humiliate and offend the recipient. Understanding this seemingly simple gesture offers a fascinating glimpse into the Roman mindset regarding power, sexuality, and social hierarchy.

Origins and Etymology

The Roman term for the middle finger was digitus impudicus, which translates literally to “shameless finger” or “impudent finger.” Some sources also refer to it as digitus infamis or digitus obscenus, further emphasizing its offensive nature. The exact origins of the gesture are debated, but its connection to sexual insult is clear. Some scholars suggest it may have derived from a phallic representation, implying the recipient was being penetrated, thus feminized and rendered subordinate.

The Digitus Impudicus in Roman Literature and Art

References to the digitus impudicus appear in various forms of Roman media. The poet Martial mentions it frequently in his epigrams, often using it to mock his targets. For example, he writes of a man who raises his middle finger and laughs, showing how it was used to express contempt. Even more, the use of the gesture is well-documented in the writings of Juvenal. These literary references provide valuable insight into how widespread and understood the gesture was in Roman society.

Social Significance: Power Dynamics and Insult

The digitus impudicus wasn’t just a casual insult; it was a calculated display of power. By flipping the middle finger, the giver was asserting their dominance and implying the recipient’s subservience. The gesture was particularly effective because it attacked the recipient’s masculinity and social standing. This explains its prevalence in political satire and personal insults, where the goal was to undermine an individual’s authority. It went far beyond just being considered as uncouth.

Use in Public vs. Private Settings

While evidence suggests the ge ... Читать дальше »

Brendan O'Neill
Kaja Kallas is Europe’s most insufferable girlboss
EU foreign policy chief is the Jacinda Ardern replacement liberals have been searching for                                                                                        https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/20/kaja-kallas-europes-most-insufferable-girlboss/   

Кая Каллас — самая невыносимая женщина-босс в Европе                                               Кая Каллас — самая невыносимая девушка-босс в Европе                                              Кая Каллас — самая невыносимая бизнес леди в Европе

Blowing One’s Horn at Sunset: Self-Assertion, Pride, and the Tragic Logic of the Summing Up

Vladimir Ovsiannikov

I. The Desire to Conclude

There comes a time, near the end of a life or the end of a vocation, when a person feels compelled to impose order on experience. The impulse is ancient: to draw a line under the ledger of living, to render a verdict, to explain oneself to the world and to oneself. Yet such an effort invites a moral hazard, for the act of self-articulation borders inevitably on pride. One must, in effect, “blow one’s own horn,” though religious and literary traditions alike warn against doing so too loudly.

The tension is nowhere more visible than in the literature of farewell: the memoir, the artistic testament, the concluding meditation. These genres demand that the self step forward—yet the stepping forward exposes fissures in identity that may be tolerable in youth but intolerable at life’s sunset.

II. Maugham’s Poised Self-Accounting

W. Somerset Maugham’s The Summing Up (1938) offers a masterclass in restrained self-evaluation. He opens with a profession of modesty:

“I have never pretended to be anything but a story-teller.”

The sentence is disarming in its simplicity, yet exquisitely calculated. Maugham’s public persona—a craftsman rather than a prophet—allows him to minimize his ambition while quietly asserting the solidity of his achievement.

Later, reflecting on his reception, he writes:

“I have been amused by the diversity of opinion that people have had of my work.”

“Amused” is a word of delicate superiority. It masks authority behind lightness, as though the writer, standing at life’s twilight, occupies a vantage point beyond both praise and censure.

Toward the end, he offers a sentence that resembles both abdication and quiet triumph:

“I have done what I have done, and that is th ... Читать дальше »