Economies (literature)

Economies is a theoretical text written by Lausán Lo'Oix author and politician Xeroise Ronango'O which covers wide topics ranging from political critique of international economies and banking, sociological analysis, advocacy for socialism, and more. It is well known to be the longest economic text of any kind written in both Rathnir and Eldham and to be a foundational text of Xeroism.

It was commissioned by the Communist Party of the United Socialist States of Eldham and ultimately published by the aforementioned nation's Commission of Media. The text itself features seven chapters or parts. It was first released in 162 TE. It is part of a wider compilation of texts called the "Select Works of Xeroise Ronango'O" also published by the Communist Party.

It is widely displayed across numerous libraries and is believed to be her most popular and republished text. It was the final text Xeroise produced before her death in 200 TE.

Xeroist Economic Models
In the text Ronango'O devises a total of four economic models that exist in Eldham in relation to the upholding of land claims. These include the disorganized model, tax-donor model, belligerent model, and state-market model.

The disorganized model is considered to be one in which there is no formal organization maintaining a fluid economy what so ever and as a result are almost always short lived and collapse. The tax-donor model is one in which claims are upheld either through a system of taxes or donation by citizens. The belligerent model utilizes exploitation, typically on an international scale, in order to bring forth funds and is as a result typically used by bandit nations. The last is the state-market model which uses state owned ownership of entities like factories and participation from citizens to bring forth production that can be redistributed to the citizenry and the surplus can be exported abroad for money which maintains the claims.

Criticism of Banking
Xeroise Ronango'O makes numerous sweeping criticisms of the banking apparatuses on Eldham and Rathnir making note of how most of them have too much expenditures to make up for paying back interest on a monthly basis which results in the collapse of many banks from defaulting on their loans and deposits. She claims it is a simply unsustainable system and is best avoided by all consumers.

Classification of Socialist Ideologies
While a great many socialist ideologies have been coined over the years, Xeroise divides all socialist ideas and projects on Eldham into two simple realms being that of Xeroism and Unitism. This is done on the basis of willingness and beliefs on revolution, the upholding or criticism of vanguard states, and the expansion of socialism abroad. In particular she classifies sub ideologies like Lavenderism to be under Unitism. Likewise, she considered things like Fjellianism or Urabonism to be subcategories of Xeroism.

Full Text
Part I: MONEY

Throughout much of the worlds’ history, one often misunderstood or under-represented aspect of society will tend to be the underlying economic structures. Money is perhaps the single most influential sign of if a state can promise stability or not and the questions of who owns it, why they have it, and how that money came to be are all important—and lest we not forget—neglected sectors of historical analysis. Perhaps the most convenient question to begin with however, is why is the money in the pockets of people and the government important to begin with? For starters, the usage of currency is inherently tied to our societies’ livelihood—under current circumstances it is impossible to develop anything without it. One needs money to create towns, create nations, and maintain settlements unless they desire for the claim to collapse. In the present day there is no viable option—especially long term—to live without money in neither Eldham or Rathnir.

Once one has recognized that money has inherent necessity in these worlds, one must figure out how to obtain it. All money stems from a singular source: minerals. There is a fixed rate whereby ingots of either gold or iron may be sold to the ‘Spawn Shops’ in exchange for money. This rate never actually changes and there is always an understanding that money can indefinitely be added into the economic cycle, as long as iron or gold exists at least. In the world of Rathnir we can see that much of the world’s ores of both types have been swallowed, as a result the economy in that world has a tendency to not fluctuate as much as there is not much new cash being added into the system. The opposite is true of Eldham, because the world’s usage of these minerals is ‘newer’, money is constantly being added into the global economy. All money in either world however starts there at the Spawn Shops in exchange for the previously mentioned resources. However it goes without thought for the reader though, that once this step has happened; economies begin to grow at an immensely rapid rate, they will diversify, and become substantially complex.

Once money has been added to the system, all the other uses for it emerge as the nature of the economy changes drastically from one reliant on the relationship of ore and fixed coins to one of various products, labor options, and shifting demand. It is very possible that you may be reading this book in fact because you bought it, and it is additionally very possible that the book and quills used to copy this text were purchased with money that originated from some player’s recent mining trip or sell of goods such as bottles of experience. There have been many tried and true methods to obtaining money whether they be egg agriculture, pumpkin pie bakeries, the experience bottle market, mercenary guilds, or weapons manufacturers. What matters though is that all of the cash used to pay for these products stem from that original source in the ‘Spawn Shop’ and that the economy fluidly relies on the demand for materials, the labor that meets to fulfill these demands, and the labor that creates the money (from ores) for the two to have a transaction to begin with.

Part II: STRUCTURE

Given the understanding that money needs to be placed into the system and that the money in that system controls the ability of claims to be relevant and stable, nations will tend to base all underlying structures in their society around it. This happens, typically organically, few nations start out knowing how their markets will operate. This is not always the case however and what may at one point be fluid and organic may mutate into something rigid and inorganic development of monarchies, oligarchies, or even liberalistic ‘democratic’ processes may arise from the vacuum left by the need for money and an often vacant position for labor or production that creates that money for the nations’ uses.

The Vulperium one may think of for example is a nation that is quite old, and founded with origins of monarchism and oligarchism at its roots. It is one of the richest in the entire world and it is often directly tied to a phenomena I’ve opted to call an economic funnel. All production and money is able to be funneled to the top to directly benefit those sitting there and productions revolve entirely around the ability of the top to maintain that money. It is called an economic funnel for when the distribution of a nation’s wealth is mapped, nations that have this blaring inequality will have a distribution that creates a funnel-like shape. I am not sitting here authoring this though to directly spite the Vulperium—they are merely a fine example of the point I intend to introduce—that money creates structure to uphold production to further create money. This may admittedly be a relatively difficult concept to grasp though, what is to be taken away from all this though is that the root of all hitherto societies—directly or otherwise—originates directly from a need to organize the way money is created; regardless of the ideology promoting it.

I would define four broad economic models within Eldham and Rathnir that the economic structures of whole nations can be attributed to, the first and most simple to understand is the Disorganized Model; this is particularly defined by a general lack of any organization whatsoever. These are often incredibly localized and fail in a rather quick period of time unless they manage to shift to one of the other economic models. This is often established, particularly in towns, where activity is strongly minimal and those leading and participating in activity in the town either care not for production or do not understand economic activity’s necessity as a whole.

Secondarily would be the Tax-Donor Model, which I place in this spot because it is the most common throughout all of the Eldhamite economies. While rather broad, the easiest way to understand the model would be its name; it is run entirely by either taxation of the masses, occasional donation by citizens, or a mixture of both. Once a person running a town or a nation realizes they need money to survive, they often look for the two simplest ways to gain this money. These two ways that are rather straightforward are by either taxing their citizens just enough to maintain the necessary funds to hold claims or by having willing (or sometimes unwilling) individuals donate to the government on occasion to some capacity. While most nations tend to operate this model, it is not exactly highly efficient, or at least uncommonly so within the modern economy. Governments tend to have very little funds, and there is often a huge wealth disparity among citizens. There are select individuals who make very large amounts of money from any variety of methods, and there are those who simply are either unwilling or unable as a result of lackluster infrastructure to make much money. We tend to see these types of nations, in spite of the otherwise self-proclaimed democratic process their nations may or may not have become increasingly oligarchic over time as a result of such wealth disparities. Places such as Sylvania, the former Confederation of Garxijos, Rodinnbrok, Yuvaria, Vulperium, and many other nations may apply to this status.

Another relatively easy one to understand is that of the Belligerent Model. This is perhaps the single most notorious one, as it is built entirely on banditry, warfare, and manipulation. To understand, in every other model, production tends to be done domestically and importation is uncommon. The opposite is true in this system, virtually all production is done in foreign nations or subnational entities which is exploited by nations following the belligerent model; through a variety of means they steal or otherwise obtain these products where they can them be used by the people, state, or be sold at a markup to bring profit. You may think of nations like Goonguard, the former Uraki Empire, or Barbossa when it comes to this system. This model as a whole is incredibly hard to perfect as it runs on the assumption that you have a strong enough military or intimidating force to subdue others and bend them to your will. One steals things such as weaponry, armor, and other resources from a producing nation (the exploited) where it is then brought to the home nation (the exploiter) before being—as previously stated—traded around for profit which ultimately creates the nation’s wealth and infrastructure. These states are often the richest in the entire world when perfected, but are incredibly susceptible to decline and are not stable in any long-term capacity.

The last and perhaps the most complex is the State-Market Model. This is a system that requires a massive organization, typically done directly through the state or national agent. In this model, virtually all production that is performed is in control of the state; directly or indirectly. Oftentimes, produced goods are sold or given to the state where they can be distributed to the people according to need and surplus can be sold as exports at a markup. The two most common entities to have this type of economic model are either smallish towns or very large nations with high organizational potential. This is because, as previously stated, the state-market model requires immense cooperation that is difficult to do when you don’t have a large intricate system or very few people to manage to begin with. When the state-market model is able to be perfected however, the home nation tends to see an immense growth in wealth that is also often times uniquely reflected in ordinary citizens. While in most systems there are wealth disparities, it is the state-market model which I’ve recorded to have the smallest gap between those at the top and those at the bottom as there is potential for all parties to gain relatively equal wealth. This is because the state both controls production directly and the sale and distribution of that product. It is susceptible to collapse though should either; the workforce cease activity or necessary numbers, or the state or other governing entity ceases its organizational capabilities. Perhaps the most notable nation to use this model would be the United Socialist States of Eldham, but nations such as Yaszuma have also been known to use this economic model. While most typically associated with socialism as an ideology, it is actually not restricted to it. It is also to be noted that many nations will also sometimes dabble in the state-market model—and even the belligerent model—during times of large warfare.

All of the above economic models are quite valuable in the understanding of Eldhamite economics as one is able to easily predict what that society’s movement of money looks like and the future of the nation’s wealth.

Part III: GROWTH and DECLINE

There are two major factors that decide the economic schedule, being that of supply and demand. Demand of a commodity can vary drastically, it does not matter if the human desire for something comes from biology or mere fancy, if a human wants something and fulfills somes desired outcome, it is a commodity. Production exists on all scales of a society in Eldham, this is because as previously explored, money must exist in order for higher organizations of society to function here. There is a demand by peoples to live in townships or large societies, this is fulfilled by production in exchange for money/capital that can create land claims.

Demand however shifts drastically over time depending on the commodity. Even in the demand of goods one would consider otherwise inelastic such as food, certain trends and tastes for specific foods changes rather quickly. Take for example the varying desire for spiced goods, breads, baked potatoes, and other tastes. This demand makes general markets difficult to predict as there are a multitude of factors that decide how much something is “worth”, even though the worth of any one coin is directly tied to gold.

Additionally we see variables diversify or change drastically, for example in recent months we’ve seen an explosion in the general value and production of the experience market and quick changes to how weaponry forges change the tides of imported arms. As societies generally develop and begin to turn to money, we begin to see the development of a mode of production within these societies. Various modes of production exist to varying capacities, perhaps one rather notorious though admittedly very uncommon as a result of its complicated nature is that of capitalism. It is identifiable by a private ownership of the means of production (i.e. factories and other ways in which goods are produced), focuses on the accumulation of wealth via labor exploitation, and generally are based and centered around market economies, restricted or otherwise.

There is also the so-called bandit mean of production which is directly tied to the previously mentioned belligerent economic model, focusing on exploitation of a foreign entity to benefit a domestic population and that being the entire driving force of the entire economic principle. There is also the socialist means of production whereby workers own the means of production, live more communally, and other such things often associated with the communist ideology which I have explored in past texts in numerous ways and will continue to explore in later sections of this text. Across a fair bit of Eldham would be the feudal means of production, whereby land and territory is owned by a lord and given to a worker in exchange for the goods produced on it, whether in the form of  literal commodities or tax income.

Ultimately, it is to be understood that much of the worlds’ economies are focused on a mixture of profit-driven motives and exploitation of the more numerous lower social class; the proletariat. There is a shifting change between the needs of the people and the supply of the producer(s) who either control their labor or the generalized money and land in the nation. This is the economic backbone of entire nation-states, a constant feud and battle between two parties who seldom recognize their inherent difference and antagonistic motives towards one another. This brings me to my penultimate conclusion; the need for a change in the way economies work. First however we have to understand how exactly we got here.

Part IV: DEVELOPMENT of SOCIETIES

If we are to take the development of organized settlements in Eldham as a case study of human nature, what we see is an innate inclination towards a communal style of living in a large number of these towns or primitive nation-states. Groups that are this small in size, largely oriented around tight-knit social groups, have a far more likely chance to succeed long into the future with a reliance on one another instead of pushing for individualist living or the formation of nuclear familial clans or guilds. We see this in the form of town communal inventory and storage, access to communal farms and other means of production, and various other assets and the ways in which they are organized and structured around their society instead of around inheritance or strict individualist hierarchy. Settlements of this communal society succeed and outlive their compatriots so often because not only is their productivity expanded upon by tenfold but they are capable of sustaining powerful bonds between citizens and their resources. It is rather self-evident to say that at the core of virtually all civilized gatherings on Eldham and Rathnir respectively is collective living to some extent.

We often point at the development of larger cities and civilizations as what brings peaceful communal living to the brink of developing more confounded ideologies and strict hierarchies; all with the intent of maintaining a ‘peaceful’ flow of life for all those above and underneath in the social ladder. The fact of the matter though is that this is not particularly accurate when you analyze all these societies, instead what we see is that as societies grow larger there is a systematic betrayal of civility and unity among all the people in some of them. Essentially, as the city or nation gets larger in size and power, the power of the people is frequently overthrown for the interests of a select few; this being the development of class and caste. Some people become more ‘worthy’ than others, whether arbitrarily drawn on lines of their abilities, income, or simple power by force, or productivity and other means.

Part V: IN LIEU of BANKS

Those attempting to garner mastery and understanding of economics in our world for the best of those around them and their nation have likely been drawn to the worlds’ financial institutions; that being, in particular, banks. They tend to comprise some of the richest people in their respective nations, and so as a result if your eyes are on the possibility of riches they would in fact seem to be your largest ally. Few understand how these banks actually function though or if they are even right for you.

For starters, it is vital to understand that banks as an institution exist to make a profit. They have two means to garner this profit: loans and deposits. A loan is easier to understand for most and is therefore my first point. Loans are given out with the intention that the person who is being given the loan will be able to pay off not only the full cost of what they are given but with interest. Interest—for those unsure—is the percentage of the money that will be given in return. Say for example, you have a one-hundred dollar loan, if the interest rate on that loan should be ten percent, then you will have to pay back one-hundred-and-ten dollars; typically by some date.

This is one of the primary ways in which banks will get their profit. Say for example someone wants a loan to make a large experience bottle factory, they will get the money to construct it and at a later point will pay off that loan with the profits created by that factory. Deposits actually work in a very similar way to this; only in vice versa. You, an ordinary person, will give money to a bank—the type of account in this predicament does not matter—and in exchange for giving the bank your money and allowing them to use it you will be given a certain percentage of interest. For example, one of the worlds’ largest banks is currently at the time of writing the Bank of Manzland which offers an interest rate of three percent on savings accounts.

This is not an efficient system in virtually all institutions and does in fact work on a backbone and structural foundation of exploitation. There is a reason most of these banking entities have failed, there is too much expenditure with too little profit being gained which has resulted in those few successful entities bending to more ungenial means. There has been loan debt trapping, funding of international military apparatuses, and more that have resulted in the world of Eldham we know being a more hostile and malevolent place. Not only are these banking systems not stable or a meaningful investment for the average consumer, but it is best to be avoided entirely as these banks often fail to make enough profit to pay monthly interest on the deposits of their consumers. This leads those who run the bank, whether it be a national or corporate entity, to artificially plug money into the holes that their own flaws create. This futile attempt to make something work in the face of it not is difficult to understand, but it is in the best interest of these pitiful small states such as Manzland to maintain the strenuous relations as it keeps them from being a target for things such as their Unitist socialist agenda which in many other nations would make them a target for international cabals of criminal activity such as those made prevalent by Squatland. Manzland after all is a nation built on the grounds of ethnic cleansing of the native Kolsson people and one that has flip-flopped on its socialist agenda to best profit those at the top of their rigid social oligarchy that less than a half dozen people belong to. It is only states like these in my years of research that I’ve seen actually become dependent on banking because they search for increasingly menial and niche methods to maintain afloat in a world filled with imperial and pro-profit rhetoric.

Any person with any understanding of how these banks actually work would rightfully come to the conclusion that these banks should be abolished entirely for the best interest of all people and instead transition into more stable financial depositing whether it be with the government directly or just maintained privately by oneself. In lieu of banking I would advise any consumer reading to, if investing at all, do it oneself instead of relying on poorly run financial institutions which make their money—and yes they do run on exploiting you of your money—on a basis of screwing over the masses of their well-earned cash.

Part VI: EXPLOITATIVE PRACTICE

The aspects of the aforementioned ‘social ladder’ in their entirety are what one would call a caste system. These systems comprise of two poles; one which is benefactory and one which is exploited or considered less ‘worthy’. There may or may not be additional positions between these polar opposites. These can be on a multitude of bases, ranging from ethnic background, economic class, religious affiliation, and more.

Simply put, a caste system rigidly is held together by the wants and needs of those at the top. Those who are best benefited by their caste—say the rich for instance—do not have it in their personal benefit to elevate the livelihoods of those beneath them—the poor in this case—at least not without the fear of losing the margin of power they hold and being closer to those they may or may not intend to harm yet otherwise will by either being actionless or actively upholding the caste system.

While Rathnir is more ‘colorful’ in the array of castes, Eldham is almost unilaterally in those nations which boast castes organized on the basis of wealth or other menial characteristics like combat prowess. Those who have money additionally have the means to maintain their power with that wealth, this can be at the far extreme such as hiring mercenaries or funding extremist organizations or in more menial things that may otherwise be glossed over such as funding construction, buying weaponry, or using it to build the foundations for political campaigning. In the term ‘political campaigning’ I do not simply only refer to the electoral processes in the few democratic nations but instead any government officials attempt to make appeasement of those they—at least in theory—are meant to represent.

It is to be understood that inaction is a rigid caste system such as those based on wealth, is not simply apoliticism or centrism, but in fact an active stance that is opposed to revolutionary deconstruction of that caste system. There are only two meaningful divisions when it comes to caste; those who are for it and those who are against it. There is no middle ground in the case of oppression; only those who are so benefitted by the system before them that they can afford to not care at all.

The will of the rich—who as previously mentioned tends to lead nations as a consequence of the benefits accosted to them by their caste—is used to uphold many oppressive structures whether in relation to production, political policy and governance, town ownership, access to materials and weapons, and many other things that most people will never stop to consider. This is at best, a confusing system however. The population in question is permanent and unequivocally split into opposing parties; those who have power and those who don’t. Those who don’t tend to either wish to achieve power or dismantle the system as a whole. Those with power wish to maintain that power if not elevate it further, and prevent those beneath them from getting ahead. After all, in a system structured in a caste such as those based on wealth, not everyone gets to be high caste and the system will fall apart if there are not those upper caste folks.

This brings me to the final treatise of this writing, that being an appeal to the ideology of socialism. Something that particular fanatics of mine have opted to call ‘Xeroism’ in my homeland of the USSE. This is as a result of a meaningful question to be posed if it is understood that there is no such thing as neutrality in an oppressive system, and that is what is to be done next, something that in all my years of research I have concluded is only solved with this ideology. After all, it is only those socialist nations in my findings that have been able to dismantle virtually all modes of oppression that we see across the world of Eldham and Rathnir respectively.

Part VII: SOCIALISM

Over my lifetime of studying the economic conditions of the world—Eldham in particular—I have seen many resounding and intriguing aspects of the ways in which money shapes our worlds and how it leads the nations before us. Without money there are no true organized higher societies as a result of the necessity of money for land claims as I’ve previously explored in this text. I have borne witness to nations and cities that are heavily designed around caste; those who are producing are often being at the bottom of such a system and robbed of their full labor’s value as such. This may be done in a multitude of methods, most common of which is simply offering a small margin of the labor’s value which creates what is called ‘profit’ for those who distribute and organize the production at the top.

Likewise, I have seen many cities that take a much more liberalized approach and live, at least partially, in a collectivist manner. Storage and production may be collectivized to some degree or another, though typically still leaving leeway for large scale private ownership and ‘entrepreneurship’ as each producer is left to make money with their production on their own terms. Even in these systems, they tend to still be robbed of their worth as they tend to find the easiest way to make this money is through offering what they’ve made, not through a private entity or government as explored previously, but instead to private international ‘pawn shops’ and other similar institutions.

Over the grand scale of my research I’ve ultimately concluded that each and every one of those systems have glaring inequalities to them and all fail to actually access the problem at hand; being the rightful worth of labor being placed into the hands of the producer instead of some separate entity that will form often through violent means or by simple force that is unresisted at first by the workers. This is of course not the only problem however I’ve seen and elaborated upon throughout this text though. Ultimately, I’ve found a scientific hypothesis: the system which we’ve been taught to fear, ‘communism’, is of course the only system which eliminates these blaring inequalities. However, it goes without saying that this system, in the present state of Eldham’s material condition, is in fact an impossibility as a result of the necessity of money to uphold claims. Therefore, we require a transitional stage whereby the community of people at large are able to demand and create communism on either mass or marginal stages through the demand of our world and our Controllers. This transitional stage is in fact called socialism.

There are two modern modes of socialist thought; at least in Eldham. These first of these thoughts have been called Unitism which derives from the origins of the socialist movements in the former nation of Nova Azcoria. They tend to call for a rather liberalistic approach, are opposed either in entirety or in part to revolutionary overthrow of the non-socialist states, tend to call for multi party democracies, and a very slow and marginal movement towards communism and even just socialism in general. I have many faults with this movement and it has been rightfully criticized by many socialists for being utopian in nature. It seldom has an actual idea of how it will achieve socialism, what that will look like, or how it will even be garnered on a larger stage whatsoever or defend itself. Unitist thought has been subdivided into several smaller groups such as ‘lavenderism’ which is preached by the state of Manzland and various other social democratic governments.

The second mode of socialist thought, and the one most common through the socialist movements in Eldham, is what has been called ‘Xeroism’. I did not name this thought, in fact it came from journalists during my tenure as General Secretary of the Communist Party in the United Socialist States of Eldham and has since grown in popularity and has been applied to the worlds’ socialist movements in large. Xeroists argue for revolutionary overthrow of the imperialist nations, establishment of a vanguard to protect the rights of the workers and defend against imperialist overthrow of socialism, advancement of collectivist teachings and organization in cities and nations, amongst other things. Ultimately what divides a Xeroist from a Unitist is their views on the necessity of quick radical change, almost always through means of revolution. Slow adaptations of socialism are only meant to suit the needs of the higher classes and give them time to corrupt what would otherwise be a socialist agenda with pro-profit rhetoric such as what has been seen in Manzland for example where a small minority of people own the vast majority of profits.

Xeroism has been picked up by the worlds’ socialist movements following the growth of the United Socialist States of Eldham into a world power and has since been adopted either in part or in whole by nations and parties from Amarillo, to Merconis, to Prubensia, to Aristios, to Andrimar, to Medtremar, to even the scopes of Barenland. While not even all Xeroists agree entirely on what the best way to go about socialism is, what I argue for is that what I can at the very least conclude is that Xeroism is the objective best way to lead the socialist project going forward; other smaller differences may attribute their various advantages and disadvantages to the material conditions in which these societies attempt to build up socialism.

Xeroism in its origins likewise to Unitism saw a relative popularity to utopian rhetoric, not being definite in its pursuit of socialism and how it will be obtained. This is not the fact anymore though, perhaps the contributions of Comrades Pengy, Chelovek Serebra, and Quintus Solokov can best be shown to determine how to take the core ideas I created and turn it into not a utopian movement; but a scientific one. In the modern day and age, Xeroism is not merely an ideology but a science. It studies how class and caste intersect with the economy, what the most successful means to achieving socialism are, and how the plethora of economic thoughts can best be applied to Eldham in a meaningful manner. As a result of this, it is the Xeroist nation states that have been the longest lasting democracies in the whole history of Eldham, one would point to the U.S.S.E. in particular. The few, and I do mean few, times Xeroist projects have failed it has been attributed to solely outside sources, such as the imperialist GULF Coup in the Garxijos Yawos. Ultimately I have come to the surefire conclusion that not only is socialism the next step for the world’s progressive movement, but Xeroist thoughts in particular are necessary for objectively understanding economic material reality and determining how our individual nations and parties should go about establishing their socialist projects.

Throughout the entirety of this book which I have chosen to aptly name ECONOMIES to show that this not merely a book on socialism or Xeroist thought specifically, but an objective study on the world of economics, I have ideally shown the reader great nuance and context to why the world we live in looks the way it does; though let it be understood that my job is not finished. It is the job of the reader and those intellectuals that wish to further the study to use the lessons I’ve tried in desperosity to forge and build upon them. There are things I may be wrong about, there are things I may not know that someone else might, this is why I greatly encourage intellectuals of all sorts to have open discussions and debates in the public sphere and build upon the groundwork I’ve set. It is my greatest wish to the world before me that we can strive for a greater one and garner an exquisite understanding of how our societies work and build upon that for the best possible experience for us all. For that, I greatly thank the work of my dearest comrades in my time and after it. Thank you and may you be blessed.