When a government of a country with respectable democracy and the rule of law makes decisions that did not result from the political programs according to which it was elected, the consequences of which in turn make the lives of citizens much more difficult, greatly reduce their standard of living and, on top of that, their raises fears for their own security and future, then without much hesitation we can conclude that it is an extraordinary situation in which the actual democracy in that country has been suspended or has been significantly reduced, and perhaps even abolished altogether. All doubts about the correctness of the conclusion should disappear if one of the leading ministers openly stated that the government does not intend to change the policy regardless of what the voters who elected it thought about it.

It seems unbelievable, but this happened to Germany these days, the largest and most powerful, white-free and the most excellent democracy in Europe. Its foreign minister, Nekni, at the 2000 Forum of Non-Governmental Organizations, said exactly the unthinkable – that she would work against the interests of the citizens of Germany, regardless of what her German voters thought about it. Lest you think that I am jumping to conclusions based on words taken out of context, the entire statement of Analena Berbok reads like this: "When I promise the citizens of Ukraine - we are with you, as long as you need us - then I want it and yes I make it happen. Regardless of what my German voters thought, I want to deliver it to the citizens of Ukraine."

If it was a mistake in speech or abuse of the position of a minister of the German government, we would have known about it immediately (or the next day). Either Berbock would have apologized to the citizens of Germany or he would have had to resign the very next day. But that not only did not happen, but she proudly and self-confidently continued to perform her function in the realization of the government's policies. That the German government considers the promises it broadcast on air to the citizens of another country more important than the promises it previously made to its voters and to all the citizens of its own country in order to be elected, that was not in the domain of the the imaginable.

What should a person think about German democracy? If you think about it, you will remember that when such statements and acts resulting from personal decisions of the political elites that are contrary to the interests of the citizens, and obviously violate the basic principles and values ​​of democracy, happen in Bananastan or, let's say, in Macedonia, then the entire advanced democratic world will collectively recognize that situation as the abolition of democracy, and will call the political situation a "stolen state". And, so that there are no misinterpretations, with the above I did not want to relativize the guilt of the fascist VMRO-DPMNE mafiocracy led by Gruevski and his clique - when they abolished the fragile Macedonian democracy and "captured the state", but on the contrary, I am amazed how Nobody recognizes the "captured state" in modern Germany?

How today the authoritarian decision-making of the political elites of several European countries (not only Germany), but also of practically all the countries of the so-called collective West, and that on issues that are of the highest interest to all their citizens, is recognized in the prevailing public not as a crisis, suspension or abolition of democracy, but as a political virtue, as a true "leadership"?

Of course, I had just asked myself the above problematic questions, when the agile German minister, speaking last Tuesday in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, resolved my dilemmas by stating literally that the members of the European Union should not blame each other and that they should be united because "they are waging war against Russia, not among themselves." This statement carries with it two hard truths, one explanatory but not comforting, the other horrifying in itself.

The first is that the abolition of democracy, the market economy and the rule of law in the countries of the European Union is something in itself understandable and inevitable, because we all know that democratic countries in war suspend or abolish democracy - it is impossible in war, you understand it's up to everyone, isn't it – and they move on to managing countries in military conditions, with emergency situations, with military subordination, command military economy and the like. But the second one is, as I said, terrible in itself: Europe is at war, but not geographically, but that the European Union is actively at war against Russia, that it is defacto at war with Russia?! Well, no one told us such a thing, even the European, American and NATO leaders stuck out their tongues, persistently declaring, to this day, that they - we? – are in no way at war with Russia, but only support Ukraine in its war with the aggressor. And the worst thing is that this statement did not even deserve to be breaking news, but went unnoticed and unimportant, like any of these perverse, wet mid-winter days.

However, one should think carefully about the fact that the fact that Europe has declared war on Russia is not news?! The silence with which Minister Berbock's declaration of war was wrapped is even more proof of the truth of her words: we have been living for a long time with a continental or will be globally abolished democracy and the rule of law, in an extraordinary state to which we have already become accustomed, and which we dully live with half an ear and a quarter of a brain, listening to the news about the world and about our own country that - as always in war - is produced by a ministry of propaganda and then distributed to everyone for elaboration, action and guvee.

This terrible, but sobering, truth that the brave Analena made public at once explains all the recent shipwrecks that befell Macedonia on her calvary along the ditches on the way to Europe. It was the war that made Europe give us an ultimatum in the form of the compromise "French proposal", because when until now and for which candidate country did the Union deliver an ultimatum that should be treated as a final act of choice, as "take or leave', actually as a proposal that cannot be refused, especially because of the gun the proposer is holding to the candidate's temple?

Ah, now it becomes clear why poor Europe could not respect any of its own fundamental values ​​in the Macedonian case, and had to incorporate the Bulgarian fascist and irredentist demands as our obligation in the whole endless process of negotiations with the Union. It is now clear that Europe had no choice either, because it had already been turned into a war zone, into a garrison on the periphery, into a branch of NATO in which it had already practiced "stepping up", so it had to use an ultimatum to put us on a "fast track" contrary to our interests.

Analena's revelation explains many other things, for example, why for a year now all the shit in the whole world has been explained as being caused by one single reason: Russian aggression. Such intercontinental nonsense is only possible in a world war.

But the biggest revelation and at the same time the most reliable proof of the truth of the announcement of the Third World War is precisely the Bulgarian veto, the Bulgarian ultimatums and the furious choleric fever that comes out of their impatience to "administer" with the beloved Macedonia again in any way. Bulgarian psychopathy enters the show, even erupts, whenever the neighbors recognize a world war, and when in the great geopolitical card divisions they recognize a force that will offer the Macedonian country in exchange for loyalty in the war. It happened in the First World War, it happened in the Second World War, and it is happening today in the Third World War. Kudos, brothers, no one on the planet is able to recognize their chance in a world war like you!

The author is an architect.