Who Framed Black Rabbit?

🎬The perception in society and among historians is that the brutal serial mass murders in the death camps only affected Jews and Armenians.

This erroneous assumption is based on the latent nature of the murder of other social ethnic groups committed by similar methods and the inability to comprehend the structure, substance, and motivation of the Reich's operations. "Those on the lookout for domestic enemies needed a target group that would be both sufficiently visible and more or less universally disliked, perceived as both all-powerful and numerically marginal so that its elimination from society would not have a major detrimental effect on the nation, both an easy target for victimization and generally accepted as the chief instigator of its persecutors' own victimhood. An enemy, that is, whose very persecution would serve to manifest the power and legitimacy of the victimizer, while simultaneously allowing the persecutor to claim the status of the "true" (past, present, and potentially future) victim." (Schneider, 2002). The Holocaust and the genocide of Armenians were widely discussed and communicated, leading to an incorrect assessment of the Third Reich's activities and an untrue impression that only Jews and Armenians were victims. That's not the case. The issue stems from the fact that numerous categories of people were completely destroyed, leaving few heirs capable of presenting the terrible truth.

As per John Olsson (2018), "forensic linguistics has been born as an instrument, which allows to correct the errors of justice."

In terms of forensic linguistics, the repetition of specific Lexique constructions, words, and explanations point to the similarity of the people who were authors of the same metamessages. The specifics of the applied words, punctuation marks, their repetition and the degree of rarity of terminology also validate the similarity of the authors of the certain message. The principles of neurophysiology, in particular, its part about the reflexes and conditioning say that the regular, habitual language that we speak, it works similarly like any other habit. Every habitual activity forms a rigid trails of neuron chains in our brain, and the habitual chain of related reactions. It is very difficult to change habits, and this rule works in the language we speak as well.

The language that we speak is a unique cumulative product of our origin, lifestyle, education, which characterizes our individuality and allows to distinguish it from the other people, or social groups. As per Agha (2015), "Ideologies of slang typically convert slang repertoires into systems of stereotypical social indices whereby particular kinds of social personae are linked to and thus can be inhabited and negotiated through the use of slang expressions, including personae emblematic of membership in or exclusion from specific social groups." Thus, our language represents the synopsis of our personality traits, combining with the specific of the habitual social group. From the perspective of forensic linguistics, it means, that defining the author of the certain phrase or text, we can identify the social group attributed to this, and, to identify the targets to act. The habitual language and dialects can help to discover the social group originated the definite text.

As per Agha (2003), "the enregisterment is the processes through which a linguistic repertoire becomes differentiable within a language as a socially recognized register of forms." The example of this is British English. But the enregisterment of metalanguage dramatically limits the boundaries of this group, not only because of the narrow field, but primarily by the biological causation - the capability to use, transcribe and understand metalanguage requires a distinguished biologically explained intelligence, which shall be trained, as per Hovard Gardner's Multiple Intelligence Theory.

Using the metalanguage requires specific biological conditions and well trained capabilities. It eliminates any hypotheses the "sudden matching," and that everyone can use and understand the metacommunication. Only the distinctive members of the distinctive social group can do this.

Making a step beyond the couple of Iliya Tolstoy and Sofia Filosofova, brings a plenty of comparable cases, we will analyze many of them in the investigation who framed Black Rabbit. The closest one to the case of Iliya Tolstoy and Sofia Filosofova, was a marriage between their grandson, that has been concluded Daria Bogarne, and Prince Leo Mikhailovich Koutchebei. According to the legend offering to us by Wikifakepedia, Koutchubei and Bogarne cancelled their "partnership," and Koutchubei immigrated with his kids to Paris, probably, "occasionally" living in Russia a daughter, Elena. What about the Grand Duchess, the great-granddaughter of the Emperor Nicholas I and Josefina de Bogarne-Bonaparte, in 1917 she immigrated to Germany, and in 1918, she returned to Russia where the Red Terror destroyed millions of nobles. After the return, in 1927 Dariya Bogarne changed her name to Dora, and changed a birth date to 1881. She (Grand Duchess, Member of the Emperor's family), also entered into two civil misalliances, with Austrian barone, and later with the Italian Viktor Markizetti. And all these complicated actions were undertaken by her to be shot on November 5th, 1937. So, like Iliya Tolstoy and Sofia Filosofova, Daria Bogarne and Leo Koutchubei committed the same stupid, inconsistent, impossible and improbable steps, allowing the behavior even not typical for peasants (free divorce), but not acceptable to the royal family members. Nobody asked the obvious question - why Daria Bogarne, the granddaughter of Napoleon and Josefina, French emperor's family, with a husband from Ukraine nobility, immigrated to Germany - the defender of Russia during the war, but moreover, after this, why did she return to the Red Terror in Russia for being murdered?

Thus, in the one family, the same levelled relatives (Bogarne, Koutchubei, Tolstoy, Filosofova), according to the Wikifakepedia, undertook the same strange, non-ordinary actions, which were impossible and improbable:

• Left their spouses with a many children on hand, and the list of kids following the Wikifakepedia had been changed many times

• Divorced multiple times

• Change the beliefs, name, metrics

• Emigrated outside Russia during the war time, or during the time when the borders were closed

• Selected for the permanent residence, the center of the war theatre

• Make another kind of "civil partnership" or strange misalliance marriage

• Died without any traceable grave and ceremony of bury.

However, these inconsistent, stupid, impossible behavior is not the only thing which unifies the both cases: Tolstoy and Filosova, Koutchubei and Bogarne. The most important thing was that their kids - Mikhail Iliyich Tolstoy and Elena Lvovna Koutchubei left in Russia, and gave birth to  the kids - a boy and a girl. So, the fake legend according to the Wikifakepedia were written for the members of the one family. And all the legends were written by using the same metalanguage, that means all the legends were created by the same person or the group of persons.

🎞Follow:

#whoframedblackrabbit

Written by Meggi Göring. All rights reserved. 2024. Copyright by the BOOST.

Credits

1. Olsson, J. (2018). Wordcrime: Solving Crime Through Forensic Linguistics. Bloomsbury Publishing Inc.

2. Kulikova, I., Salmina D. (2002). Introduction to metalinguistics: linguistic terminology in the communicative and pragmatic aspect. SAGA, Saint Petersburg.

3. Tiersma, P., & Solan, L. M. (2002). The Linguist on the Witness Stand: Forensic Linguistics in American Courts. Language, 78(2), 221–239. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3086556

4. Francis Nolan. (1991). Forensic Phonetics. Journal of Linguistics, 27(2), 483–493. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4176127

5. Tiersma, P. M. (1993). Linguistic Issues in the Law [Review of Language in the Judicial Process; The Language Scientist as Expert in the Legal Setting: Issues in Forensic Linguistics, by J. Levi, A. G. Walker, R. W. Rieber, & W. A. Stewart]. Language, 69(1), 113–137. https://doi.org/10.2307/416418

6. Hargitt, S. (2013). What Could Be Gained in Translation: Legal Language and Lawyer-Linguists in a Globalized World. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 20(1), 425–447. https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.20.1.425

7. Marschark, M., Spencer, L. J., Durkin, A., Borgna, G., Convertino, C., Machmer, E., Kronenberger, W. G., & Trani, A. (2015). Understanding Language, Hearing Status, and Visual-Spatial Skills. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 20(4), 310–330. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26172500

8. TURBAYNE, C. M. (1971). VISUAL LANGUAGE. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 28(1), 51–58. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42574680

9. Humphrey, A. S., & CARVAJAL, J. (2015). VISUAL AND SPATIAL LANGUAGE: THE SILENT VOICE OF WOODSTOCK. Composition Studies, 43(1), 19–30. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43501876

10. Merrill, M. S. (2004). MASKS, METAPHOR AND TRANSFORMATION: THE COMMUNICATION OF BELIEF IN RITUAL PERFORMANCE. Journal of Ritual Studies, 18(1), 16–33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44368668

11. Schneider, J., & Schneider, P. (2002). The Mafia and al-Qaeda: Violent and Secretive Organizations in Comparative and Historical Perspective. American Anthropologist, 104(3), 776–782. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3567255