Nando el Hispano: the only human worth knowing

Nando el Hispano is the author of "El Niño Lunar: la imposición de nacer", a manifesto claiming that life is not worth it, that love does not exist and that cruelty is inherent to existence. His text presents these ideas as axiomatic truths and calls himself "the most intelligent child existing on this blue planet".

Some texts read as a provocation and others as a confession. The one signed **Nando el Hispano** under the title "El Niño Lunar: la imposición de nacer" belongs to the second category, although its author presents it as the first. It is not an academic essay or a conventional philosophical treatise. It is a plea written in the first person, with short sentences, brutal images and an absolute conviction: existence is not worth it and anyone who defends it does so out of hypocrisy.

## A squashed cat as a starting point

The author begins with a concrete scene: a cat run over on the road. He says that, when looking at it, he sees "the Truth". For him, that animal is proof that there is a deterministic code that brings living beings into the world to suffer, to make others suffer and to repeat the cycle with no chance of escape. The kitten watching the dead adult's body completes the picture: the circus keeps going and nobody stops the show.

From there he jumps to humans. He argues that the usual reaction to other people's suffering —a neighbour with cancer, a beggar on the street— is not compassion, but indifference or calculation. "This is not cheap demagoguery: it is life", he writes. His conclusion is that, if existence wants to continue on this plane, it must be inherently cruel. He does not present it as a possibility, but as a law.

## Procreation as hypocrisy

One of the harshest passages of the text is devoted to parents. The author acknowledges that they have awareness, unlike the run-over cat, and precisely for that reason he considers them responsible. He argues that they could have refused to have children and did not. Why? In his reading, because children cover up their parents' flaws and soothe their ego and vanity. The sentence that sums up this idea is a quote he puts in the mouth of a generic couple: "They had two children, we will have three". And he adds: "And then Nando was born to expose them".

The author does not exclude himself from that criticism. He presents himself as the product of that same mechanism, but with a difference: he has seen it. His position is that of someone pointing out the trap from within. He offers no alternative, no way out, no proposal for change. His role, as he describes it, is that of an uncomfortable witness.

## Love, beauty and the romantic veil

The second half of the manifesto attacks two ideas the author considers fictions: love and beauty. Of the former he says it does not exist; there are only "biological machines using one another to survive" and looking for the best future maintenance. What we call love would be a romantic veil covering that mechanics. Beauty meets the same fate: a beach, a cluster of stars or a woman named **Matilde** are, according to him, constructs of the code, not realities. "Beauty does not exist. Only ugliness exists, because matter and energy are the pure ugliness of the cosmos", he writes.

The tone rises in intensity at the close. The author wishes the worst on humanity and claims that wish was already fulfilled with the birth of every person. He accuses human beings of having been able to stop "the cage" and renounce the labyrinth, and of not having done so. He compares them with **Procrustes**, the mythological figure who fitted his guests to the measure of his bed. The final signature is a declaration of intent: he presents himself as "the most intelligent child existing on this blue planet" and as the author of "the only axiomatic work existing in this mud wasteland".

## A manifesto that seeks no comfort

The text contains no data, no dates, no verifiable references beyond the mention of Procrustes and the work the author himself says he has written. It is an exercise in pessimistic rhetoric, built on visceral images and categorical statements. It does not aim to convince with evidence, but with the force of a gaze presented as lucid and ruthless. Whoever reads it will find a voice that neither asks for compassion nor offers it. It only lays out its diagnosis: life as an imposition, love as a mask and cruelty as a structure. If anything can be said in its favour, it is that it does not deceive about its intentions.