[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/leftistpol/ - Leftist Politics

Fiscally Left-wing Politics; Pro-Reformist; Current events; Brosocialist safe space

Catalog

Infinity Never
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


File: 1449465482333.jpeg (70.24 KB, 800x600, 4:3, 1419581298981-1.jpeg)

 No.253

>Our mission is a reformist/incrementalist approach to agitate for the working-class (non-reformers are welcome to post). Without alienating the white heterosexual cis male as is typically the case with modern leftism (which makes up a huge chunk of the working-class in the west. It's politically suicidal). We think identity politics is divisive. We want to be inclusive to people of all races, genders and sexual orientations. That doesn't mean that we're in favor of giving preferential treatment to one group over the other. That seems to be the modern leftist view of "equality". If the left didn't actively try to alienate white heterosexual males, the conservatives/Republicans would never win. The whole conservative/Republican strategy is to feed off working-class white heterosexual male resentment and it's working. I'm Pro-Bernie Sanders/Jeremy Corbyn/Kshama Sawant/Elizabeth May. Though I wish these candidates weren't so Pro-IDpol/SJW (Bernie Sanders is only Pro-IDpol/SJW because he feels that he needs to be to be politically relevant. But we know his true power level.)

So BO never lurked /leftypol/ too much? because /leftypol/ is illiberal as fuck most of the time.

Still I'll post and browse here because BO promised that this place will be action based and not theory based.

 No.254

>>253

I've lurked /leftypol/ for a couple months. I'm a reformist/incrementalist. /leftypol/ holds a non-reformist position. /leftypol/ is mostly Anti-IDpol/SJW yea. Though there is still somewhat of a SJW vibe. I made some politically incorrect comments that some people didn't like and made a politically incorrect thread that a mod didn't like. I don't want to get into it. This politically correctness shit within the modern left is madness (though /leftypol/ isn't so bad). You say one thing that isn't politically correct today and people want to dox you, burn your house down, harass your family, fire you and never want to hire you again. It's fucking madness. What the fuck happened to the left?


 No.255

>>254

>People didnt like what i had to day

>f-fuck you guys, ill start my own board, with blackjack and hookers.


 No.256

>>255

We just have a fundamental difference in philosophy. I've made it clear in the sticky. If you are on the left, the only two options you really have are to ally with the social justice warriors (the "modern left") or the "old left" types who are stuck on 19th/20th century socialism (ie. /leftypol/). It's important that the left be "updated" for 2015+ without pandering to neo-liberal interests (ie. Third Way social democracy) or the social justice warriors that have infiltrated the modern left. I advocate real reform/incrementalism to better the lives of the working-class. Not third way social democracy. Not this social justice warrior crap.

/leftypol/ says they are tired of talking about SJWs. And so this is why they delete or bump-lock those threads. But SJWs have cuckolded the left and they openly aggress the white heterosexual cis males. They are a bigger threat to us than the conservatives. The conservatives are only as strong as they are politically because they feed off white working-class heterosexual male disillusionment with the modern left. The Southern Strategy was a fucking brilliant play by the Republicans. And then once working-class white men join the conservative camp, they are fed neo-liberal capitalist propaganda (by Fox News and conservative talk radio) and told to hate "welfare queens" even though corporations benefit from all kinds of subsidies and tax cuts. And from that exposure, their belief system becomes even more polarized.


 No.257

>>256

>the "old left" types who are stuck on 19th/20th century socialism

You do realize that one of the most talk about people on the board, being Zizek, calls for the abandonment of that type of thinking?

> I advocate real reform/incrementalism to better the lives of the working-class.

Like what?

> But SJWs have cuckolded the left and they openly aggress the white heterosexual cis males. They are a bigger threat to us than the conservatives. The conservatives are only as strong as they are politically because they feed off white working-class heterosexual male disillusionment with the modern left.

Why say that SJWs are a bigger threat, and then go on with how the conservative camp one over a huge chunk of the population, opposed to SJWs who mostly win over young college kids who grows out of these things? This is just fitting in with the times. You want to appease people of the right no matter what, since that the mood of this imageboard. Not only that, you want to appeal to a group of people who get so worked up over twitter postings and shitty news articles that they will accept a ideology that they themselves don't understand. Don't be a phony about it and just say it like it is.


 No.258

>>257

>Zizek

I actually haven't looked into Zizek yet. He's mentioned a lot on /leftypol/ but I didn't read anything about him on there that captured my interest. Other people on the left (ie. RT America, yes they are funded by the Russian government propaganda machine. But I watch their programming from time to time since it's interesting) do a very good job of "pitching" leftist intellectuals do their audience. I haven't seen a pitch for Zizek that got me interested. Your pitch is the most intriguing one for Zizek thus far.

>Like what?

/leftypol/'s position is that working within the system doesn't work. We just have to wait around for the revolution. A revolution that will never happen. Because the working-class in the developed world do not want revolution. When you feel that you have something to lose, skin in the game or you feel that you have hope, there's no revolutionary potential. What the working-class in the 2015 developed world wants is social democratic concessions. If they wanted revolution, you wouldn't have Greek girls sucking dick for 2 euros. If Greece had a basic income, you think Greeks would be sucking dick for 2 euros? We need action NOW. We need to make things better NOW instead of waiting around for the material conditions to be right. We need to vote for candidates like Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, Kshama Sawant, Elizabeth May, etc. Look at Finland. They're going to institute a 800 euro/month basic income. That's a paltry sum that doesn't even quite cover the basics. But it's fucking something. Finns won't be homeless and starving at least. Reformism/Incrementalism is leading to progress.

>Why say that SJWs are a bigger threat, and then go on with how the conservative camp one over a huge chunk of the population, opposed to SJWs who mostly win over young college kids who grows out of these things? This is just fitting in with the times. You want to appease people of the right no matter what, since that the mood of this imageboard. Not only that, you want to appeal to a group of people who get so worked up over twitter postings and shitty news articles that they will accept a ideology that they themselves don't understand. Don't be a phony about it and just say it like it is.

The SJWs are not a fringe element. They are a very vocal group that has co-opted the mainstream liberal/social democrat agenda. They forced a University of Missouri president into resignation ffs. They are dismantling due process for males who are accused of rape by pushing the onus on males to prove their innocent. Instead of putting the onus on the plaintiff to prove that they were raped. They are a legitimate threat. It's not just young angry college kids anymore. These bourgeois/petit-bourgeois young angry college kids go on to work for Salon/Slate/Jezebel/Huffington Post and continue to spread their agenda. And guess what? Those young angry college kids cost a University president a job and are tarnishing the reputations of innocent young college boys with false rape accusations.

But hey if /leftypol/ wants to stick their head in the sand and pretend like there isn't a SJW problem be my guest.

Post last edited at

 No.260

>>254

>politically incorrect comments that some people didn't like and made a politically incorrect thread that a mod didn't like

Like what?

Anyway, your comment wasn't politically incorrect but rather outside of /leftypol/'s standard doctrine.

>>256

Updating the left is a strong term but I'm sympathetic to the idea

My issue with /leftpol/ is that most of them are philosophy nerd unable to communicate in a plain language

We need a left with empirical strategies/policies and not some obscure doctrine that is not even related to actual politics.

>>258

In short Zizek is a freudo-marxist

I do think that reformism is bullshit but I will atribute the lack of a revolution to other factors, I bet we will have to wait a generation into the future with this same conditions for a revolution to develope, properity is still to fresh on people's mind.

I will get behind this board because I'm more of an empirical socialist and /leftypol/ is really sunken into obscure shit.


 No.261

>>256

> If you are on the left, the only two options you really have are to ally with the social justice warriors (the "modern left") or the "old left" types who are stuck on 19th/20th century socialism (ie. /leftypol/).

>False dichotomies

Wew lad


 No.263

>>256

Are you the same board owner of /leftypol/? What is the purpose of this board compared to that one?

I don't like on /leftypol/ that there is this impression that if you're not a commie you're not a leftist. Is that something you plan on promoting here?


 No.264

>>263

>Are you the same board owner of /leftypol/?

Shit dosn't happen like that, try reading BO's posts and you can conclude that they're not the same person.

Are you a liberal? because liberals are not leftists, stick to >>>/liberalpol/ you scum.


 No.266

>>264

Cute, but I think I'll wait on the board owner's response.


 No.267

>>263

No I'm not the board owner of /leftypol/. Our boards are independent from each other.

This board has a pro-reformist line (social democracy, democratic socialism) and supports fiscal leftism in general. I don't hold the view that you need to be a communist or even a socialist in order to be a leftist. As a guideline, I like politicians like Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, Kshama Sawant and Elizabeth May (though I'm not a fan of their identity politics. Though Bernie Sanders is unique in that he talks mostly about class and only gets into IDpol as much as he needs to to get #blacklivesmatter, feminists and LGBTs to vote for him). I'm not a fan of Hillary Clinton. She's just a liberal who is adopting some social democracy to sway Democrats away from voting for Bernie Sanders.


 No.270

>>267

>>267

> fiscal leftism in general

define fiscal leftism


 No.271

>>267

I don't really see the need to separate the userbase across two boards. There's nothing stopping you talking about reformism on /leftypol/, other than the fact that reformists are in a minority there. That just means you've got people to convince. I just don't see the benefit of haviing two smaller boards instead of one larger board where reformists and wannabe-revolutionaries, statists and anarchists can all exchange ideas.


 No.273

>>267

Cool, thanks for responding.


 No.274

>>271

I'm going to be "red-pill", frank and realistic: It's pretty much impossible to convince people who are pro-revolution, anti-reform that reform is a viable option. Just like how it's counter-productive to go on /pol/ and try to convince them of the merits of leftism. The typical poster on /leftypol/ has been exposed to a lot of reformist arguments before. But they remain unconvinced because they see politics as "bourgeois politics" and believe that the bourgeois would never allow you to change anything of substance through the political process. Meanwhile in Finland they just passed a 800 euro/month basic income policy. Which is probably the biggest victory for social democracy to date. After the haters said that basic income was "pipe dream" that the bourgeois and the classcucked masses would never accept.


 No.275

>>270

The dominant definition of fiscal leftism today (check Wikipedia) is promoting more social equality, egalitarianism and equality of outcome.

To the "old left" socialists and communists on /leftypol/, fiscal leftism is about abolishing private ownership of the means of production. Eliminating the concept of surplus value of labour. There would be no private owner/shareholder skimming profits off the top. All profits would go directly to the workers. And in post-scarcity communism where there is no concept of money, everyone would be able to have their needs met regardless of what labour they do and how much they labour.

Any sort of violent insurrection against the bourgeois would be easily suppressed today or anytime in the near future. And socialism won't be achieved by democratic means anytime soon. Socialist Alternative has the nationalization of the Fortune 500 companies as part of their platform but we know that isn't going to happen. So I see it as necessary to promote social democratic reformism. We can't abolish private ownership of the means of production completely. So instead I advocate policy that promotes a more equitable distribution of wealth. ie. basic income, improved public healthcare coverage, free post-secondary tuition, improved public transportation, nationalization of natural resource industries and other key industries.


 No.276

>>274

You should be starting new threads, posting in them, and getting anyone you know to post or this place will die. You have a narrow window, and a brief opportunity because /leftypol/ board is unviewable.


 No.281

>>275

So this is a social democrat board?

Interest lost.


 No.286

>>281

Didn't the subtitle of the board and the FAQ sticky make it clear that the board has a pro-reformist stance?

I advocate for social democratic reform. But I absolutely can't stand establishment social democrats. I would place myself to the left of Bernie Sanders. And unlike Bernie Sanders, I have absolutely no tolerance for the IDpol/SJWs (#blacklivesmatter, Mizzou fiasco, #FuckParis, #HeForShe, Salon, Slate, Huffington Post, Jezebel, Tumblr, Reddit, that stupid professor who said #killallwhitemen, all that garbage)


 No.287

>>281

I do consider myself a socialist. But it's not realistic to go from neo-liberal capitalism to socialism. You can't just steal the means of production from the bourgeoisie. The state's foot soldiers will shoot you down like a dog in the street if you do that. And achieving socialism through democratic means is not realistic either for the time being. Working-class people in the west don't even want socialism. They're just tired of living paycheque to paycheque and worrying about their financial security. They want better work-life balance. They want more fulfilling work. If you want to wait around for a revolution that will never happen, there's >>>/leftypol/


 No.290

>>287

>>286

M8 you need to listen to Milo and advertise this board or this place will die.


 No.292

>>290

Where would I be able to advertise an 8chan board? I've put the word out on /leftypol/. But most of the posters there have no interest in a reformist board. I've put out a link on twitter. Not much in the way of results. I've seen Milo suggest 4chan and reddit.

I've tried using reddit before. And the weird thing about reddit is that you need a certain amount of karma in order to post in certain sub-reddits. But how can you accumulate karma when you're not allowed to post in sub-reddits until you obtain enough karma? The way that reddit is designed is retarded. The whole +1/-1 system on reddit encourages hiveminds and echo chambers. Not real discussion. I figured that reddit would possibly be a better fit for a reformist board as well. But I don't like the hivemind reddit culture. And there are lots of SJWs on there too. In order to create a sub-reddit you also need a certain amount of karma. An amount that is not disclosed.


 No.298

>>292

are you the original BO?


 No.302

>>298

No. The original BO abandoned the board like a year ago from the looks of his past posts.

That said, I deleted a lot of old /pol/ threads. So it's possible that he might have been posting in 2015.

I took over the board like a week ago.


 No.307

>>302

i had BO for a while and did many of the pol posts and advertising for more

if by pol posts you mean nationalism and the discussion of the flood of Europe and the already phase 1 completing in America then you've killed off a major talking point and censored a lot of opinions

good luck with the board


 No.308

>>257

>You do realize that one of the most talk about people on the board, being Zizek, calls for the abandonment of that type of thinking?

Which is why half the posters then immediately turn round and start discussing Stirner, Proudhon and Marx, obviously.

>Why say that SJWs are a bigger threat

They have invaded all leftist spaces in order to divert class struggle into idpol causes, /leftypol/ included. The "Anarcho"-Nihilist poster over there being a case in point.


 No.309

>>308

which is funny because anarchism tends to be about ignoring attention whoring and removing government special privileges


 No.310

>>307

I can't remember if any of the /pol/ threads I deleted were yours. I was under the impression that the board had underwent a /pol/ raid. Most of the threads looked like threads straight out of /pol/.

The European migrant crisis is a worthwhile discussion. I think Muslim immigration is an issue. A large chunk of Muslims do not hold values that are compatible with western liberal democracy. You give these people a vote and they will change your country for the worse.

As for the United States, most of their immigration at this point is driven by Hispanics correct? They are about ~13% black. But most blacks arrived back when slavery was still legal. Long time ago. And the black birth rate was decreased significantly since Roe vs Wade. I personally don't have a problem with Hispanic immigration. They are either Catholic or secular/nominally Christian. They hold our values. They are hard-workers. Though I can understand why the white working-class would be concerned about the presence of Hispanics. Especially illegals. The fact that they are hard-workers, willing to do unpleasant jobs for low pay, makes it hard for white working-class Americans to compete with them for jobs. There is a concern that the standard of living would go down in the west by importing cheap foreign labour. Though there are also studies that show that immigration increases GDP per capita.

I don't personally have a problem with migration. I see it as moving. But no one wants unwanted outsiders to move into their community. I think using representative national polls to get at the "pulse" of the country's feeling towards immigration and base your immigration policy on that would be the right step forward. Right now the majority of Americans don't like Barack Obama's Syrian refugee plan. 60% of Canadians don't like Justin Trudeau's Syrian refugee plan. The French are fed up with Muslim immigration. You have to pay attention to what the citizens want because it's their community. Would you let unwanted guests into your home? Do you want shady people as neighbours?

I'm not a fan of nationalism. I have no interest in "securing a future for white children." I don't even want kids. And my girlfriend isn't white so even if we had kids, they would be biracial. And I think it's silly that white nationalists want to outlaw miscegenation. Who are they to tell me who I shouldn't be allowed to sleep and breed with? And I don't see the point in preserving national culture or racial purity because migration happens. Cultures change. People inter-breed. Ultimately I think migration policy should be up to the community.

My reasons for disliking Islam are similar to my reasons for disliking fundamentalist Christian conservatism. I'm an atheist (raised Catholic). I want the government to get out of my bedroom and medicine cabinet. Except Islam is even worse than Christianity. They are even more socially conservative than Christian conservatives. And the ironic thing is that it's the Christian conservatives who tend to dislike Islam, not the liberals. The liberals suck Muslim dick. The liberals seek to destroy western civilization. I want to preserve western liberal democracy. It doesn't matter to me if our society becomes browner in the process. The Moors occupied my parents' country many centuries ago. I have some darker skinned relatives. I probably have some North African ancestry myself. But the difference between my family tree and the North Africans in France is that my North African ancestors adopted Christianity and evolved. They became better people over time compared to our Moorish barbarian ancestors. They went through the Enlightenment Period and all that. Meanwhile lots of North African Muslims have a very backward way of thinking. Despite living in a modern liberal democracy like France.


 No.311

>>309

Ha. Ha. Ha.


 No.312

>>308

>They have invaded all leftist spaces in order to divert class struggle into idpol causes, /leftypol/ included. The "Anarcho"-Nihilist poster over there being a case in point

Exactly. /leftypol/ seemed to almost unanimously cheer at the "far-right" Front National's loss in the French Regional elections. But was it really a victory? One the "left" corner you have neo-liberal "third way" social democrat Hollande Le Cuck. And on the right corner you have the neo-liberal conservative Nikolas Sarkozy. Marine Le Pen (Front National's leader) has been the most outspoken opponent of neo-liberalism in France.

French Regional elections used to be 100% based on Proportional Representation (PR). But because the Union of the Left and Union of the Right were tired of the far-right Front National holding the balance of power all the time, which would force the left and the right to form a central block coalition, they changed the electoral system so that it's a 2-round system. With 75% seats distributed via PR and the remaining 25% of seats distributed to the winner. The "left" and the right basically conspired to fuck over the far-right. Instead of the centre-left and centre-right moderating their immigration policy in order to compete with the rise of the far-right, they would rather just change the electoral system rules in their favour as a big fuck you to democracy so that they don't have to put in the effort to compete for votes.

In France, much like in a lot of other parliamentary countries with PR systems, there's usually two major coalitions, one on the "left" and one on the "right". But with the rise of the far-right and with the far-right being too taboo to ally with the centre-right, there are now three major factions (centre-left, centre-right, far-right). This has foiled the master plan of the establishment politicians. This is why introduced this 75% PR/25% winner-take-all rule. To ensure that two party rule would prevail in France.

I'm not French. But if I were, I probably would consider voting Front National. Because it's not like the "Socialist" Party-led Union of the Left coalition is any more socialist than the Front National at this point. If you take the working-class within your country for granted, they will always steer towards fascism. Every time. They won't steer towards socialism. Because there is no socialism anymore. The far-left parties ally with the "third way" social democratic Union of the Left coalition. And then nothing really changes. If you feel a lot of financial stress and work-related stress, you're going to continue feeling that way even with the "Socialist" Party in power. Because they aren't going to change things. At least the Front National wants to do something about Muslim immigration and they are outspoken about their opposition to neo-liberalism.


 No.315

>>310

you can be and sex anyone you want

but as you say communities own themselves and so if they don't want migrants, a powerful government shouldn't expect their loyalty if it forces resettlement


 No.316

File: 1451145960558.jpg (19.48 KB, 500x331, 500:331, 1447673073764.jpg)

>>312

Also

cultural nationalism is usually tightly bound to genetic nationalism (not surprisingly) due to the genuine practice of culture by people that have the same brains resulting in a continuous and harmonious development of culture


 No.317

File: 1451160965524.jpg (41.85 KB, 500x529, 500:529, moderate-side-of-islam.jpg)

>>316

I don't buy into the genetic nationalism argument. My girlfriend isn't white and she is very much westernized. Non-white women who have sex with white men are more loyal to western civilization in my experience than white liberal women who have sex with white liberal cuck bfs (and cheat on him with Chad and maybe even Tyrone and Badr on the side). My girlfriend's mom doesn't like that she dates white guys. But she eventually got used to it.

She and her husband immigrated from a brown-majority country to a white-majority country. They knew the risks going in. If you don't want your daughter to sleep with white men, don't immigrate to a white-majority country. If my girlfriend's mom eventually learned to live with it. Then surely Muslims should eventually learn to live with the fact that their daughter wants to have sex with western infidels. Instead of forcing her to cover up, not drink alcohol, pray 5 times a day, go to a mosque regularly and forcing her to not have premarital sex.

But you see, it's not as simple as telling religious Muslims "if you don't like it here, LEAVE." No you see religious Muslims are here because they want to impose Sharia Law on us. They want to establish a Caliphate in the west. They are consciously aggressing against us.

I am also pretty sure that I'm not pure-white. Given the migration history of my parents' country and some of the swarthy phenotypes that I have seen in my family tree. I bet if I did an ancestral DNA test, I'd find that I have some North African DNA. Because the Muslims occupied the region. And then when the Christian Knights won, they were forced to convert to Christianity. Maybe even a remote chance of Jewish DNA or maybe even an outside chance of Sub-Saharan African DNA. But I prefer to live in the west and I prefer western values. I don't want to live under Sharia Law and a Caliphate.

At the end of the day people migrate, mix races and cultures change. But unlike the cultural relativist cuck liberals who think western civilization bad, eastern civilization good, I see western civilization as superior to Islam. There are some aspects of eastern philosophies (like Buddhism) that I like. But Muslims are barbarians. I know people in my personal life who were raised as Muslim but are pretty much just Muslim in name only. They are secular/nominal. Just like the vast majority of Christians in the west today are secular/nominal. And that's it. My beef is with Muslims who want to impose their morality on our society. I also dislike Christian conservatives who wish to impose their morality on society. But liberals hate on them 24/7 anyway (while defending and praising Islam constantly) and they are a shrinking minority. They are not a concern.

You see modern liberalism is not about preserving civil liberties. And it's certainly not about advocating for the working-class, let alone promoting the idea that the ownership of the means of production should go to the workers. It's about a rejection of western civilization. It's about promoting the destruction of western civilization. Modern liberalism at the core is hatred of white heterosexual masculinity. And the bottom line is that if leftism wants to win back the working-class white heterosexual man, they need to stop being so actively hostile towards white heterosexual men.

Also, maybe you already know this, but if you look at photos of Afghanis and Iranians in the 1960s and 1970s, their style of dress and the environment looked indistinguishable from the United States. Meanwhile at present day, Afghanis and Iranians have regressed as a people. Their countries are backwater shitholes. So you can't say that it's about genetics.

Post last edited at

 No.322

>>310

honesty is a virtue


 No.323

>>317

Your post is well thought out but the 1960s 70s thing isn't accurate

Yes they had modernized in some ways and dressed modestly but not shower curtain on her head retarded but they still had their own culture

don't get me wrong and assume i mean genetic differences are all that's involved in violence and poverty

any race can get violent and aggressive or peaceful and wise

That doesn't mean two or more peaceful and wise societies should compromise themselves for some forced narrative given to them of a shared one world culture.

genetic differences account for different goals and desires and that is the primary reason you can't just move people by the millions then force them to integrate

Governments are always there to make replaceable pawns of the masses of people. Governments are glad to pretend all races are the same and recently all genders are the same.

Maybe some medical advances could allow reproduction and a single sex. Who knows if that would be good or bad.

But to transform society into that would take numerous human rights violations.

What we do now by just pretending we're all the same is even worse.

People can own their houses communities cities regions and countries without a bureaucracy class forcing people to obey. Involuntary orders and gun to the head.

It does not make sense to force free movement of people by a powerful government because that inherently means people aren't free, even if they can shift around.


 No.330

>>256

>It's important that the left be "updated" for 2015

Quit living in the past BO. It's current year already, 2016.


 No.331

>>256

>even though corporations benefit from all kinds of subsidies and tax cuts

I always found it strange that the modern political "left" was the side that robbed working people of 3 TRILLION dollars and gave it to the very investment bankers who deliberately collapsed the economy for profit. And then also failed to jail those bankers that simply pocketed the money instead of using it for the intended economic purpose (all of them).

The actual left's worse enemy are politicians like Obama and H.Clinton that call themselves progressives and liberals. One understands how people then associate the worst abuses of capitalist excess and a government owned and operated by billionaire bankers with leftist philosophy.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]