Conquer Club

Marxists Thread

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Postby spurgistan on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:43 pm

In my opinion, for all its value and beauty as a purely utopian, academic concept (and I admire greatly the works of great socialist scholars as such), I find it hard to understand how anybody could conceive that such a grand experiment would work on such a grand scale as was attempted in the 20th century. Even Marx (to the best of my appreciation of his oeuvre) intended communism to be implemented in small communes (ergo, communism!) The grand scale of the USSR and PRC made it very hard for communism to succeed. To each his own.
Sergeant spurgistan
 
Posts: 1868
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby DIRESTRAITS on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:44 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Uh huh. Let's go down to the nearest Communist country, Cuba. Castro seems to be very greedy, with his people in poverty. Is that utopian? Let's head down to Miami with many people who have escaped from Cuba. We asked them if they want to live with Castro. They said:

"No! No deseo vivir con Castro! Deseo matar a Castro! "

Translated, this means "No! I do not want to live with Castro! I want to kill Castro!"

You are a fool to think Communism is better than Capitalism. Under Capitalism we have the greatest society in the world with many, many technological advancements with much wealth.


my god have you read anything i wrote at all!? NO TRUE COMMUNIST SOCIETY HAS EVER BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN SOCIETY TODAY IT HAS ALL BEEN SOCIALISM, MARXIST, MARXIST-LENINIST, MAOISTS. THE LIST GOES ON. YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT UNDERSTAND WHAT COMMUNISM IS SO HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY BE OPPOSED TO SOMETHING YOU DONT UNDERSTAND? "GIVE WHAT YOU CAN TAKE ONLY WHAT YOU NEED". DO YOU NO WHAT THAT MEANS? OR DO I NEED TO EXPLAIN IT IN ALL CAPITALS AND BOLD AS WELL?


That's because true communism will never be implemented, just as true capitalism never will. But the modified 'real world' way of communism is way worse than its capitalist counterpart
User avatar
Private 1st Class DIRESTRAITS
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Smacking everyone who says Oreeegone

Postby Anarchy Ninja on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:45 pm

everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Anarchy Ninja
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:12 am
Location: Back

Postby Colaalone on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:45 pm

foolish_yeti wrote:I don't think we've seen anything that would show us that socialism is inherently flawed- can anyone think of an example?


The basic fallibilty of human nature?
User avatar
Cook Colaalone
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:57 pm
Location: Checking into a Las Vegas hotel with the intent of committing capital fraud and a head full of acid

Postby DIRESTRAITS on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:46 pm

foolish_yeti wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:I know the principle of communism BUT IT HAS NEVER WORKED!!!!!!! In the words of Albert Einstein " The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results"


To be fair, what most people understand to be communism is what the US government has labeled communism- e.g.- anything not in line with capitalism. I don't think we've seen anything that would show us that socialism is inherently flawed- can anyone think of an example? Often socialist endeavors were given that name but were truly just despots ruling. Capitalism, on the other hand, has been around long enough to prove itself unsustainable.

please explain
User avatar
Private 1st Class DIRESTRAITS
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Smacking everyone who says Oreeegone

Postby Anarchy Ninja on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:46 pm

spurgistan wrote:In my opinion, for all its value and beauty as a purely utopian, academic concept (and I admire greatly the works of great socialist scholars as such), I find it hard to understand how anybody could conceive that such a grand experiment would work on such a grand scale as was attempted in the 20th century. Even Marx (to the best of my appreciation of his oeuvre) intended communism to be implemented in small communes (ergo, communism!) The grand scale of the USSR and PRC made it very hard for communism to succeed. To each his own.


exactly i have no doubt that communism could work if it was in a small area perhaps a town. it is sad that such greed is everywhere making even that unlikely.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Anarchy Ninja
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:12 am
Location: Back

Postby DIRESTRAITS on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:46 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?
User avatar
Private 1st Class DIRESTRAITS
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Smacking everyone who says Oreeegone

Postby Numia Kereru on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:47 pm

spurgistan wrote:In my opinion, for all its value and beauty as a purely utopian, academic concept (and I admire greatly the works of great socialist scholars as such), I find it hard to understand how anybody could conceive that such a grand experiment would work on such a grand scale as was attempted in the 20th century. Even Marx (to the best of my appreciation of his oeuvre) intended communism to be implemented in small communes (ergo, communism!) The grand scale of the USSR and PRC made it very hard for communism to succeed. To each his own.


Wow, that puts it into perspective and I think I can see how it would work in small communities or in the kibbutz/favellas/ghettos.
Awesome post! :D
Image
User avatar
Private Numia Kereru
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:05 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:49 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


That isnt a reason. A reason would be financial rewards for doing better than everyone else. Look, if you have five workers who work the quota and do nothing more but one worker who works double the quota, under communism they would be paid the same. The person working double is hosed. In capitalism, tht person would be paid twice as much, and when the others see how much they will get paid, you will have five workers working double instead of the inevitable zero under communism.
Last edited by everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby Colaalone on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:49 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


Yeah, ok. If people don't have to work hard to obtain something, THEY WON'T. There would be no incentive to give your best effort.
User avatar
Cook Colaalone
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:57 pm
Location: Checking into a Las Vegas hotel with the intent of committing capital fraud and a head full of acid

Postby everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:50 pm

Colaalone wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


Yeah, ok. If people don't have to work hard to obtain something, THEY WON'T. There would be no incentive to give your best effort.


A basic shortening of what I said. good job.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby Colaalone on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:50 pm

fast-posted, hoorah!
User avatar
Cook Colaalone
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:57 pm
Location: Checking into a Las Vegas hotel with the intent of committing capital fraud and a head full of acid

Postby everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:51 pm

Numia Kereru wrote:
spurgistan wrote:In my opinion, for all its value and beauty as a purely utopian, academic concept (and I admire greatly the works of great socialist scholars as such), I find it hard to understand how anybody could conceive that such a grand experiment would work on such a grand scale as was attempted in the 20th century. Even Marx (to the best of my appreciation of his oeuvre) intended communism to be implemented in small communes (ergo, communism!) The grand scale of the USSR and PRC made it very hard for communism to succeed. To each his own.


Wow, that puts it into perspective and I think I can see how it would work in small communities or in the kibbutz/favellas/ghettos.
Awesome post! :D


How? Lets ask the Cuban immagrants in Miami, who fled to get away from communism.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby Anarchy Ninja on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:52 pm

DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Anarchy Ninja
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:12 am
Location: Back

Postby DIRESTRAITS on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:54 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town


people are naturally 'greedy'. It's one of the basest of human instincts, and one which has helped us survive throughout history
User avatar
Private 1st Class DIRESTRAITS
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Smacking everyone who says Oreeegone

Postby Anarchy Ninja on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:54 pm

everywhere116 wrote:
Colaalone wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


Yeah, ok. If people don't have to work hard to obtain something, THEY WON'T. There would be no incentive to give your best effort.


A basic shortening of what I said. good job.


why strive? BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE IS LAZY OR GREEDY!! i would strive i see no reason not to. i strive not to be better then everyone else but to make myself a better person, this is rare in todays culture
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Anarchy Ninja
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:12 am
Location: Back

Postby Colaalone on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:55 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:
Colaalone wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


Yeah, ok. If people don't have to work hard to obtain something, THEY WON'T. There would be no incentive to give your best effort.


A basic shortening of what I said. good job.


why strive? BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE IS LAZY OR GREEDY!! i would strive i see no reason not to. i strive not to be better then everyone else but to make myself a better person, this is rare in todays culture


EXACTLY! Hence why a it wouldn't work.
User avatar
Cook Colaalone
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:57 pm
Location: Checking into a Las Vegas hotel with the intent of committing capital fraud and a head full of acid

Postby Anarchy Ninja on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:56 pm

DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town


people are naturally 'greedy'. It's one of the basest of human instincts, and one which has helped us survive throughout history


greed didnt help us survive it helped people to expand and conquest crushing coutless other people under their feet in the process
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Anarchy Ninja
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:12 am
Location: Back

Postby everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:56 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town


And how do you get more money? By working for it, that's how! And I am sure your small town will fail for the same reasons the USSR failed. And I am sure that after one year you will have to build a wall to keep them in.
(You can call it the New Berlin Wall)
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby Anarchy Ninja on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:58 pm

Colaalone wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:
Colaalone wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


Yeah, ok. If people don't have to work hard to obtain something, THEY WON'T. There would be no incentive to give your best effort.


A basic shortening of what I said. good job.



why strive? BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE IS LAZY OR GREEDY!! i would strive i see no reason not to. i strive not to be better then everyone else but to make myself a better person, this is rare in todays culture


EXACTLY! Hence why a it wouldn't work.


hence why it wouldnt work on a large scale, rare doesnt mean non-existant
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Anarchy Ninja
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:12 am
Location: Back

Postby everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:58 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town


people are naturally 'greedy'. It's one of the basest of human instincts, and one which has helped us survive throughout history


greed didnt help us survive it helped people to expand and conquest crushing coutless other people under their feet in the process


Hence why we survive. Look, your outnumbered 4 to 1, give it up.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby DIRESTRAITS on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:58 pm

Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town


people are naturally 'greedy'. It's one of the basest of human instincts, and one which has helped us survive throughout history


greed didnt help us survive it helped people to expand and conquest crushing coutless other people under their feet in the process


Yes. It helped early man survive. People take care of themselves first. For communism to work Human nature would have to be changed
User avatar
Private 1st Class DIRESTRAITS
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: Smacking everyone who says Oreeegone

Postby everywhere116 on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:59 pm

DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
DIRESTRAITS wrote:
Anarchy Ninja wrote:
everywhere116 wrote:Anarchy, tell me one thing. If everyone shares the resources, why would they work? If the government takes care of them they have no desire to do thier best. And when everyone does this you have to pay useless workers you cant fire, and your tresury will be depleted. See: The Reagan Arms Buildup.


why would they work you ask, because they are not fat lazy slobs thats why


so by being in a communist society you are immediately industrious and hardworking?


no its just that people have grown up in this greedy and corupt society that to change their minds to anything other then 'make more money so I may be more comfortable then the everyone else' mentality is depressingly improbable. the problem is the longer time goes on the more and more impossible these leftist ideals become. it would have been possible long ago when everyone actually worked. im sure i could round up enough people who would be willing to take part in a utopian society all though perhaps only enough for a small town


people are naturally 'greedy'. It's one of the basest of human instincts, and one which has helped us survive throughout history


greed didnt help us survive it helped people to expand and conquest crushing coutless other people under their feet in the process


Yes. It helped early man survive. People take care of themselves first. For communism to work Human nature would have to be changed


And the laws of economics.
"Disease, suffering, hardship...that is what war is all about."-Captain Kirk, from "A Taste of Armageddon"
User avatar
Corporal everywhere116
 
Posts: 1718
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Somewhere on this big blue marble.

Postby spurgistan on Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:59 pm

Well yes, in societies we rigidly define as being "Marxist", [side note - all socialists are not Marxists! There are many socialists, of which Marx is one. Although I guess most of us are, as he's the most famous by far :roll: ]And certainly the Soviets and Chinese were never anything resembing what Marx] proper capitalist-style motivation is sorely lacking. However, seeing as how Marx's entire theories were based on the fact that capitalism was inherantly jinxed against the little guy, it was supposed that the workers would not need their bourgeois motivation, as they obviously do.
Sergeant spurgistan
 
Posts: 1868
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby foolish_yeti on Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:00 am

Colaalone wrote:
foolish_yeti wrote:I don't think we've seen anything that would show us that socialism is inherently flawed- can anyone think of an example?


The basic fallibilty of human nature?


Not getting into debating human nature and inherent human flaws- this would be a constant in any social system, not just socialism.

Personally I think it's bung, though- humans have survived much longer on a tribal system than we have under capitalism- much much much longer.

DIRESTRAITS wrote:please explain


I'm guessing you want an explanation for how capitalism has shown to be unsustainable?

Well I don't want to go a a huge rant here- but for a single example- one could take a look at something like ecological footprints. As it stands now capitalist societies are living way beyond their, and the planets means. The only reason they are still standing is because they have annexed the resources of other countries. At current population levels, it's estimated there's around 1.8h of useable land per person to survive off of. The States is using close to 10h per person. Any system based on continual growth is just not sustainable- eventually you hit the wall.
Private 1st Class foolish_yeti
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:09 pm
Location: nowhere

PreviousNext

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron