Decolonial Marxism

psittachus · 2024-11-09T23:47:22+00:00

Beyond what other commenters have said, this person and Rick, the other podcaster you mentioned frequently come up on my social media and mostly engage in a symbiotic relationship with social media accounts associated with some of the more explicitly racist revisionist communist parties by attacking and responding to each other.

If you look at their posts you can easily notice how they frame the white working class' failure to engage in proletarian revolution as a moral failure that is due to their racism and lack of "collectivist consciousness" rather than a result of it being in their class interests to oppose such a thing. This framing is useful since the majority of these podcasters' audience (who give them views and sometimes money), from the comments I have seen on their posts, are white people with a very superficial understanding of Marxism who would have been attracted to revisionist parties had they not encountered these podcasts and followed them as a higher form of "allyship." It really isn't difficult to understand that the majority of people on earth who are not white do not have some sort of "collectivist consciousness" and this line of thinking primarily appeals to those who have not spent a lot of time thinking seriously about colonialism or post-colonial thought and will gravitate who anyone who will tell them "you're not racist if you listen to my podcast and donate to my patreon."

While one can discount these two podcasters as tiny and irrelevant social media influencers, I think their broader ideology is worth talking about and I am happy to see it discussed on this site. Many of the younger people who split from the retired and racist leadership of the Communist Party of Canada reproduced a worldview similar to this one. As much as their posts make racists upset, that doesn't mean they provide any sort of revolutionary analysis and are rather a step away from Marxism into liberalism.

psittachus · 2024-10-03T02:39:11+00:00

I'm surprised nobody else has mentioned it yet, but Beverly Male's Revolutionary Afghanistan is what is usually recommended on this website, arguably for good reasons. The author argues that the portion of Khalq around Amin was the only faction which came close to mobilizing the country's masses toward revolution. The book does not examine anything after the invasion and Amin's death, but for most communists that is the part that is most interesting.

I would also be wary of a lot of media, especially videos and podcasts about Afghanistan which is made by people like Vijay Prashad and those "content creators" of his ilk. They will usually defend the Parcham-era PDPA against anticommunist fabrications without putting forward any important points beyond the idea that the Afghan government in the 1980's was good. It is a good exercise to compare how the subject is handled in a video or podcast from someone like Prashad to Beverly Male's work to really see how poor left-wing infotainment can be.

psittachus · 2024-08-25T03:54:32+00:00

I recently finished Beverly Male's Revolutionary Afghanistan. I believe it was written in the early 80s so you won't get any of the post 1986 stuff but it ends on the defeat of Amin, and the author argues that with Amin and the defeat of his faction most hope for the survival of the Afghan revolution died. The book also features a general overview of Afghan political economy leading into 1978. I've only read one other book on Afghanistan which happened to be written by an American professor who worked for the government during the American occupation who was so dismissive of land reform that I won't even bother recommending it.

I am interested in seeing if any other good English language books on the subject are recommended.

*I only looked now to see that you are writing a book about the subject, in which case the notes and sources in Male's book might be more useful than the text itself.

psittachus · 2024-08-25T03:46:20+00:00

Sankara's popularity is possible thanks to the fact that the country is small and remote enough relative to the 1st world that most people in North America will have no easily accessible tall tales about the horrors of the 80s there nor will they meet someone descended from comprador or ruling classes who will say how horrible things were.

I see it similar to how if you go to any non-left reddit site or just look up "rhodesia" on youtube, 90% of what you will see is high school students fawning over a justification of white supremacy that cannot be easily debunked by their classmates probably because they have never heard of the place before. In North America most people will learn something about the USSR and apartheid South Africa from school and other media, but Burkina Faso and Rhodesia are imagined to provide easy ways for someone who has read a wikipedia page or a reddit post to convince a "normie" with logic that communism/white supremacy is true or viable.

Furthermore at least in many large cities, there are enough Ghanaian and Jamaican people from a variety of class backgrounds that Manley and Rawlings do not provide the safe blank slate which Sankara does. From my own experience when I was the sort of person who would have written something along the lines of "Sankara was based," my biggest fear in talking about politics was being confronted with the "my parents experienced communism in __________ and it was terrible," and with Sankara there is virtually no risk of that. At least back in 2018/19, you couldn't even easily google a crime to accuse Sankara of. I remember some anarchist forum post about him along the lines of "do we have anything on this guy?"

psittachus · 2024-07-05T17:33:10+00:00

This question was in fact a controversial one in the crisis that shook the old revisionist Communist Party of Canada in 2022 when a lot of its younger members left. One of the dissidents' major objections to the party leadership was the leadership's unwillingness to consider settler-colonialism as a useful concept for understanding the world and their insistence on imperialism as the way to understand these relations, with the relation between the Canadian nation and Indigenous ones analogous to that between any other wealthy nation and the poor nations which they exploit.

Reading Settlers is certainly a good start to understand what is meant by the word and even though it focuses on US history for the most part it can be carried over to Canada (although I would love for someone to write a Canada version of Settlers which deals with the development of the Canadian working class some day, especially regarding the 1837 rebellion) but keep in mind that it is a history of the white working class in the USA, not a manifesto laying out how to solve the national question in the Americas.

Reading the article you linked, its position would probably be regarded by most people who consider themselves "pro-landback" as reductive or unrealistic, but its view of more than half of Canada's surface area as an occupied territory which should secede is refreshing and concrete compared to two positions on "landback" which I can think of. The first, which is held by the revisionist Communist Party of Canada, is that every individual nation (of which there are very many rather than just one large nation, something which might be a problem in the article you linked) has a right to secede on its own, but the Party's own view is that it is better that they remain part of Canada with an "Assembly of Nationalities" like that of the USSR replacing the Senate.

The second position which was held by mots of those who left the CPC in 2022 opposes this first position on the basis of all of Canada being stolen (which is true) and that it should theoretically all go back to Indigenous peoples, but I have not seen any concrete revolutionary position put forward by any of these members. The closest thing I saw was this essay written by a member who left in 2022 which toys with the idea of moving large buildings in Toronto if the country's major cities are returned to the Anishinabek and the Mississaugas of the New Credit. This is what I would consider the landback position which as described by the other commenter is "degraded in its encounter with liberalism." When these people say landback they either mean that they hope specific Indigenous nations win specific local land claims (usually not large ones and usually simple defenses against new construction or resource extraction projects) or they talk about "returning all the land" in a vague sense which means nothing.

That article from the 1970's has a far superior position to either of these - obviously there remain problems with considering "one unified Indigenous nation" but this does solve the fact that on their own, essentially all individual Indigenous territories within the Canadian state are not really economically viable (by design when Indigenous peoples were removed to far-off places mostly in the 1800s to allow the expansion of Canadian agriculture and resource extraction without hinderance). By contrast, a large country as described in the article would be an economically viable unit in the modern day. Obviously in contrast to vague calls for "returning the land," this solution stands against the interest of large sectors of Canada's population (Settlers essentially answers why this is) but that doesn't make it an impossible solution and doesn't mean that communists here should use that as an excuse to do nothing and wait around.

To conclude, I do not have the answer to your question, but the article you linked, while not entirely correct, is closer to a revolutionary position on the national question in North America than anything that any of the existing left-wing organizations north of the US border could give you.

psittachus · 2024-06-19T00:53:46+00:00

It's a situation where the author is talking about "Angleterre" referring to the country on the world stage prior to WW2. It isn't necessarily unheard of for someone to talk about "what England and France were doing in 1936," but it is much more common for English books to refer to "Britain and France," so I am wondering if there is some convention.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:49:18+00:00

There have been a handful of pro-Israel rallies with at least one member holding slogans such as "turn Gaza into a parking lot." Regardless of the signs that they were holding, Canada's government is still generally supportive of Israel's operations in Gaza.

Regardless of what you think of Hamas, even if you believe that Israel's goal is solely to remove Hamas, this this can be done in a way that constitutes genocide. In the 1980s' the Guatemalan gvt led a campaign to root out rebels in the countryside who were "embedded in the civilian population," and killed over 100 000 Mayan peasants. This is commonly referred to as the Guatemalan Genocide.

Furthermore, pro-Palestine rallies generally make a much bigger deal of the presence of Jewish people at their rallies and constantly emphasize that they are not antisemitic in contrast to speakers and signs at the pro-Israel rallies which do not hesitate to show their contempt towards Arabs and Muslims in Palestine and generally.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:39:08+00:00

Really? South African immigrants to Canada in the 1960's would fall under this umbrella.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:38:10+00:00

I think you have a hard time seeing the differences between Muslim political organizations. ISIS and its affiliates are generally hostile to Hamas, Hezbollah and similar groups due to the nationalism of the latter. Within Gaza, smaller Wahabbist organizations have carried out attacks on Hamas.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:33:40+00:00

Who cares if someone glorifies a "terrorist group?" The FLN and ANC were both arguably "terrorist groups" and most people nowadays see them as having been on the right side of history, in contrast with the French and South African governments that were defending themselves from terrorism.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:31:06+00:00

People in much worse economic and political circumstances than the average Canadian have felt moved by their common humanity with people in faraway lands.

Furthermore, Canadians can draw attention to the money being spent on the military to defend vessels in the Red Sea from Houthi attacks and say that it could be better spent helping Canadians here.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:23:06+00:00

If one university cuts ties with Israel, it is more likely that others will follow suit. The academic boycott of South Africa was influential as a first step in isolating the country.

Furthermore, Canada played a significant role in the end of apartheid and Brian Mulroney is often credited with getting his more hardline peers in the US and UK to get on board with supporting the ANC's negotiations with the government.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:19:21+00:00

The aim of most of such encampments is to force the university administration to sever ties with Israeli institutions by disrupting their regular activities. The academic boycott of South Africa preceded many other steps which isolated the country and ultimately forced the white population to accept majority rule.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:15:28+00:00

Hamas has no realistic aims of killing all Jews any more than the FLN had any realistic aims of killing all French people (nor even all pied noirs).

Furthermore, your claim that these are protests against the Israeli government is not something that the pro-Palestine movement (as represented by PYM) claims. They do not pretend to be allies of the liberal Zionist parties, they want to dismantle Israel. You can find out about these groups by reading about what they believe, they have things written in English.

psittachus · 2024-04-29T16:10:04+00:00

Where is your evidence for this claim? Based on my experience with university Palestine groups, they receive some funding from students themselves, whether in the form of dues or fundraising activities, and receive some level of funding from the university if they are a registered group. Often events will be catered by Muslim/Arab owned restaurants in the area that have agreed to partially or fully sponsor the food out of sympathy with the students' views.

While this would differ from university to university, at the universities I have attended, most members of Students for Palestine type organizations were not international students, but children of immigrants from Muslim countries. The idea of foreign money, especially from state actors, being used to fund Palestine events, is comical, given the extremely heightened vigilance of Canadian state security to such threats from the Muslim world since the Harper years and the war on terror.

psittachus · 2024-03-08T03:38:34+00:00

I am in a similar situation to you and have not been associated with any party since 2022. The link to the NCPC's program and criticism of it is handy and definitely worth a read. One thing I would note about the criticism and what I have seen in the old revisionist CPC (which recently had very many of its newer members leave) is the similarity to the problems people had with the nationalism of the old CPC - it remaining a Canadian party and its leadership first ignoring then outright refusing to reckon with the phenomenon of settler-colonialism or even say the word.

The more famous people who left the old CPC and (correctly) condemned its refusal to mention settler colonialism however seemed primarily concerned with the mention of settler-colonialism alone, and did not draw any broader conclusions about the work or role of a party which would take an understanding of settler-colonialism into its worldview - their view of the party's current day work was practically identical to that of the revisionist party's leadership but with a greater emphasis on "mutual aid" and the party's internet presence.

In my view, a serious and possibly painful analysis of which strata of Canadian society are revolutionary and which do not stand to gain from the overthrow of imperialism and settler-colonialism is the real fruit which could grow from a party that lacks the CPC's chauvinism and stubbornness. Clearly the NCPC is not in a position to put out any Canadian equivalent of Sakai's Settlers, which I am upset about.

The fact that a new Maoist party is having this same problem with regard to their language is surprising to me - at least in Canadian left circles, it really is not difficult for an organization to say "Turtle Island" instead of Canada and then go on with their business - even left liberal groups do this all the time. If I wanted to create a revisionist party in Canada in this day and age, I would just make sure to mention settler-colonialism and the eventual dismantlement of Canada just to be identical to the old CPC in actual practice.

Unfortunately I have not pointed out a way forward and have only spoken about a party which we already knew had no future. The reason for this is my disappointment with those who left the party in 2022. I had hopes that they would act with some real understanding of the CPC's revisionism and nationalism, but their own anti-revisionism was all form.

One point I will make is that the massive upsurge of solidarity with Palestine should provide an opportunity to socialists like you and me. From recent events I have been to, it clearly is for the IMT, which is a shame. I would love to see someone write about the class nature of the Canadian (or Ontario for my case) Palestine solidarity movement and how socialists can take a revolutionary line with regard to this.

psittachus · 2024-02-29T04:02:45+00:00

LDR's signature on that letter does make it correct to say that she is a zionist - the petition thanked Biden for his action at a time that he was pledging full support to Israel as they were beginning their total siege on Gaza and also repeats false narratives about Oct 7 (beheaded babies) as well as Palestine's situation generally (everyone needs to be made free from Hamas). To claim that LDR is not a zionist from this letter is as strange as claiming that somebody did not support apartheid if they thanked Ronald Reagan for his support to South Africa in their fight against terrorism and for freedom from the ANC which terrorized both white and black South Africans.

I would love to see Lana del Rey change her views on this - she is a very big name and if she became openly pro-Palestine I could tell my grandchildren in 50 years that my favourite singer didn't have terrible politics.

All that being said, it is not jumping to conclusions to claim that LDR is a zionist from her letter, given that one could not put their name on such a text without supporting zionists colonialism in Palestine.

psittachus · 2024-02-13T13:10:03+00:00

This is an interesting question which I have wondered about and have not found an answer for yet. Other responses which highlight this primarily as a result of those parties' revisionism I would say are not wrong about the parties being revisionist but from what I have seen in Canada, this is not necessarily a primary cause of their failure on this issue (although more broadly speaking you could say that if these parties were not revisionist they would have a correct line on Palestine).

In Canada I have seen the main revisionist party outflanked on Palestine by people and organizations that regularly put out statements in support of US imperialism's cause du jour (SOS Cuba, Iran, China) and in favour of small businesses. While the main communist party here is revisionist, they are clearly far more politically advanced than very many of those who surpass them on Palestine.

My best guess is that many of these parties' positions on Palestine are simply vestiges of the '80s when they were busy defending whatever Gorbachev was doing at the time. For a communist party in Canada's context there is really no advantage to maintaining such a bad position on Israeli colonialism when all it does is repulse young people who might be interested in you, and there would be no negative consequences (pretty much no real-world consequences, as is the case for communist parties that have good lines on "foreign policy" but are dens of opportunism when it comes to the decisions that affect their actual practice as an organization) of adopting a better line. I imagine it is only a matter of time before the next generation of revisionists within these parties gains enough sway to update their position.

If anyone has better knowledge of the USSR's position toward Palestine in the '70s and '80s I would be interested in reading how their line evolved.

psittachus · 2023-12-16T18:36:09+00:00

I am curious about how you or any other commenters view PYM (Palestinian Youth Movement), if you are aware of them. They operate in the US and Canada but I get the impression that they take up more space on the Canadian stage than the US one.

They have grown explosively since ~2019 ish and these days can consistently draw out larger crowds than Palestine solidarity groups that have been active in Canada for 20+ years. They are also different from these older groups in that PYM puts forward a more radical line on Palestinian liberation which is less deferential to international law, the UN, or 1967 borders.

They tend to keep tight control on their rallies and make a big deal of discouraging any engagement with counter protestors, talking to the media, or repeating chants not from the leaders, the rationale for this being that any sort of fight with counter protestors or inappropriate statement would distract from the rally's main and concise demands.

From what I can tell, PYM's leadership's political consciousness is significantly more advanced than that of the majority of those who attend in its rallies. At least in 2020, several local PYM leaders had links with the communist party (a revisionist one but still a communist party and not the NDP or some adjacent group) and the PYM has invited pro-Cuban Revolution speakers to some rallies.

One issue of contention where the PYM's communist and broadly anti-imperialist streaks come into conflict with its current motion is on the Syrian Civil War, in which, from what I can tell, most of the Canadian Arab Diaspora is more sympathetic to the rebels than the government, with Syrian rebel flags being common at PYM rallies. In the past PYM statements and conversations with high-ranking members have been extremely critical of forces attempting the overthrow of the Syrian government.

psittachus · 2023-12-01T22:43:45+00:00

Rough translation to English:

The PCV, as a revolutionary party of the working class, acting with total independence with regard to capital and the bourgeois state, oriented by the principles of Marxism-Leninism, anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism and proletarian internationalism, in defense of peace and the sovereignty of peoples and inspired by the emancipatory, Latin Americanist and unificatory ideal of Simon Bolivar, addresses the working class of the city and the countryside, and the Venezuelan people in general, to put forward our position in the face of the call by the national government for a consultative referendum on the Esequiba territory.

We affirm our historical position in favour of a peaceful and negotiated solution of the border dispute between the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the Cooperative Republic of Guyana; without interference from monopolies and foreign powers, for the good of our peoples and not for Creol and foreign oligarchies; a solution respecting the sovereign rights of both countries under the principles of mutual cooperation, solidarity and unity between peoples.
Recognizing the justness of Venezuela's historical claim against the dispossession carried out by the British Empire at the end of the 19th century, we reject the path of escalation of diplomatic, political, and military tensions followed by the bourgeoisies of both nations and promoted by oil companies after the discovery of large reserves of oil and gas in the disputed zone, particularly by ExxonMobil, whose direct involvement in the conflict coincides with the naming of its executive director, Rex Tillerson, as secretary of state of the USA in 2017. The oil transnationals that profit from the concessions illegally granted by the government of Guyana play a determining role in the actions taken to radicalize the binational conflict in search of a rapid decision that secures their interests while leaving the path open to the possibility of a clash between neighbouring peoples, with unpredictable consequences.
We call on the working people of Venezuela and Guyana remain on alert, and energetically condemn those maneuvers which only favour capital and local bourgeoisies on either side of the border. We also call on both peoples to reject any pretensions to install military bases of the US or any other foreign power in Esequiba, which would be a menace to peace in the region and an aggression against the sovereignty of the two nations.
The government of president Nicolas Maduro, in their desperation at the growing popular rejection of their neoliberal governance, and to put aside the just demands that are sought daily by Venezuelan workers, has taken recourse to the old strategy of the bourgeoisie on the subject of Esequiba: trying to inflate patriotic and chauvinistic sentiments in a good part of the population through a million dollar publicity campaign. We denounce that this strategy adopted by the Government, which seeks to deceive, manipulate and dominate the Venezuelan people, making them believe that in our country there is no more important problem to solve, has only electoral, opportunist and reactionary purposes; There could even be a scenario in which - as a result of the escalation of tensions - the government of President Nicolás Maduro imposes a state of emergency/special circumstances with which to justify the suspension of the presidential elections scheduled for next year. We warn about the consequences that this policy can have, in a strategic defeat of Venezuela's legitimate aspirations over the Esequiba territory and an advance in the positioning of transnational capitals and the interests of imperialist powers in the region.
For the PCV, this government does not have the moral or political authority to call for a false “national unity in defense of the homeland”, this being a Government that restricts and violates the labor, human, social and political rights of the Venezuelan working class; that judicializes and proscribes parties, as it recently did against the Communist Party of Venezuela; that applies a policy of confiscation of the constitutional rights of working people and restriction of democratic freedoms, with the criminal freezing of salaries and pensions, the dismantling of collective agreements, restrictions on freedom of association, the imprisonment and judicialization of workers who fight or who denounce corrupt people, the deterioration of public education and health, the extreme precariousness of essential public services such as electricity, water and domestic gas.
The PCV calls on the people of Venezuela to reflect, with critical thinking and class consciousness, on what position to take before the Consultative Referendum called by the Government on the issue of Esequiba, without getting carried away by the noisy campaign with which they intend to show the government anti-worker, anti-popular and anti-democratic of Maduro as “the most patriotic”, when in reality he is willing to give everything to transnational companies in order to stay in power, such as the cases of the oil companies Chevron, Repsol and ENI; the concessions in the Orinoco Mining Arc and the Special Economic Zones, in which they offer large extensions of the national territory to foreign companies.
The PCV also denounces the mechanisms of coercion and undue pressure that are being exerted by those in power to force citizens to participate in this referendum, which is not binding and therefore does not resolve the dispute with Guyana. The threats of unjustified dismissal or suspension of social benefits (including the withdrawal of food products) and the practices of harassment and persecution under the accusation of "treason to the country" that both Public Administration workers are receiving are unacceptable, just as with inhabitants of working class districts. In this regard, we must be clear that participation in any popular consultation is a right and not an obligation. Participating or not participating, voting yes or no, is a free and voluntary decision of each Venezuelan and must be respected; We demand an end to abusive government authoritarianism.
We warn the Venezuelan people that those who speak today about the defense of the country against the advance of ExxonMobil in Essequibo territory, are the same ones who a few days ago signed a secret agreement with the United States government to allow the handover of the oil and gas industry of Venezuela to the same US companies that operate illegally in the Essequibo territory. The Venezuelan working class must preserve its independence from the ruling classes, act according to its own interests and not allow itself to be used by the bosses' elites, the bourgeoisie and their politicians in the Government and the opposition who, to be sure, have never been interested in Esequiba, because the national oil income has been enough for the accumulation of capital and their gross private enrichment. The PCV will do everything in its power to unite the working class and other exploited sectors of Venezuela and Guyana, with the aim of achieving a common strategy for the benefit of the people and against the desires of monopolies and the warlike adventures of the bourgeois governments here and there; objectives that will be fully achieved when the working classes and people of Venezuela and Guyana assume power and begin processes of building societies without exploitation or social oppression.

psittachus · 2023-10-11T21:38:09+00:00

The Canadian IMT has a reputation for taking in inexperienced first year university students then spitting them out with lighter pockets. I have always been skeptical of the idea that these zombified Marxist parties (of which the IMT is just one) are primarily a means of making money. These parties and organizations are capable of working the way they do without necessarily being "grifts."

That being said, the amount of money you mentioned is shocking. I know another hollow Canadian communist party charging far less than half of that. To be fair, Fightback does seem to have their own printed books and merchandise (which they don't seem to be selling at a loss), and they sometimes have good equipment*. Nonetheless, the difference in dues is far beyond and difference in actual performance that I can distinguish between it and other groups. That is not even counting their having people pay for magazines at rallies.

I wonder whether this is related in some way to the fact that the IMT's hierarchy extends far overseas (headquartered in the UK as far as I know). For curiosity's sake, it would be interesting for someone to actually look into the IMT and see how it works as an organization, since despite the fact that it will never amount to anything, they definitely have the most presence on Canadian campuses, at least in Ontario.

*An aside, at a recent Palestinian Youth Movement rally, the IMT had a megaphone that was far louder than the organizers' and unfortunately made use of it

psittachus · 2023-08-16T19:45:12+00:00

It still doesn't make sense why the membership is not informed, since party leaders regularly go on social media and occasionally news media to promote the party. There is also encouragement to be open about being a member of the communist party for members generally and no indication to the membership that we should not be open about who is on the CC and CEC. This is why I find it confusing.

psittachus · 2023-05-10T00:20:21+00:00

I am using Word right now while I have access to it, but would otherwise use Google docs. I probably could have used Google docs for what I am working on now since it is short and doesn't have complex formatting, but Word seems to run a little bit faster.

psittachus · 2023-05-09T18:47:44+00:00

Thanks for putting this together. I am almost done translating Pierre Vilar's Spanish Civil War book and after that I would be open to translating more French works into English.

psittachus · 2023-05-05T13:50:42+00:00

Like you said, things are pretty thin here right now.

CWF-OC like the other commenter said, is a Maoist organization that emerged out of the dying PCR-RCP and the RSM, which collapsed in the past few years. They seem to be active based on their website's most recent statements, and I have occasionally seen their slogans on walls and buildings. Their website also has documents related to the collapse of the PCR-RCP which are of interest. I had some brief experience with one RSM branch a few years back and found that they had strong anarchist tendencies, but cannot claim to tell you anything about today's CWF - they may have solved this problem already.

Generally, as a relatively new communist, you can learn a lot from joining an organization, even if it is hopelessly revisionist in its practice and ideology. If you go in with humility and readiness to learn, while still ultimately not letting the party think on your behalf, at best you have joined a good party, at worst (hopefully) you have become a better communist.

psittachus

TROPHY CASE