An Idealist critiques GW’s [emergent] existentialism

Posted by Guest Blogger on Friday, 01 July 2011 00:45.

by Rod Cameron

An Idealist critiques GW’s [emergent] existentialism

Now that GW has made the second instalment of his planned three-part ontology I must urge him to abandon existentialism. His interest in ontology is correct but his ideas are not on the money. GW sees ontology as providing European identity and racial consciousness through his reworking of Heidegger. It is not happening, his prose is hard going, I would not be surprised if he gets into tight lederhosen to write his obscurantism and I suspect he knows the wheels are falling off. Hang-on GW, I’m coming. – Too bad Mr Wolf sees your plight.

PART 1: A STROLL OVER THE TERRITORY

It is noted that GW gets little sympathy from the commentariat for ontology. He should be respected but he has made a poor job of explaining his commitment to ontology because ontology is his main argument and it is shallow as I will explain. I am an absolute Idealist and though on the metaphysical side of the line, that standpoint does not make me GW’s ally. There is a remote chance this article could blow-up into a war, which would be a good thing, but I’m planning to shut down that prospect by either deterring GW from existentialism or converting him to Idealism.

GW’s philosophy is an example of the subjectivity wrapped in a technical code [multiplicity, final value] that passes for existentialism. GW had a ‘being’ epiphany. It is the well-spring behind his interest in ontology and Heidegger. It is probably the inspiration for MR and it gives him the energy and conviction to maintain MR. It is not surprising that he finds meaning for the experience in Heidegger. Heidegger is the “go-to man” for a non-religious interpretation of being. However, the ability to empathise with and interpret Heidegger is not a milestone towards any significant success because existentialism is shallow. Take for a start GW’s title, “The ontology of the material”. This means he is doing relativist metaphysics; materialism is immersed in phenomena and phenomena are relative. Relativist metaphysics is a joke because metaphysics is about absolutes.

To quickly determine whether GW’s metaphysics have any validity a professional philosopher might ask whether he had replies for D. Hume and I. Kant. They set metaphysics big challenges to test whether metaphysics deserves to remain within philosophy. Those challenges are beyond the scope of dialectic reasoning and will only be tackled with absolute answers. If answers are not forth-coming then GW will be suspected of having yet another subjective metaphysics. GW has a specific mission and I have made a global criticism. Is that fair? Metaphysics is a vast, syncretic project and something as vital to metaphysics as ontology has ramifications, which must include answers for these two critics. Their challenges are connected and was there ever a more ill-prepared metaphysician than GW? It was too-turgid-to-tell, but did you join something GW? Do GW’s articles on ontology differ from opinion? If you can see the material bit that rank and file Nationalists can get hold of then point it out.

Idealism and Existentialism
Existentialism is a reaction against G. W. F. Hegel’s Idealist abstractions. Instead of getting into abstractions, existentialists have sought to be concrete and in touch with what it means to be human. They claim to be in touch with life, but the result invariably is subjectivity. Individual existence is about awareness of hopes, fears, beliefs, desires, the question of purpose, will power and living authentically. These are aspects of concrete existence for the individual in his space and time, but it will not suffice for Nationalism. Individual existence is opposite to where Nationalists need to go. We need political statements that express identity. Idealist ontology concerns man as a political animal. That is where Nationalists need to be and unavoidably it involves abstractions to make statements about European man as a political animal.

The inference that Idealism is not concrete, hence Idealists are elites “playing silly-buggers”, needs to be challenged. Idealists are prepared to immerse themselves in abstractions in an attempt to arriving at new concepts to facilitate their argument. In other words, from the abstractions hopefully there will emerge ideation. Idealists respect the difficulty of breaking out of dualistic consciousness into absolute consciousness: the consciousness that will be of service to existential concerns.

READ MORE...


Andrew Fraser’s “The WASP Question”

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 30 June 2011 22:43.

The publisher Arktos Media has circularised details of Prof Andrew Fraser’s new book, The Wasp Question.  Andrew, whose travails in 2005 at Macquairrie University were followed closely at MR, and who was twice interviewed for MR Radio, is an expert in legal history and constitutional law.  His book, however, also treats of the ethnogenesis of the Anglo Saxon people and of their religious expression.

Frank Salter has written the customary blurb, describing The Wasp Question as:

... a groundbreaking contribution to the project of synthesizing Anglo-American constitutional and legal history with the evolutionary biology of ethnicity and a Christian ethno-theology. Fraser adds a new aspect to the modern ethno-pathology that now infects the Anglo-Saxon bioculture: “Civic patriotism cannot be sustained in multi-racial societies.” His radical critique of American constitutionalism exposes a major threat to the ethnic interests of America’s founding race—the White Anglo-Saxon Protestants who have since degenerated into an “invisible race” of deracinated WASPs.

Anglo-Saxon constitutionalism and its modern deconstruction are intertwined with excursions into history and genetics. Fraser explores the religious dimension of ethnic group strategies in a plausible historical and evolutionary frame. Evolutionary biology lends this book a magisterial view looking back to ethnogenesis in the England of Alfred the Great, and looking forward to a world made human by postmodern tribal solidarity, including that of the scattered Anglo-Saxon nation. The result is a fresh analysis of the ethno-religious foundations of the English people.

The WASP Question is valuable for focusing attention on the plight of Anglo-Saxon societies assailed by runaway materialism and imposed diversity. The book articulates a role for national religions in defending populations of ethnic kin. For Anglo-Saxons, that role is fulfilled by the orthodox Christian doctrine of nations. Fraser’s appeal to a patriot king who can restore Anglo-Saxons’ biocultural identity and ethno-religious autonomy is a provocative alternative.

Agree or disagree with Andrew Fraser’s prescriptions, his combination of originality and scholarship deserves to find a place in literature dealing with ethnicity, nationalism, constitutional history, biosocial science, and advocacy for Anglo-Saxon ethnic identity and biocultural continuity. Be prepared to read, reread and ponder.

Structure and chapter titles:

Introduction: The Anglo-Saxon as Pariah

I. Ethnogenesis: Toward a Biocultural History of English Constitutionalism
1. Comitatus: Kingship and Covenant in the Evolution of Anglo-Saxon Bioculture
2. Republica Anglorum: Religion and Rulership in Old England
3. Metamorphosis: The Peculiar Character of the Early Modern Englishman

II. Pathogenesis: Anglo-Saxon Identity in the Novus Ordo Seclorum
4. Homo Americanus: A Post-Mortem on the First “White Man’s Country”
5. Divine Economy: The Modern Business Corporation and the Lost Soul of WASP America
6. Political Theology: How America’s Civil Religion Fosters Anglo-Saxon Ethnomasochism

III. Prognosis: The Return of the Repressed
7. Archeofuturism: Of Patriot Kings and Anglo-Saxon Tribalism in the Twenty-First Century
8. Palingenesis: The Postmodern Rebirth of Anglo-Saxon Christendom


Greece: the international finance system versus us all

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 30 June 2011 00:31.

The BBC News website features a graphic article posted yesterday (Wednesday) from the streets of Athens by Paul Mason titled Greece: What’s burning is consent.  It doesn’t leave a lot for me to say.  The press is generally doing a pretty good job of revealing motive on the part of the Greek political class, the German and French political leadership, the European Central Bank and the IMF.  The bottom line motive-wise appears to be the serpentine, high-risk derivative products to which Wall Street is known to be horribly exposed, and I’ve even seen attempts on the financial pages to explicate these.

Mason, although he is an economics journalist, eschews all that.  He is with the forces of light.

They came on, still, in the same old way: rigid, determined, clutching heavy sticks and crash helmets. They passed the riot police, the parliament, the indignados and their squatter camp - and marched away.

Now Syntagma Square filled with other protesters: the middle class, the salariat, the youth, people with tattoos up their legs, bare midriffs; a man in a tight Armani shirt and a white gas mask on his elbow.

Earth mothers, grandmothers - if the image of Glastonbury keeps occurring to me it’s for a reason - by now this protest is no longer the preserve of one segment of the demographic, or of politics. It is a cross section: right and left, young and old.

The nationalists, who’ve claimed the ledge above the square as their territory, are the toughest bunch.

The “indignados” - anarchist youth and just generally youth who’ve camped out there in the square for 35 days, their territory is below. The black bloc anarchists? Where do they come from - it is never clear but they always somehow do.

READ MORE...


The Chairman, a keen sense of self-preservation, and a block vote

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, 27 June 2011 23:48.

From a comment by the redoubtable Papa Luigi on the BNP section of British Democracy Forums.  The subject: yesterday’s General Members Meeting (also a Founding Members Meeting) of the British National Party held in Liverpool.

The meeting was a confrontation of “the big beasts” of the BNP and proceeded as follows:

Arthur Kemp fired the opening salvos as the meeting started, asserting that there had been no consultation process with the members regarding the constitutional reforms agreed at the last party conference and that the premise for the GMM was therefore invalid and unconstitutional. He asserted further that the motions put forward were substantially different to those agreed at the party conference and that Nick Griffin had broken his promise to the members.

Geoff Dickens then informed the meeting that under the current BNP constitution, Nick Griffin has the power to make unilateral changes without reference to anyone else and that therefore, irrespective of the rights or wrongs of Arthur’s assertions, the meeting was constitutional and would proceed as planned.

In the voting that followed, the members present at the meeting, who represented the hard core of the party’s activists from across the country, were split roughly 60:40, with the majority in opposition to the motions proposed by Nick Griffin. The 200 activists present were however, dismayed to find that the proxy voting system introduced by Nick Griffin as a new and novel feature to BNP meetings gave Nick Griffin a block vote of 500+ votes that he proceeded to use to negate the majority against him at the meeting.

Despite this, the reformers continued to argue their case, with significant contributions to the debates by Arthur Kemp and the other ‘big beasts’ of the BNP; Andrew Brons; Richard Edmonds; John Walker; and Kevin Scott, all of whom voiced opposition to the constitutional validity of the meeting and the motions proposed. Speaking in favour of the motions were Clive Jefferson, Adam Walker and some other of the ‘novice’ Regional Organisers, appointed recently by Nick Griffin after high profile sackings during the recent ructions within the party.

READ MORE...


The Situation

Posted by Guest Blogger on Friday, 24 June 2011 14:00.

by The Narrator

WASHINGTON (AP) - For the first time, minorities make up a majority of babies in the U.S., part of a sweeping race change and growing age divide between mostly white, older Americans and predominantly minority youths that could reshape government policies …

After taking into account a larger-than-expected jump in the minority child population in the 2010 census, the share of white babies falls below 50 percent.

Twelve states and the District of Columbia now have white populations below 50 percent among children under age 5 - Hawaii, California, New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, Maryland, Georgia, New Jersey, New York and Mississippi. That’s up from six states and the District of Columbia in 2000. At current growth rates, seven more states could flip to “minority-majority” status among small children in the next decade: Illinois, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, South Carolina and Delaware.

The tragic part is that this is actually a rosier picture than the reality. “Non-Hispanic white” is a category that includes millions of North Africans and middle-easterners.

So this news release is actually softening the blow. When these non-white children come of age in 15 years the older generation of Whites (who make up an increasingly sizable percentage of whites) will be rapidly dying out.  As many who have read here before know, I’ve estimated the white population in America to be around 52 to 55% of the total population circa 2008/2010. So in 15 years the changeover will be even more dramatic than what has been experienced so far. Because, remember, all signs point towards a continuing flood of migrants and immigrants and refugees from the third world on top of the demographic projections based on those already here. Millions are pouring in every 12 months.

Officially, and I stress “officially”, so-called non-Hispanic whites are 63% of the population in 2010. In 2000 it was 69%. In 1990 it was 75%. That’s averaging a 6% drop every ten years. Or a 3% drop every 60 months.

Without going through all the math again, I’ll venture to guesstimate that by mid-century (39 years from now) whites will, optimistically, make up around 29% of the population of the United States. And it keeps getting worse from there, as non-whites reproduce like rabbits.

That means that if you are 25 years old today, by the time you are 75 years old whites may very well be no more than 19% of the population of America.

To give a further perspective here, if by some miracle we gained political influence in the next election cycle, increased our birthrates and stopped all immigration and deported all the illegals and refugees, we might be able to manage to be 40% of the population by mid century.

In other words, we’ve crossed the point of no return.

“White flight” is no longer an option. Go into any small town in rural America and you’ll be confronted by growing numbers of blacks and Hispanics. They’re seemingly doubling by the year (There are, after all, about 160 million non-whites in America now, so they’re naturally going to be everywhere).

To our north Canada is being overrun too, and to our south hundreds of millions more non-whites await their chance to pillage and plunder the US as well. Even our ancient homelands and strongholds in Europe are under assault and being swamped by enemies.

Recently there were so many high profile black on white mob assaults in multiple states and in a variety of settings that even the MSM was forced to cover it. Even if our people “Wake Up” now today, there is no going back to the safety and prosperity we’ve known. We are in a stage of rapid decline. There in no longer a safe haven or a fortified position into which to retreat. We are scattered and surrounded.

Whatever our future fortunes may be, we are now in a place unprecedented in human history. Thus the means by which we might extract ourselves from this situation will need be unprecedented as well.

We are in uncharted territory.


The ontology of the material: part 2, Being and multiplicity

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 15 June 2011 01:45.

Introduction

Mention ontology to even an educated fellow nationalist, and certainly to an activist, and he will very likely gaze unawares at the ground beneath his feet.  After a few seconds the void of understanding will fill with something very like scorn.  He will level his eyes at you and deliver himself of the opinion that that sort of thing has nothing to do with the world of struggle in Nature and politics that he knows and sees everywhere – the struggle which European Man is so demonstrably losing.  Too detached from reality, too self-absorbing, he will say.  Too many dancing angels.

And then, to set you right, and quite without irony, he will remind you of the great existential plaint, the crisis of the crisis.  While you are engaged in all this intellectual vanity, he will say, we Europeans are growing older and weaker by the day, our lands more lost to us, our family lines more negroidalised, the political class more traitorous (if that is possible), the bankers and corporate scum more rapacious, the Jews more audacious. 

You will see how the collective angst, unspoken by his people, unacknowledged amid the culture of greed and celebrity and political hype, is torrenting through him, defining him politically, driving him.  What do we do?  Now!  Today!  That is the question, de-Barded and anti-intellectual though it is.  That is what he will want you, somehow, to answer.

You will nod, and search for a way to explain that revolutions without founding ideas cannot sustain.  “But supposing,” you say, “you get your call to political arms, or military if you prefer, and the people come to your side.  You win.  What do you do next?  And why?”

Radical liberal, conservative or nationalist, anyone who does not want simply to bring God to us and who looks into ontology in the Western canon for an answer to those two eternal questions has to negotiate a pair of formidable philosophical obstacles which lie across the path. The effect of these is especially disruptive for the nationalist.  In the first case, it diverts his investigation back towards the teleological and, in the second, it provides false witness to who and what we are.

In this second part of my essay I will restrict myself to addressing the first of these two problems, as a way of advancing the concept, seemingly counter-factual to many, of a materialist ontology.

Being and multiplicity

The first problem is that of the finite and the infinite, no less, and the emasculation of identity which proceeds from the common apprehension of the latter.  At a superficial level, this emasculation is the real reason that nationalists complain of ontology’s lack of political agency, and the real reason that nationalist thinking romanticized in the 19th century and vaulted the heavens after myth, glory and heroism in the 20th.  Both were flights from a flawed essential conclusion which militated an appeal to a non-reality.  Let us decide here and now for the material, for experience, and for the definitely real.

It is self-evident that human identity demands to be considered in ways appropriate to individuals and groups - that is, in ways recognising their multiplicity and difference.  The predominant methods of considering, categorising and discriminating humans are, first, biological, then, as externalisation and superficiality take hold, socio-economic, religious, political, etc.  So far so good for nationalists.  But being is near-uniformly considered as the singularity of some unknowable meta-space, a universal substrate that is indivisible, prior, and, for faith-folk, endowing.

READ MORE...


Chris Hedges on Death of the Liberal Class

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 10 June 2011 00:41.

Graham Lister sent me a link today to a YouTube page full of videos of Chris Hedges, the journalist, author and jeremiah of American liberalism, democracy, education ... you name it.  Everything but white America - he is definitely not racially conscious.  His comprehension of nationalism appears to rest on his understanding, inevitably, of National Socialism and of his personal experiences as a journalist amid the sorrows of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

Nonetheless, Hedges is an interesting case ... a liberal, even a leftist, an AGW supporter, fundamentally a Christian moralist, but a man with an analysis that, once, would have been a hot ticket among the educated young.  In the 1960s such anti-Establishmentarianism was in high demand.  Now, according to Hedges, elite universities in America are corrupted by corporation money, and exist not only to churn out narrow, unquestioning future managerialists and plutocrats.  All across the rest of the system, he says, the humanities are under pressure.  Creative thought will not be required in post-industrial, post-white America.

He offers no reprieve.  He says the banking and corporate interests have won their war against us.  He fears that, from the social chaos and impoverishment which is taking hold only bad will come.

This video is of a lecture he gave to publicise his book, Death of the Liberal Class.  At 55mins it’s long, but there is interest throughout.


The sanctuary

Posted by Guest Blogger on Wednesday, 08 June 2011 00:54.

by Grimoire

I moved to Canada six or seven months ago for the mountains and the ocean. It’s a nice place, free of the racial and social tensions prevalent below the 49th parallel. The people are good-natured in their way. Yet I cannot stomach them and much prefer the company of Americans.

The other day I bought a locally made bicycle - a real work of Canadian craftsmanship, the construction and materials are superb. As good or better really than anything in this class in Europe or the States. Super light and fast, yet still tough. A semi street/trail bike, no shocks or extras ... hyper-lightweight as I wanted it.

I saw on a map a large wetlands bird sanctuary about 35 km away. So I threw a collapsible fishing pole and a few things in the panniers and ripped the 35 km in about an hour or so. The majority of the trip was off road on trails, and I passed 4 or 5 beautiful waterfalls. The largest waterfall was multi-level, each step with beautiful pools filled with shopping-carts and stolen bicycles. It was inhabited by homeless hippies smoking dope and crackheads throwing around garbage, all white. At another waterfall I saw otters fishing for salmon fry, and a large Barred Owl sat on the ground in the middle of the trail, I stopped for it and it seemed to smile . You have to be very careful with Owls, they have no fear whatsoever and will attack a human if they consider them fools.

When I got to the sanctuary a sign said “no pets, riding bicycles, etc, etc”. So I got off and walked my bike. The wetlands sanctuary was an Eden, I have seen little like it. Birds of every description; Bald Eagles, Ospreys, Hawks, Owls, Herons, Cardinals, Redwing Blackbirds, Bluejays, Northern Flickers, Woodpeckers, Geese, ducks of all types, hundreds of varieties of songbird. Beavers swam by and slapped their tails as you walked along. Turtles sat on logs, Deer everywhere. Along one 2 hectare line a stand of mature English Oaks had died many years before from flooding. The bark had completely fallen off, and the trees still stood intact, white and smooth as ivory sculpture, an incredible vision.

READ MORE...


Page 109 of 337 | First Page | Previous Page |  [ 107 ]   [ 108 ]   [ 109 ]   [ 110 ]   [ 111 ]  | Next Page | Last Page

Venus

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Tue, 12 Sep 2023 09:38. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Tue, 12 Sep 2023 07:23. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:37. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Tue, 12 Sep 2023 04:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Wed, 06 Sep 2023 23:14. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Tue, 05 Sep 2023 22:24. (View)

timothy murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Tue, 05 Sep 2023 01:53. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 03 Sep 2023 13:46. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 03 Sep 2023 03:55. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 03 Sep 2023 03:32. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 03 Sep 2023 02:39. (View)

timothy murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 03 Sep 2023 02:01. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sat, 02 Sep 2023 12:16. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Thu, 31 Aug 2023 11:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Thu, 31 Aug 2023 05:19. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Thu, 31 Aug 2023 04:12. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Thu, 31 Aug 2023 03:58. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Thu, 31 Aug 2023 03:48. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:59. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Mon, 28 Aug 2023 16:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:59. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:25. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 27 Aug 2023 23:19. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 27 Aug 2023 20:30. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 27 Aug 2023 20:05. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sun, 27 Aug 2023 18:59. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sat, 26 Aug 2023 20:20. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sat, 26 Aug 2023 16:12. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sat, 26 Aug 2023 12:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sat, 26 Aug 2023 11:37. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Sat, 26 Aug 2023 00:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Fri, 25 Aug 2023 22:52. (View)

Timothy Murray commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Fri, 25 Aug 2023 12:00. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Fri, 25 Aug 2023 11:21. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity's origin' on Fri, 25 Aug 2023 04:23. (View)

Majorityrights shield

Sovereignty badge