Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Condealism wrote:No, I mean I logged in to find a massive conversation had taken place within the span of a few hours. And since it has nothing to do with me... ain't nobody got time fo dat.

I mean you guys are denying stalin was a murderer, it is frustrating

Hallo Island wrote:That was a joke but okay

IK, but there is a genuine baseless belief that soviet tech was worse.

Free Cork wrote:Look up the Mir space station, it is the spiritual predecessor to the ISS, and was built by the USSR.

it was also the first modular space station. indeed, the first ever space station period was launched by the USSR.

first satellite in space, first man in space, first woman in space, first space station, first modular space station. indeed, if one did not know any better they may be temped to conclude that the soviets at worst ok and and at best actually pretty good at space.

Custadian Fallschirmjager Company Ii wrote:Can you actually give any source for your belief that soviet tech was somehow inferior? It's one of these myths that everyone seems to believe but no one actually has any reason for.

true dat, Soviet tech was pretty much on par with US tech.

Funny story about Sputnik, the soviets equipped it with a simple radio transmitter, which would allow them to track its movements across the sky. The CIA, of course, assumed that it was beaming "communist propaganda" down into people in America to brainwash them. They spent an ungodly amount of money trying to decode the message, which turned out to be "beep-beep, beep-beep, beep-beep."

Alyakia wrote:it was also the first modular space station. indeed, the first ever space station period was launched by the USSR.

first satellite in space, first man in space, first woman in space, first space station, first modular space station. indeed, if one did not know any better they may be temped to conclude that the soviets at worst ok and and at best actually pretty good at space.

Oh no doubt soviet technology was impressive, which inspired america to make more impressive technology 😃

Free Cork wrote:Nice to know that we're dealing with someone who is so sure of their ideology that they dare not read anything that might contradict their "deeply held religious beliefs," truly, you are the intellectual elite.

*sighs* Cork, as I said, I'm unable to copy-paste the link on my phone. Regardless, I've read the Communist Manifest and Capital.

The labour theory of value propagated by Marx is an oversimplification.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:I mean you guys are denying stalin was a murderer, it is frustrating

Simply asserting that someone is a "murderer" is really an appeal to emotion and has no bearing in an intellectual discussion.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:I mean you guys are denying stalin was a murderer, it is frustrating

It is also frustrating that no one has looked at this yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5rVD_TXrjo

Kings Island wrote:*sighs* Cork, as I said, I'm unable to copy-paste the link on my phone. Regardless, I've read the Communist Manifest and Capital.

The labour theory of value propagated by Marx is an oversimplification.

Actually that comment was directed at idealism, not you.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Oh no doubt soviet technology was impressive, which inspired america to make more impressive technology 😃

it's ok to have people talk about another nations accomplishment without going "b-but we're better" you know

freedom will, in actual fact, not die

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Oh no doubt soviet technology was impressive, which inspired america to make more impressive technology 😃

Care to back up that last part?

Free Cork wrote:Simply asserting that someone is a "murderer" is really an appeal to emotion and has no bearing in an intellectual discussion.

HE HELD MASS GENOCIDE!!!!! That is not an emotional appeal, it is a fact. I know he is a hero of yours and you don't want to except that but it is the truth

Free Cork wrote:Simply asserting that someone is a "murderer" is really an appeal to emotion and has no bearing in an intellectual discussion.

What are you supposed to call someone who kills people then?

So, I guess you communists enjoy debating with us so much you raid regions for the pleasure of using their embassies xD

Right-Winged Nation wrote:HE HELD MASS GENOCIDE!!!!! That is not an emotional appeal, it is a fact. I know he is a hero of yours and you don't want to except that but it is the truth

you got a better source than an anonymous Bulgarian person for that?

You know, maybe we shouldn't idolize Stalin. If you want to idolize a communist, have it be literally any other communist. (EXCEPT CHE DAMM IT)

you know none of us "idolize" Stalin right? we just don't uncritiaclly accept Cold War propaganda about him or the USSR like y'all do

Right-Winged Nation wrote:HE HELD MASS GENOCIDE!!!!! That is not an emotional appeal, it is a fact. I know he is a hero of yours and you don't want to except that but it is the truth

Fun fact, not everyone that is a leftist likes Stalin, Trotskyists and An-coms in particular, and on that murder part, yes but some of the figures are just ridiculous and artificially inflated.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:HE HELD MASS GENOCIDE!!!!! That is not an emotional appeal, it is a fact. I know he is a hero of yours and you don't want to except that but it is the truth

I would not conduct myself like this if we were talking to people about Hitler.

"OMG HITLER KILLED MILLIONZ OF PEOPLE YOU ARE EVIL FOR LIKING HIM!"

Granted, in that situation, I would agree with the statement, but not the way in which it is delivered. I would provide factual, undeniable info about the holocaust, etc, in a professional, intellectual manner.

In fact, I avoid using the word "evil" as much as possible. It's a throwaway term that doesn't mean anything intellectually.

Free Cork wrote:Care to back up that last part?

Russia attempted four launches to the moon from 1969 to 1972 and failed. America did it the first try in 1969

Hallo Island

Hallo Island wrote:You know, maybe we shouldn't idolize Stalin. If you want to idolize a communist, have it be literally any other communist. (EXCEPT CHE DAMM IT)

I take it you don't like Che then, why?

Is it because he helped get rid of the US puppet state in Cuba?

Hallo Island wrote:You know, maybe we shouldn't idolize Stalin. If you want to idolize a communist, have it be literally any other communist. (EXCEPT CHE DAMM IT)

No, I do not idolise Stalin. I merely wish to be historically accurate.

What's wrong with Che?

Woah. A loooooooot of economic illiteracy to answer to here.

*rolls up sleeves*

Miencraft, Kings Island, Republic Of Minerva

It appears like you guys were arguing over an allegedly deliberate famine that happened some 80 years ago while there are people dying of starvation in third world country because of capitalism at this very moment.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Russia attempted four launches to the moon from 1969 to 1972 and failed. America did it the first try in 1969

Consider the fact that those launches were the first attempts EVER at sending a man to space.

Really? The Americans didn't have failed launches? http://mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/missions/log/

Free Cork wrote:I would not conduct myself like this if we were talking to people about Hitler.

"OMG HITLER KILLED MILLIONZ OF PEOPLE YOU ARE EVIL FOR LIKING HIM!"

Granted, in that situation, I would agree with the statement, but not the way in which it is delivered. I would provide factual, undeniable info about the holocaust, etc, in a professional, intellectual manner.

In fact, I avoid using the word "evil" as much as possible. It's a throwaway term that doesn't mean anything intellectually.

Did not use evil, and stalin had his death camps called gulags. He had purges and he murdered anyone in his way.

Pevvania wrote:Woah. A loooooooot of economic illiteracy to answer to here.

*rolls up sleeves*

Fire away, I'm waiting

Free Cork wrote:No, I do not idolise Stalin. I merely wish to be historically accurate.

What's wrong with Che?

lolololo

Have you ever read Che's diary? It's seriously not okay. He basically just talks about how he loves killing people for like four hundred pages. Also, it reveals that he was a huge homophobe and racist.

Free Cork wrote:No, I do not idolise Stalin. I merely wish to be historically accurate.

What's wrong with Che?

Well, to start, he was a noted homophobe.

Free Cork wrote:No, I do not idolise Stalin. I merely wish to be historically accurate.

What's wrong with Che?

There was no historical inaccuarcy.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Did not use evil, and stalin had his death camps called gulags. He had purges and he murdered anyone in his way.

Useful tip for anti-communists. In socialist countries, there were no criminals, (eg, homicides, rapes, thievery etc) everyone who was imprisoned was there for political reasons.

Pevvania wrote:Woah. A loooooooot of economic illiteracy to answer to here.

*rolls up sleeves*

What?

You, of all people?..... are we going to get a other Stefan Moleneux post?

Free Cork wrote:Consider the fact that those launches were the first attempts EVER at sending a man to space.

Really? The Americans didn't have failed launches? http://mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/missions/log/

*Cough*challenger*cough*

Kings Island wrote:Well, to start, he was a noted homophobe.

Indeed, one of the reasons I'm not the biggest fan of Stalin.

Another one being the fact that he brought back the Orthodox Church.

Hallo Island

Hallo Island wrote:You know, maybe we shouldn't idolize Stalin. If you want to idolize a communist, have it be literally any other communist. (EXCEPT CHE DAMM IT)

We're the ones idolizing?!?!

*skimms through past RMB posts, finds long a** walls of text praising Reagan DESPITE his atrocities and general ignorance

.......

Billymcfappen wrote:It appears like you guys were arguing over an allegedly deliberate famine that happened some 80 years ago while there are people dying of starvation in third world country because of capitalism at this very moment.

Pfftttt. People are starving in Third World countries because of economic mismanagement by failed socialist states. Recall that Taiwan and Singapore were Third World countries until capitalism transformed them.

Kings Island wrote:Well, to start, he was a noted homophobe.

Yes, yes, he got rid of the Gay rights that Lenin introduced.

Hallo Island

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Did not use evil, and stalin had his death camps called gulags. He had purges and he murdered anyone in his way.

technically, a Gulag is merely a labour-based prison, not a death camp.

Free Cork wrote:Indeed, one of the reasons I'm not the biggest fan of Stalin.

Another one being the fact that he brought back the Orthodox Church.

I was actually referring to Che; I didn't know Stalin was.

Pevvania wrote:Woah. A loooooooot of economic illiteracy to answer to here.

*rolls up sleeves*

i'll have you know that praxeology is not subject to verification or disproval based on experience or fact. i'm not worried...

Oh yeah..... I forgot, he brought back religion too...

Wait, for you guys that would be good......

Free Cork wrote:Consider the fact that those launches were the first attempts EVER at sending a man to space.

Really? The Americans didn't have failed launches? http://mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/missions/log/

Don't recall saying anything about mars. mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/missions/log/

I do have to commend Lenin on his tolerance and inclusiveness. Then, I also have subsequently condemn Stalin on his, uh, polar opposites of tolerance and inclusiveness.

Miencraft, Kings Island

Pangaean Brigade wrote:Oh yeah..... I forgot, he brought back religion too...

Wait, for you guys that would be good......

I'm actually an atheist, as are most libertarians I know. Regardless, freedon of religion is an extension of freedom of thought and ought to be protected as such.

Miencraft

Pangaean Brigade wrote:Yes, yes, he got rid of the Gay rights that Lenin introduced.

The USSR was one of the first countries to give gay rights..... and then get rid of them......

Kings Island wrote:Pfftttt. People are starving in Third World countries because of economic mismanagement by failed socialist states. Recall that Taiwan and Singapore were Third World countries until capitalism transformed them.

Oh, so is Bangladesh a failed socialist country? Somalia? Kenya? Guatemala?

Recall that China, the former USSR, Vietnam and Cuba were all third-world before Socialism came along.

Billymcfappen wrote:We're the ones idolizing?!?!

*skimms through past RMB posts, finds long a** walls of text praising Reagan DESPITE his atrocities and general ignorance

.......

Not much of a fan of him, actually.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Did not use evil, and stalin had his death camps called gulags. He had purges and he murdered anyone in his way.

a camp where people die a lot is not a death camp. a camp designed specifically to kill from the ground up is a death camp. this is why there are many examples of people being released from gulags after their time is served and few examples of jews being released from auschwitz.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:lolololo

Brilliant argument. Bravo, child! You've learned how to express yourself in written form so you've earned a sticker!

But it is worth to note that he was really hot when he was young.

And Kennedy was always hot.

Free Cork wrote:technically, a Gulag is merely a labour-based prison, not a death camp.

Where they were worked to death and given small rations of food that wasn't enough to survive on

If we are criticising Stalin for being anti-gay, surely we should be doing it for all other countries, like the US for example or do you only criticise communists?

Free Cork wrote:Oh, so is Bangladesh a failed socialist country? Somalia? Kenya? Guatemala?

Recall that China, the former USSR, Vietnam and Cuba were all third-world before Socialism came along.

Well they weren't exactly capitalist per se, because they were politically controlled by imperial powers who extracted their resources.

Kings Island wrote:Well, to start, he was a noted homophobe.

And so was Reagan...

Kings Island

Kings Island wrote:Pfftttt. People are starving in Third World countries because of economic mismanagement by failed socialist states. Recall that Taiwan and Singapore were Third World countries until capitalism transformed them.

and now they live in either government housing or literal cages under dictatorships lol

tell me about the third world countries and mismanagement and i guarantee you it's no where near as simple as you think it is

(south korea is a good example though because it proves how a strong state can use five year plans to strengthen the economy)

(p.s. why are most of the great capitalist miracles dictatorships)

Hallo Island wrote:Have you ever read Che's diary? It's seriously not okay. He basically just talks about how he loves killing people for like four hundred pages. Also, it reveals that he was a huge homophobe and racist.

Source

Pangaean Brigade wrote:If we are criticising Stalin for being anti-gay, surely we should be doing it for all other countries, like the US for example or do you only criticise communists?

I actually can't stand the US government. It's always been discriminatory and never truly capitalist.

Alyakia wrote:a camp where people die a lot is not a death camp. a camp designed specifically to kill from the ground up is a death camp. this is why there are many examples of people being released from gulags after their time is served and few examples of jews being released from auschwitz.

Work camps... where they were worked to death and given barely enough to eat to survive.

Kings Island wrote:Well they weren't exactly capitalist per se, because they were politically controlled by imperial powers who extracted their resources.

And why did they do that?

(hint, the answer begins with "C")

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Work camps... where they were worked to death and given barely enough to eat to survive.

death camp means a very very very very specific thing. a very shítty work camp is not a death camp.

Billymcfappen wrote:And so was Reagan...

Like I said, not a fan of Reagan or the republicans. Gary Johnson 2016!!!!

Billymcfappen wrote:It appears like you guys were arguing over an allegedly deliberate famine that happened some 80 years ago while there are people dying of starvation in third world country because of capitalism at this very moment.

"Dying of capitalism"

So in other words, dying as a result of failure to acquire bodily needs? I suppose on a desert island a starving marooned man is being oppressed by capitalism, because the island isn't giving him muh free healthcare/roads/pensions/welfare.

Just think of the exploitation Tom Hanks's character had to go through in the film Cast Away! Wilson should have started a revolution against the oppressive trees, rocks and water! #FreeHealthcareForDesertIslands

https://bluelibertyblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ancom.jpg

And please, name me one capitalist third world country. One. No, better yet, name me a single capitalist third world country were poverty is not going down and the standard of living is not being improved. Just one.

Pangaean Brigade wrote:Source

Uh, you know, Che's diary, the source already cited.

Pangaean Brigade wrote:Source

I think I know what he's referring to, I'm pretty sure it's a part of his diary where he goes on a "combat high" essentially. All it proves is that, he was a soldier.

Free Cork wrote:And why did they do that?

(hint, the answer begins with "C")

Actually, it begins with an M - mercantilism, which is distinct from capitalism.

Kings Island wrote:Well they weren't exactly capitalist per se, because they were politically controlled by imperial powers who extracted their resources.

For profit.

Sounds pretty capitalistic to me.

So wait then Capitalism has never truly existed then?

Pevvania wrote:"Dying of capitalism"

So in other words, dying as a result of failure to acquire bodily needs? I suppose on a desert island a starving marooned man is being oppressed by capitalism, because the island isn't giving him muh free healthcare/roads/pensions/welfare.

Just think of the exploitation Tom Hanks's character had to go through in the film Cast Away! Wilson should have started a revolution against the oppressive trees, rocks and water! #FreeHealthcareForDesertIslands

https://bluelibertyblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ancom.jpg

And please, name me one capitalist third world country. One. No, better yet, name me a single capitalist third world country were poverty is not going down and the standard of living is not being improved. Just one.

Well. Honduras kinda sucks.

Kings Island wrote:Pfftttt. People are starving in Third World countries because of economic mismanagement by failed socialist states. Recall that Taiwan and Singapore were Third World countries until capitalism transformed them.

Stupidity at its finest!

Take Thomas Sankara, for example, and how his socialist policies improved life in Burkina Faso. According to The Guardian: "During [Sankara's] four-year rule, school attendance leaped from 6% to 22%, some 2.5 million children were vaccinated and thousands of health centres opened. Housing, road and railway building projects got under way and 10 million trees were planted."

Pevvania wrote:"Dying of capitalism"

So in other words, dying as a result of failure to acquire bodily needs? I suppose on a desert island a starving marooned man is being oppressed by capitalism, because the island isn't giving him muh free healthcare/roads/pensions/welfare.

Just think of the exploitation Tom Hanks's character had to go through in the film Cast Away! Wilson should have started a revolution against the oppressive trees, rocks and water! #FreeHealthcareForDesertIslands

https://bluelibertyblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ancom.jpg

And please, name me one capitalist third world country. One. No, better yet, name me a single capitalist third world country were poverty is not going down and the standard of living is not being improved. Just one.

do you consider central america, south america or africa to be third world countries because "name me one capitalist third would country" is utterly ridiclous unless you start going all communist and going nuh uh that's not real capitalism

Pangaean Brigade wrote:For profit.

Sounds pretty capitalistic to me.

So wait then Capitalism has never truly existed then?

True capitalism (like that found in Hong Kong) does not rely on state interference. The poverty of, for instance, India is due to oppression by the British government.

Profit can be found in manorialist and (in this case) mercantilist systems, not just capitalist ones.

Alyakia wrote:do you consider central america, south america or africa to be third world countries because "name me one capitalist third would country" is utterly ridiclous unless you start going all communist and going nuh uh that's not real capitalism

Lololol, if only I could like this.

Kings Island wrote:True capitalism (like that found in Hong Kong) does not rely on state interference. The poverty of, for instance, India is due to oppression by the British government.

Profit can be found in manorialist and (in this case) mercantilist systems, not just capitalist ones.

oh so there is literally only one capitalist country in the world lol and that's probably only because i can't be arsed looking it up

Billymcfappen wrote:Stupidity at its finest!

Take Thomas Sankara, for example, and how his socialist policies improved life in Burkina Faso. According to The Guardian: "During [Sankara's] four-year rule, school attendance leaped from 6% to 22%, some 2.5 million children were vaccinated and thousands of health centres opened. Housing, road and railway building projects got under way and 10 million trees were planted."

Ugh. Please, be civil.

Pevvania wrote:"Dying of capitalism"

So in other words, dying as a result of failure to acquire bodily needs? I suppose on a desert island a starving marooned man is being oppressed by capitalism, because the island isn't giving him muh free healthcare/roads/pensions/welfare.

Just think of the exploitation Tom Hanks's character had to go through in the film Cast Away! Wilson should have started a revolution against the oppressive trees, rocks and water! #FreeHealthcareForDesertIslands

https://bluelibertyblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ancom.jpg

And please, name me one capitalist third world country. One. No, better yet, name me a single capitalist third world country were poverty is not going down and the standard of living is not being improved. Just one.

Bangladesh

Somalia

Belize

Guatemala

El Salvador

Honduras

Nicaragua

Panama

The Congo

Basically the entire third world

Kings Island wrote:True capitalism (like that found in Hong Kong) does not rely on state interference. The poverty of, for instance, India is due to oppression by the British government.

Profit can be found in manorialist and (in this case) mercantilist systems, not just capitalist ones.

So in your mind "True capitalism" never existed, way to clear yourself of the burden of defending oppression there.

Alyakia wrote:oh so there is literally only one capitalist country in the world lol and that's probably only because i can't be arsed looking it up

Well, Taiwan is rather capitalist. Two, really.

Alyakia wrote:do you consider central america, south america or africa to be third world countries because "name me one capitalist third would country" is utterly ridiclous unless you start going all communist and going nuh uh that's not real capitalism

Not much capitalism in those continents. http://www.heritage.org/index/heatmap

Hallo Island wrote:Well. Honduras kinda sucks.

The same Honduras that's ranked 116th in the world in economic freedom? http://www.heritage.org/index/country/honduras

So much capitalism.

Are we ignoring the fact that Cuba has just become the first country to eradicate mother-to-child transmissions of HIV?

Pangaean Brigade wrote:So in your mind "True capitalism" never existed, way to clear yourself of the burden of defending oppression there.

No, as I said, it exists in Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Not true capitalism, lol.

Pevvania wrote:Not much capitalism in those continents. http://www.heritage.org/index/heatmap

The same Honduras that's ranked 116th in the world in economic freedom? http://www.heritage.org/index/country/honduras

So much capitalism.

"n-no it's not real capitalism"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5rVD_TXrjo

Free Cork wrote:Are we ignoring the fact that Cuba has just become the first country to eradicate mother-to-child transmissions of HIV?

They also allegedly have a cure for lung cancer.

Free Cork wrote:Are we ignoring the fact that Cuba has just become the first country to eradicate mother-to-child transmissions of HIV?

b-but... my profit motive! my liberty! my freedom!

Billymcfappen wrote:Stupidity at its finest!

Take Thomas Sankara, for example, and how his socialist policies improved life in Burkina Faso. According to The Guardian: "During [Sankara's] four-year rule, school attendance leaped from 6% to 22%, some 2.5 million children were vaccinated and thousands of health centres opened. Housing, road and railway building projects got under way and 10 million trees were planted."

None of you will bother to challenge this example? Why does it not surprise me?

Pangaean Brigade wrote:Not true capitalism, lol.

Yes, true capitalism. Colonialist systems are not capitalist just as Russian Communism is hardly communist.

Hallo Island

Hallo Island wrote:They also allegedly have a cure for lung cancer.

do you think the World Health Organization is in on some nefarious socialist plot to deceive the world about medical advances?

Billymcfappen wrote:None of you will bother to challenge this example? Why does it not surprise me?

I don't address ad homenum statements. Rephrase it and I will.

decades of the government directing the economy and foreign aid make the country rich

it goes capitalist and continues to get rich

capitalism is hailed as the miracle, everyone forgets the rest

Kings Island wrote:Yes, true capitalism. Colonialist systems are not capitalist just as Russian Communism is hardly communist.

A redistribution of global wealth would solve poverty sooner than NationStates processes this RMB post...

Trf Submarine Group I wrote:do you think the World Health Organization is in on some nefarious socialist plot to deceive the world about medical advances?

No I actually just saw that on my Facebook newsfeed.

Kings Island wrote:Yes, true capitalism. Colonialist systems are not capitalist just as Russian Communism is hardly communist.

lol what is it about colonialism that prevents the colonizers from being capitalist

is this one of those things where the we ignore that technically the definition of capitalist does not actually require half of the things you think it does *drops mic, speakers sound out free-market socialism*

Alyakia wrote:do you consider central america, south america or africa to be third world countries because "name me one capitalist third would country" is utterly ridiculous unless you start going all communist and going nuh uh that's not real capitalism

At least when we say it's "not real communism" it's genuinely factual, because "communism" is merely the end goal. Some socialists can be a**holes sometimes, and I will admit that, but if you merely say that every crime committed in order to advance someone's profit margin is not "true capitalism," then we aren't having an honest discussion. It's a "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy.

Billymcfappen wrote:A redistribution of global wealth would solve poverty sooner than NationStates processes this RMB post...

It would also bring economic growth to a grinding halt.

would you describe the current events in libertatem as a "sick party" or "wicked par-tay"?

Kings Island wrote:It would also bring economic growth to a grinding halt.

Indeed. It would bring economic growth to a grinding halt for the financial elites.

Free Cork wrote:At least when we say it's "not real communism" it's genuinely factual, because "communism" is merely the end goal. Some socialists can be a**holes sometimes, and I will admit that, but if you merely say that every crime committed in order to advance someone's profit margin is not "true capitalism," then we aren't having an honest discussion. It's a "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy.

I understand the Scotsman's fallacy and it doesn't apply. Capitalism in the correct sense of the word is private management of the economy, IE without government intervention. I would, for instance, argue that Britain's management of India was not capitalist because they favored British citizens and companies, and intervention is not capitalist.

Alyakia wrote:decades of the government directing the economy and foreign aid make the country rich

it goes capitalist and continues to get rich

capitalism is hailed as the miracle, everyone forgets the rest

As well as the fact that for years the USA had the country embargoed, it still has a quality of life index greater than any other third-world country, and is on par with the first world in terms of education and healthcare.

I wouldn't say that it has "gone capitalist," at least, not yet anyway, the agreements are still being formalised.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.