|
|
|
|
|
| |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/14/2007 6:10:41 AM | The implosion of the self de-centers it's primary concerns from one form of spectacle to the next. Wars are the orgasm of the collective indifferent. The very notion, or utopian mechanical society, that Herbert Marcuse puts foward, is the blue print for the hopelessly hopeful. After all, what is so good about more time on ones hands. It's just a slower form of losing ones mind. Marcuse says the technology of our machines should handle the major force of our current labor structure, and therefore change the course of economy, do away with capitalisim, embrace Platonic ideas to a certain degree, allow man the minimal time of work, thus more time for contemplation, distribution of equal needs, since technology, after all, will be producing our surplus.
But the very idea of labor counts on the exploitation of man, as Marcuse himself admits, so how would one even dream of changing the rational of a rich capitalist system that doesn't care about the space left to the mind that has been motorized on every factory floor, the machines will aid us, and surely their technological capacity could do even much more, without us, but it would please no one to exploit machines, and you would have to assume that the dismantling would occur because our policy formens care, preposterious.
Even in the final society that is deemed utopian, there will always be something to fetishsize, like the pornography of information, man will alway need to know something more and more. A gradual decline of goodwill and eventual boredom will seep into the social psychopathology that has never left us. I mean, what is a Marxist or anarchist revolution really? Everyone is a social pervert of the system. It's not that man has no good in him left to offer, it's that he constantly has to fetishize each object offered to him, eventually turning spectacle into performance. And besides, who would dare say to Hollywood, " you must dismantle now. " It's like saying to the germans during world war two, " you must care more for the jew's and the gays. "
Every man formulates his revolution, but as J. G. Ballard says, the only good revolution is the one that fails. Nothing can deter this globalization. There is one thing, but we are currently at war against it. A war, by the way, which will last a thousand years. A dream that will sleep until the dawn of the New World Order. A machine that will only do a half of the job. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/20/2007 9:03:52 AM | The phobic state of wonderment, ( that ceaselessness that re-verses language ) enters into a stage of confinement repetition that sub-divides all of the ancestrol tendencies towards their more liberal and incestous negative. Here we have a storage house of organs that produce no music.
Besides this incindiary precursor, there is so much more movement in these emboldened states of sexual discourse, than the surface reflects. Even if we are entitled to more, we rarely get to see beyond the affect of the signifiers ' global compass '. This idea of the global compass I have founded, is the sexual ' nodal point ' of personal sadistic hysteria.
As my aim is to elaborate why some of these darker ' return syndromes ' must be so visual as is always elaborated through a linguisitic personification of inverse orgasm dynamic.
This say's nothing to the real cretin's who suppose that what they fetishize is certainly more pure. With them we must wait until they cease acting proper, and become more adjusted to their condition.
However, a fascination with spectacle does not automatically mean we are chasing the ultimate ghost of contradictions. Psychoanalaysis and philosophy has indeed found it's way into the spectacle, and certainly any sort of theoretical undertaking must confess itself un-virtuous in the end, when all of it's technical aims are pre-disposed to the pornography of information. This gathering point where our burden of proof is to be made has sacrificed more false energy than the simple accomplishment of singular private thought. Which is still, itself, impeded by the spectacular bombardment of knowing and un-knowing, proof and unproof, belief and unbelief, so, what will sustain this analytical mind. Nourishment is not it's goal.
There is always this intention to be reborn. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/20/2007 11:45:27 AM | "personal sadistic hysteria"
i think ive dated you..
this entire thread sounds like someone has rewired Hal and mixed up his boards.
But you know its kind of like watching a sword swallower get about a foot of Damascus steel in his head but not down his throat.. perhaps in his ear..... | |
|
| |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/21/2007 8:03:14 AM | Answers to this nothing, answers out of a nothing, retained by wit, mass-produced, efficent, polished. The proposals of modern society are " fetishize your life according to your wallet and youre tastes, if you don't have tastes we'll provide them for you, we will shape your fetish, market you the perfect spectacle. "
On this thin horizon there are many isles of escape. A revisionism of marxist and anarchists doctrines, in other words new proposals. In other words, action to our thoughts. Let us mobilize the homeless, the true proletariate of the 21st century, give them a reason to rise from rags and storm the streets, let us diagram a new hopeful error, let us become casualties, new men, from the womb of american hysteria to the birth of a new dawn.
Old principles apply to the left and the right. Old ideas fester in the minds of radical liberals and demonizing conservitives, both of which have it wrong. We are the people who formulate a storage house of the true subversion.
No more introversion of the capital. No more want no more need. Action. Action. Action. The intregal reality must be upset, must be caused to vomit out it's casuality's.
And besides, our children must have this promise fought for them. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/25/2007 8:38:35 AM | Conditioned to reason there will be no reason. Of truth man must speak only of his pain. Secondary thoughts will not lift him from the mire.
Spirals of indifferent information brain wash the western mind.
Hysteria ensues.
The young take claim to all that their parents ( those perverts ) taught them.
Distilled paradigms.
What does not seek will be sought by the shadow of the reclaimed and undervalued capital.
Fetishisim of the image dominates the freeway.
Radio messages tune ears to the plastered truth.
one billboard after another.
Plato speaks through a wire shut jaw " The star blows out. "
If a man thinks he knows something it is a loss he is offering unto others.
The revolution cannot be condensed by one word.
What he knows will not be what is said.
He does not know but he will think again.
Do not give him the value he does not understand.
The price of his words are advicating death.
There is no simple thing to know.
Knowing nothing I tell you there is a void.
Unproven. A void cannot be.
I lie.
All men who tell themselves that there is something to learn are after the same illusion.
There is only this " Veil of Maya. "
They have learned nothing.
I have spoken in the same way. | |
|
| |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/28/2007 7:52:00 AM | Reversiblity anticipates the others desire. Plugged into the one dimensional, the political culture is a fashion show of food starved tenants flocking to the flattering death of ideas. Some good substance resonates like an obscene illusion. Ordinary life is grieved with it's own childhood. Supression builds upon the disorder of the formulated greivences of triangular thought. Here we notice the development period stunted by capitalist flows and econimc language, mathmatics taught to the child, to think scientifically, a good note taker is a good citizen. No hypothesis outside the educational box.
This is the good old critical exhibition of the desert. Personal opinion is on hiatus. The principle of evil aims for the elsewhere but ends up with the individual. Supported by all the systems of suburban commonality and subdivided mass, all we want is more advertising.
Our computer systems need more gadgets, our hardware needs up grades, this terryifing dream of power is gripped by the phenomena of bad intellectuals and philosophical pundunts all grasping for a singluar system of thought. This religion of science and the meat grinding of theory exhausts the original traveler who is weary from all the acedemic sideshows that dominate every mode of being.
Here is their remedy: commodify your intelligence. Come work in the lab, come study at the university, help mold our billboard tommorrow. This hypothetical swarm is a deadly wager, communications build surplus confusion, identity is drained of all possibilities. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 11/28/2007 10:54:39 AM | necro...
evil isnt aimed ,it flows out of the grasp of every hand that moves of its own volition
whats good for the species ,a judgement call made by those not already extinct
Will is what survives the torment , moves the needle ,
monitors the meter then plunges on
confusing the dance with the step doesnt hide the display of ignorance,
only those with the power of self will ever see the unrated portion of the show
Far and away your best..gratis | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 12/6/2007 7:08:29 AM | " Can a Lacanian learn something from Ayn Rand?
Rand, who wrote the two absolute best-sellers of our century, The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957), was (deservedly) ignored and ridiculed as a philosopher: her fascination with male figures displaying absolute, unswayable determination of their Will, seems to offer the best imaginable confirmation of Sylvia Plath's famous line, "...every woman adores a Fascist." However, although it is easy to dismiss the very mention of Rand in a "serious" theoretical article as an obscene extravaganza — artistically, she is of course, worthless — the properly subversive dimension of her ideological procedure is not to be underestimated: Rand fits into the line of over-conformist authors who undermine the ruling ideological edifice by their very excessive identification with it.
Her over-orthodoxy was directed at capitalism itself, as the title of one of her books Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal tells us; according to her, the truly heretic thing today is to embrace the basic premise of capitalism without its communitarian, collectivist, welfare, etc., sugarcoating. So what Pascal and Racine were to Jansenism, what Kleist was to German nationalist militarism, what Brecht was to Communism, Rand is to American capitalism. It was perhaps her Russian origins and upbringing which enabled her to formulate directly the fantasmatic kernel of American capitalist ideology.
The elementary ideological axis of her work consists in the opposition between the prime movers, "men of mind," and second handers, "mass men." The Kantian opposition between ethical autonomy and heteronomy is here brought to extreme: the "mass man" is searching for recognition outside himself, his self-confidence and assurance depend on how he is perceived by others, while the prime mover is fully reconciled with himself, relying on his creativity, selfish in the sense that his satisfaction does not depend on getting recognition from others or on sacrificing himself, his innermost drives, for the benefit of others.
The prime mover is innocent, delivered from the fear of others, and for that reason without hatred even for his worst enemies (Roark, the "prime mover" in The Fountainhead, doesn't actively hate Toohey, his great opponent, he simply doesn't care about him.) Here is the famous dialogue between the two:
— Mr. Roark, we're alone here. Why don't you tell me what you think of me? In any words you wish. No one will hear us.
— But I don't think of you.
On the basis of this opposition, Rand elaborates her radically atheist, life-assertive, "selfish" ethics: the "prime mover" is capable of the love for others, this love is even crucial for him since it does not express his contempt for himself, his self-denial, but on the contrary, the highest self-assertion-love for others is the highest form of the properly understood "selfishness," i.e. of my capacity to realize through my relationship with others my own innermost drives. On the basis of this opposition, Atlas Shrugged constructs a purely fantasmatic scenario: John Galt, the novel's mysterious hero, assembles all prime movers and organizes their strike — they withdraw from the collectivist oppression of the bureaucratized public life. As a result of their withdrawal, what social life loses is impetus, social services; from stores to railroads, no longer function, global disintegration sets in, and the desperate society calls the prime movers back — they accept it, but under their own terms...
What we have here is the fantasy of a man finding the answer to the eternal question "What moves the world?" — the prime movers — and then being able to "stop the motor of the world" by organizing the prime movers' retreat. John Galt succeeds in suspending the very circuit of the universe, the "run of things," causing its symbolic death and the subsequent rebirth of the New World.
The ideological gain of this operation resides in the reversal of roles with regard to our everyday experience of strike: it is not workers but the capitalists who go on strike, thus proving that they are the truly productive members of society who do not need others to survive.1 The hideout to which the prime movers retreat, a secret place in the midst of the Colorado mountains accessible only via a dangerous narrow passage, is a kind of negative version of Shangri-la, a "utopia of greed": a small town in which unbridled market relations reign, in which the very word "help" is prohibited, in which every service has to be reimbursed by true (gold-covered) money, in which there is no need for pity and self-sacrifice for others. "
- Slavoj Zizek | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 12/6/2007 7:16:29 AM | " In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all of life presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation.
2.
The images detached from every aspect of life fuse in a common stream in which the unity of this life can no longer be reestablished. Reality considered partially unfolds, in its own general unity, as a pseudo-world apart, an object of mere contemplation. The specialization of images of the world is completed in the world of the autonomous image, where the liar has lied to himself. The spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life, is the autonomous movement of the non-living.
3.
The spectacle presents itself simultaneously as all of society, as part of society, and as instrument of unification. As a part of society it is specifically the sector which concentrates all gazing and all consciousness. Due to the very fact that this sector is separate, it is the common ground of the deceived gaze and of false consciousness, and the unification it achieves is nothing but an official language of generalized separation.
4.
The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.
5.
The spectacle cannot be understood as an abuse of the world of vision, as a product of the techniques of mass dissemination of images. It is, rather, a Weltanschauung which has become actual, materially translated. It is a world vision which has become objectified.
6.
The spectacle grasped in its totality is both the result and the project of the existing mode of production. It is not a supplement to the real world, an additional decoration. It is the heart of the unrealism of the real society. In all its specific forms, as information or propaganda, as advertisement or direct entertainment consumption, the spectacle is the present model of socially dominant life. It is the omnipresent affirmation of the choice already made in production and its corollary consumption. The spectacle’s form and content are identically the total justification of the existing system’s conditions and goals. The spectacle is also the permanent presence of this justification, since it occupies the main part of the time lived outside of modern production.
7.
Separation is itself part of the unity of the world, of the global social praxis split up into reality and image. The social practice which the autonomous spectacle confronts is also the real totality which contains the spectacle. But the split within this totality mutilates it to the point of making the spectacle appear as its goal. The language of the spectacle consists of signs of the ruling production, which at the same time are the ultimate goal of this production.
8.
One cannot abstractly contrast the spectacle to actual social activity: such a division is itself divided. The spectacle which inverts the real is in fact produced. Lived reality is materially invaded by the contemplation of the spectacle while simultaneously absorbing the spectacular order, giving it positive cohesiveness. Objective reality is present on both sides. Every notion fixed this way has no other basis than its passage into the opposite: reality rises up within the spectacle, and the spectacle is real. This reciprocal alienation is the essence and the support of the existing society.
9.
In a world which really is topsy-turvy, the true is a moment of the false.
10.
The oncept of spectacle unifies and explains a great diversity of apparent phenomena. The diversity and the contrasts are appearances of a socially organized appearance, the general truth of which must itself be recognized. Considered in its own terms, the spectacle is affirmation of appearance and affirmation of all human life, namely social life, as mere appearance. But the critique which reaches the truth of the spectacle exposes it as the visible negation of life, as a negation of life which has become visible.
11.
To describe the spectacle, its formation, its functions and the forces which tend to dissolve it, one must artificially distinguish certain inseparable elements. When analyzing the spectacle one speaks, to some extent, the language of the spectacular itself in the sense that one moves through the methodological terrain of the very society which expresses itself in the spectacle. But the spectacle is nothing other than the sense of the total practice of a social-economic formation, its use of time. It is the historical movement in which we are caught.
12.
The spectacle presents itself as something enormously positive, indisputable and inaccessible. It says nothing more than “that which appears is good, that which is good appears. The attitude which it demands in principle is passive acceptance which in fact it already obtained by its manner of appearing without reply, by its monopoly of appearance.
13.
The basically tautological character of the spectacle flows from the simple fact that its means are simultaneously its ends. It is the sun which never sets over the empire of modern passivity. It covers the entire surface of the world and bathes endlessly in its own glory.
14.
The society which rests on modern industry is not accidentally or superficially spectacular, it is fundamentally spectaclist. In the spectacle, which is the image of the ruling economy, the goal is nothing, development everything. The spectacle aims at nothing other than itself.
15.
As the indispensable decoration of the objects produced today, as the general expose of the rationality of the system, as the advanced economic sector which directly shapes a growing multitude of image-objects, the spectacle is the main production of present-day society.
16.
The spectacle subjugates living men to itself to the extent that the economy has totally subjugated them. It is no more than the economy developing for itself. It is the true reflection of the production of things, and the false objectification of the producers.
17.
The first phase of the domination of the economy over social life brought into the definition of all human realization the obvious degradation of being into having. The present phase of total occupation of social life by the accumulated results of the economy leads to a generalized sliding of having into appearing, from which all actual “having” must draw its immediate prestige and its ultimate function. At the same time all individual reality has become social reality directly dependent on social power and shaped by it. It is allowed to appear only to the extent that it is not.
18.
Where the real world changes into simple images, the simple images become real beings and effective motivations of hypnotic behavior. The spectacle, as a tendency to make one see the world by means of various specialized mediations (it can no longer be grasped directly), naturally finds vision to be the privileged human sense which the sense of touch was for other epochs; the most abstract, the most mystifiable sense corresponds to the generalized abstraction of present-day society. But the spectacle is not identifiable with mere gazing, even combined with hearing. It is that which escapes the activity of men, that which escapes reconsideration and correction by their work. It is the opposite of dialogue. Wherever there is independent representation, the spectacle reconstitutes itself.
19.
The spectacle inherits all the weaknesses of the Western philosophical project which undertook to comprehend activity in terms of the categories of seeing; furthermore, it is based on the incessant spread of the precise technical rationality which grew out of this thought. The spectacle does not realize philosophy, it philosophizes reality. The concrete life of everyone has been degraded into a speculative universe.
20.
Philosophy, the power of separate thought and the thought of separate power, could never by itself supersede theology. The spectacle is the material reconstruction of the religious illusion. Spectacular technology has not dispelled the religious clouds where men had placed their own powers detached from themselves; it has only tied them to an earthly base. The most earthly life thus becomes opaque and unbreathable. It no longer projects into the sky but shelters within itself its absolute denial, its fallacious paradise. The spectacle is the technical realization of the exile of human powers into a beyond; it is separation perfected within the interior of man.
21.
To the extent that necessity is socially dreamed, the dream becomes necessary. The spectacle is the nightmare of imprisoned modern society which ultimately expresses nothing more than its desire to sleep. The spectacle is the guardian of sleep.
22.
The fact that the practical power of modern society detached itself and built an independent empire in the spectacle can be explained only by the fact that this practical power continued to lack cohesion and remained in contradiction with itself.
23.
The oldest social specialization, the specialization of power, is at the root of the spectacle. The spectacle is thus a specialized activity which speaks for all the others. It is the diplomatic representation of hierarchic society to itself, where all other expression is banned. Here the most modern is also the most archaic.
24.
The spectacle is the existing order’s uninterrupted discourse about itself, its laudatory monologue. It is the self-portrait of power in the epoch of its totalitarian management of the conditions of existence. The fetishistic, purely objective appearance of spectacular relations conceals the fact that they are relations among men and classes: a second nature with its fatal laws seems to dominate our environment. But the spectacle is not the necessary product of technical development seen as a natural development. The society of the spectacle is on the contrary the form which chooses its own technical content. If the spectacle, taken in the limited sense of “mass media” which are its most glaring superficial manifestation, seems to invade society as mere equipment, this equipment is in no way neutral but is the very means suited to its total self-movement. If the social needs of the epoch in which such techniques are developed can only be satisfied through their mediation, if the administration of this society and all contact among men can no longer take place except through the intermediary of this power of instantaneous communication, it is because this “communication” is essentially unilateral. The concentration of “communication” is thus an accumulation, in the hands of the existing system s administration, of the means which allow it to carry on this particular administration. The generalized cleavage of the spectacle is inseparable from the modern State, namely from the general form of cleavage within society, the product of the division of social labor and the organ of class domination.
25.
Separation is the alpha and omega of the spectacle. The institutionalization of the social division of labor, the formation of classes, had given rise to a first sacred contemplation, the mythical order with which every power shrouds itself from the beginning. The sacred has justified the cosmic and ontological order which corresponded to the interests of the masters; it has explained and embellished that which society could not do. Thus all separate power has been spectacular, but the adherence of all to an immobile image only signified the common acceptance of an imaginary prolongation of the poverty of real social activity, still largely felt as a unitary condition. The modern spectacle, on the contrary, expresses what society can do, but in this expression the permitted is absolutely opposed to the possible. The spectacle is the preservation of unconsciousness within the practical change of the conditions of existence. It is its own product, and it has made its own rules: it is a pseudo-sacred entity. It shows what it is: separate power developing in itself, in the growth of productivity by means of the incessant refinement of the division of labor into a parcellization of gestures which are then dominated by the independent movement of machines; and working for an ever-expanding market. All community and all critical sense are dissolved during this movement in which the forces that could grow by separating are not yet reunited.
26.
With the generalized separation of the worker and his products, every unitary view of accomplished activity and all direct personal communication among producers are lost. Accompanying the progress of accumulation of separate products and the concentration of the productive process, unity and communication become the exclusive attribute of the system’s management. The success of the economic system of separation is the proletarianization of the world.
27.
Due to the success of separate production as production of the separate, the fundamental experience which in primitive societies is attached to a central task is in the process of being displaced, at the crest of the system’s development. by non-work, by inactivity. But this inactivity is in no way liberated from productive activity: it depends on productive activity and is an uneasy and admiring submission to the necessities and results of production; it is itself a product of its rationality. There can be no freedom outside of activity, and in the context of the spectacle all activity is negated. just as real activity has been captured in its entirety for the global construction of this result. Thus the present “liberation from labor,” the increase of leisure, is in no way a liberation within labor, nor a liberation from the world shaped by this labor. None of the activity lost in labor can be regained in the submission to its result.
28.
The economic system founded on isolation is a circular production of isolation. The technology is based on isolation, and the technical process isolates in turn. From the automobile to television, all the goods selected by the spectacular system are also its weapons for a constant reinforcement of the conditions of isolation of “lonely crowds.” The spectacle constantly rediscovers its own assumptions more concretely.
29.
The spectacle originates in the loss of the unity of the world, and the gigantic expansion of the modern spectacle expresses the totality of this loss: the abstraction of all specific labor and the general abstraction of the entirety of production are perfectly rendered in the spectacle, whose mode of being concrete is precisely abstraction. In the spectacle, one part of the world represents itself to the world and is superior to it. The spectacle is nothing more than the common language of this separation. What binds the spectators together is no more than an irreversible relation at the very center which maintains their isolation. The spectacle reunites the separate, but reunites it as separate.
30.
The alienation of the spectator to the profit of the contemplated object (which is the result of his own unconscious activity) is expressed in the following way: the more he contemplates the less he lives; the more he accepts recognizing himself in the dominant images of need, the less he understands his own existence and his own desires. The externality of the spectacle in relation to the active man appears in the fact that his own gestures are no longer his but those of another who represents them to him. This is why the spectator feels at home nowhere, because the spectacle is everywhere.
31.
The worker does not produce himself; he produces an independent power. The success of this production, its abundance, returns to the producer as an abundance of dispossession. All the time and space of his world become foreign to him with the accumulation of his alienated products. The spectacle is the map of this new world, a map which exactly covers its territory. The very powers which escaped us show themselves to us in all their force.
32.
The spectacle within society corresponds to a concrete manufacture of alienation. Economic expansion is mainly the expansion of this specific industrial production. What grows with the economy in motion for itself can only be the very alienation which was at its origin.
33.
Separated from his product, man himself produces all the details of his world with ever increasing power, and thus finds himself ever more separated from his world. The more his life is now his product, the more lie is separated from his life.
34.
The spectacle is capital to such a degree of accumulation that it becomes an image. "
- Guy Debard
" The society of The Spectacle " | |
|
Hoop
|
Joined: 5/1/2006
Msg: 63 | |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 12/7/2007 1:35:20 PM |
What is really happening ?
I'd be interested to know if it is before, now or later
I found this article today I was trying to decide where it might be best to share it..
Reading it, I couldn't help but wonder again "where" I am, real or not, I'm itching to know where.
Some technologies seem old or slowwww in their evolution, is it like this for anyone else?
Anyway, here's (I ignored the wargames reference) the article
Sentient world (3 pages)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/23/sentient_worlds/ | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 7/19/2009 4:17:17 AM | | The psychoanalytic relationship is Hegelianism par excellence, the patient feels he is in a fight to the death with the analyst for his own neurotic autonomy. His unconscious is commanding him, in ever such subtle tones, to enjoy his symptom. There are those patients as well, in whom the analyst embodies the perfect parent, in which case, are we still speaking of Hegel. The lack in which the patient feels and carries out in his empty speech must be made whole, since the onset of neurotic attachment or utter disavowal the patient has been a stranger in a strange land, cut off from all proper forms of communication. In the random bits of discontent that the analysand free associates on, one must hear his ultimate narrative, his relationship to the other. His confrontation with the Name-of-the-Father. It is much more than being deprived of ones own autonomy. Before the mirror stage, in the throes of anal and oral lack of control, the infant is the fed and diapered subject. If his living environment seems unsafe to him, the longer he will try and stay in these stages. Even when he gets a grip on himself, so to speak, it is too late, the emotionally dependent oral and anal stage regress psychologically to that of the traumatized infant. Relying on one own abilities becomes an unconquerable problem, and the insufficiency of the self sterilizes the subjects total outward and inward mobility. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
