+ Reply to Thread
Page 41 of 43 FirstFirst ... 2728293031323334353637383940414243 LastLast
Results 641 to 656 of 679

  1. #641
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Empirical research is a heavy handed tool, it brings down false ideas, or false ideologies. In the course of empirical studies, we find nothing convincing about Marx's ridiculous ideas. Radical Communists just accept their version of reality to be correct. Where is the evidence for social equality? Where is the evidence for worker alienation? Where is the evidence for social stratification being an unnatural condition for human societies? WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?

    Oh, I get it! Marxism is like an religion. Taking the perspective of those at the bottom end of the social class ladder, there are issues of social injustices. In capitalist nations like the US, common law addresses such matters, or to a degree. There are issues of social inequality which cannot, or have not, been addressed in capitalist societies, but, perhaps, there is no resolution. Unfortunately, incompetence is an "unfortunate state" for which there may be no resolution. It is reality! Oh, oh, I am in big trouble. The Marxist police will be at my throat.

    Isn't it interesting, most of Marx's theory has not been tested. It has been assumed to be correct, because, after all, there should be no social injustice, or no inequality. So much for fairly land and Marxism. Oh, that's it, Marxism is a dream land theory. Oh, I hear it now, stop that criticism, it is upsetting Marxists.

    My favorite criticism of Marxism is about social stratification whereby Marx claimed it to be "unnatural," or inappropriate. So, we go back in history and search for equality. We look at early settlements throughout the world. Remember, Marx suggested we go back to early civilizations. There we would find people living in harmony, or in peace loving tribal communities. Is that really true? The answer, of course, is NO! There is no evidence for such communities!


    However, one might say, we should not dismiss Marx, he was brilliant, and he wrote so much about problems of capitalism. Well, if social problems is the issue, there is material in "every society." However, where do we find equality? Keep looking, it may be under a rock someplace! ha. ha.
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-27-2019 at 02:19 PM.

  2. #642
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    It is happening, and it may be the end for capitalism, at least in higher education. As for the average American with common sense, there is hope. It seems the average American may be smarter than the average social science professor. If you have common sense and a lot of work experience, don't go to college. Really? Yes, in college, you may be brain washed with Marxism. You will come back into the world with a new perspective, one to ensure you'll rebel against democracy as protected by the US Constitution. You'll hold a lot of stupid ideas about overturning capitalism in favor of a "loving socialist order." Then, if you go along with the right leaders, you can become part of a new communist society. College professors will celebrate until they loose their jobs and pensions because the new social order won't support them, and, after all, we have no need for study routines which support the democratic way of life in a capitalist society. Yes, who needs a career or a job when everyone shares in common in a new Communist society. Oh yes, sociology professors will be overwhelmed with happiness knowing their Marxist teachings may taken hold to produce a wonderful world of "sameness."


    https://www.econlib.org/archives/201...valence_1.html

    https://dailycaller.com/2016/01/11/m...tern-academia/
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-04-2019 at 01:53 PM.

  3. #643
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    How about "communes?" Aren't they a form of communism? I propose they fail for the same reasons "communist governments" fail. They propose equality, when, in fact, it really doesn't exist, They propose sharing everything in common, when, in fact, people are rewarded according to competency based contributions. Mostly, they fail from "failed assumptions!" Communes utilize utopian ideas in order to make a community. When those ideas fail, communes collapse.

    The central characteristics of communes, or core principles thatdefine communes, have been expressed in various forms over the years. Before 1840 such communities were known as "communist and socialist settlements"; by 1860, they were also called "communitarian"and by around 1920 the term "intentional community"
    [citationneeded] had been added to the vernacular of some theorists. The term "communitarian" was invented by the Suffolk-born radical John Goodwyn Barmby, subsequently a Unitarianminister.[4]
    At the start of the 1970s, TheNew Communes author Ron E. Roberts classified communes as a subclass of a larger category of Utopias.[5] He listed three main characteristics. Communes of this period tended to develop their own characteristics of theory though, so while many strived for variously expressed forms of egalitarianism, Roberts' list should never beread as typical. Roberts' three listed items were: first, egalitarianism – that communes specifically rejected hierarchy or graduations of social status as being necessary to social order. Second, human scale – that members of some communes saw the scale of society as it was then organized as being too industrialized(or factory sized) and therefore unsympathetic to human dimensions. And third, that communes were consciously anti-bureaucratic.[5]
    Twenty five years later, Dr. Bill Metcalf, in his edited book Shared Visions, Shared Lives defined communes as having the following core principles: the importance of the group as opposed to the nuclear family unit, a "common purse", a collective household, group decision making in general and intimate affairs.[6] Sharing everyday life and facilities, a commune is an idealized form of family, being a new sort of "primary group" (generally with fewer than 20 people although again there are outstanding examples of much larger communes or communes that experienced episodes with much larger populations). Commune members have emotional bonds to the whole group rather than to any sub-group, and the commune is experienced with emotions which go beyond just social collectivity.[6]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commune
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-06-2019 at 04:12 PM.

  4. #644
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Throughout the world, there have been numerous commune experiments. Apparently, they have short lifespans because they cannot form into mini societies, or worlds where everyday competency needs are fulfilled. Moreover, issues of equality become problematic whereby commune rules bend everyday norms into untenable means for interacting. However, there have been some successes, usually under circumstances of strong leadership and dedicated membership with unambiguous rules and procedures. However, these communes are short in duration insofar as they are subject to fouled up interactions from unmet equalitarian agendas.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/goingoutguide/movies/the-commune-a-tale-of-idealism-and-failure-in-1970s-group-living/2017/05/25/8461aa56-3bf9-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9d3bd462bdf3

    https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/03/u...-movement.html

    http://mentalfloss.com/article/23297...-didnt-pan-out

    https://www.rollingstone.com/culture...gerous-106818/
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-08-2019 at 08:07 PM.

  5. #645
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Marx’s definition of human nature is problematic whereby, instead of acknowledging human tendencies toward fulfilling competency needs, he envisioned humans in a communist world away from “the crippling influence of specialization." For Marx, capitalism is the culprit for workers insofar as they become alienated in their jobs. Instead of acknowledge possibilities for workers to adopt to specialized jobs and therefore utilize areas of competency, Marx proposes a definition of human nature which is antithetical to human tendencies to satisfy needs for successful completion of jobs. In most work situations, supervisors, or managers, are adept at allocating jobs based on worker ability and experience. Therefore, in order to produce a product, there must be coordination between managers and workers. Otherwise, we have situations of inefficacy or unproductive work efforts.

    Marx’s idea for the fulfillment of human tendencies is unrealistic because he assumed an incorrect model for human nature. Marx proposed an utopian ideal world (Communism) where “society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, shepherd or critic." Evidently, Marx didn’t consult with workers or managers in order to have a good understanding of work situations. He assumed, without really knowing, as a consequence of a strong ideological bias for capitalism being a "dehumanizing world," rather than a world for fulfilling competency needs. In other words, if you have strong beliefs, or prejudices, the possibility for you confirming them is greater than if you have an open mind for finding “objective truths.”

    My criticism of Marx is not intended to diminish the harmful consequences of capitalism during the time of Marx. I acknowledge exploitation of workers, then and now. However, one must acknowledge advances in labor relations as a consequence of labor movements and government regulations. It is also important to point out the degree to which “interpretation” plays a role in analyzing labor and industrial relations. If one assumes work to be alienating, and capitalism to be antithetical to human nature, then one will find most activities associated with modern society to be harmful.

    Are there happy workers? In the work world, we find a variety of different temperaments. We find people happily engaged in challenging tasks, and there are workers with strong work ethics who find fulfillment in work. My primary point is Marx didn't acknowledge the other side of the picture having to do with "fulfillment of competence needs." People seek recognition for fulfillment of tasks or activities for which they derive satisfaction. Without opportunities to fulfill competence needs, humans drift into apathetic situations, or areas of unfulfillment leading to low self-esteem. The more freedom people have in capitalist societies, the more they find opportunities to fulfill competency needs. Evidence for the work commitment to capitalism is overwhelming, it is found in low unemployment, high enrollment in tech training programs, high levels of worker satisfaction, manufacturing productivity, and a booming US economy. Contrary to Marx's statement about specialization being alienating, it has allowed workers to development and utilize training programs in order to maximize areas of competency. For individuals to maintain a healthy psychic, or to maintain self-esteem, they must utilize their talents, skills, or "areas of competency." In modern societies, jobs provide excellent opportunities for people to utilize abilities, which is a key factor for "survival" as well as "self-expression."
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-12-2019 at 11:40 PM.

  6. #646
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    9

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Read these articles about terrorism & politics in India! Links:- 1. https://www.thebloggerspoint.in/2019...top-on_10.html
    2. https://www.thebloggerspoint.in/2019...terrorism.html

  7. #647
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by Atuls93 View Post
    Read these articles about terrorism & politics in India! Links:- 1. https://www.thebloggerspoint.in/2019...top-on_10.html
    2. https://www.thebloggerspoint.in/2019...terrorism.html
    I acknowledge the terrorist problem in India. How is it related to communism? Perhaps, you are making a reference to China as a communist nation.

  8. #648
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    When Trump became president the US was saved from becoming a Clinton welfare state following Obama's socialist (Marxist) agenda. Finally, the American people woke up to Democratic abuses, a nightmare of tax and spend which has nearly bankrupt the nation. Trump has enacted common sense solutions to a failing economy. Now corporations don't have to go abroad to avoid huge taxes, they can prosper in a capitalist nation where prospering from honest labor is not a shameful practice. What a relief, the US does not have to suffer from Obama's elitism.

  9. #649
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Reducing social differences is a difficult, if not impossible, task. If ever accomplished, it would inhibit individual freedom. No matter what government leaders do, or attempt to do, to bring about an equalitarian society, the results are often disastrous. Stringent government rules and regulations are required for a "state of equality." This heavy-handed government causes the Proletariat (workers) to revolt from government repression? Communism limits freedom, stifles opportunities, and, in almost every way, curtails opportunities for individual development.

    Karl Marx called it dialectic materialism, ongoing class conflict resulting in the destruction of the capitalist class in favor of the proletariat. In the process of destroying social classes in favor of one social class (Communism), capitalists are to be eliminated. It is not a natural process, strong government control is necessary to produce such and unnatural society, one in which individual freedom is reduced. Stalin favored extermination of the bourgeois class of "capitalist upstarts" in order to make a new social order, or communism. He exterminated several million Russians to bring about the new communist order, which, of course, never happened. You can’t change human nature! Cuba is undergoing devastating damage from the many decades of communism. The communist assumption of equality defies human nature. Sorry, Marx did not get it right. If he had, we would have worldwide communism. He assumed an equalitarian society of one social class would fulfill peoples' needs. In reality, a one-party society violates individual freedom to pursue one’s own destiny based on what is best for each individual. Moreover, we don't find individuals resembling one another. People tend to compete in areas where they can maximize competencies. Subsequent, people mobilize resources, the net results of which is change, not a stagnant one class society.

  10. #650
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Historical Records are very revealing as to the horrible consequences of communism. Around the world, communism has failed with horrific loss of human life.

    Two major factors were the most important causes of the atrocities inflicted by communist regimes: perverse incentives and inadequate knowledge. The establishment of the centrally planned economy and society required by socialist ideology necessitated an enormous concentration of power. While communists looked forward to a utopian society in which the state could eventually “wither away,” they believed they first had to establish a state-run economy in order to manage production in the interests of the people. In that respect, they had much in common with other socialists.



    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/07/lessons-from-a-century-of-communism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c4b1f42e578
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-14-2019 at 06:30 PM.

  11. #651
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    As history has shown, democracy cannot function in a communist society, which may be an important reason for it's failure. The most important reason, however, is the obsession of socialist or communist leaders to control government in order to being about an equalitarian society. Where is the real world do we find equality, or similarities?

    Unfortunately, it is unlikely that a communist state could remain democratic for long, even if it started out that way. Democracy requires effective opposition parties. And in order to function, such parties need to be able to put out their message and mobilize voters, which in turn requires extensive resources. In an economic system in which all or nearly all valuable resources are controlled by the state, the incumbent government can easily strangle opposition by denying them access to those resources. Under socialism, the opposition cannot function if they are not allowed to spread their message on state-owned media, or use state-owned property for their rallies and meetings. It is no accident that virtually every communist regime suppressed opposition parties soon after coming to power.

    Even if a communist state could somehow remain democratic over the long run, it is hard to see how it could solve the twin problems of knowledge and incentives. Whether democratic or not, a socialist economy would still require enormous concentration of power, and extensive coercion. And democratic socialist planners would run into much the same information problems as their authoritarian counterparts. In addition, in a society where the government controls all or most of the economy, it would be virtually impossible for voters to acquire enough knowledge to monitor the state’s many activities. This would greatly exacerbate the already severe problem of voter ignorance that plagues modern democracy.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/07/lessons-from-a-century-of-communism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.980b3303f259
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-14-2019 at 11:24 PM.

  12. #652
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    An often quoted proposal for advocating Marxism is "the ability of each person will be employed to the greatest benefit of the people."

    So, we know each person's ability, and how that person may contribute to the greater good, but how do we do it? In a free market society, each person seeks work to maximize abilities, and the marketplace determines success or failure of the enterprise. In a communist world, government leaders allocate work based on what they deem necessary, but which may not result in the efficient allocation of labor. When government dictates terms of employment without market demands, or efficient allocation of labor and material resources, strong possibilities exist for inefficiencies, and subsequent failures. For a while, a communist government can assume inefficiencies, but, eventually, poor choices will result in economic failure and a communist government without financial resources.
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-25-2019 at 01:44 PM.

  13. #653
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    What are differences between communism and socialism?

    Communism and socialism are economic and political structures that promote equality and seek to eliminate social classes. The two are interchangeable in some ways, but different in others. In a communist society, the working class owns everything, and everyone works toward the same communal goal. There are no wealthy or poor people -- all are equal, and the community distributes what it produces based only on need. Nothing is obtained by working more than what is required. Communism frequently results in low production, mass poverty and limited advancement. Poverty spread so widely in the Soviet Union in the 1980s that its citizens revolted. Like communism, socialism’s main focus is on equality. But workers earn wages they can spend as they choose, while the government, not citizens, owns and operates the means for production. Workers receive what they need to produce and survive, but there’s no incentive to achieve more, leaving little motivation. Some countries have adopted aspects of socialism. The United Kingdom provides basic needs like health care to everyone regardless of their time or effort at work. In the U.S., welfare and the public education system are a form of socialism. Both are the opposite of capitalism, where limitations don’t exist and reward comes to those who go beyond the minimum. In capitalist societies, owners are allowed to keep the excess production they earn. And competition occurs naturally, which fosters advancement. Capitalism tends to create a sharp divide between the wealthiest citizens and the poorest, however, with the wealthiest owning the majority of the nation's resources.

    https://www.investopedia.com/video/play/difference-between-communism-and-socialism/

    Apparently, communism is the most destructive of the two utopian governments inasmuch as the government owns everything. Socialism is more civilized insofar as it allows people to spend wages as desired. It is difficult, if not impossible, based on the reality of our world, to imagine a government owning everything. As history demonstrates, communism brings about poverty, corruption, military dictatorships, and a general collapse of economies. Read about the collapse of the USSR and you find direct evidence for the failure of communism.


    If you return to basic principles of human nature, you find the best fit for humans is a capitalist society where people can find the best means for them to function, or find adequate means for living a healthy and productive life. As for inequality where people suffer consequences of not fitting into the mainstream of society, democratic institutions provide safety nets, or social programs for rehabilitation or daily needs. Marx’s idea of everyone finding a perfect fit in a communist society is purely utopian. It sounds good on paper, but in the real world it fails!

    If you accept the proposition that inequality is the natural condition for human societies, then, by logic, you cannot propose a society based on equalitarian principles. In all human societies, regardless of ethnicity, nationality, geographical circumstances, or other natural features, you find social classes to be a natural phenomenon. Humans seek to fulfill needs, which are distributed according to individual competences. The more advance the society the more differentiated it becomes as a consequences of social differences as technology dictates terms of employment and distribution of the population.
    Last edited by Cnance; 04-30-2019 at 10:50 PM.

  14. #654
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    I propose “competence” to be one of the most important concepts for understanding human behavior as well critiquing Marx’s theory of communism. Marx began his argument against capitalism by claiming social stratification to be an evil, or an unnatural condition brought about by ruling class domination and exploitation of lower classes. As a harmful phenomenon, Marx traced social stratification from early civilizations to his lifetime in Europe. He proposed a reduction of social differences would reduce class conflict for the final resolution of social class conflict (Communism). By rejecting “social stratification” as a "natural phenomenon," Marx neglected "competency-based abilities" for the development of a healthy society.
    Last edited by Cnance; 05-01-2019 at 05:46 AM.

  15. #655
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    How about concentrating on one's immediate environment? Assume one has to pay allegiance to one political party and that means you have to clear social activities with government officials. If you want to work, it has to be approved by the local commisaire or official. Well, it goes on so everyone is assigned a function in government or in some government sponsored organization. The government's purpose is to promote equality, or to eliminate social differences in order to achieve the greater goal of an equalitarian society. How happy would you be?

    What would be possibilities for inventions, innovations, or basic improvements to the society? Wouldn't government control interfere with general well being? How would one achieve fulfillment or satisfaction of one's potential? In short, would people be satisfied to have the government as their boss?

  16. #656
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    The most intensive experiment for Marxism has been the USSR beginning with the Bolshevik Revolution. Marxism has been around long enough for there to be historical evidence of its value. My criticisms of Marx have been based primarily on social psychological principles. If a government violates “competence needs” of its citizens, there will be dire consequences for its citizens and, subsequently, the survival of the nation. The following are comments by other authors.

    The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia led by Lenin in October 1917 did not simply alter the face of the Russian nation. It also affected the whole of the 20th century as the spread of communism and the teachings of German ideologue Karl Marx spread across the world from Russia to Eastern Europe and then Africa, the Middle East and South America. This red storm promised equality, prosperity and justice to all nations. However, this was the one of the biggest lies ever told as communism, spreading across the world like wildfire, also spread poverty, war and dictatorship. In 1991, the world witnessed the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the death of this ideology at its heart. However, alas, there are still countries held captive by it even today, and the latest victim is Venezuela.

    Venezuela, led by communist President Nicolas Maduro, has shown the world once again how fast this ideology can destroy the economy and potential of a country from within.
    Maduro appears to some as a time-traveler beamed into Venezuela from the 1950s. Following in the footsteps of his predecessor the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, he has been adamant about continuing the communist modus operandi for the economic destruction of Venezuela.

    At times, Maduro appears to be more like a character from a Marvel or DC comic book than a 21st-century president. From his Venezuelan-themed attire to his speeches, he never fails to leave an eccentric impression, being one taken over wholesale from the communist leaders of the past. His antics would be relatively benign if they did not lead to the destruction of the Venezuelan economy. Once the largest per capita economy in South America as a result of being one of the world’s biggest oil producers and the holder of the world’s largest proven oil reserves at 296 billion barrels in 2012, Venezuela is now witnessing an economic nightmare of unprecedented proportions.

    Maduro, who took power after the death of his mentor Chavez in 2013, has expanded his communist economic plans and nationalized a significant portion of the country’s private sector, including supermarkets and pharmacies. As a result, there has been a vast deterioration in services, and the local production of oil has plummeted. Oil is the country’s chief source of income, so this means shortages of supply, blackouts, and of course economic troubles. The fuel subsidies given to Venezuelan citizens were unmatched in any other country in the world as the government distributed oil to its citizens at very cheap prices. However, this was at a staggering cost to the Venezuelan economy, and it added to generally poor government economic policies and draconian ones such as the nationalisation of private-sector companies. The end result of Maduro’s policies has been a projected shrinkage of the Venezuelan economy by 15 per cent this year alone, making it half the size it was in 2014. In other words, in fewer than five years in power Maduro has slashed the Venezuelan economy in half, creating the biggest economic meltdown in the country’s history.

    Inflation rates in Venezuela have been reaching astronomical figures, with market prices for commodities doubling every 18 days. This will eventually lead to a mind-blowing inflation rate of one million per cent by the end of 2018, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It goes without saying that Maduro has followed the pattern of communist and socialist leaders around the world in blaming imperialist and colonialist Western countries for his country’s woes. However, the leaders of the so-called “imperialist West” do not need to conspire against Venezuela as all they have to do is sit and watch Maduro sink his country’s economy through his own disastrous policies. The country’s economic collapse has led to an exodus of its citizens to neighboring countries. The poorer sectors of the nation have been migrating towards Brazil and Colombia, and the richer ones have been attempting to find a fresh start in the United States and Spain.

    With the dire shortages of food and medicine and the rampant crime and unemployment and inflation rates now common in the country, over 1.6 million Venezuelans have left their country, creating the biggest migration problem in South America in recent memory. Venezuelans who once enjoyed the highest standard of living in South America now resort to accepting menial jobs in their attempts to make a living. The Venezuelans are the victims of their communist leaders who have sold them a dream of a country when in fact they were leading them to the gates of hell. Their tyranny, corruption and obsolete ideology have turned Venezuelan lives into living nightmares, and they have now realized the futility of receiving cheap petrol for their vehicles as well as other subsidies when these policies lead to economic collapse. Products must be sold at more than the cost of their production plus other premiums for them to be sustainable and continually available.

    Communism in general did not simply fail because it was badly applied in the nations that adopted it. The pattern of its failure speaks for itself. It is a faulty ideology that contradicts human nature and the values of competition, self-improvement, and the freedom to travel and to express oneself, as well as to acquire possessions, that all people hold dear.
    Ignoring these things, communism instead suppressed these human traits to enforce inhuman ones like servitude, the lack of ambition, and following leaders’ whims. The end result has been nations in ruins and economies in shambles. Venezuela is simply the latest victim of this ideology that has spread like cancer by preaching false promises and delivering loss and despair.
    Despite being at odds in terms of ideology, the Communists and the Islamists ironically share a common trait, which is their belief that their doctrines, when applied, will bring justice and even heaven to people on earth. However, experience has shown that their shoddy theories have in fact brought nothing but pain, death and destruction to all the nations that have applied them.
    Even so they keep on applying them where they can on the pretext that their theories were not correctly applied in the past and when they are they will work.
    Maduro is just the latest in a line of communist leaders who have applied communist dreams to their nations only to turn them into economic and social rubble.

    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsCont...t-failure.aspx
    Last edited by Cnance; 05-03-2019 at 04:20 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •