Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Share
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 19, 2015 6:48 pm

Evo jedna tema za Šuvara.

Šuvare, jesi li čitao ovaj Robinov tekst?

"The trouble with the emphasis in conservatism on the market," Buckley told me, "is that it becomes rather boring. You hear it once, you master the idea. The notion of devoting your life to it is horrifying if only because it's so repetitious. It's like sex."


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
Guest

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Guest on Fri Jun 19, 2015 7:05 pm

Drago mi je sto si otvorio , hteo sam ja...Pricacemo veceras, moram sad da prepustim komp
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:39 pm

Books & Ideas
Preserving the Self
The Political Economy of Attention
George Scialabba
June 22, 2015
Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services

Photo: Angie Garrett
 
The World Beyond Your Head: On Becoming an Individual in an Age of Distraction
By Matthew B. Crawford
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $26 (Cloth)
 
Aristotle and Marx may not have agreed on much else, but they agreed on the purpose of life. Aristotle defined the highest happiness as "the pursuit of excellence to the height of one’s capacities in a life affording them full scope." For Marx, the mark of a rational, humane society is that free, creative labor has become “not only a means to life, but life’s prime want.” Not leisure, not entertainment, not consumption, but creative activity is what gives human beings their greatest satisfaction: so say both the sage of antiquity and the prophet of modernity.
How much creative activity does work life in the contemporary United States encourage or allow?
"Creative” is not a well-defined word, so no precise answer is possible. But it’s hardly controversial that the "de-skilling” of the workforce has been the goal of scientific management since the beginning of the industrial age, and is accelerating. In his invaluable Mindless: Why Smarter Machines Are Making Dumber Humans (2014), journalist Simon Head tracks the rapid spread of Computerized Business Systems (CBS): job-flow, business-process software designed to eliminate every vestige of initiative, judgment, and skill from the lives of workers and even middle managers. CBS, he writes, “are being used to marginalize employee knowledge and experience,” so that “employee autonomy is under siege from ever more intrusive forms of monitoring and control.” Head cites a 1995 report that “75–80 percent of America’s largest companies were engaged in Business Process Reengineering and would be increasing their commitment to it over the next few years,” and a 2001 estimate that 75 percent of all corporate investment in information technology that year went into CBS. They’re expensive, but they’re worth it: insecure, interchangeable workers mean lower labor costs.
The end result of de-skilling was foreseen nearly 250 years ago by one of capitalism’s earliest and most penetrating critics:
The man whose whole life is spent in performing a few simple operations, of which the effects are perhaps always the same, or very nearly the same, has no occasion to exert his understanding or to exercise his invention in finding out expedients for removing difficulties which never occur. He naturally loses, therefore, the habit of such exertion, and generally becomes as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become. The torpor of his mind renders him not only incapable of relishing or bearing a part in any rational conversation, but of conceiving any generous, noble, or tender sentiment, and consequently of forming any just judgement concerning many even of the ordinary duties of private life. . . . But in every improved and civilized society this is the state into which the labouring poor, that is, the great body of the people, must necessarily fall, unless government takes some pains to prevent it. (Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations.)
Prescient though he was, Smith did not foresee the degree to which the state would become a largely-owned subsidiary of business, with no interest in preventing the stultification of “the great body of the people.”
In recent years de-skilling has been joined by omnidirectional saturation advertising in a pincer movement aimed at turning our non-work as well as our work lives into profit centers. Matthew Crawford’s brilliant and searching new work of social criticism begins with a familiar modern ordeal: boarding an airplane. Those plastic bins you put your shoes, wallet, and keys into? It dawned on some marketing genius that the insides of them could be plastered with ads. The tubes of lipstick advertised on the bottom of Crawford’s bin resembled flash drives, so he almost failed to retrieve the flash drive containing the lecture he was flying somewhere to give. Once past security, he looked for a quiet place to sit and think. Forget it—shops, huge ad posters, TVs, “the usual airport cacophony.” Virtually every inch of this public space made a claim on his attention for private commercial purposes. Except one: the business class lounge, the only place in the airport quiet enough to work, where the samurai of commerce sit devising the innovative marketing and business-process strategies that appropriate and direct the attention of the poor shlubs in the rest of the terminal.
De-skilling of the workforce has been joined by omnidirectional saturation advertising to turn our lives into profit centers.
These banal frustrations give rise to some original reflections on the political economy of attention in The World Beyond Your Head. Though we rarely think of it this way, control of our attention is both a public good—a commons—and an individual right. In public places like airports, subways, buses, stadiums, streets, and schools, and even more in quasi-public spaces like television, newspapers, and social media, our attention is sold to advertisers in ever finer increments. This is, Crawford suggests, strictly analogous to environmental pollution and the plundering of public resources.
There are some resources that we hold in common, such as the air we breathe and the water we drink. We take them for granted, but their widespread availability makes everything else we do possible. I think the absence of noise is a resource of just this sort. More precisely, the valuable thing that we take for granted is the condition of not being addressed. Just as clean air makes respiration possible, silence, in this broader sense, is what makes it possible to think. We give it up willingly when we are in the company of other people with whom we have some relationship, and when we open ourselves to serendipitous encounters with strangers. To be addressed by mechanized means is an entirely different matter.
But for those who hold to the psychological model of rational choice that underlies neoclassical economics, it is not a different matter. On that view, decisions are made by ranking all available options on a single, unidimensional scale of utility or desirability. Ads, however seductive, are simply information, and the more information we have, the better—the freer—our choices. Consumers have a right to be bombarded with solicitations, however distracting, just as workers have a right to accept any conditions of employment, however degrading or unhealthful. Any government interference between seller and buyer or employer and employee is paternalism, the bane of American liberty. (Encouragingly, two other new books arrive, in their own idiosyncratic ways, at similar political insights: David Bosworth’s The Demise of Virtue in Virtual America: The Moral Origins of the Great Recession (Front Porch Republic Books) and Craig Lambert’s Shadow Work: The Unseen, Unpaid Jobs That Fill Your Day (Counterpoint).)
Although even economists are beginning to abandon these simplistic notions of individuality and freedom, they continue to inform the official ideology of our governing party and are entrenched in law and policy (to the advantage, not coincidentally, of sellers and employers). Crawford proposes a different model of individuality and choice, at once traditional and radically new. Expounding it, with richly informative excursions into neuroscience, experimental psychology, intellectual history, mass culture, skilled crafts, and sports, is the main business of The World Beyond Your Head.
The detached, autonomous self of rational choice theory assumes the possibility of what philosophers call “the view from nowhere.” In the quest of epistemological certainty, we “take a detached stance toward our own experience, and subject it to a critical analysis from a perspective that isn’t infected with our own subjectivity.” Analogously, moral autonomy requires (paraphrasing Kant) that we “abstract from all objects … they should be without any influence at all on the will, which should not bend to outside forces or attractions but rather manifest its own sovereign authority.”
These formulations did much useful work historically, asserting and defining human freedom against oppressive traditional authority. But they don’t, when pushed to the limit, hold up. There are always initial conditions, presuppositions, things our previous experience has primed us to notice or overlook; there are always pre-existing appetites, values, commitments. We can’t abstract from all these things when making judgments or choices, because they are, taken together, us. Our selves do not exist apart from circumstances, accidents, constraints. We are situated beings. “How we act is not determined in an isolated moment of choice; it is powerfully ordered by how we perceive the situation, how we are attuned to it, and this is very much a function of our previous history of shaping ourselves to the world in a particular way.”
On the rational choice model, consumers have a right to be bombarded with solicitations, however distracting.
What this means in practice is illustrated by Crawford’s superbly detailed, psychologically astute descriptions of motorcycle riding and repair (the subject of his previous, best-selling Shop Class As Soulcraft), glass blowing, short-order cooking, organ-making, and other demanding skills. In each case, a beginner submits to the rules and traditions of some practice. A sustained narrowing of focus and intensification of discipline gradually yield a wider vision of possibilities and an increase in freedom of action. Internalizing the past of the activity and identifying with the community of its practitioners make one capable and desirous of carrying it forward—of creating something new. The joint attention required by any shared effort creates a new viewpoint, in which our genuine individuality is more accurately perceived and more reliably confirmed. Rootedness, obedience, and self-limitation are thus the conditions of autonomy and mastery. Crawford summarizes:
Genuine agency arises not in the context of mere choices freely made (as in shopping) but rather, somewhat paradoxically, in the context of submission to things that have their own intractable ways, whether the thing be a musical instrument, a garden, or the building of a bridge. … When we become competent in some particular field of practice, our perception is disciplined by that practice; we become attuned to pertinent features of a situation that would be invisible to a bystander. Through the exercise of a skill, the self that acts in the world takes on a definite shape. It comes to be in a relation of fit to a world it has grasped.
But does individual character matter in a liberal democracy? On the neoclassical model, work, culture, and politics are mutually independent. In the political marketplace as in every other, we are presented with an array of options, inform ourselves about them, compute our preferences, and select one. We decide in much the same way as IBM’s Deep Blue decides on chess moves: we start from scratch every time and calculate. Of course the analogy is imperfect: computers don’t have habits, prejudices, impulses, or memory lapses; and their capacity for attention is virtually unlimited. The neoclassical model needs quite a number of simplifying assumptions, like pre-Copernican epicycles. But the alternative—to acknowledge that humans are not simple utility maximizers with arbitrary preferences and unbounded desires, but rather that there is a hierarchy of human goods, with limits on the scale and rhythms within which we can flourish—would upend our current political economy.
It would mean, among other things, revulsion against what work has become, or is becoming, for all too many of those Americans lucky enough to have jobs: not merely ill-paid and insecure but also repetitive, stressful, and wholly scripted. The only way workers can resist this degradation is (as Adam Smith pointed out) collectively. But neoclassical economics frowns on unions, committed instead to the fiction that fully autonomous individuals can negotiate freely and on equal terms with large corporate employers; and likewise to the dogma that the only proper subject of this negotiation is the price of the employee’s labor, not its meaning.
Seeing past the liberal model of individual autonomy might also mean recognizing that consumerism can have civic consequences. Just as atmospheric fine particles can clog our lungs and impair our society’s physical health, an unending stream of commercial messages, some overwhelming and some barely perceptible, can clog our minds, fragment our attention, and in the long run, impair our society’s mental and civic health. Even intelligent and straightforward ads, in sufficient quantities, might do this to us; the dumb and manipulative ones we are daily subjected to are surely accelerating our moronification. “Please," Crawford pleads, at once jokingly and in earnest, “don’t install speakers in every single corner of a shopping mall, even its outdoor spaces. Please don’t fill up every moment between innings in a lazy college baseball game with thundering excitement. Please give me a way to turn off the monitor in the backseat of a taxi. Please let there be one corner of the bar where the flickering delivery system for Bud Lite commercials is deemed unnecessary, because I am already at the bar.”
This—and no doubt a great deal more of The World Beyond Your Head—is just what John Ruskin, William Morris, Ivan Illich, Christopher Lasch, Wendell Berry, and other great conservative radicals, or radical conservatives, would say to our over-managed, ad-choked, out-of-scale society. They were all skeptical of inevitable progress, alert to the costs as well as the benefits of new technology, able to distinguish the blessings from the cruelties of tradition, and as anxious to preserve the former as to abolish the latter. We’re lucky that Matthew Crawford has updated this invaluable dissenting thread of cultural commentary. But our ecologies—of attention, of imagination, of civic virtue—are eroding ever faster. All too soon, it may no longer matter what anyone says.


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 9648
Join date : 2012-02-12
Location : фаширам шницле

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by паће on Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:52 pm

Мало се зајебо, ствар је штогод гора.

Оглас је сад већ ретко кад информација. Довољно је наћи било који комад амбалаже од пре 40 година (без обзира на земљу порекла) и упоредити са данашњим. Комад је обично био фоткан са две-три стране, било је обиље техничких података, знао се чак и састав. Данас - једна фотка, и само оне информације које можда помажу продаји. Пошто то сви раде, ефекат је никакав, а информација је често негативна: кад прочиташ/чујеш/видиш рекламу, често знаш мање него пре.

Мада, мени је и то нека информација: од фирме која баца толику лову на рекламу, нарочито ако гађа нешто пси'ћки, не очекујем да не жали трошка на контролу квалитета. Ако пазарим код њих, плаћам пре свега ту рекламу, а онда и ризикујем фалш робу. Како (би требало да) пише у преамбули америчког устава, caveat emptor.


_____
чим кажу да бројке не лажу, тачно знам да баш онда лажу
pirates are guys with one eye, one leg, or both.
avatar

Posts : 4856
Join date : 2014-11-04

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Indy on Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:53 pm

Pa, mora da se uštedi negde.


_____
Take a day and walk around... Watch the Nazis run your town... Then go home and check yourself... You think we're singing 'bout someone else
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:55 pm



_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 4437
Join date : 2014-12-09

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by uskok i ajduk on Fri Jun 26, 2015 4:48 pm

Чик погодите ко је ово написао....



_____
"U novoprimljenim EU zemljama su korumpirani (policija, sudovi, političari) do koštane srži dan danas, pare što su od primitka dobili su raskrali i profućkali, nešto malo se izgradilo, bez pravog plana i preplaćeno. Ulazak Srbije u EU ne bi bio mnogo drugačiji. Naprotiv, političarska bagra ovih postsoc banana se u EU vremenom još osili. " / otto katz 
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 26, 2015 4:50 pm

Pa nije baš teško pogoditi s obzirom na naslov knjige u zaglavlju teksta, samo mi nije jasno šta će taj post na ovom topiku.


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 5813
Join date : 2012-02-11

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Ointagru Unartan on Fri Jun 26, 2015 5:39 pm

A i netacno je da je svetosavska ideologija nastala u 13. veku. Nastala je pocetkom 20. veka.


_____
"Ne morate krenuti odavde da biste dosli tamo. Moguce je krenuti odavde i vratiti se ponovo tu, ali preko onoga tamo."
Aca Seltik, Sabrana razmisljanja o topologiji, tom cetvrti.

My Moon Che Gavara.
avatar

Posts : 4510
Join date : 2014-10-27
Location : kraljevski vinogradi

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by otto katz on Fri Jun 26, 2015 6:25 pm

E, Uskoče, nesrećo.


_____
Разгромили атаманов
Разогнали воевод
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:02 pm

Ej, ljudi, čitajte onaj tekst što sam postavio, odličan je. I daj ne neko prebaci ono uskokovo na neku drugu temu, pošto je ovde stvarno oftopik. 

Uskoče, ja razumem da si ti pod utiskom te kapitalne knjige, ali ajde da raspravu o njoj ipak lokalizujemo na jedan topik, ako hoćeš otvori i novi, samo o njoj pa kačii saopštenja iz iste, kao što na DJB redovno kačiš saopštenja.


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
Guest

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Guest on Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:09 pm

Večeras se javim (pošto je meni posvećen topik), sad radim najgluplju stvar u istoriji sveta (više o tome na vocapu)..

Samo da kažem pre nego što nad odnese val moderacije da su izašle Dobricina i Latinkina knjiga nova u isto vreme i da sam ja naručio Latinkinu..

Koja sam ja Srbija?
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:13 pm

Treća, ofkors.


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 4353
Join date : 2015-05-16

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by No Country on Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:54 pm

Radagast wrote:A i netacno je da je svetosavska ideologija nastala u 13. veku. Nastala je pocetkom 20. veka.

Tacno, a plus nije ni ideologija - nego jagnjeca koza kojom jedna mnogo mracnija ideologija voli da se ogrce.
avatar

Posts : 4353
Join date : 2015-05-16

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by No Country on Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:04 pm

Glede teksta, a pogotovo one cekaonice za biznis klasu i prava na odsustvo - jebemmumater, mozda se mi zapravo vracamo u neku hiljadugodisnju normalu, a to sto nam se ta normala ne dopada - to vise ima veze sa tim sto smo odraslu u jednom cudnom/ atipicnom vremenu, treptaju oka spram trajanja vrste. Ovo ce mozda zazvucati blago rasisticki: gledam oko sebe Kineze, Induse, Filipince, niko kao da nema ni najmanji problem sa kastinskim ustrojstvom post-industrijskog kapitalizma. Kod njih ta stvar traje, u jebenom kontinuitetu, hiljadama godina. A mi smo se, je l' da, ispileli u tom socijaldemokratskom/ baby-boomers-american-dream prozorcetu, kada je izgledalo da ce svi ici leti na more a zimi na skijanje, vo vjeki vjekov, a u medjuvremenu biti "kreativni". Bila je to jedna od najcescih reci moje mladosti, a sada ne mogu da se setim kad sam je cuo van ironicnog konteksta. Let's get creative - znaci, sve drugo je zaribalo, krece ludilo, spasavaj se ko moze.

U tom smislu: da li su konzervativci o kojima pokusava da govori ovaj topik zapravo pomalo socijalisti?
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:11 pm

Ovaj tekst definitvno pokušava da napravi tu vezu, već sa onim početkom u kojem povezuje Aristotela i Marksa, a i zato što sa levice hvali knjigu jednog konzervativca.

Što se tiče kreativnosti:



_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 9648
Join date : 2012-02-12
Location : фаширам шницле

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by паће on Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:52 pm

не знам одакле ми ово wrote:
Old definition of a liberal: a conservative who just got arrested. A conservative, of course, is a liberal who just got mugged.


_____
чим кажу да бројке не лажу, тачно знам да баш онда лажу
pirates are guys with one eye, one leg, or both.
avatar

Posts : 4856
Join date : 2014-11-04

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Indy on Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:55 pm

Pa, nemoj tako, ovi bemtini naučnici rade ozbiljne studije o tome kako se liberali i konzervativci genecki razlikuju. Dve različite vrste, takorekuć.


_____
Take a day and walk around... Watch the Nazis run your town... Then go home and check yourself... You think we're singing 'bout someone else
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:02 am

паће wrote:
не знам одакле ми ово wrote:
Old definition of a liberal: a conservative who just got arrested. A conservative, of course, is a liberal who just got mugged.


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 4353
Join date : 2015-05-16

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by No Country on Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:08 am

Portland... where young people go to retire. 

Postoji li i takva biljka: hipster, a konzervativac? Da, to je ono sto je meni progresivno sve manje jasno: ako iskljucimo neocon-e, ko su danasnji konzervativci? Po cemu ih prepoznati?
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:17 am

U, kako da ne. Pa tatko na Vice, Gevin MekAjns je sad konzerva koja piše za kriptofašistički Taki's Magazine.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/gavin-mcinnes-interview-im-not-796177

http://takimag.com/article/the_us_of_shame_gavin_mcinnes#axzz3eD0VREHM


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 16044
Join date : 2014-10-27

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by ostap bender on Sat Jun 27, 2015 1:46 am

sto me bre uputi na ovaj taki mag? ionako ne mogu da spavam posto dete sutra ide na more sa babom a sada jos i ovo.


_____
navijao bih protiv zvezde i da igra protiv tima od 12 radulovica
avatar

Posts : 4856
Join date : 2014-11-04

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Indy on Sat Jun 27, 2015 1:51 am

Naleteh na neke dobre članke, ne bih znao da su kriptofašisti da Will ne reče.


_____
Take a day and walk around... Watch the Nazis run your town... Then go home and check yourself... You think we're singing 'bout someone else
avatar

Posts : 16044
Join date : 2014-10-27

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by ostap bender on Sat Jun 27, 2015 1:55 am

pa ja sada citam ovu pohvalu ann coulter. ne znam da li je to kriptofasizam ali jeste neka infantilna perverzija.


_____
navijao bih protiv zvezde i da igra protiv tima od 12 radulovica
avatar

Posts : 37904
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by William Murderface on Sat Jun 27, 2015 2:00 am

Ma ludaci bre. Skup rasista koje su prognal iz svih pristojnih medija. Derbišajra najurili iz National Review zbog rasizma, pa sad ti vidi koja je to ekipa

Pored toga, ludi Jim Goad, nacoš Steve Sailer, ovaj Mekajns, beše još neki ludak, ali sam sad zaboravio. A taj Taki je neki lud lik, mutan ko mutna Morava, grčki biznismen koji je godinama živeo u UK, sarađivao sa torijevcima, neki bonvivan i socialite, kao Kalajić. BTW, da je Kalajić živ, sigurno bi i on za njih pis'o.


Indy, šta si to dobro naš'o?


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije

Re: Ozbiljno o konzervativizmu

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Thu Aug 17, 2017 3:43 pm