Who is the main enemy

[whiterabbit]

The "real" enemy. The question of this elusive real enemy has been touched on by great minds and written about in elaborate volumes yet on this board it is defined in the sentance to page range. This, I must say surprises me some. I agree and disagree with all your statements regarding the matter. I see a lot of oppressors, ruling class, and things to that affect in your post. I do agree. Yet, I can't help but feel that recognition of subjectivity of the inqury has been negalected. The idea of the "real" enemy is based on a several factors within the individual. The word enemy representing some sort of oppsing force indicates that there is some pristine or perfect vision it is obstructing. Each one of you have your own vision of a perfect world . You can all read the same writers but your interpretations of those words will all vary at least a little bit between you all. This subjectivism leads to both conflict and functionalism. This on a mere ineractionist scale also applies to the greater structure of society. The fault , in my opinion, does not lie within the world but within man himself. We are so busy in recognizing the part of us that is capable of reason that we don't recognize the human animal that also dwells within each of us. This ugly part capable of this "immortal" things such as greed such as murder and all the things that the christian morality, which most of us are socialized in, follow. As much as everyone likes to think they are not part of they system they don't realize exactly how complex it is. history is not just a history of class struggle or fighting some power it is also a history of achievment and progress achivhived through cooperation.The human animal in man screams bloody revolution but instead of creating more destruction to create a uneasy peace we sould use the system and manipulate the system to get what we want. We, in the past, where never able to do this. Now with the information age doors open. Especially here in america. I was happy that I was able to read books like derailing democracy and curruption of american politics. In hoxhas stalins and maos etc.. nations I would never see books like derailing communism or curruption of albanian politics. I guess in conclusion man himself is the opressor and the oppressed and he is the rich pig we love to hate and the impoverished peasent we love to pity. Society only reflects that. The real enemy is us. We are the same in each country. We are both the reactionaries and conservatives. We exist in all classes. Wearethe enemy now and in the long run. and about knowing,Idon't know, Iam just giving my opinion.

Sorry about the spelling errors but it is late. Have a good evening everyone.

[ShineThePath]

Objectivily in this world there is a matter of Social Classes that determine who is whose enemies, and who are "allies" for the moment. In the Capitalist society there are "enemies" and "allies" depending on class situation and depening on the enviroment of the economy at the moment. The Bourgeoisie is the ruling oppressor in the nations which follow the route of Capitalism, but they don't oppress Bourgeoisie and other Capitalist interests, so they udnerstandinlgy are not an "enemy" to them; however for the dialectic of the society in which they need to oppress for profit, the Proletariat is their enemy. There are reactionary elements in some situations that are considered "enemies" at points, than become "allies", in order to drive away the prevelant enemy which stands in the way of Revolutionary change, meaning there are contradictions between them; however there is a more everlasting contradiction with both of them with another that prevents the growth and struggle between the two.

This is what Mao Tsetung coined as "Principle Contradictions" between Contradictions, the Princple Contradiction usuallu applies to objects and people with Goals of meeting a standard or place they are comfortable in. For example, I need to turn on the Light, yet the Light Bulb has blown out, what must I do? Well first I must deal with princple contradiction and rid myself of the usless bulb and replace it with a new one. Then I need to deal with the next contradiction, which is to turn on the light. Another example, Mao Tsetung faced fighting with the Imperial puppet Chaing Kaishek and the Goumintang from 1928 through the early 1930's. When Japan invaded China, and it became evident that Goumintang and Chinese soverignty faced destruction if the pace of the Japanese military continued its push into central China, Mao Tsetung and his Army allied with Goumintang, whom's generals forced Kashek to accept the alliance, to fight Japan. The defeat of the "Principle Contradiction", the Japanese Imperialists, than to fight Goumintang once again in the Civil War of 1945-1949.

It is important to understand that in societies throughout the world, every government, every form of "rule" is Dictatorship. It is dictatorship of one class or another. The oppression of the "Dictatoship of The Proletariat" is directed at our enemies, The Bourgeoisie and their reactionary ideology. Our enemy is also happen to be stagnation of revolution, in order for "communism" to be successful, we need constant quantitative change in order for the qualitative change of communism, any object that stands against the mvoe foward of Socialism is a emeny of the class interests of the Proletariat and the Masses, these "objects" will be dealt with in antagnonistic or non-anatgonistic struggle.

The subjective nature of "written words" can only be taken so far, until the words are abstract from real objective meaning of the time and are LIES. For example if I were to say "Hitler invaded Poland, but he was prevoked by the Poles." This statement is objectivly true, Hitler did invade Poland, but my subjective understanding of history has made me come to make a claim that is wrong, and distorts the truth. The dialectic between Truth and Lie is that of as well struggle between each other that moves through One opposing force without another, yet they can not exist without each other. People who acknowledgingly try to be "subjective" in thinking lead to wrogn errors, and this form of thinking must be taken against. For one to find the Lies in Truth and vis versa, one must stay objective at all time and analyse completely. You pointed out yourself, "Subjectivism leads to Conflict", and this is why we need to struggle against acknowledged subjectivism.

It was at one time "nature" that the woman be forced to sit at home, and be subjected to Male oppression over her, which in relation is a fundamental outlook of the social relations in the "family" is the outlook of patriacrhy in social relations of social-economics. It is no accident that the word familia first meant in Latin, one who owns a slave or group of slaves. The point is that when people start considering something in the "natural" and it how it is suppose to be, this leaves the "truth" out of the equation, that this is not natural, that since the development of Man and the World is constantly making quantitative and qualitative changes, nothing can remain in the "natural." Is it the same "nature" as it was that meant that women are suppressed because that is how things are? No, obviously there has been progression since the most brutal oppression in "familia" relations. It was alos said that African people are not "naturally" effecient enough to rule themselves and compete with Europeans, so it was in the "nature" of Africans to be the Subjected "svages" to european rule. The "nature" of humanity is constantly evolving and will not stagnate at certain matters, and I will not accpet that they will ever do so.

Historical Materialist outlooks, says yes that there has been "cooperative progression" and there will continue to be that, in a more drastic scale as we advance into Socialism and then Communism. However the "cooperative progression" has been made by Class Struggle and in use of the class dicatorship oppression. For example, the Cotton Gin, the Steam engine, and other such helped progressed society from the Feudal backward ties prior and it progressed human development. In this progression Capitalism was progressed as well, and so was the bourgeoisie. The Bourgeoisie used such progress made by humanity to advance capitalism and their Class Dictatorship over the Masses. For example the Cotton Gin and Steam Engine progressed society into the Industrial Revolution, a brutal time of exploitation of the Proletariat began, but it was progressive of humanity non the less, espcially delivering some of the final blows to Feudal Ties in Europe.

As Avakian noted in "Democracy:Can't We Do better than That?", The English Social-Democrat, E.P. Thompson suggests that the Working Class fought for hard earned "liberty, but he also makes the analyse to go against it suggesting "A propserous empire may possibly be able to afford in its metropolis, a little more space for liberty and dissent amongst its own citizens." Avakian points out that the "internal freedoms" that MOST(not all) in this nation have is due tot he fact that they rest on the foundation of Imperialism and Colonialism. If the structure of Imperialism and Capitalism was to be threathened by National Liberation struggles, and "internal freedoms" used by Working class individuals to try to change the system. Such was the case in Germany, Italy, Chile, and elsewhere.

To say that we "are all enemies" is simplifing the situation at hand, and leave nothing to be questioned. The Individual Person himself or herself is never the enemy we have come upon, as of yet. It is certainly the enviroment they are in, this has built these people's reactions and thinking, their violence and love, their compassion and hate, The person is not mystically "inhabited" with such feelings and emotions, he inherits them from the structure around him.

[whiterabbit]

My goodness Shinethepath your replies are long...lol.

"Objectivily in this world there is a matter of Social Classes that determine who is whose enemies, and who are "allies" for the moment. In the Capitalist society there are "enemies" and "allies" depending on class situation and depening on the enviroment of the economy at the moment"

This is a BOLD statement starting with the word objectivly. Objective refers to the external or material reality. Reality afterall is constrained by the limits of your subjective world. I can't help but feel that your focus is to much on class starification. I feel you put to much weight on Ascribed status( I say this by how you insinuate that this "conflict" is borne into every society no matter how other variables change,from birth) and not Achieved statues. You also do not give mention the idea of how social mobility fits into the very poloralized conflict model. Another factor is culture ,all its aspects, and how they would effect this society. I see that you are talking from a conflict macro prespective here but from an interactist prespective don't feel enmity against a rich person if they walk by in the city(you sould be able to realte to the interactist prespective atlest some). Yes, of course it's true that class stratification is a BIG deal, and social confict emgerges but that depends on so many factors which you have not listed and to make a generalization as you did leads it to a direction of contradiction which is every mathamaticans nightmare while making an equation. However, we are not talking math but if you are going to make a BOLD statement like that account for as many of the unknown variables as you can. Though many of them are case sensitive, and I understand that, if you can't create solid connection between at least a few in all kinds of societys then that theory is rendered void. I do, however see were you are coming from and in a industrious society like ours for SOME of the people this holds true...but not for EVERYBODY.

With principle contradictions I see what you are saying and it good in theory...and for anyone in the situation as china it seems like common sense. In a military, or political sense the theory seems good enough but on a sociological level...It is just not conclusive enough and the society existed much longer then COHERENT policical stuctures such as capitalism, socialism or whatever. Society is way more complex and well over- specialized that is why you need to separate classes in the first place. I hope you see what I am getting at...

"It is important to understand that in societies throughout the world, every government, every form of "rule" is Dictatorship."

Dictatorship, Absolute or despotic control, power whatever...that is what you mean...whoa. Thats pretty harsh. So then then rule of the proletariat is just some form of despotic control...whoa...Okay then evil Bourgeoisie (I always have trouble spelling that) powers are taken down by the good benevolient proletariat or the masses. No these masses are chillin ruling and they too impose despotic rule...destroying their enemies cutting new lines of distinction creating new enemies. Bourgeoisie and proletariat fight one is eradicated;proletariat trumpthsand what happens now ...alas a new polar oppisite must be created and the old proletariat splits a half become the new Bourgeoisie and the other half the new proletariat.

"The subjective nature of "written words"

words certainly are subjective; I agree.

"People who acknowledgingly try to be "subjective" in thinking lead to wrogn errors, and this form of thinking must be taken against"

The funny thing about this exerpt is that it is an opinion. Aside from that little irony...

I a figure in the distance and I say, " my word I think that is my sister" or I say, "that is my sister". I draw nearer I find out it is not her I am wrong either way. How I say something really does not matter "objectivly"

"It was at one time "nature" that the woman be forced to sit at home, and be subjected to Male oppression over her, which in relation is a fundamental outlook of the social relations in the "family" is the outlook of patriacrhy in social relations of social-economics"

I was talking about nature in refrence to the id and the premature brain which we ALL have and we all act on. people are learn to think girls are less then them and people learned to think that africans couldnt rule them selves. People where not born with this knowlage that why it is NOT nature at least in the clinical way since we are talking in terms of the brain...

"Historical Materialist outlooks, says yes that there has been "cooperative progression" and there will continue to be that, in a more drastic scale as we advance into Socialism and then Communism. However the "cooperative progression" has been made by Class Struggle and in use of the class dicatorship oppression."

yeah ...There has been very far reaching advancements in many areas among them agricalture and medicine. yeah 4,000 hungry children are dieing a day (but it's better then a few centries back..I am sure) Yet, "that which nourishes you destroys you". We have newer more resilent desiease which threaten our lives among these aids (which threaten to wipe out 1 third of the african population in about 30 years. Also due to the agriculture surplus there is a ever growing number of mouths to feed and every growing number of unsatifiesd mouths.

To say that we "are all enemies" is simplifing the situation at hand, and leave nothing to be questioned. The Individual Person himself or herself is never the enemy we have come upon, as of yet. It is certainly the enviroment they are in, this has built these people's reactions and thinking, their violence and love, their compassion and hate, The person is not mystically "inhabited" with such feelings and emotions, he inherits them from the structure around him.

This intresting thing the structure. The structure is bulit by mans own hands. Man like any animal is out there to survive so it is implanted in his nature to build the structure. Which is nurtured and furture evoloved as the enviorment changes, but its core ideas, like rooots remain. If man is not inhabited with feeling are fallces then why do YOU, aware of this, care about others. Why do you suggust that the answer is in communism. Souldn't you be saying fuck the little man if you are aware of this. Why not implement your philosophy. ( I am not trying to patronize I am just making a point)


I think, that this is argument that you made in this last paragraph can be argued between us back an forth prepetually since this is a undercover version of that god ol' nature vs. nurture bit... I feel that it boils down to opinion in the end which you being an "objectivist" ( I use the word with a heavy heart) probably don't want to discuss). I find whenever I discuss things like this it leads back to philosophy, ideology and then prepetuality or "pure contradiction" , don't you?

Whew...too bad I am such an ineffiecnt writer...thanks for your very intersting input ShineThePath. On an unrealted note: There is this videogame called Civilization III I think you'd like, you get to build your own civilization.so I guess you could parhaps test you ideas.lol. You have a wonderful evening

[ShineThePath]

I find it more bold to say that reality is LIMITED. As if something exists outside of material objectivity that can never be known because of our LACK of perception to ever know them. I first question what do you mean by "Reality after all is constrained by the limits of your subjective world". Many take this concept in different ways, for example I am stuck in a well and only can see the sky from the well in a circular way and surrounding it is the walls of the well. Is this to say reality is the circular outlook, your perception from here. There is no other reality? No of course not, we obviously no such "subjective" outlook is ALL of reality. Or this remark could be made to Idealist thought of God or other supernatural entities beyond or realm, a subjective or alternate world if you will. The problem with this is the inability for anyone to prove when science has been proving unseen forces for millenias now. We have proven the forces of Gravity, Friction, and so on. The unseen Photons were seen, the "Dark Matter" of the universe, before unseen is now, known to scientists and the matter of its anti-quarks. Saying we just can't know the "nature" of supernatural entities is just cover-up to not proving it to be Objective Truth. I for one can not accept "Subjectivity" as anything else besides hypothesis, nothing else until proven. For me to think in any other way on the point, it needs to be proven by Historical Materialism, Dialectical Materialism, or Scientific Method. Within these confines is process of a more productive and useful system. If man wants to bring results of his ideas, he must bring them to practice and bring them to the laws of Objecitivity, not Subjectivity.

Throughout the historical presence of our people, development has been made because of Class Struggle within the confines of their economical system. In this class struggle there has been quantitative changes, making qualitative changes that profoundly changed society. Lets look at Feudalism advancing to Capitalist productive measures through years of actual "Blut and Eisen" Struggle, years of a fight between Aristocracy and the Bourgeoisie, a strife between the power and development of productive forces. In the 1600's, In England, Olivar Cromwell made the first successful Bourgeoisie Revolution, it was not until the Industrial Revolution was this revolution complete. France underwent in and out of Capitalist Society for a century in the 1800's. It also most be said about the United States, as outright feudal ties were eliminated in 1865; however some dynamics of that existed still in the Black Belt. The German people went through almost 300 YEARS of Bourgeoisie Revolution, not being complete until the end of WWII. The Enlightenment developed in these situations of Bourgeoisie struggle, and it developed its philosophy around it. The best examples of this can be seen in Locke, Montisque, and others. Mao said it best "In class society everyone lives as a member of a particular class, and every kind of thinking, without exception, is stamped with the brand of a class." This is not to say that because you are in a class, lets say Petite Bourgeoisie, you must have the thoughts of only a Petite Bourgeoisie. No that is not the case, because from Marx to Lenin to Mao Tsetung, non were true Proletariat. Every thought; however serves a class interest, technology serves class interest, many things throughout this world serves class interest. Bourgeoisie Enlighten thought might have some truths and it was certainly Revolutionary in its time (Yes we can all Learn from it as well), but it has certainly outlived its function to attributed anything anymore, and much like Mechanical Materialism.

Ascribed and Achieved status in social relationships is one of the many structural differences in Feudalism and Capitalism, were as Aristocrats inherit all the hand me downs from their patriarchal family, the Capitalist must compete for his status amongst the rest. In many ways, this social mobile class has come to an end with the last stage of Capitalism itself. Imperialism, the last stage of Capitalism, allows next to nothing in "social mobility", because of its Monopoly tendency it takes, destroying the competing forces and honing in wealth and profits. The Natural order from Ascribed and Achieved means nothing though, in the larger magnifications. If a Textile Factory manager gets a better wage, or is promoted to a higher position, that does not make the "Class Struggle" untrue. In fact such instances of that happening are less and less everyday. There are the few Aristocrats of Labor who enjoy their position in a capitalist system that still dominates them; however the back breaking jobs of factory work has been shipped away for another person to be broken for more surplus value. It has even come to the point were a loss of Compound Labor is being seen as well. This is the relation of Imperialism to the rest of the world, their social mobility must be retarded and must not be built. The Capitalist simplest form of production might of let, some "competition" between Bourgeoisie and Petite Bourgeoisie, but most of those days are long gone. Also if you are referring to a possible working class Student, studying and becoming a CEO of an Oil Company, so what, he is still serving his class interests, now he is just doing it as Bourgeoisie. The antagonistic struggle between the Proletariat and Bourgeoisie has not been about "Achieved" status, it has been going on for the simple dialectics between the two.

"Society is way more complex and well over- specialized that is why you need to separate classes in the first place. I hope you see what I am getting at"
Not entirely, because the truth upon this matter is the reason why we have "Classes" is because of the Dialectics within society. Society is not "overspecialized" to escape the science of Dialectics and be something of its own. Within a Economical or Social System, such as Capitalism, the way of which wealth and productive forces are formed leave it open to Classes in which there are extreme Contradictions. The Bourgeoisie need the Proletariat, they need a class in which they are the back breaking labor and where the wealth is accumulated from. Literally, Capital, has its dialectic as well. Capital for all its complexities, is at the same time simple, just being the literal outward form of Oppression. That is what Capitalism trades in, in a sense it is Oppression. Capitalists need Proletariat, their dialectic, in order for this process to continue. A system as Capitalism is bound to the unity of opposites, and it can't be without an Oppressor and Oppressed. Society in itself is complex as well as simple, Dialectics has just shown how the society is structured, simply. Since Communism is a "Wrangle-ism", we will look and dive into detail with its complexities and solve its problems.

[ShineThePath]

(This is the last part to the prior post, sorry)

Communists have no doubt that all state rule is dictatorship, but state rule is depended on the Dictatorship of Classes, not Individuals. As Feudalism is dictatorship of Aristocrats, not matter if it is Roman Republic or European Monarchy, with Capitalism being dictatorship of Bourgeoisie, no matter good old American "Democracy" or Adolf Hitler's Germany. All dictatorships are formed with the dialectical classes within such systems, and it can not be a "middle ground" class. It must be between two antagonistic classes in which the relationship in unity of opposites. With the quantitative changes to qualitative changes, the systems dynamics are changed fundamentally with new productive forces being capitalism. Socialism does not eliminate Capitalist ties though, there is no negation of Bourgeoisie, and they are still around from contradictions, which arise from socialist system itself, and remain a class enemy. There is no "Split" between the proletariat class in Socialism, Socialism is a transition to Communism as when the contradictions within society, as compound and simple labor, must be dealt with. In still also must deal with the old Capitalist ties such, as The Law of Value and its outward appearances, like the Wage System. In every dictatorship of classes, usually democracy is practiced within that class. So I can promise you, as well as we have dictatorship over the Bourgeoisie and oppress their reactionary movement, we will have greater democracy than we ever had in the "Democratic" structure of today.

If you were to see a figure from long away, and guess it were a rampaging Elephant, just because there is some possibility of being that. That leads no where, decisions have to be made on decisive facts, information, and practice. Anything outside this is hypothesis, and if there is no will to test it, there is no need to take it even seriously until it can be tested. The problem with "subjectivity" is that as much nonsense can be said easily and ideas and thought being confused in the process, without basing it on Objective reality and having it tested. Dialectical Materialism, Historical Materialism, and Scientific Method ways of working on the other hand to "subjectivity" (Metaphysics and Idealism), they need effort and practice.

The Id is not important in any manner in this, even though I disagree with the position of Freud on this subject, since more and more biological scientific explanations have come since his theory (also he just lies a lot). The Brain in all its parts Cerebrum, Cerebellum, and the Brain Stem has grown since our relatively humble beginnings. The Cerebrum in fact is continuously growing and the only "instinct" which humanity has is more along the lines of survival and survival of his genetics. Also if "Id" is true, then thinking of women as objects as domination if fine, because literally that is what Homo Habilas to Homo Sapien has done, female dominated by the male counterpart. Freud's "Ego and the Id" teaches such chauvinism is "natural", this is a false Pseudo-Science as much as the Biologist trying to say that "rape" is natural as well, because of Human genetics. There is ever need of proof, the "Id" from Freud does explain a lot about some aspects but leaves more questions and much more disbelief. Yes there is Psychological development within a person, but this is as well all objective in nature and can be handled in scientific manner. Since the environment affects human behavior, we should deal with the environment around people, and attack reactionary thinking. Don't forget, even Freud called for people to use their "Ego" to battle their "Id", thus Communists do the same, getting people to battle their Reactionary Ideology with a Revolutionary one, while at the same time transforming the enviroment to suit a better humanity in which generations would not know the same as their grandfathers or grandmothers, progression upon progression.

If you’re looking to feed the Masses, you don't go by it by feeding every one of them individually in the same system which already denies them that food. That is going no where, it presents no solution. What is needed to be done is to destroy the system in which such atrocities are "normal" and have "always been". Defeatist compromise to the capitalist structure is literally betraying the Billions in this world. All who stand for this and defend such actions are no better, than what I believe to be like a Nazi Soldier defense, "Just taking Commands." This world is more than capable to feed the "starving masses" and then some. However giving free food, giving people what they need is not profitable. Imperialism is profitable though, their starving is profitable. Think about this, 40% of our economic aid goes to the Fascist Israeli Nation and their oppression of the Palestinian people, instead of going to AIDS help in Africa.

Human Emotions just don't stem from no where, they must come from the situation he or she is at hand, or her environment and structure they live in. People create the environment of others, shaping that others actions, and it continues on. If the Bourgeoisie did not create the conditions it did, I would not be talking on this subject; however I am. As I said before, the dynamics of society change with a new system. People will constantly change in their development way after communism, and we can't stop it. The superstructure is in existence to its base indirectly, it corresponds to the needs of the base. Socialism, as the base, is entirely different from the capitalist superstructure. A new super structure, which brings a new people. Man will always be inhabited by emotions, feelings, a whole psyche; however the emotions and feelings are indirectly related to the environment.

Humanity must break his bonds and destroy the system that keeps him in chains. The Masses can do great without the plunder of the Bourgeoisie and the brutal reactionary ideology of religion and the class system; however unlike Nietzche and his cryptic writing portrayal of humanity, there is no hope in moving by yourself against the system which does this. There is only hope for the Masses, not the Individual. The Individual can only be liberated when the Masses are liberated.

[whiterabbit]

thanks for the large quantity of time which you must have devoted to this post
(I simply must comment now after reading it. Expect another post later I am going to warped tour tommorow ;D so I've got to get my rest)

have a great night !

[RedViper]

Who is that real enemy?

Capitalism is the real enemy; wage labour, commodity production, the law of value. Capitalists are not free either, they are also slaves under the law of value, still they stand in our way and must thus be seen as our enemies. But capitalism is, and will always be our primary enemy. We can destroy every single capitalist in the entire world, and capitalism would still exist.


Is it the same in each country?

Yes.


Is the u.s. government the enemy of everyone?

No. But the US Goverment (and all other goverments) is the enemy of the working class and communism.


Is the enemy the reactionaies of every country? all conservatives?

Yes, reactionaries and conservatives are our enemies in the class struggle. Well, accually you could vote conservative and still act communist...the most intersting think is not what you think and say, but how you act in class struggle. I know so called "communist" who in a real class struggle act hell more reactionary than some liberals and conservatives, etc. Still, liberal and conservative ideology is always our enemy.


What classes are not "enemies"?

The working class. There is only two classes: The working class and the bourgeoisie, the later is our enemy in the class struggle. That does not mean that all who works are right, or on our side. Class is defined in the class struggle.

...and, even the working class is enemy to itself. Its function as labor power is in antagonism to its function as class. And ultimatly, the working class will have to destroy itself to destroy capitalism, there is no other way. Why? Because it is capital. The bourgeosie are not capital, the workers are.


Is your enemy the ones who oppose us now, or those who have long-term interests to oppose our movement all the way down the line in the future?

Both, and they are one.

[wow gold]

vvvnhbn
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
×â·¿
±±¾©×â·¿
·­Ò빫˾
rs gold
Runescape Gold
RuneScape Money
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
rolex
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
World of Warcraft gold
World of Warcraft gold
wow gold
wow gold
googleÅÅÃû
hong kong hotel

[wow gold]

vvvnhbn
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
×â·¿
±±¾©×â·¿
·­Ò빫˾
rs gold
Runescape Gold
RuneScape Money
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
rolex
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
World of Warcraft gold
World of Warcraft gold
wow gold
wow gold
googleÅÅÃû
hong kong hotel