Bloody Shovel 3

We will drown and nobody shall save us


Peter Turchin recently published his research, which says that the trigger for civilization wasn't a certain geographical situation, or a critical mass of food or other resources. No. Spontaneous civilization didn't happen. War happened, masses of horse riding bandits happened, and settled farmers had to pull their shit together to confront them. Hence, civilization. It is through outsider attacks that people learn to coalesce and organize.

If you need more close evidence, look at the state of neoreaction these days. For some reason the mainstream internet media has noticed that there are evil reactionaries on the internet, and suddenly progressives over the internet are finding the need to proclaim their unconditional condemnation of Emmanuel Goldstein. Everybody was getting agitated, and just when the hate wave was subsiding, the follow-up came: entryism.

So the progs are out to infiltrate the Dark Enlightenment, to make Moldbug into an antiracist antisexist saint, whose points were all about improving governance in order to benefit women and minorities. Oh well, Moldbug was never very focused on HBD or  sex realism, although I do remember him linking to Roissy. And hey he's half-Jewish, so if Polansky can be forgiven for ass-raping a 13 year old, Moldbug can surely be forgiven for advocating the restoration of the Stuarts.

What remains of course are the scared rank-and-file of neoreaction closing ranks on seeing hordes of little progressive bitches flood into our blogs filibustering our comment threads with cherry-picked statistics taken from Scott Alexander's FAQ, and pointing how World War T hasn't finished yet so how can you talk about the leftist singularity? There's so much to do!

Under Peter Turchin's theory, when under attack a group naturally grows asabiya, and part of the (for lack of a better term) exogenic ethno-genesis process is defining who we are. Which is a good question we have been asking for years, without a good answer. What do we stand for? Outside sympathizers like T. Greer asked us to drop the whole movement thing, and scatter so our political radicalism doesn't taint mainstream scientists who do research on topics we agree with. Given that we live in an era of witch hunting where public heresy will lead you to poverty and ostracism, guilt by association is understandably scary.

But the thing is this gestalt that we call neoreaction doesn't stand for anything in particular. That's not what this is about. Neoreaction is not an advocacy movement, it's an analysis movement. What draw us together is our willingness to see reality for what it is, and to see how exactly did civilization decay to the point that it has.

That's why we have techno-futuristic anti-nationalist exiles together with open admirers of Hitler, staunch Christian conservatives with 6 children with poolside nihilists who pump and dump our sisters and daughters for pleasure. Yes we're all in it and we get along mightily well. Why? Because we (mostly) agree in (most parts of) reality. As GLaDOS said in a pretty good thread on LessWrong:

Watson was right about Africa. Larry Summers was right about women in certain professions. Roissy is right about the state of the sexual marketplace.

Democracy isn't that great. A ghetto/barrio/alternative name for low-class-hell-hole isn't a physical location, its people. Richer people are on average smarter, nicer, prettier than poor people. The more you strive to equalize material opportunities the more meritocracy produces a caste system based on inborn ability. Ideologies actually are as crazy as religions on average. There is no such thing as moral progress and if there is there is no reason to expect we have been experiencing it so far in recorded history, unless you count stuff like more adapted cultures displacing less adapted ones or mammals inheriting the planet from dinosaurs as moral progress. You can't be anything you want, your potential is severely limited at birth. University education creates very little added value. High class people unknowingly wage class war against low class people by promoting liberal social norms that they can handle but induce dysfunction in the lower classes (drug abuse, high divorce rates, juvenile delinquency, teen pregnancy, more violence, ... ). Too much ethnic diversity kills liberal social democracy. Improving the social status of the average woman vis a vis with the average man makes the average man less attractive. Inbreeding/Out-breeding norms (and obviously other social norms and practices too) have over the centuries differentiated not only IQs between Eurasian populations they have also affected the frequency and type of altruism genes present in different populations (visit hbd* chick for details ^_^ ).

These are things we broadly agree on. Add to it the historical speculations of Moldbug on how progressivism evolved, which is still controversial but I think we might say the broad consensus is that the Jews aren't totally responsible, that progressivism is more or less a descendant of Puritanism (with more or less Jewish input), and that's what unites neoreaction. A common diagnostic, of sorts.

But we aren't an advocacy group who is trying to come up with some utopia to sell to the masses and gain status for ourselves. No, the left is about What should be done! Oh we should start a 21st century Oneida Community in Berkeley so I can fuck with all my school friends while we talk about how biased conservatives are! Oh, we should go to Africa and shit on the beach with blacks so I can go back home and shame my friends for not going to Africa! Or eating in the floor with Indian peasants and rationalize it as being healthier! Holier-than-thou through advocacy. So much for sola fide.

Advocacy is what leftists do. Neoreaction is not about advocacy. Of course we do think about how to cure progressivism and build a new society from the ruins of it, but as you might imagine there's little agreement. That's part of why the community is so alive: we're constantly bickering with each other about how this or that isn't good or feasible. Nick Land says smart people should just beat the fuck out and take their brains abroad where they're welcome; Michael Anissimov says we should restore the Habsburg monarchy and fund transhumanist research. Obviously both agree very little, and honestly I don't agree with either. But leftists don't understand why anyone would go in the internet and write without trying to form a conspiracy to change society and raise their own status. So suddenly neoreaction is all about Monarchism. Yes we're a Dark plot to abolish democracy and put ourselves as kings and enslave all the black lesbian neuroscientists. Why else would we have a blog, huh?

And so we are undergoing the natural asabiya-genesis process that happens when you're under attack, but we also see that we already have all the asabiya we need anyway. We aren't running anything besides our blogs, and we (mostly) believe democratic politics are part of the problem, so we aren't planning to organize to participate in the political process. Of course the movement is maturing, and some initial attempts of community building are already starting in the US. To the extent that some actual real life communities evolve out of this, they will have to decide their own rules and advocacies. Henry Dampier has some good ideas over here. Communities, if they happen, will be different, some will dislike each other, and the whole thing will splinter.

But that's cool, because this isn't about doing anything. Neoreaction is above anything an intellectual movement that seeks to know what humans are really about. I'd say we're pretty fine close to it. For the most part the conclusions aren't pretty, and the way out doesn't seem easy. Some have joined fundamentalist communities and live a life of deep religiosity. Some are working for the Cathedral and not giving a shit. Some are building ethnic communities out of scratch. Some are staunch patriarchs while others are enjoying the decline poolside.

None of this matters to neoreaction because neoreaction is not a government agency. It's a research center. We're here to see what reality is and what it teach is, in short, that humans are evolved apes, with mammal brains, with innate biases and tendencies, all of them inheritable and variable between individuals, groups and races. That everything that the powers that be teach us is false, and that they lie to each other too. Well we don't lie to each other. That's all we have in common, and all we can have in common. And it's enough. When the entryists come in, we'll know who they are, because they're the ones lying. We have the best shibboleth there can be.


Leave a Reply
  • I think Greer's just confused. I like the term Dark Enlightenment, but sometimes alternative adjectives or verbs make the point more explicit to those that don't get the context.

    So you could have the 'Lost Enlightenment', or Al Gore's 'Inconvenient' or maybe 'Hidden' or 'Buried' or 'Censored' or 'Suppressed' or 'Muzzled'.

    These are the connotations that arise in my mind when I hear about DE - true things that the powers-that-be, out of various motivations, will not allow to be openly discussed lest they become generally accepted as true - but Greer may have a point about how it sounds to someone new to all this.

  • You give the Jew-haters a friendly smile with your gratuitious sodomy-reference and then reassure the Jews that you don't think it's all their fault. Jew-haters are vermin. Don't stroke the slimy fur of stinking rats.

    • There's plenty of evidence that jews make leftists movements much worse for the common man and plenty of evidence that removing Jews from an area makes life much better the entire society. But the same is true for anything destructive minority group. The only thing differs is the amount damage each group is capable of inflicting.

      • anything=any*

        Jew haters should be not be ostracized, but re-directed. Most are middle class/lower class sheep dogs who need an enemy because actual thinking is above their pay grade. They'd make good foot soldiers for a political movement given good leadership.

        As far as who's fault things are, Jews have spent 2000 years shitting where they sleep. They're practically made it an art to fuck with and fuck over their host population. This isn't something new or different. The middleman Chinese in east Asia are the same type of creatures and soon we'll see the same shit from the Mormons. I'm still not sure if such groups are purely parasitical, or if having such groups is necessary to civilization.

        • Yes, the Jews certainly were terrible for every place they lived in. I mean, with our perfidious influence, Spain and Portugal were able to reconquer their lands from the Muslims-they would have been much better off squatting in the mountains and periodically getting raped by Moorish raiders. We built the banking system (along with the North Italians,) and G-d knows that banknotes are a far inferior way of doing business than hauling your currency reserves around with you, and banking had nothing to do with Europe's success in the Middle Ages and Rennaisance. And the terrible things the Jews did to the US! If not for the Jews, the US would not have a nuclear arsenal, nuclear submarine fleet, cryptography...poor Americans, so exploited by the Semites who give nothing in return!

          The Overseas Chinese are just as bad-without them stealing everything, the genius Malaysian and Indonesian populations would be flying to Mars by now. That slant-eyed Jew Lee Kuan Yew-he is keeping the Malays of Singapore down, man!

          • The Malays have a cool agreement with the Chinese (they tax them so the Malays can live without working), but the Indonesians aren't very happy that the Chinese own all the wealth of the country.

            The Jews of course made themselves useful to the Kings they served, but they also had no qualms about backstabbing when it was convenient. Funny that you talk about Spain, it's a known story that the Jews enthusiastically helped the Muslims overthrow the Visigoths. And 100 years after their expulsion Spain had its Golden Age, where it conquered half the world and produced its best art and literature.

            I mean please, stick to your nation-building effort in Israel, which we are all very supportive of. Defending all Jews in history might win you points for heaven but you're making a fool of yourself. Why exactly would we care about the US having a nuclear arsenal? The majority opinion around here is probably that we'd be better off if Hitler had won the war.

            • > the Indonesians aren’t very happy that the Chinese own all the wealth of the country

              ...which wealth they created and continue to maintain. Well, a low-IQ majority being ungrateful to the high-IQ minority running their country is a dog-bites-man story.

              >it’s a known story that the Jews enthusiastically helped the Muslims overthrow the Visigoths.

              Are you a loyal servant of the Cathedral? Would you die on the barricades if a foreign force with values in line with the Reaction came conquering? In any case, the Visigoths and the rest of the Spanish aristocracy were well-known for periodically deciding to throw the Jews to the mob so as to cancel their debts, so it was a wash.

              >And 100 years after their expulsion Spain had its Golden Age, where it conquered half the world and produced its best art and literature.

              90 years after their expulsion, Spain was beaten soundly by England, a frost-covered island on the edge of the world. It was then beaten by the Dutch who, know. Conquering half the world yielded it the following effects: the exit of its best men to go squat in the wilderness and interbreed with the locals, a source of currency which functioned exactly like the American dollar printing press (massive inflation ensued) and its eventual thirdworldization. Meanwhile, Holland and later England, which accepted the Jews and treated them well, had a multi-century boom, building great empires not based on digging gold out of the ground, minting it, then buying stuff from productive nations as their metropolitan population gradually transformed into welfare recipients. Hmmm.

              >Why exactly would we care about the US having a nuclear arsenal?

              Well, it sort of gives the lie to the idea of the Jews as a parasitical population. If a minority gives your country what are effectively superpowers with which to destroy its competition, this is hardly a parasitical minority. If your elites are so stupid and corrupt as to squander those superpowers on NGOs and Detroit, well, that's hardly the fault of the Jews.

              >The majority opinion around here is probably that we’d be better off if Hitler had won the war.

              1) If grandma had a dick, she would have been grandpa. 2) If Hitler had won the war, you personally would be considered a miscegenating race traitor, with corresponding consequences for you and your progeny. Needless to say, the parteigenossen would be less than enthusiastic about the other misfits on here complaining about the existing order. And if you think the Cathedral is dysfunctional, the Nazi bureaucracy could give it a run for its money back then. Wehrmacht guys were having to hijack trains in the winter of '41-'42 to get supplies to the Eastern front-NSDAP cadres were commandeering them to bring loot back to Germany, while their army was starving and freezing in the snow. What it would have degenerated into over 70 years, one can only imagine. 3) But in fact, Hitler LOST the war. With the consequence that the Germans got massively raped and looted by the Soviets, firebombed and occupied by the Cathedral, and are now dying out with their country being settled by the Turks and company. Come to think of it, the other empires throughout history which mistreated their Jews also collapsed, with dire consequences for their titular nations. The Russians, the Spanish, the Romans, the Greeks, the Babylonians, the Assyrians (I've actually met their miserable remnants in Iraq-nothing you'd want to be a part of.) Now, had Hitler treated his Jews well, he'd actually have been able to hold his own. There is a lesson in that-a word to the wise is sufficient.

              • "Come to think of it, the other empires throughout history which mistreated their Jews also collapsed, with dire consequences for their titular nations. The Russians, the Spanish, the Romans, the Greeks, the Babylonians, the Assyrians (I’ve actually met their miserable remnants in Iraq-nothing you’d want to be a part of.)"

                Don't forget the Americans. Amazing how costly the decision to keep you guys out of a few country clubs turned out to be.

              • The Americans are still very much around. I anticipate that the Cathedral's final stupid mistake will be turning on the Jews.

                If you were better read, we might have had an interesting discussion about Judah Benjamin and Haim Solomon. But your username suggests you identify with a gang of pig-faced executioners who murdered their betters from behind-that makes me think you are probably pig-faced yourself, metaphorically speaking, and we'd have nothing much to discuss.

              • "If Hitler had won the war, you personally would be considered a miscegenating race traitor, with corresponding consequences for you and your progeny"

                Yeah, like, you know, being tapped on the fingers with a ruler by Himmler.

              • Well, it sort of gives the lie to the idea of the Jews as a parasitical population. If a minority gives your country what are effectively superpowers with which to destroy its competition, this is hardly a parasitical minority. If your elites are so stupid and corrupt as to squander those superpowers on NGOs and Detroit, well, that’s hardly the fault of the Jews. Come on, man. You can't have it both ways. It's facetious to take all the credit for the Manhattan Project and then lay all the blame for 'NGOs and Detroit' on the feet of those same silly anglos who were just inconsequential puppets a while ago.

                The 'parasitical population' meme is obviously incorrect, but so is your 'population of benevolent, superpower-granting chosen people'. Jews are a diaspora people with a diaspora mentality, and as such, your aspirations and methods for inter-generational prosperity are sometimes at odds with what we more sedentary folk have, even though there are some mutual benefits along the way.

                The lesson I took is to avoid having any Jews to mistreat in the first place. I wish you success with your nation-building.

              • Any dumbshit can be in an NGO or spout anthropology duckspeak. Thus, the Jews involved in these things in the West were interchangeable with their anglo colleagues, and ultimately irrelevant. Lytton Strachey, Frankfurt School, same difference.

                Not any dumbshit can build you a nuke from scratch or break PURPLE just by looking at the encoded transmissions and reverse-engineering the encoding machine. Thus, the Jews involved in the Manhattan Project and ULTRA/MAGIC were not interchangeable with their non-Jewish peers, as witnessed by the failure of Deutschefizik to build a Deutschenuke, and the failure of the Abwehr to break Allied high command ciphers or to realize that their own were broken. Yes, I know that the Poles broke the three-wheel Enigma first. It's irrelevant.

          • Nothing in return. Yes, I suppose that's why the Jews live in Antarctica. Get off your high horse, man!

          • B you a good brah. Stop being a pussy. Take a position, and stand by it. Own your thoughts. Own your commentary. Then let it be... and get some fuckin' sleep brah. No use letting a bunch of n00bs rape your psych. Fuck 'em.

            • Most of these whores are clowns. Haters gonna hate. Pick your battles. Man, this is so not like me to be Mr. Advice... but holy shit... DOH!

    • True enough. My observation is that most of the people who openly hate the Jews most assiduously tend to resemble them in all their worst aspects: double-dealing, bullying, refusal to place any open or final loyalty to country or creed, a nominal liberalism that generally covers for an ethnocentrism too narrow to even accept imperfect whites, an emphasis on leaving the maximum possible room open for verbal evasion in any conversation, an utter disinterest in doing disinterested good things for their own sake, true believers in petty legalisms as moral realities, and an at first adolescent, then finally psychopathic glee in knocking down and shitting on straw men and claiming victory.

      With such men do not even eat, for their fixed hatred is their object of worship, and they will stab you in the back as quickly as the Jew in an A. Wyatt Mann cartoon. If their hatred was motivated by the defense of good people, things, or concepts, they would have talked about those instead. But the mark of this particular type of Jew-hater is an extreme weakness for easy or harmless targets, preferably those that show up again every week for more entertainment.

  • I'm afraid the vast numbers of subversive Jews, from Marx to Freud to Sontag to Prinz to Chomsky, none of them were interchangeable with their anglo colleagues. Drop it man.

    KK nailed it. Best you can do is avoid any Jews, like his country or my adoptive one. Second best is call them Muslims and make them marry your daughters, Chinese style.

  • Ultimately the question you ask with the Jews is:

    If I was starting a non-Jewish country from scratch would I want a Jewish minority or not?

    The answer to this seems to be no. When I weigh the advantages and disadvantages of Jews as a whole I just don't see the scales balancing out on the pro side. Whites and Asians seem to have plenty enough high IQ people to get along without Ashkenazi brilliance. Its not like there is some shortage of perfect SAT scores waiting for Harvard admission. And we know those Jews that are in elite positions tend to be very parasitical elites.

    This is a different question then what to do with present Jews, nor that a society capable of harnessing Jews is impossible (only that its hard, not the society we live in today, and Jews themselves seem to make this difficult). If I had to guess pointing them like a laser and science and engineering while getting them to avoid finance, politics, philosophy, and journalism would be a good start. But then again we know how segregating Jews ended.

    The best idea yet was giving them their own country to go be Jews in and leave everyone alone, but the Israeli lobby seems to make this point to impossible as well. They won't even fight their own wars, they have to manipulate whites into doing it for them.

    While I suppose I wish Jews didn't exist, they do, and its rather unclear what is to practically be done with them. Final Solutions are obviously not my proposed remedy, and if we can't expel NAMs I don't see any luck with Jews. It would be nice if the bastards would just lay off and somehow change their actions somehow, but that's probably wishful thinking.

  • People are drawn to political theories because today's governments suck and they want to live under a state that doesn't suck. A theory that can actually "see what reality is" better than other theories would generate actionable advice on how to change reality. If your theories don't offer any better way to make better government, they aren't very useful, relevant, or appealing, and they probably aren't uncovering any new reality.

    Your rejection of advocacy is like a scientist rejecting formulating or testing hypothesis, it's fundamentally at odds with your claim to be focused on reality. It's like an engineer saying "I'm a brilliant engineer, but I don't want to ever actually build anything, I'm just here to muse about material properties and design ideas, but I'm really brilliant, and if anyone disagrees with my ideas it's because they are jealous of me and afraid my ideas will supplant theirs." The real auto engineers work at BMW - or invent new tech and sell it to BMW. They put their ideas to the test.

    Of course it is harder to put political ideas to the test, much much harder, but if that isn't your goal (which is what your anti-advocacy stands sounds like), you aren't actually working on politics. You've just found yet another way to waste time on the internet.

    Also, when I see the anti-semitism by your commenters, I feel embarrassed about defending dark enlightenment ideas against people who say it's nothing more than thinly disguised neo-nazi garbage. How can you link approvingly to Less Wrong and take anti-semitism seriously - isn't Eliezer Jewish? If you want to play in high-IQ circles, you should try a bit more Cochrane-Harpending and a bit less Stormfront.

    • No, it's like a scientist sticking to being a scientist, and not claiming to be an engineer when he hasn't a clue about engineering. And political systems being what they are, extremely few, if any, have a clue about how to engineer a political system.

      I'll be glad to go into advocacy once I think I actually have a clue about what would work and how to implement it. Many others in other related movements (say, the fellas at Counter Currents, or B over here) think that they know how to make a functional system and are busy at community building. Good for them, I just happen to think they are misguided.

      I am not doing Stormfront and my views on the Jewish Question are quite nuanced, you can look at this very thread, or here . The most extensive debate was at Foseti's not long ago:

      As I said here: for better or worse ethno-nationalists are a quite important part of the DE, some of them are pan-white nationalists, and part of each are quite visceral in their hatred of Jews. You can call that anti-semitism and make it an unmentionable taboo, but that doesn't help the question. As far as this blog is concerned I try to tone down unhelpful shows of hatred, but I will not forbid an educated discussion on the issue. Hey I think this very thread is pretty good. I even let B go on with his "Jews never did no wrong" chutzpah theory of history which probably is as radical as any Stormfront "All evil comes from Jews" idea.

      And why shouldn't I link to Less Wrong? The fact that I think that on net Jews have been a bad influence for Western Civilization doesn't mean that individual Jews can't be brilliant, or agree with my ideas, or even be a good influence for Western Civilization. And surely the fact that Yudkowsky is Jewish doesn't mean that all content at LW is tainted by evil Jewishness and I can't quote it. What kind of retarded perspective is that? If you really think that the Dark Enlightenment is as stupid as Stormfront you haven't been reading enough.

      Anyway, thanks for coming by.

    • People are drawn to political theories for many reasons -- usually thede-signaling, power, or careerism -- but the one that's most likely to draw people all the way out here is that the regime just can't stop peddling shams. If you get blatantly lied to constantly over a period of many years, and you hear hardly anyone contradicting the lies unless you go looking, you're going to go looking. Maybe because you want to make sure you're not insane, maybe because you have a Will to Truth, whatever, you're going to go looking.

      If building things had a strong chance of getting you fired with your name smeared all over the internet, the wise engineer wouldn't build things, so the analogy fails before I even get the chance to point out that "putting political ideas to the test" is the same thing as seeking power. If you're reacting to the regime being a pack of fucking liars, seeking power is not a goal; hell, you probably want as little to do with either end of power as you can manage. The point is to correct all the false ideas you inherited from your sham-packed environment, and possibly to understand how the hell a pack of liars, thinking lactose intolerance is a matter of just not liking milk, getting e-cigarettes banned because they're not ~cool~, calling for the mass imprisonment of their opponents because their opponents are all evil authoritarians who hate The Other, screaming about how the evil white racist Zimmerman killed an innocent little boy who never did anything wrong and if you disagree you must be in the Klan, screaming about the Japanese internment and the Trail of Tears while completely refusing to mention the Allied commission of the largest ethnic cleansing in European history, turning the name of a short-lived and relatively harmless (for that century) regime into a synonym of evil, deciding the second-greatest president in American history was the one who was in bed with Stalin -- how these vile, stupid little pissants, not fit to run a laundromat, ended up getting so much power, and how they manage to keep breaking shit with no opposition from anyone except an even dumber organization whose apparatchiks are so comically deluded that they seriously thought all the polls were wrong and they were going to win in 2012.

  • Northeast Asian countries have had much lesser Jewish influence than the west but throughout history had their own class of manipulators producing social problems. Does having Jews make much of a difference? or, will there be domestically produced groups which fill the niche of the Jews anyway? Are they really that extra-destructive, or being used as scapegoats to consolidation nationality and assuage their own guilt? Granted, being a victim of Jewish influence give one reasons to hate Jews. But I don't hate Marx because he gave the communism theory to Mao. I see the Chinese brought upon themselves the suffering, the "original sin" of being backward and stupid.

    The Jews produced Marx but also produced Einstein. Yes there may be another person to produce the work of Einstein, but so do for Marx.

      • No I hate neither. A scientist don’t use hate to deal with things. Mao’s psychology and the communists’ actions were distinctly Chinese. They are a reasonable product of China. It just be.

        • Well use another term you prefer. I also don't lose sleep over the Jews, I have better things to do. But my reading o history tells me long term its better not to have powerful minorities around.

          Mao was surely very Chinese, but the Cultural Revolution was also very innovative. Overturning the graves of Confucius was a bit over the top. You can't deny the Soviet input to communist China.

    • Given the conditions in China at the time I'm not surprised that some radical government capable of uniting the place and bringing order sprang up. Sucks that is was Mao, but what came before sucked too. Eventually they got their heads on straight and reformed, they will be fine in the long run.

      The one thing the Chinese, or the Japs, or the Koreans, or other Asians didn't do was adopt PC culture and import a bunch of NAMs. Long term that is going to be the difference between them and us. Jewish influence in these areas is appalling. Its bad enough they have to run our banking system as con artist looting scheme, that happens everywhere to some degree, but it seems they decided fucking up white culture, dividing us, introducing diversity, and having PC hate crime commissions would protect them. "Look at what the Germans did when they united! We've got to make sure white society is too crippled to do that again." Well they sure did a good job of it.

  • Fantastic post. I knew of Turchin, but this research you've unearthed is going to be really useful to me. Thanks a lot!

  • Are we sure Anissimov isn't a false flag entryist designed to make neo-reactionaries look like fags? He literally sounds and looks gay.

  • 3 pingbacks