Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: REAL FREEDOM


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: REAL FREEDOM Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 11:21:49 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
No, no.

The US invented greed, and the only country in the history of the world that was ever ruled by it. And that's how the country started, and how it will forever be, don't you know.

It's a good thing that Canada isn't ruled by pecuniary interests at all, or anything, which they prove by destroying vast swaths of their ecosystem in digging out some barrels of crud from the tar sands, 4-5 barrels of water rendered undrinkable per one gallon of 'oil,' the government (their government) paying those destroyers of the environment handsomely for their effort.

One percenters only exist in the US, the rest of the world consisting of 85-90 percenters, I guess we should assume.

Those corps doing the digging are subsidiaries of US corporations (your 1%ers). As I have said before, I am totally against the Americanization of Canada (or any other country, for that matter).. Imo, a country should see what the US does and then do the opposite.. which is what Denmark has basically done.. and as I said before, that is why it will never happen here..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 11:23:59 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Mind you, the idea of Germans using laughing gas is a hoot........Have you seen how serious Angela Merkel gets.

Yeah... Every time I see her on the news she looks like she's chewing a wasp!!
She certainly needs something to lighten up.

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 2:33:20 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Fascinating OP. Thanks defiantbadgirl.

We in the West do like to think we are free. We even list our freedoms - free speech, a free media, freedom of religion, right to cast a ballot and express dissent and so on. But what do these freedoms mean to someone about to die an unnecessary death because they can't afford health care? Or a homeless person freezing on a cold winter's night as they huddle under a few cardboard cartons?

Or as ftp asked, are the lives of Bangla Deshi workers less important than our need to obtain cheap clothes?

Do we need to re-think what freedom is?


This is the crux of it really. But this thread seems to have dissipated. Not sure why because I think this construct of "freedom" is a fascinating one that has cultural context, but, at least to me, has a more fundamental meaning that balances the individual against the society. I think the moment you give more "freedom" to either the individual or society you have tipped the balance the wrong way. I think the meaningful discussion here is how to keep the scales balanced. What does "freedom" mean in that context (such that both the individual and the society can flourish)?

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 3:30:07 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline 		Balance is key.

Humans dont operate alone. It didnt take them long to fathom it was easier to work in groups, and to do that you have to have rules. Some seem to conflate rules with a lack of freedom. Others link freedom to selfishness and not enough rules, so we need to get the right balance.


(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 5:16:33 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline 		I really think this is the key. Finding a way to find the balance. Of course, this is where the rubber meets the road because not everyone believes that there should even be balance. I'm wondering about whether there is some way to identify what correlates with a belief in balance vs. a belief in maximum freedom to the individual vs. belief in maximum freedom to society. In other words, is it "empathy", "compassion" or some other trait that enables people to seek balance on the freedom scale. Is it "selfishness" that makes people want only to maximize individual freedom? And if these beliefs are associated with other personality traits that we have, will we ever get the selfish to believe in balance?

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 8:07:40 PM   
subfever


Posts: 2895
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Fascinating OP. Thanks defiantbadgirl.

We in the West do like to think we are free. We even list our freedoms - free speech, a free media, freedom of religion, right to cast a ballot and express dissent and so on. But what do these freedoms mean to someone about to die an unnecessary death because they can't afford health care? Or a homeless person freezing on a cold winter's night as they huddle under a few cardboard cartons?

Or as ftp asked, are the lives of Bangla Deshi workers less important than our need to obtain cheap clothes?

Do we need to re-think what freedom is?




Please explain how we could possibly be free, if we can't even legally grow a natural plant in our own back yards to produce effective medicine for ourselves.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 8:19:03 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I am with you... but then again I am an isolationists and always have been...but I would never want to turn our boys and girls into paid mercenaries. If we give up the protector roll Europe will just have to pick up the slack or not survive.

Butch


Laughable stuff. Europe will survive with or without American support.



I hope you don't mind but I said it just to get a rise out of you...sooo predictable... of course so am I.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/29/2013 9:53:17 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Fascinating OP. Thanks defiantbadgirl.

We in the West do like to think we are free. We even list our freedoms - free speech, a free media, freedom of religion, right to cast a ballot and express dissent and so on. But what do these freedoms mean to someone about to die an unnecessary death because they can't afford health care? Or a homeless person freezing on a cold winter's night as they huddle under a few cardboard cartons?

Or as ftp asked, are the lives of Bangla Deshi workers less important than our need to obtain cheap clothes?

Do we need to re-think what freedom is?


This is the crux of it really. But this thread seems to have dissipated. Not sure why because I think this construct of "freedom" is a fascinating one that has cultural context, but, at least to me, has a more fundamental meaning that balances the individual against the society. I think the moment you give more "freedom" to either the individual or society you have tipped the balance the wrong way. I think the meaningful discussion here is how to keep the scales balanced. What does "freedom" mean in that context (such that both the individual and the society can flourish)?


they can play idealistic lip service all day long at the end of the day you as an individual have literally no freedom. You do not have the freedom to "exercize" your religion only to pray to a diety. Think I am wrong? Fine show me one "STATE" constitution that gives you the right to do that. the state mob controls. sadly. Not the way its supposed to be but its the way it is.

You are told how long to cut your grass what you can drink what medications you are allowed to have or not and the fools in america call that freedom.

well then again it is, its freedom as applied to a feudal society.










oh and so freedom is joining a mob!

so they can tell you what you are free to do! LOL Hmmm has a familiar ring.


< Message edited by Real0ne -- 5/29/2013 10:44:25 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 12:21:21 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

I really think this is the key. Finding a way to find the balance. Of course, this is where the rubber meets the road because not everyone believes that there should even be balance. I'm wondering about whether there is some way to identify what correlates with a belief in balance vs. a belief in maximum freedom to the individual vs. belief in maximum freedom to society. In other words, is it "empathy", "compassion" or some other trait that enables people to seek balance on the freedom scale. Is it "selfishness" that makes people want only to maximize individual freedom? And if these beliefs are associated with other personality traits that we have, will we ever get the selfish to believe in balance?

Perhaps the first step towards the answers you are seeking is to accept that the answers will be inevitably culturally influenced.

For example, people in Asia tend to place a lot less emphasis on the notion of the Individual, and to accord much more respect and deference to hierarchies than Westerners do. When I was in Japan I was surprised to hear the Western pursuit of unlimited individuality described as 'selfishness'. The Japanese I was talking to felt that the individuals concerned had an obligation to contribute their best to society, and that their failure to do so, and putting their own needs and desires first was selfish.

All of which raises a rather tricky question: Are our concepts such as individuality and universal human rights really just another product of Western culture with limited application to non-Western cultures? Or do they embody truly universal values? Are there ways of organising the relationship(s) between a person and the society they live in other than codifying it into laws and legal obligations, duties and rights?

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 5/30/2013 12:34:37 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 4:24:19 AM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I hope you don't mind but I said it just to get a rise out of you...sooo predictable... of course so am I.

Butch


I am fine with your trolling Butch.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 7:14:40 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

But what do these freedoms mean to someone about to die an unnecessary death because they can't afford health care?


A lot, or it ain't a big loss.

It prolly won't be the foremost thing on their mind, though, which is another matter entirely.

quote:

Do we need to re-think what freedom is?


No, you need to be clear on the difference between freedom, liberty and power. A lack of the latter is what ails the one starving and freezing in a cardboard box. A lack of the former two is more comfortable, but no less of an ailment. Any half decent thinker can design a comfortable and safe society for you, using current resources and technology, if- and, most likely, only if- you're willing to pass up on freedom, but you wouldn't like it, I hope, nor would I.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

Not sure why because I think this construct of "freedom" is a fascinating one that has cultural context, but, at least to me, has a more fundamental meaning that balances the individual against the society.


That would be liberty, assuming I'm correctly understanding the meaning of that word as referring to the individual in a social context (and, in my view, it seems to straddle the line between being about freedom and being about power).

quote:

I think the moment you give more "freedom" to either the individual or society you have tipped the balance the wrong way.


Here, you seem to be conflating it with power. Society, in a nation state, is embodied in the nation, which has freedom bounded only by the strength of other nations and their will to intervene, arguably the closest you can come to "total" freedom. You can't "give" freedom to either society or individuals. You can, however, give them power.

And, yes, a balance of powers is fundamental to a working society, which is nothing new.

Voters, media, judicial, executive, etc., are seperated as part of effecting a balance.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 7:15:52 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

In other words, is it "empathy", "compassion" or some other trait that enables people to seek balance on the freedom scale. Is it "selfishness" that makes people want only to maximize individual freedom? And if these beliefs are associated with other personality traits that we have, will we ever get the selfish to believe in balance?


Your inquiry is a good one, but you're looking for a square peg to fit a round hole, a question of factoring.

Supposedly, I have excellent empathy and too much compassion. I'm contrite about possibly harming the wings of a wasp yesterday in the process of capturing it to take it out of the house, and I was sad to see it struggle to fly, though I find some hope in the fact that it appears to have succeeded in flying off in the end. I've been stung by the critters more than enough times, incidentally, so I'm not singling them out- I feel compassion for an earthworm being carted off by ants, too, and often let them climb onto my credit card so I can lift them to a safe place when they're about to crawl into traffic. It's a proven fact that I'm not nearly selfish enough, compared to the norm for egalitarian, altruistic Norway, and I have paid for this, indeed diminishing my capacity to help others before I struck a balance on this point.

And I seek to maximize individual freedom, not just for myself, but also for others; clearly, you're looking in the wrong place, if you'll accept the anecdote.

Here, the construct of power is appropriate, and it balances readily.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 7:19:07 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Are our concepts such as individuality and universal human rights really just another product of Western culture with limited application to non-Western cultures?


Yes. Has this ever been questioned by anyone fit to hold a pen?

quote:

Are there ways of organising the relationship(s) between a person and the society they live in other than codifying it into laws and legal obligations, duties and rights?


Yes. Many. Though, I doubt you can avoid culture carrying some codified defaults.

Depending on your definition of 'society', other ways of organizing those relationships has been the norm for most of the existence of our species.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 7:56:00 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
This is the crux of it really. But this thread seems to have dissipated. Not sure why because I think this construct of "freedom" is a fascinating one that has cultural context, but, at least to me, has a more fundamental meaning that balances the individual against the society. I think the moment you give more "freedom" to either the individual or society you have tipped the balance the wrong way. I think the meaningful discussion here is how to keep the scales balanced. What does "freedom" mean in that context (such that both the individual and the society can flourish)?


The cultural discussion would revolve around how "balance" is determined. Speaking only from a USA standpoint (because I don't know this about any other country), the discussion would also have to include what is allowed by the US Constitution. Any "balance point" that doesn't completely fall within the scope of the US Constitution would require an Amendment to the Constitution.

You'd also need to determine what "freedom" is at the personal level.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 8:34:48 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

I really think this is the key. Finding a way to find the balance. Of course, this is where the rubber meets the road because not everyone believes that there should even be balance. I'm wondering about whether there is some way to identify what correlates with a belief in balance vs. a belief in maximum freedom to the individual vs. belief in maximum freedom to society. In other words, is it "empathy", "compassion" or some other trait that enables people to seek balance on the freedom scale. Is it "selfishness" that makes people want only to maximize individual freedom? And if these beliefs are associated with other personality traits that we have, will we ever get the selfish to believe in balance?

Perhaps the first step towards the answers you are seeking is to accept that the answers will be inevitably culturally influenced.

For example, people in Asia tend to place a lot less emphasis on the notion of the Individual, and to accord much more respect and deference to hierarchies than Westerners do. When I was in Japan I was surprised to hear the Western pursuit of unlimited individuality described as 'selfishness'. The Japanese I was talking to felt that the individuals concerned had an obligation to contribute their best to society, and that their failure to do so, and putting their own needs and desires first was selfish.

All of which raises a rather tricky question: Are our concepts such as individuality and universal human rights really just another product of Western culture with limited application to non-Western cultures? Or do they embody truly universal values? Are there ways of organising the relationship(s) between a person and the society they live in other than codifying it into laws and legal obligations, duties and rights?


I agree that finding the balance is the key. I've heard the term "hyperindividualism" to describe individualism going to excess.

In America, we tend to believe that our freedom can only be taken away by governments, so the idea of limiting government makes sense from that point of view. Culturally, we seem to champion the mavericks and wild ducks more than yes men. The heroes in our culture are those who still do the right thing while thumbing their noses at the hierarchy (within certain boundaries, of course). Whether a lone gunfighter, rogue supercop, or a "dirty dozen" of misfits coming together for a righteous cause, they don't seem to have much respect or deference to any hierarchy - although some might see them as operating according to a higher set of principles.

I think selfishness and greed can exist in any society, although perhaps they have a greater sense of community obligation in other countries. Or perhaps they just have a greater sense of community in general, whereas in America, we don't really seem to have that anymore. It's really more of a dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself mentality that pervades our culture. Those who can't go it alone or need help from the community are perceived as weak, leading some to ask questions like "Why should my tax dollars go to support ________?"

The other dimension to this is that, given what we already know about our culture of individualism and selfishness, it is generally assumed that those individuals who work in government are also a part of that culture. Ideally, I'd like to think that people enter government service out of a sense of dedication and obligation to contribute to their society, but that hardly seems to be the case nowadays. Even setting aside whatever corruption exists in government, there's just a general sense of inertia caused by overpaid bureaucrats just marking time until they can start collecting their bloated government pensions. Experience has shown that whatever money gets put into healthcare, education, or any other useful purpose, much of the money gets siphoned off at the administrative level before it finally trickles down to where it's actually supposed to go. (Even private charities and religious organizations seem to have similar problems, so that seems a questionable option as well.)

I think that tends to reinforce the idea that it's really government itself that needs to be reined in. Whatever laws and legal obligations that are imposed on the common citizenry are meaningless until the government applies the same laws and principles to itself.

I don't know how they do it in Japan or Denmark. Maybe there's less corruption there and less of a sense of bureaucratic privilege and entitlement than we have over here. Maybe they're able to police their system better and weed out the bad apples before they stink up the whole barrel.

But overall, I don't get any sense that government employees have any sincere dedication or desire to serve the public interest. I don't think they're all on the take, but everything seems to be about them - their salaries, their benefits, their pensions - very little about what they're willing to do for the money they earn, and absolutely zero sense of community obligation.

We still have plenty of people with empathy and compassion, and a sincere desire to contribute to their communities. But I can see where there would be plenty of others who might feel it all a wasted effort, as they don't want to rock the boat and "you can't fight city hall," as the saying goes. Empathy can turn to apathy rather quickly under these conditions. Just get whatever you can for yourself and screw everybody else.

I don't know of any quick fix here. I'm not sure if it's a systemic issue either. That is, I don't think we can just copy the system of another country and expect it to have the same results here. I don't think we have any real sense of community anymore. The NIMBYs rule the roost.


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 9:54:38 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline 		Zonie63,

The question isn't more or less government.

The question is better or worse government.

Don't focus on shrinking it. Focus on improving it. Until you do, size doesn't matter.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 10:19:16 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline 		Interesting tid-bit on Sweden. Another model of efficiency.


Dan West, my right hand man at Sovereign Man, is actually Swedish and on the ground right now in the country. He recently sent me a note describing the situation:

“Hundreds of cars are burning. Schools were set on fire. Police stations were set on fire. Businesses were vandalized. Rioters clashed with police. Hundreds of masked rioters ran wild in the streets.

Seeing photos and video of this you’d think it was a war zone in some unstable part of the world, not Stockholm.

Allegedly it started last week because the police fatally shot a 69-year-old man who wielded a machete in public. Now people are angry and destroying things.

Swedish politicians say the root causes of these riots are inequality of the immigrant minorities.

Bear in mind, this is a place so obsessed with equality that the words “him” and “her” have been blended into “hem”… and taxpayers fork over 70% of their income to ensure that everyone can live to an equal level.

But to those of us living outside of this statist bubble, the real problem is obvious: however well-intentioned they may be, welfare states almost always attract people who want to be taken care of at the expense of others.

And ultimately this engenders serious conflict… between those who are on the receiving end, and those on the paying end.

Occasionally this conflict becomes violent. And that’s exactly what’s been playing out.

The government has all sorts of propaganda to influence the way Swedes view the welfare state and convince us that we should pay huge taxes to support others.

In other words, we should not be economically free so that others can live for free. This is the definition of a welfare state.

And in addition to such ‘thought controls’, the Swedish government also rules with capital controls, people controls, and media controls.

The government here tries to churn citizens out as if we’re widgets coming off a factory line, influencing everything from what we think to how we spend our time.

Yet despite such a finely-tuned system, the capital suburbs practically turned into a war zones over the past week.

The politicians here claim it can all be fixed with more redistribution of wealth. It’s not enough that the average working Swede pays ~70% in taxes; if only they could extract 80% or 90% in taxes, they could solve everything!

If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

People have the wrong idea of this place. It is not a well-functioning welfare state. Any system based on giving people something for nothing, and sticking hard-working, productive citizens with the bill, is doomed to fail. Sweden is no exception.

People in North America who are rapidly being dragged into a welfare state should pay very close attention… because this is the future that awaits.”

And via Bloomberg, some of the potentially incendiary reasons for the ongoing riots:


Ah, freedom!


_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 10:25:25 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Yeah, a blog quoted by a blogger who read the daily mail.

Asswipe of the highest calibur.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 11:00:39 AM   
tiemeupalso


Posts: 39
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		yachtie,thats why we have the 2nd amendment.when we get fed up with everything we will fight back.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: REAL FREEDOM - 5/30/2013 11:27:34 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		ca you remember the screams of horror over Occupy?? can you remember the pepper spray and all the righties crying foul like their shit dont stink...
and they didnt have guns....what would have happened if they had? would you have joined them for trying to take the "country back" from the corporations and wallstreeet and government?

LOL real freedom my left test tickle

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to tiemeupalso)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: REAL FREEDOM Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125