Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Billy_TParticipantI like Stafford’s game. He has arm talent is in excess of Goff’s. But, game in, game out, his track record is meh. Yeah, you can blame a lot of that on his surroundings. But not all of it.
If I had to choose between either QB for right now, I’d take Stafford. But he’ll turn 33 next month, so I wouldn’t choose him over Goff to “build a team around.” Goff turns 27 in October. I’m taking him for the future.
But what I find truly appalling is how much the Rams gave up in this trade. To me, it really should have been a one to one swap, at most. In fact, the Lions should have given the Rams a draft pick. Instead, the Rams made a trade, in terms of value given away, for a perennial All-Pro, in the top five, league-wise, at least. That’s not Stafford.
Dumb, dumb, dumb trade. And the Rams basically mortgaged their future on this one.
Billy_TParticipantWell, after two days of mulling it over, I still think what I said on the 28th is brilliant. It’s in the stratosphere above all other sports commentary on the Rams. I mean it’s as if I were . . . um . . . well, divinely inspired, or something.
But I’ll add this, too. This all should have been handled “in house,” and we shouldn’t know about any of it, until after a trade or trades. It’s just not professional to blab this all over the place, though I’m not sure who said what to whom.
I’m also wondering, in connection with the threads about coaching losses, if the real issue is that McVay/Snead don’t seem to like hiring from within all that much. That can tend to kill morale too. Zooey might be onto something about staff not particularly liking to work for McVay/Snead, but I’m hoping it’s just the lack of insider hiring. That can be fixed.
Who knows? Has the hype gone to ‘ees ‘ed? As some British bloke likely never said. Or is this all just an upstart mountain within a much older mountain range?
Anyway, I think we’ll learn a hell of a lot more during the Combine and FA.
Hope all is well with youze guys.
Billy_TParticipantJust guessing: Goff has a confidence issue. You don’t motivate an insecure athlete by saying his status is insecure, especially in public. And if the idea is to get him to reduce his salary — so you can trade him — why would he do that? If he wants to stay with the Rams, why would he make it easier for the Rams to trade him — if that’s even possible? And, as others have mentioned, athletes don’t give back money, except in very rare scenarios. This is known, as Missandei would say.
Another guess: The Rams offense and Goff were at their best when they had the following:
1. A healthy Gurley to open up the passing game, cuz he scared the hell out of defenses. Rare athlete, with size and legit track speed.
2. A true vertical threat to open up the underneath passing game, especially for Woods and Kupp. Watkins and Cooks gave them that.
3. An O-line they could count on to protect GoffThe most generous way to look at the above, IMO, is that the Rams now lack two of three. Less than generous is that the O-line is too inconsistent to help Goff’s mental state.
To me, the Rams FO screwed up by paying Gurley and Goff too soon. It should be baked into the pie that football players get seriously hurt, and contracts need to reflect that. Running backs, especially. Running backs who come into the league with knee issues more than especially.
(I loved the Gurley pick, and rooted for him from Day One. He was the best running back in the league for at least two seasons, but it was never gonna last. The Rams FO should have taken its time and paid him when they needed to, not two years early. Same with Goff.)
Anyway . . . on balance, I’m good with the trajectory of this team, but I also think they’ve made some serious mistakes that were avoidable. Hope I’m wrong, but it looks like they may be at it again.
Billy_TParticipantAs I’ve gotten older — and hopefully wiser — I’ve changed my mind a bit about the relative importance of coaching. Used to weight it far behind player talent. Not so anymore. I still think you win with superior athletic talent, and that it’s the most important factor, but that coaching talent is close.
…==============
Andy Reid’s career is interesting. For so long he was “the good coach who couldnt win the big one.” Kinda like Shottenheimer or maybe Robinson for the Rams.
Enter Mahommes.
Now Reid is Mr Hall of fame coach.
I think it will interesting to see what Belichick
can do over the next few years, without Brady.w
vYeah, as the young kids used to say, That’s what I’m talking about.
I think a great coach can help a mediocre bunch of players “win.” But he can’t get them to the Super Bowl. In my view, pretty much never. In a game as physically and athletically demanding as NFL football, it’s just not gonna happen. At least in this era. Maybe 60 years ago, when training, diet (etc.) was hit and miss, but not now.
At the same time, a mediocre coach can degrade a superior group of athletes, screw with their heads, put them in the wrong position, fail to utilize their gifts, talents and so on. He can create a bad atmosphere so the players just don’t give a damn.
In short, I (basically) think the coach has a greater (potential) impact on the downside than the upside, relative to the import of the players themselves. But the flow goes back and forth, obviously. And, again, coaching really does matter a ton.
So I’ll take a good coach with a great team over a great coach with a good team eight days a week and twice on Sunday. When I was younger, though, I would have been fine with an even larger gap between players and coaches.
Brady? He just defies belief at this point. I don’t get it. I would have written him off before the season started. He proved me wrong (and right, in a way).
Billy_TParticipantEmory Hunt@FBallGameplan
What makes Eric Bienemy such a great coordinator, is his understanding of personnel. He thinks ‘players, not plays’ in critical situations. That’s a very tough thing for many coordinators to graspI would have thought every coach would know this.
As I’ve gotten older — and hopefully wiser — I’ve changed my mind a bit about the relative importance of coaching. Used to weight it far behind player talent. Not so anymore. I still think you win with superior athletic talent, and that it’s the most important factor, but that coaching talent is close.
But one aspect of that coaching talent has to be to recognize player talent and how to best utilize it — macro and micro-wise. Isn’t that fundamental and obvious?
What good is a play, a scheme, even a team philosophy, if the personnel is all wrong for it?
Syncronicity, harmony, meshing, blending, etc. etc.
January 24, 2021 at 4:44 pm in reply to: Trumpie behaviors (examples of that, plus comments on that) #127174Billy_TParticipantI know most everyone is sick of talking about, thinking about, having anything to do with Trump and his regime — perhaps politics in general. I feel the same way, and I look forward to a 2021 when I begin to detach from it all, hopefully for good.
But I also think it’s vital that before we “move on,” we take an honest look at the horrors he brought upon the world, and how close we came to the end of even our kinda sorta maybe democracy. We came within whiskers of Trump staying in office for as long as he cared to, via a violent coup, and/or torturing all the levers of power he could get away with . . . and that’s not hyperbole.
One of his key methods for accomplishing his goals of absolute power was, of course, the Lie. His final, documented tally came to over 30,000, and that’s just beyond surreal. No previous politician has come within light years of such a figure, and it literally killed people. His lies about Covid, for instance, were the biggest vector of misinformation about the disease, according to several recent studies, including this one from Cornell:
Trump has been the biggest source of Covid-19 misinformation, study finds
*ZN, if you want to move this to another thread, a farewell tour of Trumplandia, perhaps, please feel free.
January 24, 2021 at 8:45 am in reply to: Trumpie behaviors (examples of that, plus comments on that) #127158Billy_TParticipantUm, a drop box, in the middle of a pandemic, is sanity, rationality, and logic all wrapped up in a smart package, and easily supported by the Constitution.
Calling that “harvesting” is like calling the entire vote, for Trump or Biden, “harvesting.”
Of course, the real issue here is this: It was always about projection and confession by Trump and the GOP. It was always designed to create the false narrative that the Dems were trying to cheat, when, in reality, it was Trump and the Republicans engaging in the(ir usual) cheating, rigging, stealing.
Best defense is a good offense, etc. etc.
And as everyone here knows, the GOP has been doing this for generations. Set up a “voter fraud commission,” whenever they’re in power, try to cover for their own cheating, and put the Dems back on their heels. In no case has their own commission ever found any substantial fraud. The most recent, massive non-partisan study, which looked at all votes cast between 2000 and 2014, came up with something like 30 votes, total. Out of roughly a billion.
Goddess, I despise right-wing politics and parties!!
January 24, 2021 at 8:30 am in reply to: The Meaning of Mittens: or, would you date a centrist #127157Billy_TParticipantAs mentioned by Cal and WV on this thread, it’s obviously not enough. But it is a major, positive departure from Trump’s presidency.
I hope Biden and the Dems go Bigger, much further, and always keep the supreme urgency of the issues in mind.
We’ll see.
To borrow the oft-used phrase, I’m cautiously optimistic.
January 24, 2021 at 8:28 am in reply to: The Meaning of Mittens: or, would you date a centrist #127156Billy_TParticipantHow Biden’s executive order could reduce hunger today — and long after the pandemic is over
Excerpt:
Opinion by
Catherine Rampell
Columnist
Jan. 23, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. ESTStories of deep, pervasive hunger have been among the more disturbing undercurrents of the past year. Food lines stretch for miles. About 29 million U.S. adults — nearly 14 percent of the adult population — said last month that their household sometimes or often didn’t have enough to eat in the previous seven days, according to the Census Bureau’s most recent Household Pulse Survey. The shares are even higher among Blacks, Latinos and households with children.
Congress has temporarily increased food assistance over the past year in response to the coronavirus pandemic, but the benefits are still not sufficient. Even with Congress’s temporary increases, for example, the average food stamp recipient still receives only $2.30 per person, per meal, according to estimates from Dottie Rosenbaum, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (Before the pandemic, the average benefit was closer to just $1.40 per person, per meal; without changes to law or administration policy, it would be slated to return to this level once the public health emergency ends.)
On Friday, however, President Biden took some important steps toward relieving this hardship. As part of an executive order on economic relief, Biden set in motion three major changes to food assistance programs.
January 24, 2021 at 8:24 am in reply to: The Meaning of Mittens: or, would you date a centrist #127154Billy_TParticipantTrump went out of his way (for four/five years) to be absolutely sadistic to poor people, migrants, people of color in particular, and minorities and leftists in general. He was easily this earth’s biggest enemy, as far as American presidents go, historically. It’s not close.
Biden won’t be that. He’s already, in just a few days, cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline, reversed Trump executive orders that had slashed food support for the hungry, etc, and has stopped or reversed dozens of orders Trump had implemented to kill the environment. He’s also surrounded himself with people who actually care about the environment and the poor.
I’m very hopeful he’ll be just fine, relatively speaking. Oh, and he got us back into the WHO and the Paris Climate Treaty.
Track all of Biden’s executive orders and actions as president
All too many leftist pundits-with-audiences, IMO, will always be afraid to say anything good about the Dems, much less a centrist to conservadem like Biden. I’m no pundit, so I can give him kudos when he deserves them.
(The usual caveat: We’re pretty much limited by existing realities in our comparisons. Major party versus major party. Which sucks. Would that we had real choices, as far as designing agendas and necessary fixes, etc., . . . true problem-solving, logical, rational common goals, ideals, etc.)
Billy_TParticipantJoseph-Day has impressed me. I think they hit on that late pick. I know he hates his new nickname, but it kinda fits. Seabass has game. I like Brockers, too.
It shouldn’t be that tough to transition, really. But they’re still going to need to bring in some youngins, cuz Brockers will turn 31 in season, and Donald will be 30. Got some yute if they keep Williams, who fits the hogmolly mode, kinda. Don’t really know what they have in Gaines yet.
You can never have too much talent at D-line.
That’s what initially drew me to the Rams in the first place, back in the 1960s. The Fearsome Foursome. I want them to get that all back, updated for 2021!
Billy_TParticipantIf I have the LDE and RDE rolls reversed, I can blame it all on lack of coffee. And, well, age.
;>)
You do but it’s okay obviously! You do the defense from their own right to left. Quinn was the RDE, same spot as Wistrom. Long was the LDE, same spot as Carter.
I personally think they have several candidates for DT and LDE–Brockers, Ramsey, Joseph-Day, Gaines, Fox. If they kept Floyd I would put him at RDE.
Yeah, I thought about that after I posted. Quinn rushed from the RDE spot, primarily. And I also remembered, traditionally, at least, that the blindside protector is the Left Tackle. Pace, among the greatest evah. So, that means the RDE going against him should be the most athletic.
Mea cupla. Mea maxima culpa, as my aunt used to say.
Billy_TParticipantIf I have the LDE and RDE rolls reversed, I can blame it all on lack of coffee. And, well, age.
;>)
Billy_TParticipantI’ve always preferred the 4/3. And will be happy to go back to that, with caveats.
I thought that Phillips actually didn’t have the personnel for a 3/4. And the Rams didn’t until this past year, when they finally had a surfeit of true long and lean edge guys. They finally, IMO, had the right guys for a 3/4 to really work well, and now they may switch.
As ZN and others have mentioned, they really don’t have the guys, now, for a proper 4/3. But that can be remedied. Again, in my opinion, they need a hogmolly to play DT next to Donald, get Davis to put on a bit of good weight for LDE, and hopefully retain Floyd for that side’s rotation. Traditionally, anyway, you want your blindside rusher to be super athletic. Those two players fit the bill.
(Robert Quinn, in his best years, was absolutely perfect for LDE)
So, they just need to find a bigger, edge-setting RDE to go along with Davis and (hopefully) Floyd.
Not sure what happens to Hollins, Ekuban, and Rivers, who all had their moments. Rams probably can’t keep ’em. It’s a bad time to be in cap hell. Gotta hit on all of their picks!
Billy_TParticipantDid the Rams receive any compensation for losing Staley?
I’m not exactly clear about the new NFL policy.
I believe compensation is for minorities. A strategy to get more jobs for them.
Thanks.
Sounds like a good program. So if the Rams hire Morris, Atlanta likely receives comp, right?
Since it’s not a subtraction from teams, but an addition from a separate pool, there is no incentive to deny access to coaches . . . if I understand it correctly.
Again, I like it.
Billy_TParticipantDid the Rams receive any compensation for losing Staley?
I’m not exactly clear about the new NFL policy.
Billy_TParticipantDoes anyone doubt that if Obama and Dem enablers had done this, that if the shoe had been entirely on the other foot, they would have been arrested immediately? With the full support of the GOP as well?
I don’t.
And I honestly think Trump should have been arrested on January 6th, along with Giuliani, Gosar, Brooks and Cawthorne, and anyone else who was involved in whipping up the violent mob — whipping up the mob into violence.
To me, this isn’t at all about “free speech,” or “protected political speech,” and I don’t see it as a civil liberties issue, either. IMNSHO, when you incite violence, and this is all based on lies, you have to be held to account.
Fair trial, impartial jury, no kangaroo courts. But you get a taste of your own beloved “law and order,” at least.
January 19, 2021 at 4:18 pm in reply to: Why I think the Center is significantly better than the right. #127047Billy_TParticipantIt never ends for the right. This is a great example of what I’m talking about. Absolutely zero agenda to make lives better, so all they have is to whip up their base into a frenzy of fear and hate . . . and all too often on the tiniest sliver of nothingness as their supposed “proof.”
Fox News pushes conspiracy theory about ‘reeducation camps’ on the eve of Biden’s inauguration
Excerpt:
Fox News ran several segments on Monday and Tuesday pushing a conspiracy theory on “reeducation camps” for Trump supporters.
The ominous package on Tuesday relied on just two soundbites from liberal-leaning shows, including a Katie Couric appearance on HBO’s comedy program “Real Time with Bill Maher.”
“Is the plan of Couric and others to cram everyone into a digital reeducation camp, or are they gonna set up a concentration camp like that for the Uighur Muslims in communist China to make sure everyone gets reeducated and deprogrammed?” co-host Dagen McDowell asked.
Billy_TParticipantI’m guessing this won’t happen. But I wish they could just find someone in house, willing to keep the same defense as Staley’s. It’s gotta be tough for players to learn a brand new system, and it tends to lead to slow starts.
Ego likely comes into play, of course. I doubt many new DCs want to just keep the previous regime in place. They want to make their own mark, and I understand that. They have their own ideas, and given the chance, want to implement them.
But Staley’s D worked so well — with rare exceptions, like the GB game — I’d love to see it in 2021 too.
Find a really good coach, in house, one who can motivate, get the players to buy in to his leadership, but keep the 2020 D in place.
That’s my hope.
Billy_TParticipantDisappointing game, but after a bit of time away from it, I agree with the folks who say the Rams weren’t supposed to get this far. So there’s a lot to be happy about.
GB is really, really good. Rodgers is crazy good. They’re loaded on offense and their D is better than I thought.
The Rams needed to meet them with their own bye week. Without that, they really didn’t have a chance. Gotta win more games in the regular season and not kinda sorta squeeze into the playoffs.
So, where will they be next year? No first rounder and a tough cap situation. They’re going to have to get lucky in Free Agency and the Draft, and I hope they can retain some of their own D guys. I like their linebackers and edge players, and hope Staley stays for another year at least.
Tough loss in a tough year. May 2021 be a thousand times better.
Billy_TParticipantWhiteness is a shield. Although I think it’s fair to add this: If white people rebel against the system from the left, they risk losing all or part of that shield. White people who rebel from the right just don’t. They’re seen by all too many police/protectors of capitalism as somehow representing the “real” America. They’re seen as “patriots,” who own the flag, etc.
White leftists, OTOH, are seen as the Other, foreign in a sense, not real Americans.
Hitler went after communists and all leftists before he went after the Jews.
Trump’s overwhelmingly white rioters/supporters stormed the Bastille to keep Louis XVI in power.
-
This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by
Billy_T.
Billy_TParticipantSome quick and dirty observations:
Wonder how many of Trump’s supporters picked up on the fact that he was nowhere to be seen during the melee, after promising them, “I’ll be there with you!” He whipped them into a frenzy — for five years — and then, when it really counted, was safely in a secure location, cheering on the mayhem. Coward and liar to the end.
Imagine Mel Gibson’s William Wallace, whipping his fellow Scots into a war frenzy, but instead of charging into the brink with them, he flees from the battle as fast as his horse can carry him.
The above also makes me think of how exhausting it must be to be a right-winger. Right-wing politicians are relentless in keeping their “base” in a state of permanent fury, with the help of right-wing media, of course. No other part of the political spectrum requires so much effort/hatred/othering to be in with the tribe.
Billy_TParticipantGood post, Cal.
Yep. Dems suck at messaging. They have from roughly Carter on. Some of the younger Dems, like AOC, are much better at it, but their message is undermined by the Dem leadership itself.
THE key to messaging for political parties is standing together, without apology. The GOP does this, regardless of the odiousness of their policies or politicians. Which tells me it isn’t the content of the message, but its delivery, and a united stand behind that delivery.
Americans respond to confidence, certainty, unwavering support for this or that agenda. If the folks at the top don’t project that, voters tend not to buy in.
Hope all is well.
Billy_TParticipantGood responses on anarchism, Zooey and ZN.
The vast majority of anarchists are non-violent. Very few exceptions. David Graeber, who recently passed, was one. Chomsky considers himself one.
They never hurt a flee. Tolstoy was a Christian anarchist. Then there’s William Morris and Petr Kropotkin. Again, they never hurt anyone. Their thing was to advocate for society free from domination by anyone, anything, any group, etc. etc. Mutual aid, cooperative, egalitarian, democratic society. And they preached getting there through non-violent, democratic means.Ironically, it’s all too frequently the case that the “authorities” use deadly force against “anarchists,” on the basis of the perceived, automatic, dangerously biased belief that anarchism is synonymous with chaos and violence, etc. etc.
Anyway, thanks to WV, I read James C. Scott on the subject. His Two Cheers for Anarchism is very good.
Also have read Kropotkin on anarchism. Some of his ebooks are available to borrow from your local library, most likely, through the Hoopla app.
He also has a lot of stuff online, at the anarchist library:
Billy_TParticipantAnother thing (or two, or three) to consider about the change:
Trump repeatedly lobbed attacks at the so-called “radical left,” putting the lives of leftists in danger — and anyone thought to be a leftist. This was echoed endlessly by his supporters and flunkies. It was concerted, revved up to eleven, and his “base” bought into it. One of the oft-cited reasons for his voters’ support was their view that “socialism” had to be crushed. Ending “communism” was a battle cry for the mob at the Capitol.
Biden won’t be our friend, of course. But he won’t call openly for the destruction of the left. He won’t incite violence against us. And his DoJ, ICE, Homeland Security, etc. etc. . . . are unlikely to be headed by political appointees with anything approaching a white nationalist agenda. The latter is the norm under Trump.
In short, POCs and leftists won’t be official policy targets after January 20th. Will that end the overall targeting, etc.? Of course not. But at least it won’t have an official stamp /support to be proactively, overtly racist and anti-left.
In a world with so few things to feel (even slightly) hopeful about . . . I’ll take the above.
Billy_TParticipantThe WaPo has some new video that puts things in much better context.
Billy_TParticipantThe Rightwing-Fascists invaded
the Neoliberal-Imperialist house.The only change i see coming during the Biden years,
is there will be even more emphasis on ‘security’.w
vI think we can expect a significant change in environmental policy. Well worth the switch from the fascist Trump to the center-right Biden. I also see a truly significant change happening in the way we deal with Covid. Going from an admin that turned mask-wearing into a culture war, shut out the science, and spun out umpteen lunatic fringe fictions, to one committed to medical science? I think that’s going to save hundreds of thousands of lives. That’s not hyperbole, IMO.
Lotsa other areas of significant difference, in my view. Again, if we compare just the two parties, those differences matter. Compared with where we should be, what we should do, the standards we should adhere to? Biden and company will fall waaay short. But we didn’t have the choice of a Biden or a leftist. We had a choice of a Biden or a Hitler wannabe.
Personally, I’m gonna happily take the old-school centrist Dem eight days a week in that scenario.
Billy_TParticipantHey you guys ! I know what socialism is; I know my conservative friends are “nutz”; I know that calling Biden a socialist is simply “mane calling”. I get all that. My point is how can we ever come close to bridging these gaps as long as there is such a divergence of opinions
It’s not a “divergence of opinions.” They’re wrong. One side in this is not an “opinion,” it’s rational and fact-based truth.
Same with climate change deniers. I don’t want “middle ground” with deniers, they’re wrong.
Same with those who downplay covid. I don’t want to arrive at a middle ground with them. They’re wrong.
Same with those who claim Trump won the election and was robbed. I don’t want to meet them halfway. They’re wrong.
Those are all dangerous things to be wrong about.
…
Agreed, ZN. Which is why I think we’re at the point . . . well, we’ve been at that point for generations, actually . . . where is just makes no sense to even try to “understand” them, much less compromise. It comes down to maximizing our own time behind the wheel, if and when we get it. The political right wrote the book on that. It’s time the rest of the political spectrum figures out that there is no “meeting of the minds” at this point.
If our “side” gets a turn behind the wheel, it needs to max out on pushing our agenda through, without apology, without watering it down, or backing down. Make our best case, max out on policy, regs, legislation, etc. etc. . . and let the chips fall where they may.
Once one side of the aisle thinks the other side consists of satanist, baby-eating pedophiles, it’s absurd to even think of attempting any more “reaching across the aisle.” And it actually just plays into the hands of reactionaries to even bother.
Shut them out. Ignore them. Bash on, etc.
Billy_TParticipantW,
I think most of this is about filling deep, deep voids created by capitalism and its atomization of society. It’s about identity politics. People seek tribal allegiances when society creates such voids. When it can’t deliver on its promises . . . and most of this is likely on the subconscious level.
Used to be that religious ritual fulfilled that for the masses. But capitalism killed “God” and tried to replace him with “the free market.” That’s simply not sufficient for 99% of the populace. God is dead, capitalism killed him, and people need to find somewhere, someone, to fill that void, to replace that cosmic/social/personal loss.
Especially for the right, that means the reactionary (identitarian) trifecta: nationalism, fundamentalist religion, and ethnicity.
In short, as capitalism creates more and more despair, dislocation, inequality, and environmental destruction, people will struggle harder and harder to “belong” in some other way. That means a hell of a tough row to hoe for the foreseeable future.
Billy_TParticipantI’m following up Todd McGowan’s excellent Universality and Identity Politics with his Capitalism and Desire, and it might be even better. About a third to go. Just makes all sorts of brilliant observations about our current system, with a major focus on capitalism’s promises and endless inability to deliver them. At the same time, capitalism has this amazing ability to make the vast majority of folks believe it does, that it has, that it will continue to deliver, even though it can’t, won’t, doesn’t intend to.
Also, that it atomizes society, turns us all into monads of desire, denying our freedom(s) while gaslighting us into thinking it sets us free.
He brings in Freud and Lacan a ton, as well as Smith, Ricardo, Keynes, Marx, Von Mises, Rand, Hayek, among others. His criticism of our system is (justifiably) devastating . . . but he goes beyond Marx by bringing in psychoanalytical aspects as well. Fascinating.
Our system, basically, puts us in mental (and physical) chains, endlessly lies to us about what it can do for us, how supposedly free we are, while at the same time radically reducing our ability to fight back. It separates and segregates us, in our own little consumerist bubbles, which obviously makes collective action far, far more difficult. Makes me think about how deluded the entire political right is, in its vision of “liberty and freedom.” They espouse their idea of “individualism” because the system makes them believe this is the case.
-
This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts
