I have seen D'Souza speak live once and once on C-Span he is 100% convinced Western Culture as developed out of the Enlightenment is the best thing since sliced bread.
The idea that one culture can be "better" than another, much less being "the best thing since sliced bread" is just fascinating. I would have never thought of boiling down millions of cultural differences in everything from language/religion to math/science to a single measure of "good," "better," best." I am mesmerized by the possibility.
I hereby invite members to suggest formulas that can measure a culture's overall "betterness." Average longevity? Mean per-capita wealth? Communications technology? Medical intervention for individuals? Public health? Military technology? Certainly if the last-mentioned were the measure, then D'Souza would be correct—every nation uses Western military technology today.
I ask only two limitations: first, the yardstick has to be something that we can all use to numerically measure a culture. For example, a culture's Gini index is okay (Google the term, if it is unfamiliar to you) but its happiness is not okay, since we cannot numerically measure happiness. Second, the yardstick has to be objective. For example, an open vote among OneDropRule members, where Zsana gets ten votes and all other members share a single vote, would be easily measurable but not objective.
Incidentally, for the life of me I cannot figure out where to post this thread. It doesn't seem to fit any of our forums. If you want to move it elsewhere, feel free to ask a moderator to do so (or if you are a moderator, go ahead and move it).
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1842 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 13:46 Post subject:
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not?
Excellent question. I guess we would first have to agree on a definition.
My gut-feel reverts to 18th-century terminology: "The West" = "Christendom." On the other hand, who was it that said, "Europe ends at the Pyrenees"? Still, all-in-all, I think that I would go with "Christendom," which includes the dominant culture of the New World today.
Japan will be an exception, not matter what definition we come up with, since they have adopted a European Enlightement world-view (that nature is knowable by observation and experiment and religious dogma is irrelevant to learning how the universe works) but have retained Shinto and all its effects (including the plight of the Burakumin).
India might also be a problem (but a smaller one) because of the mismatch between behavior and rhetoric. I am reminded of the politician, praised by Dipesh Chakrabarty in Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference (Princeton: Princeton University, 2000), whose very popular political platform contained two planks: First, he promised to expand and stimulate India's technological infrastructure, with high-speed broadband in every state, wireless in every city, and more modern airports to compete in the world markets. Second, he promised to erase every trace of Western influence in Holy Mother India and return to the purer, less money-greedy society of the Hindu past.
I have seen D'Souza speak live once and once on C-Span he is 100% convinced Western Culture as developed out of the Enlightenment is the best thing since sliced bread.
The idea that one culture can be "better" than another, much less being "the best thing since sliced bread" is just fascinating. I would have never thought of boiling down millions of cultural differences in everything from language/religion to math/science to a single measure of "good," "better," best." I am mesmerized by the possibility.
I hereby invite members to suggest formulas that can measure a culture's overall "betterness." Average longevity? Mean per-capita wealth? Communications technology? Medical intervention for individuals? Public health? Military technology? Certainly if the last-mentioned were the measure, then D'Souza would be correct—every nation uses Western military technology today.
I ask only two limitations: first, the yardstick has to be something that we can all use to numerically measure a culture. For example, a culture's Gini index is okay (Google the term, if it is unfamiliar to you) but its happiness is not okay, since we cannot numerically measure happiness. Second, the yardstick has to be objective. For example, an open vote among OneDropRule members, where Zsana gets ten votes and all other members share a single vote, would be easily measurable but not objective.
Incidentally, for the life of me I cannot figure out where to post this thread. It doesn't seem to fit any of our forums. If you want to move it elsewhere, feel free to ask a moderator to do so (or if you are a moderator, go ahead and move it).
In the abstract all cultures are equal, in reality I do not believe all cultures produce equal products.
Every culture is not capable or even interested in producing the type of living standard and political system that we have here in the United States.
If Arabs from the Middle East suddenlybecame the majority and could vote America as we know it would not exist...same as if Chinese nationals became the majority.
As far as Western culture, I would say, and I would agree with D'Souza that the West is defined by adherence to Enlightenment values, secularism, and some variation of capitalism. The heart of this began in present day Germany, Italy, France, and the UK.
From there it spread.
I do not believe South America to be "Western" because South America came from pre-Enlightenment Spain and Portugal.
In fact one can argue that Spain and Portugal were brought into "Western thinking" along with modern Greece quite recently. We know the Englightenment did not start in these nations nor did they adhere to most of the values until very recently in history.
South America had constant contact with Europe, but the initial culture was laid down at the end of the Dark Ages. The intense class heirachy you see, the religiousity, these things are not characteristic of most "Western nations" not in the Anglosphere or in Europe.
I would also argue that Enlightenment values and secularism are far more important than Christianity. Eastern Europe is very Christian (but for the Balkans) but they are not considered "The West" and never have been. Russia is not a Western country. One could argue as the EU spreads they serve to Westernize more nations.
I could also argue that Poles and Baltic nations were Western from centuries back (thanks to intensive German and Scandanavian contacts). Russia, a good portion of Ukraine, Belarus, Romania, Serbia, Albania are not Western.
Japan, no way. They have a Western style government (mix of British/American/German) however their fundamental ideologies under all of that are still Confucianist, Shinto/Zen (Chan) Buddhist. They are not Western although they have a lot of window dressing and have accepted some ideologies in a limited way.
Joined: 02 Feb 2007 {Posts: 255 } Location: California
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 17:29 Post subject:
DChapman wrote:
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
To complicate matters further, what do we mean by "Culture"? Do we mean civilization? Ethnicities? Is it merely descriptive or is it proscriptive?
The purpose of culture is not necessarily to produce 'higher' standards of living. If we start from that premise then we hopelessly biased any attempt at cross cultural comparison.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1876 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 18:12 Post subject:
High School Teacher wrote:
DChapman wrote:
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
To complicate matters further, what do we mean by "Culture"? Do we mean civilization? Ethnicities? Is it merely descriptive or is it proscriptive?
The purpose of culture is not necessarily to produce 'higher' standards of living. If we start from that premise then we hopelessly biased any attempt at cross cultural comparison.
The point of culture is not to produce higher standards of living per se, but it is obvious that some cultures do and others do not.
This means they are not equal in every way.
I would also not say the West is not a culture, it is a civilization made up of various related cultures
Better for whom and depending on what desired outcome? If men want to be able to decide whether their wives and children live or die on a whim, the modern West isn't the "best" civilization for them but the Middle East or parts of Africa are looking pretty good. Ancient Rome would have been a great place too.
I would say that comparing infant mortality rates is a pretty objective measure since a culture or civilization benefits from successful regeneration. Well, if they can feed all those extra babies.
Joined: 02 Feb 2007 {Posts: 255 } Location: California
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 18:50 Post subject:
Dragon Horse wrote:
High School Teacher wrote:
DChapman wrote:
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
To complicate matters further, what do we mean by "Culture"? Do we mean civilization? Ethnicities? Is it merely descriptive or is it proscriptive?
The purpose of culture is not necessarily to produce 'higher' standards of living. If we start from that premise then we hopelessly biased any attempt at cross cultural comparison.
The point of culture is not to produce higher standards of living per se, but it is obvious that some cultures do and others do not.
This means they are not equal in every way.
I would also not say the West is not a culture, it is a civilization made up of various related cultures
I don't believe its culture qua culture that is producing higher standards of living. That is largely an elite directed process that has very little to do with "culture", except maybe a subculture of elites.
Areas of the world with higher concentrations of poverty are no more inferior to places with higher levels of affluence than blackamericans are inferior to white americans. Is there inequality?--yes. Is there inferiority?--no.
Joined: 02 Feb 2007 {Posts: 255 } Location: California
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 18:55 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
Better for whom and depending on what desired outcome? If men want to be able to decide whether their wives and children live or die on a whim, the modern West isn't the "best" civilization for them but the Middle East or parts of Africa are looking pretty good. Ancient Rome would have been a great place too.
I would say that comparing infant mortality rates is a pretty objective measure since a culture or civilization benefits from successful regeneration. Well, if they can feed all those extra babies.
I agree. Infant mortality rates are objective and relatively 'unloaded'.
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
To complicate matters further, what do we mean by "Culture"? Do we mean civilization? Ethnicities? Is it merely descriptive or is it proscriptive?
The purpose of culture is not necessarily to produce 'higher' standards of living. If we start from that premise then we hopelessly biased any attempt at cross cultural comparison.
The point of culture is not to produce higher standards of living per se, but it is obvious that some cultures do and others do not.
This means they are not equal in every way.
I would also not say the West is not a culture, it is a civilization made up of various related cultures
I don't believe its culture qua culture that is producing higher standards of living. That is largely an elite directed process that has very little to do with "culture", except maybe a subculture of elites.
Areas of the world with higher concentrations of poverty are no more inferior to places with higher levels of affluence than blackamericans are inferior to white americans. Is there inequality?--yes. Is there inferiority?--no.
This makes sense to me. DH may be getting at an underlying "betterness" about societies that have less extreme and prevalent poverty (perhaps their overall safety or infrastructures) than outright standards of living for elites. I'll tell you right now that there are people living higher on the hog in Haiti than there are in the U.S., and for much less money too.
I'll tell you right now that there are people living higher on the hog in Haiti than there are in the U.S., and for much less money too.
Well, as I implied earlier, the Gini index measures wealth maldistribution, so if we are coming up with a formula involving wealth, I think that how evenly wealth is distributed should go into the equation.
Another thing important from my viewpoint is the Enlightenment zeitgeist. It is easy to forget the long hard and bloody struggle that the West had in coming to the realization that wealth, health, freedom, independence, etc. ultimately depend upon technology. Technology depends upon science. And science depends upon the fundamental belief that nature is knowable and reveals her secrets to those who experiment and observe. This is in stark contrast to the prior belief (still prevalent in many non-Western cultures) that religious authorities are the source of all knowledge, and that to seek knowledge on your own merits burning at the stake. (Remember Giordano Bruno.)
Finally, recalling something that Caribj and I were talking about, I suspect that most of us have internalized the turn-of-the-19th-century idea that your lot in life should depend upon your own desires and abilities, and that a society that forces you to live your life based solely upon the accident of your birth is less desirable. Again, it is terribly easy to forget how recent this notion is, how much blood it cost to achieve, and the fact that even today many people around the world sincerely believe that such personal freedom is wicked because it is betrayal and treason to your predetermined place in the cosmos. I suggest that this should also go into the equation.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1876 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 20:50 Post subject:
High School Teacher wrote:
Dragon Horse wrote:
High School Teacher wrote:
DChapman wrote:
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
To complicate matters further, what do we mean by "Culture"? Do we mean civilization? Ethnicities? Is it merely descriptive or is it proscriptive?
The purpose of culture is not necessarily to produce 'higher' standards of living. If we start from that premise then we hopelessly biased any attempt at cross cultural comparison.
The point of culture is not to produce higher standards of living per se, but it is obvious that some cultures do and others do not.
This means they are not equal in every way.
I would also not say the West is not a culture, it is a civilization made up of various related cultures
I don't believe its culture qua culture that is producing higher standards of living. That is largely an elite directed process that has very little to do with "culture", except maybe a subculture of elites.
Areas of the world with higher concentrations of poverty are no more inferior to places with higher levels of affluence than blackamericans are inferior to white americans. Is there inequality?--yes. Is there inferiority?--no.
This is not an issue of superiority or inferiority. All cultures do not value the same thing so they will not always have similar outcomes.
If I took 500 rural Chinese and 500 San Bushmen and dropped them off in NYC...and come back in 10 years who do you think (on average) will have a higher standard of living, educational achievement, etc?
Remember the Chinese invented the standardized test, and Confucianus culture dictates that education is key to upward mobility in society. This has been the thougth in China for over 2,000 years.
This is why that wherever you see Chinese immigrants in large numbers, they are typically more industrious and better educated than average people in that country.
This is cultural, everyone does not have these cultural beliefs of traditions.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1876 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 21:05 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
Better for whom and depending on what desired outcome? If men want to be able to decide whether their wives and children live or die on a whim, the modern West isn't the "best" civilization for them but the Middle East or parts of Africa are looking pretty good. Ancient Rome would have been a great place too.
I would say that comparing infant mortality rates is a pretty objective measure since a culture or civilization benefits from successful regeneration. Well, if they can feed all those extra babies.
Also fertility rates in general, if you don't reproduce at all, well...that is a dead end and short lived society.
Joined: 02 Feb 2007 {Posts: 255 } Location: California
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 22:36 Post subject:
Dragon Horse wrote:
High School Teacher wrote:
Dragon Horse wrote:
High School Teacher wrote:
DChapman wrote:
First, how do we specifically define Western Culture??? Which nations are included, and which nations are not??
I remember Omar stating that Latin America is Western Culture, and I agree with him. Some do not regard Latin America as being a part of the West. They maybe a different branch of the West, but if Spain and Portugal are regarded as Westrern (they are), then I would say Latin America is as well.
How about Japan, some regard Japan as being a part of the West, but in a different light.
I don't know if Western Culture is better than any other, but it is sure the most desirable I think.
To complicate matters further, what do we mean by "Culture"? Do we mean civilization? Ethnicities? Is it merely descriptive or is it proscriptive?
The purpose of culture is not necessarily to produce 'higher' standards of living. If we start from that premise then we hopelessly biased any attempt at cross cultural comparison.
The point of culture is not to produce higher standards of living per se, but it is obvious that some cultures do and others do not.
This means they are not equal in every way.
I would also not say the West is not a culture, it is a civilization made up of various related cultures
I don't believe its culture qua culture that is producing higher standards of living. That is largely an elite directed process that has very little to do with "culture", except maybe a subculture of elites.
Areas of the world with higher concentrations of poverty are no more inferior to places with higher levels of affluence than blackamericans are inferior to white americans. Is there inequality?--yes. Is there inferiority?--no.
This is not an issue of superiority or inferiority. All cultures do not value the same thing so they will not always have similar outcomes.
If I took 500 rural Chinese and 500 San Bushmen and dropped them off in NYC...and come back in 10 years who do you think (on average) will have a higher standard of living, educational achievement, etc?
Remember the Chinese invented the standardized test, and Confucianus culture dictates that education is key to upward mobility in society. This has been the thougth in China for over 2,000 years.
This is why that wherever you see Chinese immigrants in large numbers, they are typically more industrious and better educated than average people in that country.
This is cultural, everyone does not have these cultural beliefs of traditions.
So they will not have the same outcome.
The issue is whether or not culture A is better than culture B, as Fsweet framed it. So yes, I would say the issue is one of superiority or inferiority.
It is not necessary to discuss or debate something that is prima facie—cultures do not value the same thing in the same ways or have the same outcomes by definition!
Also, Presidents Mbkei and Mandela are both from Khoisan stock. Why would you assume in 2007 that the standard of living for 500 rural Chinese would be higher in New York than 500 urban Khoisans? That very well may turn out to be the case. But it will probably have more to do with a support network that took decades, if not centuries, to build rather than innate cultural traits unique to the Chinese.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1876 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2007 23:24 Post subject:
Mbkei and Mandela grew up in a form of Western culture.
That is a biased sample, I can find 2 or 3 of any people in the world who are educated, westernized, blah blah blah even if 95% of the rest of the people who share their culture live just above the stone age.
I want to know what the average person of their ethnicity (who lives a traditional life thinks and believes)...and more importantly what they do and what the community response is.
Quote:
That very well may turn out to be the case. But it will probably have more to do with a support network that took decades, if not centuries, to build rather than innate cultural traits unique to the Chinese.
I would argue that this support network is due to culture as well since all cultures do not build them or even seek to.
Chinese are historically quite groupist, ethnocentric, and nationalistic. That is a part of their culture that goes back centuries.
All cultures do not value such things, or even greatly value formal education.
It really doesn't matter if it is NYC or what ever major country in the world, there is no significant Chinese community anywhere outside of China where the people are poorer, lesser educated, and more criminalistic on average than the native population.
If you can find one let me know, if I have not heard of it it must be very very hard to come by.
That is a direct result of Chinese culture.
All cultures are not like that.
A really good example of this is Lebanese Muslim immigrants as compared to Lebanese Christians.
I follow radical Islam quite a bit, and the Christians Arabs from Lebanon are quite high achievers and usually integrate well into Western or South American nations (Shakira, the wealiest man in Mexico is also Lebanese, a Gov of one of the Aussie provinces, the list goes on).
Lebanese Muslims do not. They often remain poor, form gangs, etc. (Australia has a big problem with them).
They are both Arab, look indistiguishable, from the same nation.
Joined: 02 Feb 2007 {Posts: 255 } Location: California
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2007 02:11 Post subject:
Quote:
Mbkei and Mandela grew up in a form of Western culture.
That is a biased sample, I can find 2 or 3 of any people in the world who are educated, westernized, blah blah blah even if 95% of the rest of the people who share their culture live just above the stone age.
I want to know what the average person of their ethnicity (who lives a traditional life thinks and believes)...and more importantly what they do and what the community response is.--Dragon
Yes, the whole scenario was biased from the start. You could easily ponder dropping 500 rural Chinese and 500 traditional Khoisans in the middle of the Australian desert and then ask how many of each group would be alive one year later.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2007 03:50 Post subject: Western Culture
Well, I believe the key point is this:
Western Civilization is confussed by some with:
Anglosaxon Culture (inside Western Civilization), particularly W.A.S.P. cultural patterns,
Germanic Culture inside Western Civilization (the idea that westerners are blond),
Industrial nations,
Culture of the Indoeuropean peoples (that's almost exact; except that India is not considered Western, and excluded Jewish and Arab influences)
Capitalist regimes during the Cold War (that was only temporary alliances)
etc.
However, if we have to be rigurous, Western Civilization is part of a groups of Civilizations that have its origin in the FERTILE CRESCENT, between India, Mesopotamia, Turkey, Levante and Egypt (contries that are considered Easterners now). The cultures that spread West of that Crescent is what we know as Western Civilization. In that sense, Crete was the first Western culture that existed.
Now, the close relative of East Orthodox countries can be considered a branch INSIDE Western civilization. Outside it, believe it or not, the Muslim Civilization and the Jewish Culture have lot in common with the West. Going inside Asia, India also presents certain similar pattern with the Western Civilization.
The rest of the Western Civilizations are theirs former colonies that were populated by Westerners. Of those, we can easily point to North America, Australia, New Zealand and to Latin America (whether we like it or not).
Non-Western civilizations are the Islamic countries and India (with lots of points in common), Subsaharan Africa, East Asia and the cultures of the nomadic and tribal people that still survive.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1876 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2007 10:30 Post subject: Re: Western Culture
oevega wrote:
Well, I believe the key point is this:
Western Civilization is confussed by some with:
Anglosaxon Culture (inside Western Civilization), particularly W.A.S.P. cultural patterns,
Germanic Culture inside Western Civilization (the idea that westerners are blond),
Industrial nations,
Culture of the Indoeuropean peoples (that's almost exact; except that India is not considered Western, and excluded Jewish and Arab influences)
Capitalist regimes during the Cold War (that was only temporary alliances)
etc.
However, if we have to be rigurous, Western Civilization is part of a groups of Civilizations that have its origin in the FERTILE CRESCENT, between India, Mesopotamia, Turkey, Levante and Egypt (contries that are considered Easterners now). The cultures that spread West of that Crescent is what we know as Western Civilization. In that sense, Crete was the first Western culture that existed.
Now, the close relative of East Orthodox countries can be considered a branch INSIDE Western civilization. Outside it, believe it or not, the Muslim Civilization and the Jewish Culture have lot in common with the West. Going inside Asia, India also presents certain similar pattern with the Western Civilization.
The rest of the Western Civilizations are theirs former colonies that were populated by Westerners. Of those, we can easily point to North America, Australia, New Zealand and to Latin America (whether we like it or not).
Non-Western civilizations are the Islamic countries and India (with lots of points in common), Subsaharan Africa, East Asia and the cultures of the nomadic and tribal people that still survive.
Omar
No one defines Western Civilization as currently including the Middle East or Eastern Europe.
Just because one can argue that it once existed or originated there does not mean it still does.
This is not about WASPS.
The Enlightenment was not just in Germanic countries, it started in Italy and quickly spread to France.
This is like saying India is a Buddhist country because Buddhism originated there or Israel is a Christian country because Christianity originated there.
Since we haven't defined "western country" yet, it makes it difficult, but scanning the list, I see the world average as 50.11 infant deaths/1,000 live births. Not one western hemisphere or western European country is above that average that I can see. Of note, South Africa and India (both fairly well respected) are above the world average.
The first western hemisphere country I see is Guatemala at 32. I'm not familiar with a lot of these countries, but the first one I think of as a "western" country is the US at 6.5 (Israel is 7.03, but you could argue round and round about where it fits in). The first western European country is Italy, at 5.94, but the best? Singapore, of all places, at 2.1. One-third the rate of the US.
Infant mortality is suggestive of the superiority of western culture, but not conclusive. Most of the below-average countries are very poor, and poverty might be more of a factor than any cultural things.
How about rate of suicides, and depression. Is a person that lives to 80 with bouts of depression better off than a person that lived heartily and content to 35?
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
