All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 26, 2007 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
42:24
946 Breaking Through Humiliation...

Why I focus so much on psychology as a prerequisite for political freedom.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, everybody. Hope you're doing well, Steph.
We're at the new gym, which is quieter.
So I must myself be shockingly quiet.
Let's see how this works out, see how this turns out.
But I wanted to talk a little bit about putting some of the general concepts together in this conversation.
Why it is that the psychological aspect of what it is that we're doing, why the psychological aspect of it is so important.
To getting us free of the state.
So, the way that I'd like to approach that is to answer the question, which is, yeah, yeah, okay, so I free myself from corrupt people in my personal life.
How on earth is that going to lead to the overthrow of the state?
And how on earth is that going to lead to the overthrow of the state?
Well, I think that the approach that we've taken for the last year and a half in this conversation, I guess almost two years if you can't, the articles, none of which were particularly psychological, but the approach that we've taken is...
To put the principles of voluntarism into practice in our own life.
And tracing the causal effect that that is going to have on the eventual overthrow or collapse of the state is something that has sort of been with me from day one.
We might as well get into that from an explanatory standpoint, so it makes a little bit more sense to you.
I think that it is safe to say, and a reasonable truism, that we cannot change what we don't acknowledge.
It's a mainstay of the psychological community.
It's a mainstay of what is meant by self-analysis, the purpose of self-analysis.
We cannot change what we don't acknowledge.
And the way that people look at The state, or the way that people experience the state, is as a benefit, right?
It's as a benefit.
And thus, they don't experience any negative emotional stimuli from statism.
I mean, they experience some grumpiness when it comes to paying their taxes, or they may feel just a certain amount of irritation or annoyance or exasperation with the politicians and so on.
But they don't, at a very fundamental level, people do not experience the state as a rank and base humiliation.
They don't experience the state as a rank and base humiliation.
And that really is a hard thing for people to understand.
It certainly was a hard thing for me to understand.
I always hated being ordered around, particularly by pious and self-righteous people.
I mean, the amazing thing is that if any particular individual...
Tried to pull what the state pulls.
They would be perceived as evil, irrational, horrible, abusive.
Fundamentally, they would be perceived as a vain, glorious joke, right?
So if I went around ordering my neighbors at gunpoint to put them in my school and said, I know better than you know how to spend your money, so give it to me at the point of a gun.
If I did... That, fundamentally, I would be viewed as a lunatic.
People would laugh at me.
And until the state becomes comedy, we're not going to get rid of it.
I mean, until the state will never be comedy because of the enormous destruction that it inflicts on society and humans.
But... When the proposal to the state becomes comedy, becomes ridiculous, becomes a laughing star, then the state will collapse, right?
When the moral justifications become, are revealed as so completely absurd.
So, for me, a really central challenge in working, I guess, as hard as I have to try and put my two cents worth of freedom or...
My two cents worth of advocation for freedom out into the world has been trying to figure out why don't people feel this humiliation?
Why don't they feel just how astoundingly contemptible it is to wave guns at people, tell them you know better than they are, tell them that you're more moral than they are because you wave guns at them, and be taken seriously, like expect to be taken seriously, but these people are taken very seriously indeed.
They're given all of the...
Positive moral accolades and obedience and allegiance that you could imagine.
And that fundamental capacity of people to not feel this kind of humiliation is the greatest...
I mean, to me, it's the greatest barrier to libertarianism.
I mean, if people actually felt...
If people viewed the state as a collection of people and not as a sort of fictitious, monstrous social entity...
If people viewed the state as an aggregation of individuals...
And they actually processed what was going on to them.
The state would be gone by tomorrow, right?
And the people who advocated it would be shamed into silence, right?
Or at least into, you know, they'd go into the underground of society, you know, like overt racists do in most places these days.
So, until people emotionally connect with the humiliation of being ordered around at gunpoint for most of their lives, then the state will continue.
So, a central question that I've always tried to work with is Why do people short-circuit when it comes to humiliation?
Why is it that people flock to defend actions which, if enacted by an individual, they would roundly condemn?
Why is it that people rush to defend and support and call moral actions which, if any other individual, other than somebody calling himself or herself the state, actions which, if any other individual did or suggested, they would laugh at as contemptibly ridiculous and evil?
That really is the most fundamental question to the political aspects of human freedom.
Why doesn't it bother people to be ordered around?
Right? Why doesn't it bother people when someone comes along and says, hand over your children or hand over the money to pay for your children's education.
I'm going to take your money at gunpoint.
Oh, and if you don't want to pay, I'll throw you in jail.
Why is it that people don't feel that humiliation?
Because until they do feel, I don't mean intellectually understand that humiliation, until they actually feel that humiliation, the state will be with us forever, and the state will continue to expand.
And that's why, you know, in these listener conversations, like the fine one with a listener that I did, I guess, very early this morning and then later on this morning, 9.31 and 9.32...
Why is it that people don't feel this?
And we can see in these listener conversations, what we're doing is mapping the things which we're trained not to feel.
The listener conversations that are on this channel, on this frequency, on this show, and frequency is the key, the listener conversations are...
Direct blows to the state.
I mean, I know that's hard to see, right?
It's hard to see. But the listener conversations are direct blows to the state.
Because the listener conversations are all about feeling the humiliation of the family.
Feeling the humiliation of the family, right?
Because, as I said, the state is an effect of the family, and what that means is that people are trained to have no self, no identity, with regards to their parents.
I mean, and their teachers and so on, but it comes back to the parents, the primary caregivers.
People are trained to have no emotional reality, no preferences.
No weight. They're not allowed to feel humiliation, right?
They're supposed to be little love robots there to serve their parents' needs, narcissistic needs, right?
Narcissism is humanity at the moment, unfortunately, in the same way that mysticism was humanity before the rise of science.
So, because people aren't allowed to feel any kind of rational emotional needs when it comes to their family, Because they're not allowed to feel, they're trained not to feel the humiliation of being controlled and bullied and ignored and exploited by their families, there is a huge blank spot in their minds, in their souls.
There's a huge blank spot, which is where they're processing Of humiliation.
Of anger.
Of self-definition.
Of boundaries. Of independence.
There is a huge blank spot.
And we see this very clearly in the listener conversations.
That's why I keep talking with people about the blank spots.
The spots which we...
Are not allowed to feel.
The stuff that we're trained not to feel.
Of course, I am talking about that with every individual, without a doubt.
But every single person who gets the null zone, the blank spots, every person who gets that in his gut or her gut...
Who is outraged and learns how to feel outrage, who learns how to feel humiliation, and who learns how to feel what it's like to be exploited, which we're all trained not to feel, so that we can be further exploited by others.
Everybody who actually, genuinely and completely gets around to feeling that has taken by far, by far, the greatest conceivable leap forward in bringing down the state that can be imagined or that can be achieved.
There is no way that people are going to be able to successfully take on a dominant propaganda without an extraordinary amount of emotional passion and certainty.
There is no way that people are going to be able to do it.
Because we're all raised to be social metaphysicians, to read our parents, to read our teachers, to read those in power, and attempt to provide to them what they want, to minimize the punishment they can inflict and to maximize the rewards they can bestow.
And basically we're trained to be leaves in the wind, calling it choice.
That's why people have such a problem with determinism.
So, when people break through that null zone, and they actually get to the place where they can experience humiliation and control, and the anger and the bitterness that results from being controlled and bullied,
When people can break through to that null zone and actually bring it to life, bring it into conscious awareness, and actually begin to feel it, well, basically what they're doing is they're waking up to the degree to which they were controlled and bullied and trained to not feel any negative repercussions from that.
I mean, you simply cannot cure an alcoholic if the alcoholic only feels the beneficial effects of the party and the fun and never feels the hangover.
Because then it would be like, well, cure me?
Cure me of what?
If the illusion, if the falsehood brings no pain, but only pleasure, then to say you need to be cured is ridiculous, right?
People wouldn't understand what you mean.
They say, I need to cure you of breathing.
They're like, no, I like to breathe.
When I breathe, it feels good.
When I don't breathe, it doesn't feel so good.
So saying you need to cure me of breathing doesn't make any sense.
And similarly...
If people don't experience the pain of being controlled and bullied and ordered around at the point of a gun at the hands of the state, if they don't feel that pain, if they don't feel that humiliation, then what are we selling?
You can't sell a cure to an illness that people don't feel.
And in fact, as I've talked about before, if you attempt to cure someone who's healthy and they feel worse, you will be accused of attacking them, and from their subjective experience, that is entirely the case.
So then, of course, the question would logically occur, which is, well, how do we know...
That they're not well, right?
How do we know that it is a sickness?
Maybe people do like to be controlled.
Maybe people do like to be told what to do at the point of a gun, which is a perfectly reasonable question, right?
We wouldn't want to be curing something that's actually healthy, right?
That would not be any good.
And that would be abusive, right?
That would be culty. So, how is it that we know that people are actually humiliated and are avoiding it?
Well, we know that because of the argument for morality.
So, if people genuinely did not experience humiliation at the hands of being controlled their whole lives by people with guns, then they would never need to evade that topic, right? I mean, I openly admit that I'm a complete slave to my wife's wishes.
When she says jump, I say how high.
It doesn't mean I don't have opinions.
My opinion is that she's right.
And she's wonderful, so I just throw myself completely on her judgment.
Because in the same way that I throw myself completely on the judgment of my instincts.
And I have no...
If somebody says to me, you are a total slave to your wife, I say yes, and happily so.
Somebody says to me, you're a total slave to reason.
Absolutely. And completely say, oh, you're a total slave to reality.
You know, guilty as charged, right?
I don't need to evade that. I don't need to minimize it.
I don't need to come up with a whole bunch of stories.
Because it is a fact.
I have no problem with it.
And I'm actually quite proud of it.
To find somebody worth submitting to is not the easiest thing in the world.
So... How is it that we know that people are in fact humiliated?
Well, all we have to do is look at the mythological webs they spin whenever the topic comes up.
If somebody's not humiliated, they have no problem talking about the realities of the situation.
But if somebody is humiliated, then they're going to attempt to turn their bullied humiliation Into some sort of chosen virtue, right?
I hope this isn't too redundant.
I think it's important to spend a few minutes on because it is quite complicated.
So when you say to somebody, well, the state is coercion, if they're fully aware of that and they don't feel any humiliation of being ordered around their whole life, then they should say, well, yeah, of course the state tells me what to do at the point of a gun.
But then, of course, they run into the problem of UPB, which is why only those people, then they immediately have to say, well, we choose them as leaders and If you don't like it, leave.
Obedience to force is exactly the same as obedience to virtue.
Force equals virtue.
And they run into all of that.
They immediately run into logical conundrums which can't be resolved, except through the elimination of the state as a valid moral theory, as a valid moral entity.
So, it's the avoidance that is the key to understanding how people really feel about this problem of being ordered around for their entire damn lives.
If they didn't have a problem, they wouldn't need to make up stories about how it's voluntary.
If they did not mind being ordered around at the point of a gun, they would not need to make up all this nonsense.
About how it's really voluntary and I choose it and I vote and this and that, right?
So, I think it's fairly safe to say that we're not making up an illness but rather recording and attempting to alleviate an illness that people are doing or spending an enormous amount of energy trying to convince themselves and others that it's not an illness,
right? But As long as people have this out of being able to redefine their subjugation as voluntary morality, then they will never consciously feel that humiliation, that humiliation of being controlled.
And thus, of course, because they can't feel the humiliation of being controlled, they end up inflicting it.
They end up inflicting it on their children and re-inflicting it on everyone else, right?
If you can't feel the humiliation of being controlled, you end up casting control as a virtue.
Whatever we define as a virtue, we inflict upon others.
So you inflict then that humiliation on other people.
And you control them arbitrarily and violently, in one form or another, either through verbal or physical or sexual abuse, or the threat of withdrawal, and so on.
And so we have to find a way to break through to people, to break through their obfuscated defenses, right?
And to actually help them to feel humiliation.
Now, you know and I know, at this point in the conversation, what an enormously volatile situation that is to be in with somebody.
Right? Because what you're doing is you're uncorking a volcano, right?
What you're doing is you are taking somebody from a state of compliant and numb conformity and, depending on their level of patriotism, of conformity which they perceive as virtuous and noble and heroic and wonderful and beautiful.
I support the troops and so on, right?
You're taking somebody from a state of happy, vacuous conformity to a state of perilous and soul-destroying humiliation.
Right? And we all know exactly what a volatile situation that is for people.
And this is like if you sort of want to understand the pattern of your conversations with people and why there's such an enormous degree of emotional volatility, which I talked about very early on when I was still publishable on Lou Rockwell.
I talked about very early on about the emotional volatility of using the argument for morality.
When You pierce through somebody's defenses.
The first defense, of course, is numbness, right?
The first defense is, I don't feel bad, so what's the problem, right?
That's the first defense. Now, the secondary defense, when that first defense is punctured, the secondary defense...
Is for the false self to crank on the emotion of humiliation, of anger, of upset, and so on, to crank it on so suddenly that the true source of it is obscured to the personality,
right? Like, for instance, if you're just sort of standing around, and suddenly, sort of seemingly out of nowhere, an incredibly loud noise comes crashing through the air, it's very hard for you to figure out the source, right?
Yes. Can't figure out where it's coming from because it's so loud.
It's disorienting, right?
It's confusing.
I can't figure it out. So, what happens is when that first defense is broached, the secondary defense is for the floodgates, literally the floodgates of Emotional upset to flood, right?
To open up and to flood the person with stress, anxiety.
I mean, you could see this occurring at a biochemical level.
Cortisol and all the stress hormones hit the person, right?
And so what happens then?
Because the stimulus is so sudden and so strong...
The person cannot perceive or conceive of it coming from themselves, right?
I mean, if you drop me into a bucket or into a swimming pool of boiling water, I don't imagine that my own heat...
Heating and cooling and sensory apparatus have suddenly gone haywire.
If I suddenly get hit with, I don't know, 200 volts of electric shocks, I don't imagine that it's internally generated.
So the more sudden the stimuli, the more people perceive it as coming from outside.
So, it's this secondary line of defense that we all pause at, right?
This is where, of course, a lot of people are getting stuck in the conversation, which I completely understand and, of course, massively sympathize with.
It's where I got stuck for a hell of a long time as well.
But it's this place where people are getting stuck because we all know what happens when you put that one step too far, right?
We all know what happens when you put that one step too far.
When you put that one step too far and you break through the primary defense of numbness, you sort of pop the champagne cork of rage and terror and Anger.
Rage, really. Stick with the rage.
Stay with our definitions. So...
What's happening is the secondary defense activates the entire neurological system, floods it with all of the buried pain and humiliation of having been ordered around, of having been controlled, and also the self-loathing of having recreated that for others rather than deal with it as an internal stimuli,
right? So that's what happens next is when you break through the crust of those outer numbing defenses that these massive floodgates of stress, anxiety, rage, humiliation, and so on all come pouring out of the other person and they themselves, to a large degree, are startled by this Occurrence, right?
They're startled by this massive uprising of anger and fear, humiliation.
And due to the suddenness of the stimuli, you know, with all due sympathy and so on, they genuinely, they genuinely cannot, for the life of them, figure out where it's coming from.
This is the moment that we all avoid and this is the moment that's so important to understand.
BAM! The floodgates of feeling open up and the entire history of the person and the abuse that they have suffered opens up.
And it's shocking to them.
And if you've ever experienced one of these genuine uprushes of feeling, it is enormously disorienting.
I've experienced it a couple of times.
And where you could pay me a million dollars to not cry, or to not whatever, and I would do nothing.
Like, it is a genuine eruption.
When that occurs, people feel that they've lost control, right?
And they feel the humiliation of having been controlled.
But the stimuli is so overwhelming that they can't identify the sources coming from within themselves, right?
Like you wouldn't look down at a bullet wound in your belly and say, gee, I guess my spleen just exploded.
You say, damn it, somebody shot me!
Right? So, that moment is so important to understand.
Because the connection that occurs for people in that moment is not, you have uncorked an already existing part of me.
You have got me in touch with the humiliation of which you speak.
What people say, due to the suddenness and unexpectedness of the stimuli, you are humiliating me.
You have attacked me.
And then what they do, and this is again part of the secondary line of the false self-defenses, what they do is they launch an attack at you.
But within their own minds, it's entirely...
It's entirely justified.
It's entirely justified in the way that you might throw a rock at a dog that is growling at you and looks like it's about to attack.
It's purely rational self-defense.
Here I was, chugging along, happy in my life, content in my circumstances, embedded and reasonably content in my social life.
And then you say things to me.
I fire off the warning shots of being uncomfortable and unhappy.
But dammit, you just had to keep going, didn't you?
And now you have inflicted, right?
This is their experience. You have inflicted enormous suffering on me.
You have activated some enormous pain centers through some bizarre, evil, anarchist voodoo.
You have created this in me.
And I don't...
I don't feel so good about that, right?
So they're going to attack you because they genuinely perceive it as a genuine perception that you are attacking them.
Because you've taken them from a state of calm certainty to a state of unbelievable pain and anger and humiliation.
And... When you look in society, you look around you, look at your own life, certainly prior to getting involved in this conversation.
Look at your own life.
I guarantee you that if you analyze the lives of everyone around you, and if you really are alive and aware and awake to this in human interaction, it will become very clear to you All too quickly that by far the vast majority of what people call interaction society relationships is a non-stop massive and interminable effort.
Almost always successful effort to avoid these basic truths, to avoid these landmines, to avoid stepping into one of these landmines that Family life is all about stepping around these landmines.
Political discourse is all about stepping around these landmines.
Of course, this is the case in very many romantic relationships as well, that it's all about stepping around these landmines to avoid the reality.
And, of course, I talked about this in the video about Socrates, the moral hitman.
It's the words that can never be spoken.
They're the words that everybody knows.
So, let's turn this same analysis, or focus, if you will, on ourselves.
That's an important thing to do as well.
So, When I say that people put an enormous amount of effort into avoiding the negative stimuli of the truth because for them it is only negative well of course the same thing applies to us as well so the question is Why would I want to confront people?
Why would I want to go past their secondary line of defense, right?
And this is all about the real-time relationship and all of this.
It's all about getting rid of the tyranny of institutions, whether parental, priest, or politician.
But the real-time relationship is all about getting past the first layer of defense.
You can get past the first layer of defense intellectually, with intellectual arguments.
With an argument for morality.
But you can't get past the secondary line of defense without the real-time relationship.
I'll get more into this in sort of the book.
The book that I'm working on.
The book that I plug on. I'm plugging on.
Slowly, oh so slowly. But why is it that we would want to go through the extraordinary discomfort of seeing people erupt in this manner?
Why is it that we'd want to do that?
Well, I would submit, or I would argue, that the reason we would want to do this is because it leads to overthrowing the state.
So, to get rid of slavery requires not intellectual arguments, which don't pierce anything but the first defense.
Getting rid of slavery as an institution requires It requires empathizing with the slave.
Right? That's why Uncle Tom's Cabin was such a powerful work.
I mean, what's it Lincoln said to Harriet Beecher Stowe?
Look at the little lady who started the big war.
Now, that's not really true. But at an emotional level, it very much was true.
That intellectual arguments about the equality of man could not do the job.
That what was required was empathy with the slave.
That's why I keep talking about empathy with the Iraqis and so on, right?
That we need to have empathy for those who are being murdered in our name if we really want to put an end to war.
So if people don't experience the horror of what the state does...
Then we can never get rid of the state.
If people don't empathize with the victims of the state, and this of course is all of us, we're all slaves.
It's a little bit different than slavery.
If you weren't a slave, it was more of a leap of imagination to empathize with a slave.
But we're all slaves in this way, right?
So people have to empathize with their own humiliation in order to gain the emotional energy, in order to gain access to the pride, to the basic pride of To free ourselves from the state.
The state is a false moral theory, and false moral theories are always maintained by psychological defenses.
I mean, false moral theories are so obvious, so obviously wrong, right?
I mean, UPB is a four-hour read, right?
And the argument that taxation is violence is like a 10 or 20 second argument.
Again, this is not like learning ancient Aramaic, right?
So, false moral theories are always protected by emotional defenses.
And you can see this, of course, when you argue the existence of God with people who are very religious.
That the intellectual arguments take a minute or two, and then after that, it's all just about managing emotional defenses.
Because Christians already know that God does not exist, right?
Christians already know that.
I'm not telling them anything they don't already know.
And it's fighting the knowledge within themselves that creates all the emotional tension.
Fighting the knowledge in themselves...
That creates all the emotional tension.
And that, of course, is what I'm saying occurs with the state as well, right?
With people's humiliation at the hands of the state.
And they're just fighting a knowledge that they already have within themselves.
And we have to get through the first level of defense and get to the second level of defense.
And There are sort of two reasons that we do that practically.
And the long-term goal, the long-term reason, of course, is to create the circumstances necessary for the elimination of the state.
The first reason that we want to do it is that if somebody does connect with that humiliation, they will become an anarchist.
They will. It will be unthinkable for them not to, right?
They will become an anarchist.
When it hits people emotionally, they can't maintain false ideologies, right?
And, I mean, there's endless proof about all of this, right?
So, you know, we've all heard the tales, the endless tales of those congressmen who are totally gung-ho about the war on drugs, right?
And then their son gets caught in possession of drugs, and suddenly they want rehab, right?
When things hit home, it's very hard for people.
It's always impossible for people to maintain false ideologies when they themselves have to pay for it, right?
That's why taxation is so essential for war, because if the people who want the war actually have to pay for the war in money and blood, then they're a whole lot less keen, right?
And we see this kind of thing with the scooter liberty, right?
He gets pardoned by George Bush.
Well, because to maintain the reality of this kind of ethic, it's not for the ruling class, right?
When it hits home for people, they can't maintain the false ideology.
As I say, false ideologies are defended.
By psychological defenses.
They are ringed and protected by psychological defenses.
They have to pierce through those, right? To get through to the reality of the humiliation.
When people feel that, then they will abandon the false ideology of the state.
But as long as they can't feel it, then it's a no-lose situation for them.
they get all the social approval, they get to feel like a moral person, they don't ruffle any feathers, and they themselves don't have to become the person who pierces through to the second line of defense, right?
So, from that standpoint, I think it's important that we understand and appreciate why it's so important to do this.
And, It will, as I say, lead to the dissolution of the state and people feel the humiliation, but when somebody breaks down emotionally, they discredit themselves, right?
It's my particular opinion that we should be largely merciless in terms of We're not causing a meltdown in a corrupt human being.
I think we should be perfectly never happy to do that.
It's never fun, but I guess it can be if the person's dislikable enough.
But I think that we need to really focus on being comfortable with that, or getting more comfortable with that.
Because it absolutely discredits your opponent.
If they can get you to blow up and be really...
Sorry, if you can get them to blow up and be really angry, and not through manipulation, but just through that relentless real-time relationship, the honesty, the returning to basic principles, and so on.
If you can get them to blow up, particularly in public, then that's really good, right?
I mean, that discredits them.
Because then people can clearly see that their supposed intellectualism is, in fact, an emotional defense.
And that discredits them.
Right? That discredits them.
And that, of course, has a lot to do with the Socratic approach.
Socratic method is nothing that I've invented.
I'm just sort of putting a few reasons around why it's so important.
So, I just wanted to talk for a few minutes, and thank you for your patience.
I know it's been a little bit repetitive, but this is a tough concept to get in.
Why is it that we're doing these emotional projects?
Obviously, it's our own happiness and all that, so that's all good.
But if you want to step beyond the immediate emotional impact of...
What it is that you're doing, like for your own life, the happiness that you have for your own life.
And now that you're up at this level of the podcast, I would say that you really should be trying to do more with the gifts that you've been given by this conversation and by nature herself.
Then the question is, how do we bring this out to the world?
Well, The more clear and more open that you are emotionally, the more you will open up the channels to other people.
You can get through to some true selves and you can discredit the rest through your relentless honesty.
And once we can discredit the false intellects, sorry the false moral defenses that people have, once we can Eliminate those as credible sources or valid sources of ethics, and we can only do that by exposing the emotional defenses that are at the root of them, then we are a huge way further, right?
Because clearly intellectual argument hasn't worked and doesn't work.
And that's, of course, because intellectual argument is a psychological defense for so many people.
Therefore, you can't overturn a psychological defense with a psychological defense, right?
All you can do is provoke.
So, if we relax into honesty and truth in our own selves, in our own lives, We can really help people connect with themselves.
For some people that's going to be a violent emotional reaction, and for other people that is going to be a sort of calming of themselves out of the stress intention of maintaining a false moral ideology for the psychopsychological defenses.
And then they can truly begin to experience the humiliation of the lives that we are forced to lead under this controlling fist of the state.
And that leads everybody that much step closer, not just intellectually, which doesn't work, but emotionally to yearn for freedom.
Thank you so much for listening. I will talk to you soon.
Look forward to your donations. It's been just a tad dry lately, so if you could see your way clear to throwing a few bucks to Steffo Rama for the Christmas season, I would really appreciate that.
▲
Export Selection