December 9, 2010


Crisis: On Corporatism


I continue being not well, and otherwise also as before, so I cannot do much, and today I will only give a translation of the second entry in

in continuance of the few things I said yesterday about the ongoing social and political crisis in the West. The Dutch original is from September 2, 2009. It contains a few bits about Dutch politics that are a bit hard to get if you are not Dutch, for which I have today written some notes, but apart from that I believe this contains some useful ideas and concept that should help many to get a better intellectual grasp of the current social and political crisis the West is in.

On Corporatism

Yesterday I wrote about a strange advertisement, remarked that it made me think of corporatism, and quoted Hazlitt as follows from the beginning of "On Corporate Bodies", that was written before the term "corporatism" existed (in a more or less modern sense), but that even so, like everything by Hazlitt that I read, is very perceptive:

Corporate bodies are more corrupt and profligate than individuals, because they have more power to do mischief, and are less amenable to disgrace or punishment. They feel neither shame, remorse, gratitude, nor goodwill. The principle of private or natural conscience is extinguished in each individual (we have no moral sense in the breasts of others), and nothing is considered but how the united efforts of the whole (released from idle scruples) may be best directed to the obtaining of political advantages and privileges to be shared as common spoil. Each member reaps the benefit, and lays the blame, if there is any, upon the rest. The esprit de corps becomes the ruling passion of every corporate body, compared with which the motives of delicacy or decorum towards others are looked upon as being both impertinent and improper.

I also refered you to "decent handbooks" if you wanted to know more about corporatism.

Well, I have looked into the English Wikipedia, and can offer you today a small selection of eleven relevant conceptual definitions, that I shall give below, with some notes, so that you may better understand what I was thinking of yesterday - and I am used to have knowledge of what I write about, and also to indicate clearly what I do not know and what I quote, incidentally virtues that deserve to be much more common than they are - and because it provides a rather clear perspective on recent political developments in the Netherlands, and on movements like those of Wilders and Verdonk.

To the point. I have numbered the quotations, with titles of and links to the thus named Wikipedia-articles whence they come [1], so you may all read it yourself in context if you want to, here usually minus some links and otes that are in the Wikipedia, but have little point on this site:

1. From Corporatism:

Historically, corporatism (Italian: corporativismo) refers to a political or economic system in which power is held by civic assemblies that represent economic, industrial, agrarian, social, cultural, and/or professional groups. These civic assemblies are known as corporations (not the same as the legally incorporated business entities known as corporations, though some are such). Corporations are unelected bodies with an internal hierarchy; their purpose is to exert control over the social and economic life of their respective areas. Thus, for example, a steel corporation would be a cartel composed of all the business leaders in the steel industry, coming together to discuss a common policy on prices and wages. When the political and economic power of a country rests in the hands of such groups, then a corporatist system is in place.

The word "corporatism" is derived from the Latin word for body, corpus. This meaning was not connected with the specific notion of a business corporation, but rather a general reference to anything collected as a body. Its usage reflects medieval European concepts of a whole society in which the various components - e.g., guilds, universities, monasteries, the various estates, etc. - each play a part in the life of the society, just as the various parts of the body serve specific roles in the life of a body. According to various theorists, corporatism was an attempt to create a modern version of feudalism by merging the "corporate" interests with those of the state

This as regards the meaning of the term - and see yesterday's piece.

2. From Corporatism:

Corporatism is a form of class collaboration put forward as an alternative to class conflict, and was first proposed in Pope Leo XIII's 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum, which influenced the Catholic trades unions that organised in the early twentieth century to counter the influence of trade unions founded on a socialist ideology. Theoretical underpinnings came from the medieval traditions of guilds and craft-based economics, and later, syndicalism. Corporatism was encouraged by Pope Pius XI in his 1931 encyclical Quadragesimo Anno.

This as regards the meaning and background of the term. The above has a somewhat marxist smell [2] (I believe that "class struggle" is a concept like "race struggle" and both are mostly category mistakes: There is something like it, but it is too general and too ideologically loaded a concept for real science, and indeed it is not "races" and "classes" that struggle, but human individuals intent upon murdering each other, or not) but the background - the arisal of socialist ideas and big trade unions of workers - is as claimed.

3. From Corporatism:

To show that the concept is quite relevant, consider this (and also see my Het oligarchisch kapitalisme):

Russian corporatism

On October 9, 2007, an article signed by Viktor Cherkesov, head of the Russian Drug Enforcement Administration, was published in Kommersant, where he used the term "corporativist state" in a positive way to describe the evolution of Russia. He claimed that the administration officials detained on criminal charges earlier that month are the exception rather than the rule and that the only development scenario for Russia that is both realistic enough and relatively favorable is to continue evolution into a corporativist state ruled by security service officials.

Here is some background. In December 2005, Andrei Illarionov, former economic adviser to Vladimir Putin, claimed that Russia had become a corporativist state.

"The process of this state evolving into a new corporativist (sic) model reached its completion in 2005. ... The strengthening of the corporativist state model and setting up favorable conditions for quasi-state monopolies by the state itself hurt the economy. ... Cabinet members or key Presidential Staff executives chairing corporation boards or serving on those boards are the order of the day in Russia. In what Western country—except in the corporativist state that lasted for 20 years in Italy—is such a phenomenon possible? Which, actually, proves that the term 'corporativist' properly applies to Russia today."

All political powers and most important economic assets in the country are controlled by former state security officials ("siloviks"), according to some researchers. The takeover of Russian state and economic assets has been allegedly accomplished by a clique of Putin's close associates and friends who gradually became a leading group of Russian oligarchs and who "seized control over the financial, media and administrative resources of the Russian state" and restricted democratic freedoms and human rights

Illarionov described the present situation in Russia as a new socio-political order, "distinct from any seen in our country before". In this model, members of the Corporation of Intelligence Service Collaborators [Russian abbreviation KSSS] took over the entire body of state power, follow an omerta-like behavior code, and "are given instruments conferring power over others – membership “perks”, such as the right to carry and use weapons". According to Illarionov, this "Corporation has seized key government agencies – the Tax Service, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Parliament, and the government-controlled mass media – which are now used to advance the interests of KSSS members. Through these agencies, every significant resource of the country – security/intelligence, political, economic, informational and financial – is being monopolized in the hands of Corporation members"

Analyst Andrei Piontkovsky also considers the present situation as "the highest and culminating stage of bandit capitalism in Russia”. He believes that "Russia is not corrupt. Corruption is what happens in all countries when businessmen offer officials large bribes for favors. Today’s Russia is unique. The businessmen, the politicians, and the bureaucrats are the same people."

Actually, in modern Holland, and it seems also in England and the US, the politicians, the bureaucrats, the journalists, the managers of corporations and the professors of social and economic "sciences" in the universities "are the same people", for a considerable part, at least, especially when their careers are tracked in time, and in any case nearly all of any of the just mentioned groups work for nearly all of the other groups, regardless of political affinity, for on their level it all is an Old Boys Network, that these days includes Old Girls as well.

4. From Corporatism:

If you are Dutch, you may believe thet "in Our Superfine Dutch Democratic Community it will not work out so badly". Well, consider this:


Some contemporary political scientists and sociologists use the term neo-corporatism to describe a process of bargaining between labor, capital, and government identified as occurring in some small, open economies (particularly in Europe) as a means of distinguishing their observations from popular pejorative usage and to highlight ties to classical theories.
Most political economists believe that such neo-corporatist arrangements are only possible in societies in which labor is highly organized and various labor unions are hierarchically organized in a single labor federation. Such "encompassing" unions bargain on behalf of all workers, and they have a strong incentive to balance the employment cost of high wages against the real income consequences of small wage gains. Many of the small, open European economies, such as Finland, Sweden, Austria, Norway, Ireland, Belgium and the Netherlands fit this classification.
Examples of modern neocorporatism include the ILO Conference, the Economic and Social Committee of the European Union, the collective agreement arrangements of the Scandinavian countries, the Dutch Poldermodel system of consensus (..)

I do hope for Dutchmen reading the above will give them a feeling of pride (that is quite gay if you are a properly adjusted Dutchman!) in our lovely Dutch polder democracy. (You can look upon it thus: Just as Dutch has a term and a national passtime that no other people knows of, or so Dutchmen stupidly believe or falsely pretend, namely The Gezelligheid [3],  so the Dutch have a term for the Dutch ideal state that no other people knows of: Poldermodel).

5. From Fascism:

Corporatism touches upon fascism at many places:

Fascism is a totalitarian nationalist political ideology and mass movement that is concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence, and which seeks to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity

At this point - I only have extremely intelligent readers - any Dutchman ought to see that this description has a strong Fortuynistic, Wildersian and Verdonkian stench [4], including Proud Of Dutchmen (in whose veins flows the Real Dutch Blood, untainted by the impure blood of foreigners).

Please note: I do not say here that the gentlemen and lady are fascists - I say their movements and persons look a lot like it.

6. From Fascism:

In the linked article, there is a reasonable definition of "fascism" by Robert Paxton:

A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. — Robert O. Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism .

Note that usually this "redemptive violence" only gets practised on a large scale once the fascists have taken over state power. Before that they love to posture as if they are a kind of radical - "real" - Democrats.

7. From Fascism:

To clarify the relation with the bands (or gangs) of Fortuyn, Wilders en Verdonk again (who are not leaders of parties but of movements following these exalted Leaders of Men):

Nationalism and populism

Nationalism is an important element of fascism. Fascists believe the state to have its own distinctive characteristics, culture, and interests, and which is superior to others. Mussolini once said "Everything in the state. Nothing outside the state. Nothing against the state."

I could make similar remarks here as I made under 5 and 6.

8. From Fascism:

There is a relevant difference between German national socialism (Nazism) and Italian fascism as these existed in the 1930ies:


Nazism differed from Italian fascism in that it had a stronger emphasis on race, in terms of social and economic policies. Though both ideologies denied the significance of the individual, Italian fascism saw the individual as subservient to the state, whereas Nazism saw the individual, as well as the state, as ultimately subservient to the race.

Of course there is in Holland these days - for persons of the sketched mental capacity - a kind of purely Dutch racial sort of real human beings, which Real Dutchmen can recognize by the Real Dutch Family names (of four grandparents [5]).

But it is true, and deserves some stressing, that Mussolini was a lot less anti-semitic than was Hitler.

And here is a direct link with something I wrote about Amsterdam's alderman Ossel and its Social Services director Wim Schreuders, that clearly outline the tendencies of their thinking (and see "Aan het werk, op welke manier ook"):

Hitler was personally opposed to the idea of social welfare because, in his view, it encouraged the preservation of the degenerate and feeble.

(I write this as - it must be the case - "a weak degenerate fraud and thief from the Dutch community", according to my corporatist Clientmanagers of the DWI. My Clientmanagers, all with an IQ of 50 or more points less than mine, really believe that it is I who is mad and bad, and that I don't have any right to call myself doctorandus, and that it is totally fit for the functionally anonymous bureuacratic morons who are thirty or more years younger to address me as if I am a piece of shit, and to scream in public that my "mother is a dirty cuntwhore" and that I also may, invalid and all, be threatened with murder and violence by their beastly colleagues or y themselves, and namely if I politely protest against their racism against those of a non-white skin colour and against calling my mother "a dirty cuntwhore" in public, with threats to murder me. Amsterdam has it! [6])

9.  From Fascism:

Here is a further analogy with earlier mentioned Netherlandish Movements:

Fascism also has elements of populism and appealed to an Agrarian myth. Fascism also tends to be anti-intellectual. The Nazis in particular despised intellectuals and university professors. Hitler declared them unreliable, useless and even dangerous. Still, Hitler has been qouted as saying "When I take a look at the intellectual classes we have - unfortunately, I suppose they are necessary; otherwise one could one day, I don't know, exterminate them or something - but unfortunately they're necessary."

At this point you may be able to appreciate a little better why the Dutch Labour Party corporatists have repeatedly removed me from the University of Amsterdam: I was in the way of their grabbing power and personally appropriating millions, for the board of directors that removed me, includings messrs. Noorda and De Hon, still in power or alive, let disappear 65 million guilders from the University of Amsterdam.

10. From Quango:

Then as regards corporatism and what it is related to, there is the more recent concept Quango, although in fact this is a term that meanwhile has been replaced by NGO:

The acronyms Qango and Quango, variously spelt out as QUAsi Non-Governmental Organisation, QUasi-Autonomous Non-Governmental Organisation, and QUasi-Autonomous National Government Organisation, have been used, notably in the United Kingdom, but also in Australia, Ireland and other countries, to describe a range of organisations to which governments have devolved power. Confusion over the meaning of the acronym has been reflected in confusion over the use of the term, and may have contributed to its decline in use. The term Quango carries with it an implication of poor management and lack of accountability.

The term originated as a humorous shortening of Quasi-NGO, that is, an ostensibly non-governmental organisation which performs governmental functions, often with government funding or other support. There are many such organisations.
However, the appeal of the term was such that it was extended to a wide range of governmental organisations, such as executive agencies (from 1988) providing health, education and other services.
Since most of such bodies are in fact part of the government in terms of funding, appointment and function, the acronym does not work as a description - these are generally not non-governmental organisations with less autonomy than others. As a result, it has largely been abandoned in UK official usage. The less controversial term non-departmental public body (NDPB) is now used to describe many of the organisations with devolved governmental roles, in an attempt to avoid the pejorative associations of the term Quango.

The UK government's definition of a non-departmental public body or quango in 1997 was:

"A body which has a role in the processes of national government, but is not a government department or part of one, and which accordingly operates to a greater or lesser extent at arm's length from Ministers.

11. From Quasi-governmental:

So now we have arrived at the majority of the institutions I spoke of yesterday:

A quasi-governmental organization, corporation, business, or agency is an entity that is treated by national laws and regulations to be under the guidance of the government, but also separate and autonomous from the government.

While the entity may receive some revenue from charging customers for its services, these organizations are often partially or majorly funded by the government. They are usually considered highly important to smooth running of society, and are sometimes propped up with cash infusions in times of crisis to help surmount situations that would bankrupt a normal privately-owned business. They may also possess law-enforcement authority, usually related to their functions.

I do hope you now appreciate a little more what I wrote about yesterday - and also that you understand better why I am not so happy about the Movements of Wilders and Verdonk (and Fortuyn and the Leefbaren and the Vlaams Blok, or whatever the last is called these days [7], and Berlusconi and Putin).

O yes - about the just quoted statements:

They are usually considered highly important to smooth running of society, and are sometimes propped up with cash infusions in times of crisis to help surmount situations that would bankrupt a normal privately-owned business. They may also possess law-enforcement authority, usually related to their functions.

This also holds for all those private defense corporations (as far as I know still forbidden in Dutch law) that pretend to be "Security Corportations" or "Guard Services" (the sort of institutions that form the natural habitat for the arisal and lust of the neo-rightist cognively challenged).

And see Quis custodiet ipse custodes - about the "services" that now have ... incorporated themselves in the Netherlands, mostly on the basis of lies about the dangers of Terrorism by populist state propaganda, NGOs, Quangos and corporations like the Municipality Amsterdam (Duce: Job Cohen).

But these gentlemen will assure you, with their right hand solemnly on their noble social-democratic hearts, that they are each an "echter Mensch" (= "Real Human Being", unlike dregs of mankind like myself and my family [8]) - who have the very best of superhuman intentions for you, and for me, and for Our Proud Dutch Nation.


P.S. of Sep 2, 2009: As I remarked before, because it is true and of some importance for those who read me: I am not looking for people who agree with me, but for people who can think rationally for themselves. This is also the reason that I gave the above quotations, that undoubtedly may be criticized from various points of view, buth which my readers very probably never got presented in the present sort of context, and that I recommend you consider with some care, if only because - astonishment all around! - even Dutch Political Leaders may lie about what they really want and try to get.

Notes from December 9, 2010:

[1] I quote as I found it in 2009.
[2] Rather a lot in the social and related sciences on Wikipedia has pomo-tendencies, that include marxism-like considerations. See my Scientific Realism versus Postmodernism and if you read Dutch "Politiek, Ideogie en Taalgebruik". My  Morningstar shines a bright light on postmodernism and - to get a taste of it, including marxism, The Postmodernism Generator.
[3] This is a proud Dutch myth that is each year repeated a million times: There is no word and no concept for "gezelligheid" (= cosiness, companionability, being social) outside Holland. The vast majority of the Dutch really believes this, so the foreigner may infer what the Dutch really think about foreign hordes.
[4] Fortuyn, Wilders and Verdonk were or are rightist populists, with rightist propaganda and xenophobic ideals that have great appeal on at least 25% of the Dutch electorate, mostly but not solely of the least intellectual gifts.
[5] In Holland during WW II  (and who knows how probably: Real Soon Now), one's proper racial qualification to be allowed to live in Holland was whether one's four grandparents all were of the proper - Aryan - racial kind. (And Mr. Geert Wilders, the man with the Aryan artificial hairdo, may insist, while gently foaming at the mouth, that he - "Thank God!" - is not "a fascist", namely because he, the man with the Aryan artificial hairdo, does not discriminate Jews - at this point in time - while he, in his great goodness and eminent sanity, only wants to lock up some 20 million European muslims in what Our Dutch Leader is pleased to call "camps". I trust my readers will see that this is proof positive that Mr. Wilders is entirely sane, entirely of good intentions, and racially, religiously, morally and politically also the purest of the pure, in my Proud Fatherland. (Except unfortunately for the colour of Our Great Leader's hair, which he therefore paints with great personal pride with peroxide to a proper Aryan colour: Nobody is perfect, not even the Dutch Supreme Leader To Be.)
[6] All of this is pure fact: The doormen of the Amsterdam dole threatened to murder me and screamed out that my mother "is a dirty cuntwhore" - "gore kuthoer", in lovely Dutch - in public, because I publicly - and politely! - criticized their racism against blacks and muslims, with whom I was waiting to apply for the dole. I never got any excuse for this since this happened in 1984, and have been much discriminated by their colleagues for insisting these - I say here and now, but did not say to their kind colleagues - fascist racist assholes should be punished severely. 
[7] Fortuyn was a Dutch would be politician and would be saviour of The Fatherland who got murdered in 2002, and who had a rightist political populist program that since has been adopted by Wilders and Verdonk, both ex-members of the Dutch Liberal Party, that is as little liberal as the Dutch Social Democrats are social or democratic. Wilders still flourishes in Holland; Verdonk has disappeared in obscurity (after she was revealed to have been such a degenerate careerist that she was a member of the pascifist socialist party when that offered promises for her personal career).
[8] It is a fact that both the propagandists of the narco-fascistic municipality of Amsterdam and their eager journalistic servants in the media and the daily papers have been proud to collaborate on namebranding the then mayor of Amsterdam Job Cohen, another narco-fascist, as "echter Mensch", including the implication that everybody else in Amsterdam - if not a municipal bureaucrat, of course - is not "a real man" (this being what "echter Mensch" means), but a sort of sub-human, such as myself for example, and my family, who are all fit for gassing, in modern Amsterdam; are all "cuntwhores" or "fascists" and "terrorists", according to the Übermenschen that are mayors, aldermen and bureaucrats in Amsterdam since decades, as outlined in [6], and according to professors grown rich and sexually satisfied in the University of Amsterdam.

Here we are again in December 9, 2010, more than two years after writing the above, but rather a lot further down the drain towards real Dutch neo-fascism or neo-nazism - that one is not allowed to call "neo-fascism" or "neo-nazism", for then the local Duch neo-fascists and neo-nazis start screaming and crying and complaining that you "demonize" them, and they may well personally headbutt you and beat you up - which they then can settle peaceably and amicably with the Dutch public prosecutors, for a mere 500 euros, no further questions asked, and all legal persecution undone, since that might be detrimental to his parliamentary career, you see, and that is Dutch law and Dutch morals in practice.

For this is what happened with the Wilders-parliamentarian Hernandez, a lovely guy who loves headbutting and beating up those who dare to contradict him: He is a Real Dutch Paliamentarian, in the style and with the morality his Leader Wilders loves to see practised on his opponents. (*)

Anyway... wholly apart from Dutch politics - difficult to understand for foreigners, I agree, for Holland is a rather strange and thoroughly sick country (**) - the above list of quotations should help you understand a little better, at least, what is and has been happening in the West since 2008, and what are the main causes the continuance of the economic and social crisis : The ruling elites - which exist and must exist in any complicated human society - are thoroughly incompetent and/or immorally greedy and willing to be bought by the elites that form the corporate and banking rich.


(*) If you disagree: Else The Leader Wilders-with-the-artificial-Aryan-hairdo  would and should have replaced him. But no: My blessings, comrade Hernandez! Congratulations! You have arrived in a Parliament full of your very own natural equivalents! I am eagerly awaiting the headbutting and beating up of your parliamentary colleagues!

(**) Let me also add, for those who know some Dutch "intellectuals" of my generation, who are certain to contradict me and assure any foreigner that they had a happy, well-paid career and life:

Anybody who collaborated in Holland, in and after WW II, was taken care of by the solid democratic majority of willing collaborators of the powers that be. I merely protested against the declines in education and against my being gassed and threatened with murder by Amsterdam drugsdealers. I made no radical criticism of other kinds, and anyway would have fled Holland before 1980 had I been healthy enough to do so, having seen already then how sick it had gotten by then.

Merely for being not like the majority, and having the courage to publicly criticize what by now all Dutchmen except a handful will admit I was right to criticize, meant that I was delivered, because I was already ill, into the hands of or at least made the dependent of the degenerates that ruled Amsterdam and the University of Amsterdam - and learned that in every generation a considerable proportion of native fascist beasts (I choose the term for lack of a better one) gets born, who are the most likely to get to the top of any bureaucratic institution, namely because they are morally non-existent, i.e. have no conscience whatsoever, except loyalty - "Unsere Ehre heisst Treue!" - and because the last 45 years intellectual incompetence has gotten to be the norm and standard that benefits one's promotion, in Holland, in most institutions, and according to the predominant Dutch moral norm, which translates as "Act normal, then you act madly enough already!".

So, yes... for those without character and those without talent, Holland may have been close to a paradise, the last 40 years, I am quite willing to agree, just as it used to be in the Soviet Union, for titled conformists and collaborators, who helped the state, its politicians, and its bureaucrats:

For every one Amalrik or Bukovski, there are tenthousand collaborators with similar education, and most are willing to betray such rare individuals to the secret police of the state, and are able to convince themselves that doing so is moral.

See also On Zinoviev's Theory of (Soviet) Man and On Zamyatin's "WE".



P.S. Corrections must wait till later.

P.P.S. It may be I have to stop Nederlog for a while. The reason is that I am physically not well at all. I don't know yet, but if there is no Nederlog, now you know the reason.

As to ME/CFS (that I prefer to call ME):

1. Anthony Komaroff

Ten discoveries about the biology of CFS (pdf)

3. Hillary Johnson

The Why

4. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf)
5. Eleanor Stein

Clinical Guidelines for Psychiatrists (pdf)

6. William Clifford The Ethics of Belief
7. Paul Lutus

Is Psychology a Science?

8. Malcolm Hooper Magical Medicine (pdf)

Short descriptions:

1. Ten reasons why ME/CFS is a real disease by a professor of medicine of Harvard.
2. Long essay by a professor emeritus of medical chemistry about maltreatment of ME.
3. Explanation of what's happening around ME by an investigative journalist.
4. Report to Canadian Government on ME, by many medical experts.
5. Advice to psychiatrist by a psychiatrist who understands ME is an organic disease
6. English mathematical genius on one's responsibilities in the matter of one's beliefs:
   "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon
     insufficient evidence
7. A space- and computer-scientist takes a look at psychology.
8. Malcolm Hooper puts things together status 2010.

    "Ah me! alas, pain, pain ever, forever!

No change, no pause, no hope! Yet I endure.
I ask the Earth, have not the mountains felt?
I ask yon Heaven, the all-beholding Sun,
Has it not seen? The Sea, in storm or calm,
Heaven's ever-changing Shadow, spread below,
Have its deaf waves not heard my agony?
Ah me! alas, pain, pain ever, forever!
     - (Shelley, "Prometheus Unbound") 

    "It was from this time that I developed my way of judging the Chinese by dividing them into two kinds: one humane and one not. "
     - (Jung Chang)


See also: ME -Documentation and ME - Resources

Maarten Maartensz

        home - index - top - mail