|
LimburgLimbo posted:In some broad senses HK has similarities as an entity that’s majority Han Chinese while not being completely in the fold of mainland China et al, but it was officially Chinese and part of Chinese territory. Drawing parallels between it and Taiwan insofar as US military intervention is concerned makes no sense. It's not about military intervention as a means of unification, it's about precluding the prospect of US intervention to magnify the impact of coercive economic/political measures. The model of HK shows that China has historically been content to move slowly on integration as long as it is confident it is in complete control of the security situation.
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:48 |
|
|
Alchenar posted:It's not about military intervention as a means of unification, it's about precluding the prospect of US intervention to magnify the impact of coercive economic/political measures. The model of HK shows that China has historically been content to move slowly on integration as long as it is confident it is in complete control of the security situation. There's a big difference though that HK was territoriality handed over and then allowed to retain a large degree of its autonomy from the mainland government, which refrained from doing anything because of a combination of treaty obligations and caution about killing a economically bountiful golden goose when it comes to investment. China maintained a garrison already there etc. It's a clear cut example of domestic politics that China decided to "alter the deal" sooner than agreed; while Taiwan is decidedly a foreign government its exercising political influence over but does not have military control over (yet). A better analogy is Russo-Ukraine relations; where Russia maintains a large degree of both economic, military and political coercive influence over; and is using whatever tools in its arsenal to secure Ukraine in its orbit and prevent geopolitical acts that would weaken this. The big difference is Ukraine doesn't have 300 miles of ocean to keep little green men from slowly subverting things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
Mirello posted:Give me an example more recent than 40 years ago grandpa.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
The PRC is also actively building military installations on islands in other countries' territorial waters and daring anyone to stop them, which has lead to numerous standoffs over the years. Their foreign policy towards their neighbors is hardly "pacifistic."
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 19:15
|
|
|
China is going to go to war with India and lose.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 19:18
|
|
|
Smeef posted:Oh, and maybe good news for us all. According to live tweet (well, WeChat) coverage of the event for the 110-year anniversary of the 1911 Revolution, Xi stated pretty drat unequivocally that reunification must be peaceful, which I believe is the first time that language has ever been used by PRC. However the piping hot takes on state media are highlighting the more aggressive language used about Taiwanese separatists being the only obstacle. Lol no sir. China tune on reunification has always been like this. Peaceful reunification preferred but really it is reunification whatever it takes. Hu Jintao's '05 anti succession law has almost identical language to Xi's language. http://eng.mod.gov.cn/publications/2021-06/29/content_4888396.htm Muscle Tracer posted:And... an invasion of Taiwan would be short and victorious? Victorious is a certainty without outside intervention. Short is also likely a guarantee as Taiwan imports 65% of its food so even if the PLA marines totally wet the bed, the entire island will capitulate in a couple of months tops. The calculus for China hasn't been whether it can or cannot invade Taiwan successfully for a decade or so now. The calculus is whether the US will intervene and whether the political fallout will be worth the investment. China's naval and air build up isn't about its capability to successfully force Taiwan to surrender. It is about changing the American calculus with respect to intervention to be less attractive as an option.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
yeah for some reason starving out an island of 25 million people so you can usurp their right to self determination is probably why people are saying china is a huge regional threat
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 20:21
|
|
|
I'm not sure xi has to resort to a military invasion to boost his popularity considering he is insanely popular amongst the citizenry for rooting out corruption, raising millions out of poverty, and kicking COVID rear end like I don't want to spec on the likelihood of the prc engaging in military action on Taiwan, but it's just ridiculous to me that xi would have to do it to help his popularity
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 21:48
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I'm not sure xi has to resort to a military invasion to boost his popularity considering he is insanely popular amongst the citizenry for rooting out corruption, raising millions out of poverty, and kicking COVID rear end "Why would this power hungry lunatic want to do something to increase his personal popularity" is a question I guess
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 22:18
|
|
|
I don't think it's an immediate risk by any means, but you have to remember that we are talking about a political lifespan that is far in excess of any democratic leader and will continue long past the point where a democratic leader would be unpopular enough to be voted out. Biden can win another term and this is still a risk his successor will have to contend with. Also autocratic leaders genuinely unconcerned that the people love them don't invest in enormous censorship and internal security regimes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 22:23
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Also autocratic leaders genuinely unconcerned that the people love them don't invest in enormous censorship and internal security regimes. It's a mistake to think of xi as autocratic then because that regime is far more focused on the aims of the party
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 22:36
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:It's a mistake to think of xi as autocratic then because that regime is far more focused on the aims of the party And the aims of the party are....the continued existence of the party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I'm not sure xi has to resort to a military invasion to boost his popularity considering he is insanely popular amongst the citizenry for rooting out corruption, raising millions out of poverty, and kicking COVID rear end A big flaming stink posted:It's a mistake to think of xi as autocratic then because that regime is far more focused on the aims of the party These views ignore the fact that Xi has significantly altered the way Chinese politics works since the passing of the torch from Deng Xiaoping in 1990 to Jiang Zemin and the following transition of power to Hu Jingtao in 2002. Since the passing of Deng and the rise of Jiang Zemin, internal CCP politics have been characterized largely by a defacto powersharing agreement between the coastal Shanghai faction and the more internal Chinese Communist Youth League faction. These two factions dominated Chinese politics for 20 years prior to Xi's ascension to the top of the CCP food chain. Top leadership posts were held for a maximum of 2x5 year terms and it was rare for the top 2 spots in any governmental or party organ to be manned by people from the same faction. It was understood as one side advanced its members, power in those offices would shift to the other faction. The 2018 National People's Congress saw Xi, who rose out of the Shanghai faction, eliminate the 2 term limit which is why most China observers now view him as effectively the leader for life. This was brought about because when Xi first took power in 2012, he launched a massive (and much-needed) anti-corruption campaign that nailed thousands of party members at all levels of government. However, as the power vacuum was backfilled, Xi effectively installed his most loyal followers into key positions and has effectively created his own faction within the CCP while simultaneously sidelining the Shanghai group (Jiang) and the CCYL (Hu) and effectively frozen them out of power. It is obvious that neither group is happy as the next generation within each faction now has effectively found themselves stonewalled from further advancement and the unofficial title of "Paramount Leader" of China is now effectively in Xi's hands for the foreseeable future. One of the key hallmarks of the Jiang and Hu eras in CCP politics was the relative lack of "palace intrigue" so to speak as both sides had an understanding that each would have time under the sun both on a national level and a local or provincial level. Xi has effectively put a halt to this and factionalist struggles are never pretty. They typically are unstable and life in the party apparatus can be dangerous as people find themselves falling in and out of favour. Couple this with the fact the CCP has proclaimed openly (Xi himself proclaims) that its legitimacy rests upon a government's ability to provide “political stability, social progress, and better lives". Since Deng's rise to power following Mao's death and the opening of China's economy to the world, this has been easy for the CCP to deliver on its promise. Its cheap labour and the acceptance of lower trade barriers by the Western world as a whole has allowed China to essentially become the world's factory and manufacturing plant. Those days of easy growth are now obviously over as new manufacturing has moved to other locations such as Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia are emerging as the start of alternative manufacturing sites. Not restricted to East Asia, we have Bangladesh and South America being looked at closely not to mention the possible resurgence of re-shoring manufacturing in North America after COVID exposed a painful lesson in being too dependant on foreign manufacturers in key sectors. The CCP, and now Xi by extension since he has monopolized power, must constantly deliver on its promise of improving its citizens' lives. As many authoritarian regimes have found out, during times when it cannot deliver the goods to its people to keep them distracted, it is useful to tap into the parallel rail of nationalism and identity politics as a means to keep its populace fixated away from problems that could cause domestic unrest and threaten its power. This is why Taiwan remains such a critical and non-negotiable issue for the CCP. It has been selling the story that China has been raped by foreign powers in the past and that China must be restored to its former glory (despite the fact that the last dynasty to rule a united China wasn't even ethnic Han Chinese) and Taiwan remaining out of the PRC's rule is a constant reminder of that. This second rail is what the CCP always falls back on during times of economic uncertainty or when there is mismanagement of issues that it cannot cover up to the general populace. This is why Chinese "Wolf Warrior" diplomacy always rears its ugly head whenever China is suffering from internal issues. If you ever wonder why China seems to always have this weird sense of fragility regarding its ego, and resorts to petty actions and hyperbolic rants against other countries over the most trivial of slights, this is the reason. Societies need pressure-release valves whenever they go through hard times. Democracies in the west have that built into the system where voters can assuage their anger by kicking out the existing set of oligarchic politicians but authoritarian regimes must rely on repression, misinformation, and diversion/distraction away from their population's core grievances. Taiwan used to be a fruit that was simply too high to be plucked in times of internal crisis to create the diversion needed while it waited for the situation to pass. But as the PLA's capabilities continue to grow, and the likelihood of US intervention being easy and cheap to effect, the branch upon which the fruit rests continues to sag lower and lower. Xi may be popular now and may have his lieutenants in all the key spots that maintain a close grip on the party, but circumstances may change rapidly. Just look at the entire Australian coal situation. Xi was miffed that Australia would dare back Trump when he was trying to smear the COVID disaster on China so they engaged in ridiculous trade action like banning the import of Australian coal and now find themselves not having enough coal to power their northern provinces as they enter the winter months and they have rolling blackouts. Xi has shown that he is more than willing to be petty and act in interests that do not line up with good governance during times of stress. With COVID starting to fade and the economy picking up again, is he likely to resort to lashing out at Taiwan without Taiwan being stupid? Nope. But what happens after 2022 when he becomes President for the 3rd term and everyone not in his circle has knives out ready to pounce the next time they have trouble and popular opinion once again start to sag a bit? This isn't trying to scaremonger. The odds of the Taiwan situation being pushed into the military realm remain very low. But it is important to note that Taiwan isn't a "pie in the sky" option for Chinese leadership anymore and Xi has removed one of the safety valves the CCP had built to relieve internal pressure. Who knows what happens in 2025 and 2026 if Xi still wants yet another term? Maybe it doesn't start with a shooting war straight away. Maybe it starts with Xi needing to puff out his chest and blockading Taiwan over perceived slight or the words of an over-enthusiastic junior politician in Taipei. Don't write it off as a situation that will 'never happen'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
3D Megadoodoo posted:China is going to go to war with India and lose. Focus on the definition of lose. Lose what? Territory? Prestige? Governance? Give me details here. I mean your probably right in the first time around. The PLA is basically a national police force but so is the Indian military to a good extent. Neither side has fought a conventional war in a long time so most likely they'd learn a lot very fast and fight a follow-up war that's much deadlier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 02:11
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Focus on the definition of lose. Well, I personally don't know anything about either of their armies, but if they actually fought and finished a war, there'd probably be some kind of territorial exchange. 'Cause, well... 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 02:31
|
|
|
LimburgLimbo posted:In some broad senses HK has similarities as an entity that’s majority Han Chinese while not being completely in the fold of mainland China et al, but it was officially Chinese and part of Chinese territory. Drawing parallels between it and Taiwan insofar as US military intervention is concerned makes no sense. I'd argue that even from a non-military point of view vis-a-vis PRC taking control, making comparisons between HK and Taiwan doesn't get very far. MikeC posted:Lol no sir. China tune on reunification has always been like this. Peaceful reunification preferred but really it is reunification whatever it takes. Hu Jintao's '05 anti succession law has almost identical language to Xi's language. I stand corrected — thanks. I do still think that it is a good signal amidst the escalating tension. MikeC posted:
Great post, and I agree with pretty much all of it. To add my two cents to this paragraph — it's not just a matter of labor costs. A lot of the alternative countries (which are beyond emerging at this point) are not much cheaper in nominal wages, much less all-in costs, and are increasing in cost as well. Some that are (or were) promising have failed to meet expectations and/or are facing challenges way bigger than China faces (e.g., Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Myanmar). Many lack the scale and/or sophistication that Chinese manufacturers have developed. India... well, India is gonna be India. A lot of buyers have diversified (or are doing so) not to reduce costs but to lower exposure to risk (e.g., natural disasters, political risk, etc.). This may come as a surprise to this thread, but a lot are lowering their exposure to China for ESG reasons. Chinese suppliers are notoriously difficult to monitor for ESG compliance, and there's basically an entire industry of consultants who help suppliers cheat their ESG audits. This trend was apparent even before atrocities in Xinjiang were getting major global attention. It happens in every country, but in China it's just nuts. I've talked to some buyers who said they estimate about half of their Chinese suppliers are cheating their ESG audits. Some of the specific stories are hilarious. One manufacturer created an entire fake government agency website to list themselves as having some sort of certification. Re-shoring was already a trend before Covid and may accelerate afterwards. I expect it may hurt China more given that it tends to be the more valuable industries that get re-shored. Those industries were probably where China had the most potential for growth. For similar reasons, I think that automation could also be a big obstacle for China. I don't think any of this will dethrone China as the world's manufacturing giant. But all of it chips away at Chinese growth. As you very correctly point out, the legitimacy of the Party is ultimately dependent on continuous improvement of the material living conditions of the Chinese people. It has done that incredibly well for 40 years. But it's now plateauing when GDP per capita is $10k, and much lower for large portions of the country. Smeef fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Oct 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 02:42
|
|
|
Smeef posted:But it's now plateauing when GDP per capita is $10k, and much lower for large portions of the country. ...is it though? Like is it legit starting to flatten? because i could have sworn they just had a 8.1% growth quarter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 05:08
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:...is it though? Like is it legit starting to flatten? because i could have sworn they just had a 8.1% growth quarter. Maybe it's a bit premature for me to say plateauing, but the growth rate had been slowing steadily for ~10 years. It was under 6% in 2019. Obviously 2020 was somewhat anomalous. I'm not sure how much the current rate is some sort of post-Covid rebound. That's still rapid growth, but it seems more in line with Southeast Asia growth patterns than it is with East Asian economies that saw another explosive growth stage that took them from about where China is now to being OECD level. Maybe people were having the same conversations about those economies decades ago, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 05:41
|
|
|
ronya posted:Yes, but the problem with those unrealized opportunities is that they're hitched to the same national policy considerations that have to also consider the interests of its already-rich regions... (see also: all the other BRICs! All share a phenomenon of deeply unequal internal development, I don't think that's accidental) The PRD wants to spend its thirty-glorious-years on its own domestic consumption, not capital investment in Northern or Western China - reposting an old point hence: quote:Second, we have changed the thinking that the GDP growth rate is the sole barometer of success. At the Central Economic Work Conference on December 15, 2012, I stressed that we cannot blindly pursue rapid growth without regard for objective laws and conditions. At a meeting of the Standing Committee of the Central Committee Political Bureau on April 25, 2013, I stressed that local governments should not take national regulatory targets as the baseline for local economic development, nor should they compete with each other to have higher growth rates. I said that we needed to shift the focus to improving the quality and returns of economic growth, to promoting sustained and healthy economic development, and to pursuing genuine rather than inflated GDP growth and achieving high-quality, efficient, and sustainable development. ... this is why there is a deleveraging campaign: debt raised in anticipation of future growth (concretely: population and material growth in lower-tier cities to match the trajectory that higher-tier cities enjoyed) must be unwound if that growth is now accepted to no longer be expected
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 05:52
|
|
|
I guess if China keeps clamping down further, that may raise the amount that people would want to see some kind of economic growth and improvement to justify all that clamping. Although how much public opinion really matters in an autocratic state, and how much the state can even tamp down on truths that are inconvenient for them is up for grabs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 06:17
|
|
|
Mirello posted:Give me an example more recent than 40 years ago grandpa. https://thediplomat.com/2019/05/chinas-dynamic-grip-on-myanmar/ China funds and materially supports Myanmar's armed ethnic separatists to maximize its leverage over the country's military government. Just because a country claims to be non-interventionist does not mean that they actually are.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2021 06:24
|
|
|
If that's true than I'm glad someone is helping those people, the Myanmar military went in to Rhakine like the loving Einsatzgruppen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 09:23
|
|
|
Wrong part of Burma - that article is one China's intervention in Shan state in the East and Kachin state in the North, bordering China's Yunnan province, not the Rakhine state in the West Burma has no shortage of local ethnic conflicts in the uplands far from Yangon On the Rakhine conflict, China is firmly backing the military government
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 09:37
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I guess if China keeps clamping down further, that may raise the amount that people would want to see some kind of economic growth and improvement to justify all that clamping. Xi probably doesn't want to lose any elections.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
You joke, but the regime definitely cares about candidates not even pretending that elections are real :https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3149468/hong-kong-elections-patriots-may-have-triumphed-lazy A key element of supressing dissent is giving people the option to suspend disbelief that they have a say in their rulers. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 16:12
|
|
|
Xi himself is picked through a process by key members of the party called the Selectorate so in a way he does worry about "selections" of a sort, the party could pass their equivalent of a vote of no confidence and turf him if the stars aligned.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 17:15
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Xi himself is picked through a process by key members of the party called the Selectorate so in a way he does worry about "selections" of a sort, the party could pass their equivalent of a vote of no confidence and turf him if the stars aligned. I would like to issue a dutiful reminder that one of the more common features of contemporary autocracy and dictatorship is the presence of multiple governmental show-apparatus bodies and functions that imitate those of republics and democracies or even just pre-dictatorship party functions, but which possess no actual capacity to challenge the dictator. Most party-based dictatorships have show processes where the autocratic leaders of the country are "elected" on terms that are set by the autocrats. Putin is also "selected" in his country's supposedly democratic elections. The Kims are repeatedly "selected" by its supposedly tricameral government and Supreme People's Assembly. In these examples is the template for what there is actually to say about how Xi has been "selected"
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 06:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ap/status/1447147267669037057?s=21
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 08:13
|
|
|
That is an incredibly bleak article, holy gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 09:49
|
|
|
So they've moved from "put them all into concentration camps" to "turn their homes and towns into concentration camps".quote:Uyghurs live trapped in an invisible system that restricts their every move. It’s near impossible for them to get passports, and on planes to and from Xinjiang, most passengers are from China’s Han Chinese majority. quote:Xinjiang’s unique brand of state-controlled Islam is most on display at the Xinjiang Islamic Institute, a government school for imams. One of the linked articles, from July, is about a detention facility with room for up to 10,000 people so they're not totally moving away from the camps. Just putting them further away from places journalists and tourists can access. quote:One night, I was seated next to Dou Wangui, the Party Secretary of Aksu Prefecture, as well as Li Xuejun, the vice chairman of the Xinjiang People’s Congress. They are both Han Chinese, like most of Xinjiang’s powerful men. There's a quote from someone (Russian, maybe?) about cultural genocides and how ethnic dances are the only thing left afterwards. EDIT: Here we go Enver Zogha posted:I know this post is a bit old, but I'm reminded of a book I read where a British guy visited Romania in 1989 and overheard two Romanians privately arguing whether Hungarians were discriminated against or not. One guy was giving specific instances of discriminatory treatment (like the closing of a Hungarian-language university), whereas the other argued that Hungarians had outlets for their culture. This led the British guy to recall the observation of a friend: "under communism all minorities dance." Megillah Gorilla fucked around with this message at 11:21 on Oct 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 11:10
|
|
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:There's a quote from someone (Russian, maybe?) about cultural genocides and how ethnic dances are the only thing left afterwards. possibly referring to the Soviet 1936 "национального по форме, социалистического по содержанию" (national in form, socialist in content) campaign that notionally sponsored folk dresses, poetry, dances, and music, even as ethnic cleansing of 'unreliable' nationalities accelerated
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 11:25
|
|
|
Yeah, it's shocking how common it is when you start looking. Australia's spent the last 200 years genociding our Aboriginal population, but you better believe you can get a corroboree and BBQ at all the tourist hotspots. And as you pass through the gift shop, why not buy a boomerang to take home for the family?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 13:31
|
|
|
Didn't know that China had government Imam schools. Learn something new every day!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 13:40
|
|
|
You can express your culture any way you like!* * as long as it is through a state approved institution and explicitly acknowledges the primacy of the CCP as the sole source of legitimate authority in China. Also that the place you live in is definitely China now and forever. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 14:04 on Oct 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 13:56
|
|
|
Kavros posted:I would like to issue a dutiful reminder that one of the more common features of contemporary autocracy and dictatorship is the presence of multiple governmental show-apparatus bodies and functions that imitate those of republics and democracies or even just pre-dictatorship party functions, but which possess no actual capacity to challenge the dictator. Most party-based dictatorships have show processes where the autocratic leaders of the country are "elected" on terms that are set by the autocrats. Putin is also "selected" in his country's supposedly democratic elections. The Kims are repeatedly "selected" by its supposedly tricameral government and Supreme People's Assembly. In these examples is the template for what there is actually to say about how Xi has been "selected" Its been a while but Susan Shirk's book has details about this, it is a real process, it isn't a democratic process, but its still a process. Its also a process that China's most hard liner and conservative institution has the most sway to boot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:08
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:You can express your culture any way you like!* Is there any school on the planet that does not teach recognition of state authority? poo poo, my little religious school had us make the pledge of allegiance every day. Edit: come to think of it there are probably some southern schools that still have Confederate flags. Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 14:33 on Oct 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:16
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Is there any school on the planet that does not tech recognition of state authority? poo poo, my little religious school had us make the pledge of allegiance every day. Yeah, but the US is uniquely hosed up. The pledge of allegiance, flags on every house and singing the national anthem at every sports event makes me think of some banana republic where El Presidente wins every election with 100% of the vote and there's a coup twice a decade. Gotta re-pledge every day or you might forget you're American Gort fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Oct 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:21
|
|
|
The whole American thing of doing the pledge of alliegance every day and the Thing With The Flags is supremely hosed up and weirds everyone out. Like, a lot. Seeing any country doing that sort of poo poo throws up all sorts of red flags, and not the  kind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:33
|
|
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:The whole American thing of doing the pledge of alliegance every day and the Thing With The Flags is supremely hosed up and weirds everyone out. Most people not on the Right realize it. Its worth noting that The Pledge and a lot of the other Patriotic stuff always had creepy pseudo-fascist vibes and ideas backing it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:48 |
|
|
Is there any movement towards getting rid of The Pledge? (realise this is a bit off-topic for the China thread) Does China have an equivalent?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:44
|
|