Springtime for Autocrats
Bill Keller surveys the scene and proclaims a “springtime for autocrats” with China and Russia as autocratic states capable of playing a substantial role on the world stage. Of course it’s hard to know if things would look that way from the perspective of, say, Sao Paulo, the largest city of a very large country that is now both more democratic and more prosperous than it’s been in quite some time. And similarly, the 1990s were hardly springtime for Japan, also a large and important democracy. And, again, there’s India. Over the past ten years we’ve seen something of a waning of U.S. geopolitical influence (though one can overstate this) and something of a waxing of influence of most other important countries. Some of these countries are autocratic and others democratic. Some of this trend is inevitable “catch-up” and some reflects U.S. policy errors, but the trend is fairly general and shouldn’t really be seen as representing a specific ideological turn against liberalism or democracy.
Keller, meanwhile, observes of Russia and China that “[b]oth countries have calculated that you can buy a measure of domestic stability if you combine a little opportunity with an appeal to national pride.” That seems about right as an explanation of why neither Moscow nor Beijing sees the need for substantial reforms or faces unmanageable public unrest. It’s worth noting, however, how absolutely normal this is — patriotic and nationalistic sentiments are cynically manipulated by incumbent politicians in democratic countries every bit as much as in Russia or China. And of course it’s well-known that robust economic growth tends to keep the opposition party out of power, whereas recession makes people want to throw the bums out.
It’s hear that I think the analogies start to break down. The Communist Party in China has long since ceased having any particularly compelling story to tell about why it needs to maintain a monopoly on political power. Crackdowns on the rights of ethnic minority groups like the Tibetans have a certain popular appeal, but patriotism can’t get the regime off the hook for being oppressive to the country’s vast Han Chinese majority. Rather, popular discontent is manageable because there simply isn’t that much popular discontent. Chinese people tell Pew that they’re very happy with the direction of their country, with the state of its economy, and with their own personal levels of well-being. The regime is staying in power, in short, mostly in virtue of the fact that it’s doing a pretty good job and delivering reasonably effective public policy.
In rare instances — Singapore, for example — this kind of thing can go on for a long time. But to me the PRC government is a bit like Wile-E-Coyote mostly being kept afloat by its own forward momentum. It doesn’t seem especially likely to me that China will go on and on and on without experiencing a substantial economic crisis or a serious foreign policy blunder forever. And any such crisis is likely to lead to a political crisis. What that would lead to, I couldn’t say. People sometimes seem to assume that the alternative to China’s current course is democratization, but it could just as easily be clampdown and insularity or chaos and destruction. But for things to just keep on keeping on would be genuinely odd and require a not-especially-likely combination of competence and good luck for Chinese officials.
Putin’s Russia, by contrast, is securing its geopolitical influence and economic prosperity the old-fashioned way — by seeing the value of its hydrocarbon exports boom. This is nothing really new. When I was in Russia in 1998 everyone old enough said the best of times was not the current era of glorious democracy but rather the Brezhnev years when high Soviet oil revenues allowed the government to make cheap consumer goods available as never before or since. Eventually the oil boom collapsed in the 1980s, forcing the regime to contemplate reforms. Thus, barring some kind of huge blunder, Putin should be in excellent shape until either the price of hydrocarbons falls substantially or else Russia’s reserves start to run out. People used to sometimes refer to Russia as “Upper Volta with missiles” (”Upper Volta” = the old name for Burkina Faso) but these days it’s more like Saudi Arabia with missiles and we should expect that situation to last until either Russia’s reserves run out or else hydrocarbon prices crater.
49 Responses to “Springtime for Autocrats”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
August 17th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
I just think that teleology is bullshit. History does not precede in any particular direction, increased democracy and righteousness are not inevitable, and you can’t say that there is any such thing as progress in one direction or another. The world doesn’t work that way, and the insistence by many to see those kinds of narratives in every phase of human history distorts our understanding of both history and contemporary geopolitics.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
ahem. proceed.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
“it’s doing a pretty good job and delivering reasonably effective public policy.”
But since the United States government is generally viewed as legitimate, it does not have the same strong incentives for high performance. The Feds are not _afraid_ of the people: the Chinese government is. In fact, many Americans are emotionally attached to their government, so much so that they’ll cling to fantasies that excuse gross failure on its part.
Love is blind.
August 17th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Indeed, Mr gcochran makes a good point.
Wile E. Coyote run off a cliff? I thought that was the USA, deep in debt, overstretched in its military, incompetent in its government.
What happens when China and Russia sell a bit of their Fannie and Freddie bonds?????
Joe
August 17th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
In 1989 Bill Keller’s thrilling dispatches on the democratization taking hold in Moscow led me to drop a Harvard PhD program and move to Moscow.
Unfortunately, Keller is more a superficial observer than I ever would have expected.
He now seems oblivious to George Kennan’s prophetic NYT op-ed in February 1997, where he wrote:
“expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold war era.”
“Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking,”
And now we have this. Yeltsin would never have anointed Putin were it not for the Clinton/Albright betrayal which was NATO expansion.
In all the media and blogging, the question of the expansion of NATO is rarely re-examined.
If we had not treated Russia as an enemy, the chances that it would become one would have been greatly reduced.
In the 90’s Russia had to worry about Georgia as a conduit for weapons and terrorists into Chechnya. Now imagine having such a conduit be a NATO member! Encirclement bears real security threats, not just wounded pride, as it is universally depicted in the West.
If we want a democratic Russia, it is we that will have to step back from the precipice, temper our ravenous appetite for controlling Central Asian and even Russian oil, and build down the threat as we did in the 70’s, with bilateral reductions.
We have been the aggressors for the past 15 years, not Russia.
If we want a democratic Russia, we need to figure out how to create the space for democrats who have the Russian national self-interest firmly in mind, rather than trying to bend Western-friendly politicians to our interests, as we did in the 90’s.
I believe in democracy, but I don’t see how the oligarchs (who were ready to sell of their assets to the West at bargain basement prices) could have been reigned in without a very strong-willed and patriotic leader.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
“But since the United States government is generally viewed as legitimate, it does not have the same strong incentives for high performance.”
That is a good point. In my travels I’ve noticed that the countries with the best governments have citizens who are the angriest at their government. This isn’t really surprising. A government that is afraid of its electorate has to be responsive to that electorate.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
The worthwhile thing to note here is that Russia is much more free, in nearly every way, than is China. Russia is far from a real democracy and is authoritarian in some important ways and really, really corrupt, but it’s nothing like China in terms of freedom. To imply that they are is crazy. The bad think is Matt still drawing so heavily on his few months in one city in Russia at the time of a major default for insight. It’s high Tom Friedman in a cab territory and the sooner he realizes it the better his writing will be. He might realize, for example, the oil wealth, while it does slosh through the economy of Russia, is very highly concentrated and that the income inequality there (when “unofficial” income is include- much more than official income for many people) is much more than in the US and getting worse, that the education system is getting worse, that the infrastructure used by most people is getting worse, and the even the military is very, very bad (because most of the money is stolen), and that this won’t get better because of the massive corruption put in place by Putin via a huge increase in bureaucracy. Matt doesn’t know or care about this, though, because he went to Nizhny Novgorad in ‘98 for a few weeks and people told him that hated Chubias and Nemmtsov and he’s never learned anything serious about the place since. If he did he might wonder about why inflation is so bad and price controls are tried, and whether this produces shortages or not. I’ll not hold my breath, though.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
There’s a strange fact about China that apparently a lot of young people never learned.
In 1949 China was basically a feudal stone-age society. Most of what they ever had was blasted by war or stolen by the Soong gang when they left China. There were no laws, no policemen, basically, nothing. There was no tradition of self-government. In fact, China had prospered for a thousand years when a central government controlled the economy, interspersed with periods of disaster and famine when the central government did not control the economy.
What they had was something like you see today, mandarin classes exercising power in the framework of an imperial state. Except that system was eroded, for example, by the Taipei rebellion, in which 50 million people died when fundamentalist Christianity tried to take over China (1852), or the British opium trade, where the Chinese were forced at gunpoint (literally) to accept opium as payment for Chinese exports the British wanted.
Another way to put it is to realize that in 1949 China had about 500 miles of railway track, while the US had about 150,000 miles of railway track. Extend that analogy to almost every industry you can think of in an effort to realize how far they’ve come.
We’re talking about hundreds of millions of people who can remember a poverty Americans can hardly imagine. As Jefferson said, people do not lightly change their government, while evils are sufferable. To a lot of Chinese, having too many factories or cars in their cities probably still looks pretty sufferable.
Heck, maybe if they did have a downturn, they would cash in some of the US bonds they’re holding. Wouldn’t that be fun?
Frankly, it is incredibly patronizing to go on and on about how one of these days the Chinese will wake up and realize they should be like us. There was a time when they did want to be like us, and we made war on them, refused to have anything to do with them, and tried to pressure other countries not to trade with them. That was not setting a very good example.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
It’s high Tom Friedman in a cab territory and the sooner he realizes it the better his writing will be. He might realize, for example, the oil wealth, while it does slosh through the economy of Russia, is very highly concentrated and that the income inequality there (when “unofficial” income is include- much more than official income for many people) is much more than in the US and getting worse, that the education system is getting worse, that the infrastructure used by most people is getting worse, and the even the military is very, very bad (because most of the money is stolen), and that this won’t get better because of the massive corruption put in place by Putin via a huge increase in bureaucracy.
Man, I can make some hellacious run-on sentances but that’s a fucking work of art.
It’s also kind-of-to-my-observations a bunch of bullshit. Bigtime bullshit. I don’t think there is anyway Putin could have the situation worse than the Yeltsin years without seeing starving Russians on the streets while some billionaires ran over them at random heading to Sheremetyevo to catch a flight to their BP meeting
August 17th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Here’s the thing that keeps being overlooked.
Putin, wherever you place him on the dictator-democrat scale, is a genius. He has built the perfect post democratic, post America structure within which Russia can attain great power, regionally and, within recognized limits, internationally.
He has relatively firmly enforce economic and individual freedoms, while fiercely restricting political freedom. He has defined and structured a system where you can become educated, become successful, become wealthy, live as well as you can, just as long as you stay the hell out of politics. He has essentially opened up the available economic opportunities while shutting off the political opportunities.
The Russian people are DELIGHTED with that compromise. They can live a free, happy, even prosperous life if they can find a way, if they can figure out how. No different, actually, than in the US, France, Spain, Japan, etc. The compact is so simple, and so easy to make – leave politics to the designated players, and live your life the way you want to. What Russian familiar with the last 100 years wouldn’t take that deal?
Indeed, looking forward, what American in the authoritarian dystopia of 2020 won’t wish for the freedoms the Russians take for granted?
mikey
August 17th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Matt (unfamous, but not infamous), and Ed
I think the two of you are having a run-on contest. Ed’s is shorter, but much less intelligible, so I guess he wins.
In any case Matt is right about Matt. Russia has changed enormously since 1998, both for the better and for the worse. Although the observation about 70’s wealth and 90’s troubles is in many ways (but not entirely) pertinent.
And Matt (famous), rule No. 1 about Russians: don’t take anything they say at face value or as what they really think, and not because they are deceiving you even.
As they say about themselves “A Russian says one thing, thinks another, and then does a third.” Knowing Russia means gathering up a kaleidescope of impressions and then re-processing them through oneself.
Not for the faint of heart.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
I can’t compete in intelligibility with that. You win.
I was going to try and invent an essentializing aphorism to trump yours but I cede the field, sir.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Russia also faces the non-trivial problem of a declining population. I gather there are some signs of the population eventually stabilizing (maybe), but on the other hand I understand that if you look specifically at ethnic Russians, the picture remains fairly grim.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
People used to sometimes refer to Russia as “Upper Volta with missiles” (”Upper Volta” = the old name for Burkina Faso) but these days it’s more like Saudi Arabia with missiles
Or, you know, Iran with missiles.
The Communist Party in China has long since ceased having any particularly compelling story to tell about why it needs to maintain a monopoly on political power.
I don’t know why they need a “story to tell”. China has been an autocracy for many thousands of years, and has none of the Lockean democratic tradition we take for granted in the west.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Ed, I didn’t say that Russia now is worse than in the Yeltsin era. I said that Matt Y’s depiction of it is consistently misleading and mis-informed based on a short trip he made to one city 10 years ago and that he ought to stop drawing so many bad conclusions from that. He doesn’t know much about the country and would write better things about it if he’d realize that.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
“Empires wax and wane; states cleave asunder and coalesce. When the rule of Chou weakened seven contending principalities sprang up, warring one with another till they settled down as Ts’in and when its destiny had been fulfilled arouse Ch’u and Han to contend for the mastery. And Han was the victor.”
–San Kuo Chih Yen-I
August 17th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Ok, I haven’t been there since the late 90’s. You must have or you wouldn’t be lecturing. What great insight did you gather that can’t escape the Iron Curtain of contemporary Russia?
August 17th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Ed, what you’d see if you spent time in Russia (especially if you traveled around in the provinces), or for that matter if you just carefully read both international and Russian news, is just what I’d said: that under Putin the Bureaucracy has grown greatly and that this has in turn greatly increased corruption. The education system is a huge mess and more and more corrupt all the time. Much of the medical system is a huge mess. The infrastructure not used by the elite or fancy tourists is a huge mess. Income inequality is rising greatly. Right-wing xenophobia and neo-nazi groups are growing as are violent crimes against “chornies”. Aggression against non-Russians is encouraged or at the least ignored. Inflation is very high and is probably under-stated. At the least the inflation that hurts the poor the most (food, fuel, etc.) is much higher than the high official 11% rate. Price caps have, predictably, caused shortages. And so on. If Putin had been smart or cared about anything other than lining his own pockets and those of other FSB types these things could have been prevented. They were not prevented, but Matt Y knows that people hated Gaidar and Nemtsov and the like so Putin must be mostly good. But that’s stupid, as is most of Matt Y’s commentary on Russia.
August 17th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
At the end of WWII, America’s economy was equal to about 50% of the world’s GDP.
This year America’s economy was equal to 19% of the world’s GDP.
Of course our influence on the world is waning.
We can’t afford to play big man anymore.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:13 am
What happens when China and Russia sell a bit of their Fannie and Freddie bonds?????
At that point, they become the owners of a fascinating but really rather useless stack of wallpaper.
That’s why they won’t do it. Indeed, one could argue that the most successful scam BuSh has run has been the one on foreign bondholders. He’s borrowed the money for his toys from the Chinese and others, and now the lenders have to hope like hell that their investment keeps at least some of its value. If the Chinese, for instance, can’t even borrow against that stuff, they are going to have a very interesting time when the demographic tsunami caused by the shift from six-child to one-child families hits in two or three decades. It’ll make the most paranoid fantasies about Social Security look like heaven on earth — one person working to pay the pensions for two parents and four grandparents?
Also, while China may have no Lockean tradition (rather odd if it did, all things considered), it does have a very strong tradition, beginning right with Confucius and continuing for the next 2500 years, of assuming that rulers who screw up and lower the living standards for their people deserve to be overthrown. Mencius, the most important Confucian philosopher after Confucius, even said that gods who didn’t answer prayers should have their altars demolished. There will be no patience with the government if there is an economic downturn or other major screwup — it will be pitchforks and pikes time, just as it has been dozens of other times in Chinese history. Uneasy lies the head that wears that crown.
August 18th, 2008 at 1:38 am
“Thus, barring some kind of huge blunder, Putin should be in excellent shape until either the price of hydrocarbons falls substantially or else Russia’s reserves start to run out.”
They do appear to be sucking it out of the ground rather fast, faster than just about any other producer. They will almost certainly tap into the Artic fields quicker than anyone else, though no one really knows how much is up there.
One gets the sense that they are in fact largely intersted in current lining of pockets and consolidation/expansion of post Cold War power more than long term production.
John
August 18th, 2008 at 1:59 am
I can buy that Russia is autocratic, though it still remains to be seen whether Putin’s handpicked puppet president will stay a puppet. But China’s no autocracy. Ultimate power in China is held by an oligarchy made up of powerful figures in the Communist Party. There’s no single leader who has total control over the government. Maoist China was a totalitarian autocracy, but today’s china is an authoritarian oligarchy.
August 18th, 2008 at 3:13 am
Kennan was right: historians in future decades will devote far more time to what happened to NATO over the past decade than people did while it was happening.
As for Russia, it’s finally setting itself up for the kind of striated society that Marx thought was ripe for communism.
August 18th, 2008 at 3:43 am
I hate to be a stickler asshole, but it was the Taiping Rebellion. I only correct in case someone tried to Google this to learn more. It is a rather darkly fascinating time in history. However, while the Taiping rebels were definitely Christians of some sort, I wouldn’t label them fundamentalist’s because the Bible says nothing about their leader, Hong Xiuquan, being Jesus’s baby brother (which we know was actually the ODB).
Also, excuse my ignorance, but I don’t know enough about Burkina Faso to figure out what exactly “Upper Volta with missiles” is supposed to mean. Does anyone know?
In the major Chinese urban centers, especially among the middle class, there is a definite acceptance of the CCP’s rule even if people do voice disagreements on smaller policy issues. One of my students, a young, university-educated nurse, claimed in class that Mao made China into a democracy. All of my students in that class believed the Dalai Lama to be a terrorist on par with bin Laden and Yasser Arafat. A lot of people in China seem to really believe that foreign criticism of the Chinese government on human rights is motivated primarily by anti-Chinese racism and a wish to see China weakened than any genuine concern over human rights. Such views seem to be more strongly held the higher you go up the income chain. The fear of chaos possibly resulting from the CCP’s fall and/or removal is much more palpable in the cities than any desire to overthrow the government and have a genuine liberal democracy.
Memories of the Tiananmen Square Massacre have disappeared from Beijing except for those who lived through it (and then rarely talked about). I have had more opportunities to talk about that moment in history with Chinese intellectuals in Baltimore than I have in Beijing because of the degree to which it is forgotten. When expat friends of mine have hinted at it around Chinese friends of mine (with the exception of one woman who has recently married a British guy), there has only been confusion and the subject is often dropped.
August 18th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Reality Man:
All that you say is true, but the question remains: what happens when economic crisis hits China? Even excellent economic management would have a hard time dealing with the demographic crisis they’re about to face. And the government itself doesn’t operate as a entity with a single purpose, but as a bunch of political actors vying for greater control. Hard to see how that’s going to play out cleanly.
The great thing about a well-established democracy is that if things get really bad, you just vote for the other party. It works remarkably well.
August 18th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Thanks for the correction to the Taiping Rebellion. One thing seems clear- it was an event on the scale of the Irish Potato famine, an event that has strongly influenced British and American politics for 150 years. In China, the Taiping Rebellion was just one of several similar sized shocks, eventually resulting in a 20 year civil war- while the Japanese invaded about half the country.
An interesting look at China was offered by Jack Belden, who spoke Chinese, had reported from China for most of the 30s, and accompanied Joe Stilwell on the retreat from Burma. In 1948 Belden returned to China and spent six months walking in the countryside and talking with the people.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
@18 Matt (not famous)
Matt, you must obviously be in the “closely follows newspapers” crowd – you are simply dripping with the pervasive bias of the Western media which is perfectly evident to those of us who have spent countless, countless (ok, violins, start playing) eons in Muscovy.
If you have spent much time in the Russian provinces, you would know that despite endemic poverty, and inequality with the rich (especially in Moscow), they are still much, much better off than in the crisis-ridden 90’s.
A state pension, which was worthless then, is now a small but real income, which allows for survival. That was not the case under Yeltsin.
And don’t underestimate the psychological lift which Putin’s vigorous figure has provided to the entire country.
Russians have been corrupt for hundreds of years, to them this is not the scandal we experience it as. Corruption really effects the upper classes more than the lower. (OK, I hear the howls, but it really is true).
And its not just government corruption. Corporate corruption is probably an even bigger problem than government corruption (sorry, neocons).
August 18th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Tom- please read what I said again. I did not say, and in fact denied, that Russia is worse now than in the 90’s. I know, because I first went to Russia in the 90s and go back fairly regularly. The changes are clear and obvious. My point is that this is mostly _despite_ Putin rather than _because of_ him, and that any half-way decent leader who cared about the country could have, and would have, done much more and that Putin has in fact held back what should have been good improvements.
I also don’t deny the corruption effects the wealthy. But to deny the it effects anyone else is crazy. When you can’t expect the police to do anything for you unless you pay a bribe, and expect they will shake you down for small amounts of money, that effects the poor more than the wealthy, but that’s every-day common in Russia. If you can’t get decent medical service unless you pay “extra” fees, that effects the poor, but it’s an every-day occurence in Russia. If you can’t start a small business because there are so many bureaucratic layers, each one demands a bribe, it effect the poor, and that’s an every-day event. When school teachers demand bribes or you must pay bribes to get in to even mediocre universities that effects the poor. These are all things I know first hand but that Matt Y, if he cared to, could have learned about by reading news sources.
August 18th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Frankly, it is incredibly patronizing to go on and on about how one of these days the Chinese will wake up and realize they should be like us. There was a time when they did want to be like us, and we made war on them, refused to have anything to do with them, and tried to pressure other countries not to trade with them. That was not setting a very good example.
Actually, the patronizing folks are the people who pretend that there is little disagreement with the government in China, when in fact it is perfectly clear that the dictatorship has simply suppressed almost all dissent through brutal and evil human rights violations.
The key to understand this is to look at Taiwan. Tawian and China share exactly the same culture and ethnic heritage, and yet Taiwnese love their freedom and would never willingly give it up. The only reason they have this freedom is because they escapbed the butchers of Beijing and after Chiang’s dictatorship passed from the scene, Taiwan was able to move to democracy because it wasn’t run by totalitarians.
Thus, no theory that goes off on some characteristic of Chinese culture or society to justify the world’s most evil and oppressive dictatorship (no other country comes close to brutalizing and oppressing 1.2 billion people) can ever be valid. It’s the government, not the culture.
August 19th, 2008 at 12:39 am
A real key to understanding Chinese contentment with the government is that virtually every Chinese has roughly the following understanding of the historical time line.
1. China was once the richest most powerful country in the world
2. Corruption and foreign influence degraded that over the years
3. China hit the lowest of possible lows when Japan invaded
4. The Communists beat Japan and while they did make mistakes, they were the ones who started China on the road back
There’s enough truth in there to buy the communists a lot of good will. That’s why you see 90% or so approving of their country, but much lower numbers who are happy with their own lot. The Chinese aren’t blind, they know their are failings of their government, but they also are pragmatic enough to see that the alternative may not be better.
Of course a good part of why there are no better alternatives is that the current government won’t give the opposition any oxygen, but the CCP has done some very good and highly popular things to balance the frustrations that many Chinese have, namely making it possible for a lot of people to improve their lives. Everybody in China certainly prefers their currently upward trajectory to the constant downward spiral the proceeded the 1949 revolution.
August 19th, 2008 at 5:11 am
Assuming discontented and/or educated segments of society figure out how to get organized (the Floating Population, rural families disposed of their land and plagued by local Party corruption, young men without a real chance to get married because there aren’t enough girls, Tibetans, Uyghurs, unemployed university graduates, labor, environmentalists, etc.), then the Party is rather fucked. You bring up a good point: No country can have permanent perpetual economic growth. The first wave of major ’80’s urban protests was set off by high inflation. China today sees thousands of protests a day. It’s no wonder the CCP has devoted so much effort to controlling new communications technology.
February 28th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Wow!! This is a really nice blog mate. Do you accept donations?
March 1st, 2009 at 9:25 am
viagra
It is the coolest site,keep so!
March 1st, 2009 at 10:19 pm
cialis
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:20 am
levitraIt is the coolest site,keep so!
March 11th, 2009 at 8:29 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 13th, 2009 at 4:40 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 14th, 2009 at 9:12 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
xanax
March 17th, 2009 at 3:21 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:17 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:26 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra