PLM International Department on Duterte's Separation From the US PDF Print E-mail
Written by Partido Lakas ng Masa   
Sunday, 23 October 2016 09:56

Yes, to ‘separation’ from US, but an economic anti-imperialism is also needed


President Rodrigo Duterte’s statement declaring his intentions to “separate” from the United States in both military and economic relations should be welcomed, but it’s easier said than done. Hence the President’s constant ‘backtracking’ on his statements.  Given the President’s inconsistency, the question is posed: What does it mean to be an anti-imperialist government today? And is lining up with China (and to a lesser-extent Russia) an anti-imperialist positioning?


Since the formation of the Philippine republic every single Philippine President has visited the US seeking ‘assistance’ and ‘guidance’. This has been an indication of the Philippines being subservient to US interests in both foreign and domestic policy and the successive elite-controlled governments acting as proxy for US interests, from Korea (1950-1955) to Vietnam (1964-1968), when Philippine troops fought with or assisted the invading US forces. Duterte, despite the backtracking, is the only President who has declared, on several occasions, his intentions to pursue a foreign policy independent of the US, thus signifying an important and even historical shift. This significance has not been lost on the trapo elite, those both allied with and opposing Duterte, who have come out criticizing the President’s statement. This includes former President Fidel Ramos, who is considered to be an ally of the President.


Neoliberal globalization has increased the importance of economic imperialism vis-à-vis political/military imperialism. Neoliberalism has consolidated imperialist domination of Third World economies. Regimes that have been politically independent from Western imperialism, have been part of the Western-dominated neoliberal economy, such as Syria and Libya (2000-2011) and Vietnam (since the early 2000s). Interestingly, in the case of Vietnam this has lead to a state that fought a 30-year war for independence against the US increasingly becoming a US ally.


The Cuban revolution and the Hugo Chavez project of 21st Century Socialism in Venezuela sit in contrast to these examples. The Cuban revolutions anti-imperialism began in the domestic front when Fidel Castro declared in 1960 that the revolutionary government would expropriate US corporations “down to the nails in their boots” and then started a program of nationalization of the key sectors of the Cuban economy, such as sugar and tobacco. Likewise, Hugo Chavez’s anti-imperialism was primarily waged on the economic front, further socializing the country’s oil assets and embarking on an anti-neoliberal economic program with the stated intention of transitioning towards socialism, despite the current challenges faced in the consistency of the implementation of this program. In both cases, key to the success of this economic and subsequent political anti-imperialism of these revolutionary governments was the mobilizing of the masses around an ‘all-sided’ anti-imperialist program.


If Philippines remains a neoliberal economy, and especially if it remains dependent on export of labor as a major income-generator, it will be easy for the US to either pressure a backdown from Duterte or effect regime change. The country will be at mercy of international financial institutions and vulnerable to economic sanctions, official and unofficial. The pro-US elite, which is the overwhelming majority, will be a ‘fifth column’ supporting US interests, along with the top echelons of the AFP loyal to the US high command.  Whether the masses will line up behind a popular President when the going gets tougher, is a question mark. As we know from our own historical experience and can observe in the case of the progressive governments in Latin America today, the US has a long history of manipulating the class struggle for its own ends


An economy dependent on the export of labor is extremely vulnerable to international pressure. US Ambassador Philip Goldberg’s statement on the importance of OFW remittances to the Philippine economy and the decline in the value of the peso in the last few weeks are indicators of the government’s economic vulnerability. Economic independence, therefore, would have to end the export of labor as a major sector of the economy. This would necessitate serious development of the means of production, that is, a sustainable industrialization of the economy. The campaign by the labor organizations against contractualization needs to be viewed in this light. It’s an important part of the struggle to end neoliberal economic dependence. It should be viewed as a key part of the struggle for an economic anti-imperialism.


The rise of neoliberal imperialism or global capitalism has also involved the rise of China as an economic power. This is extremely contradictory because the US still controls the world economy and China's economic growth is intertwined with neoliberalism. Chinese manufacturing is dependent on Western markets, which is why after 2008 financial crisis China did all it could to stabilize global capitalism. Therefore, the President aligning himself with China, while indicating a direction towards an independent foreign policy in the political arena, is not an indication of an anti-imperialist policy in the economic arena.


Obama's “pivot to Asia” was the idea that surrounding China with countries willing to maintain a US military presence or relationship with the US would be a more effective way of projecting power than Middle East wars which can get out of control and end up having an effect opposite to what was intended, i.e., Bush's fiasco in Iraq ended up damaging US military and political prestige. China had to do a bit of military projection of its own to respond. Hence the increase in assertiveness over territories claimed by other nations in the region. The US is upset about Duterte's ‘defection’ to China because this sabotage of “pivot to Asia” would weaken US in its global competition with China.


President Duterte’s ‘political’ anti-imperialism has to be matched, both with the scrapping of the military agreements such as the VFA, the EDCA, and the RP-US Military Treaty, and an ‘economic’ anti-imperialism. This requires pursuing an anti-neoliberal program and mobilizing the masses around such a program. Supporting the struggle for a comprehensive end to contractualization will be an important step forward in this regard.#


Rei Melencio,

International Department

Partido Lakas ng Masa (PLM)





October 7, 2016 PDF Print E-mail
Written by Partido Lakas ng Masa   
Friday, 07 October 2016 20:25

100 days of Duterte administration. Workers and supporters launched a rally at Mendiola to protest the non-implementation of the anti-contractualization pronouncements of President Duterte. PLM also marked the event by supporting the rally and calling for the reversal of the neo-liberal policies of the government and the implementation of all promised reforms.


14566375_1064596950321887_2134388572629659802_o 14500585_1064597883655127_7388712045793784755_o


100 Days of the Duterte Presidency PDF Print E-mail
Written by Partido Lakas ng Masa   
Monday, 03 October 2016 12:16

100 Days of the Duterte Presidency:



By Sonny Melencio

[This article has been presented and discussed by the leadership and organizers of the Partido Lakas ng Masa (PLM) to mark the coming 100-day anniversary of the Duterte administration. It is a contribution to the discussion among the Left and progressive forces on how to view this administration and the tasks ahead.]


I. The tactical period


1. According to Vladimir Lenin, the Marxist conception of a tactical period is based on “an objective consideration of the sum total of the relations between absolutely all the classes in a given society, and consequently a consideration of the objective stage of development reached by that society and of the relations between it and other societies, [which] can serve as a basis for the correct tactics of an advanced class.”  [From Tactics of the Class Struggle of the Proletariat, V.I. Lenin,]


2. How do we assess and analyze the tactical period faced by the broad working class movement and its positioning in relation to all other classes under the present Rodrigo Duterte regime?


3.  Let’s begin with the ruling class. The ruling class today is undergoing intensifying factionalism because a new faction has emerged vis-à-vis the older factions coming from or supported by the oligarchy and the so-called Yellow trapos [traditional politicians].


4.  The new faction is the Duterte faction which is based among the local trapos and the local elite that have long been opposing the rule of “Imperial Manila” or the older factions. One of the main goals of this faction is to overturn the rule of the previous factions by enforcing ‘federalism’ or a federal with a parliamentary or presidential/parliamentary system.


5.  The broad masses, who have been disenchanted and dissatisfied with the previous regimes that ruled after the Edsa Revolution (regimes which they lump together as the Yellow/Dilawan), are generally still supportive of the Duterte presidency. Duterte has the highest trust rating, reaching as high as 91%, among presidents during the first weeks of his presidency.


6.  Duterte’s pronouncements on providing peace and security to many (through an anti-drugs, anti-criminalism campaign), eradicating corruption, increasing social benefits for the poor, and the likes, fuel the expectation of the masses that change is indeed coming under this administration. They consider the Duterte administration the last bastion of hope for a better future. It is however only a hundred days of Duterte administration and the masses seem ready to wait for a while and see whether the promised change will come their way.


7.  A large section of the middle classes supports Duterte, especially his war on drugs or the peace and order campaign. Those who have assets and properties to protect (big or small) are relieved that the campaign gives them some security.


Left and progressive groups


1.  In general, the Left and progressive groups are divided into those in coalition with Duterte and those against Duterte’s presidency. The former includes those aligned with the Communist Party of the Philippines/National Democratic Front forces. The CPP has characterized Duterte as the “chief political representative of the ruling classes and the head of the reactionary client-state” today. Duterte has offered them some choice positions in his Cabinet, which they accepted by putting open leaders of the mass movement there. However, there are different signals on how they stand on the Duterte regime, ranging from outright collaboration to critical collaboration or critical engagement with the Duterte regime.


2.  The anti-Duterte groups include former leaders and members of Akbayan (or leaders and members who are still with Akbayan but critical of its dalliances with the Liberal Party or the Yellow forces).


3. There are however some sections of the Left and progressives who long consider themselves independent from both the elite factions: the Duterte and the Yellow forces. It is in this third force that PLM (Partido Lakas ng Masa) positions itself.


State apparatus


1.  How strong and consolidated is the state apparatus under Duterte? Duterte’s Cabinet continues to be under the helm of neoliberal technocrats and trapos despite the posts given to the CPP-allied leaders. The parliamentary apparatus (Senate & the House of Representatives) are now under Duterte supporters, since a large section of the Liberal Party Coalition has joined up with the majority faction out of political opportunism.  But they’re not really loyalists of Duterte; they can easily change sides depending on how the wind blows or on undue pressures from US imperialism and the oligarchs.


2.  The PNP and the AFP are reported to be still supporting Duterte as the latter continues doing the rounds of visit to police and military camps all over the country. Duterte has put his own people at the helm of the PNP (Chief ‘Bato’ dela Rosa) and the AFP (Chief of Staff Ricardo Visaya) and has been campaigning hard to attract the police and soldiers to his no-nonsense, seemingly strong style of leadership and to promise them more support and funds. Yet, it’s more likely that the forces in the AFP and PNP who are supportive of US imperialism, the oligarchy and the Yellow trapos are waiting in the wings to make their moves soon.


US imperialism


1. The foreign powers, especially the US government and its adjuncts, are becoming wary of the Duterte government. A few weeks ago, the US considered the Duterte administration under a “business as usual” situation. The country has a “colorful president” who still adheres to a neoliberal program that does not pose a threat to their political, military, and trade and economic operations in the country.


2.  After the US and its allies critiqued the Duterte government for human rights violations, Duterte has counteracted by threatening to kick out US military troops in the Philippines, review the US-RP Mutual Defense Treaty (which he said was an unequal treaty), and open up more trade and economic relations with China and Russia (including buying arms from these rival countries of the US). Now it is not only the US but the European Union which has taken a critical stance against the Duterte regime’s human rights violations.


3. Duterte’s tirade has continued by calling for an end to the joint US-Philippines military exercises and by threatening to “cross the Rubicon” soon, meaning deserting the alliance with the US and opening up “new alliances” with its rivals. These declarations may still be rhetoric, but there’s consistency in Duterte’s tirades that come from the nationalist positions he took when he was a young activist of the Kabataang Makabayan. These may not be anti-imperialist pronouncements, but a threat to shift to rival alliances surely will rile the chief imperialist power, the United States.


4. Duterte must have known that this early, the United States might have been contemplating a “regime change” in the country. Duterte is too unpredictable and his dalliances with the revolutionary Left are problematic to them.  To plot for a “regime change” is something that the US imperialist forces have done in a number of countries in order to keep their interests intact and to retain a docile government that it can use as a proxy to serve their interests. It is also in the interest of the US to restore the rule of the Yellow forces and the old oligarchs as they have been its partners for a long time. It is not unrealistic to say that the Senate inquiry on extra-judicial killings and the anti-drugs war, initiated by the Yellow forces, and the counterpart House of Representative inquiry are part and parcel of the “regime change” scenario and its attendant reaction coming from Duterte’s legislative supporters.


II. The political scenario

1.  Where is the situation heading?  Right now, we are in a very unstable period; we can even say it’s a very perilous period for the Left and progressive forces.


2.  There are two possible scenarios in the immediate future:


2.1. One is the degeneration of the Duterte regime into a dictatorship or a neo-fascistic regime. This scenario is already being raised by many forces including independent forces among the Left and the progressives.


2.2. The other is the intensification of US intervention and the ouster of the Duterte government either through constitutional (impeachment) or extra-constitutional means (coup d’etat or assassination). This scenario is being raised by forces of the CPP and those supporting Duterte.


3.  Both scenarios can also coexist as one can be a counter-reaction to the other.


4. A seeming third scenario of Duterte going to the Left by siding with the revolutionary movement in actual deed, not only in rhetoric, is somewhat far-fetched. It is being hampered by the nature and character of the Duterte regime itself (still a reactionary regime of a faction of the elite), its avowed program of neoliberalism, the weak state of the revolutionary movement, the support of the state institutions especially the military and the police, the regional balance of forces (in terms of US imperialism and the rival powers in the region), and others.


The dictatorship scenario


1.  The degeneration of the Duterte government into a dictatorship is indicated by the warlord and authoritarian mould of the Philippine president. The phenomena of warlordism in the country is itself characteristic of a political system shaped by a mongrel, backward capitalism (others call it the semi-colonial, semi-feudal system). This points to a weak nation-state, headed by oligarchs and top political clans who care less about the regions and provinces as long as they dispense the loot in government. This may be the first time that a local warlord has come to sit as the national president.


2.  The warlord type of rule, which includes a command of private guards and goons and an impunity for violence, including violence against women and extreme forms of sexism, has been emblematic in areas such as Davao (Duterte with the Davao Death Squad), Isabela (the Dys), Escalante (the Yaps), Maguindanao (the Ampatuans), and the likes. Warlordism is founded on authoritarianism and violence, and can easily slide into a destruction of bourgeois or formal democratic processes and the imposition of martial rule.


3. Duterte’s authoritarian and violent bent is being unraveled by the mass killings and the human rights violations incurred by its war on drugs in the communities. The killings are happening in urban poor areas and have reached a death casualty of more than 3,000 during the 100 days of the Duterte government. Those killed, either by direct police actions or so-called vigilante operations, are generally the small-time pushers and users in the communities.


The underclass


1. Although there’s a rising number of children and innocents killed in the war on drugs, the main target is the so-called underclass – the layer of society which has been alienated and debased by the very system of mongrel, backward capitalism that exists in our urban jungle or in any other Third World cities in the world today. This is the layer that was originally called by Karl Marx as the lumpen – it’s the “class of outcast, degenerated and submerged elements that make up a section of the population of the [urban centers]” which include beggars, prostitutes, gangsters, racketeers, swindlers, petty criminals, tramps… and all sorts of declassed, degraded or degenerated elements.” [Marxist Internet Archive,] For Marx, this is the layer of the working class that is unlikely ever to achieve class consciousness and can even be an impediment to the realization of socialism.


2. Much has changed in the categories of lumpen or lumpenproletariat as Marx defined it. This is a fluid, not a static or sharply defined category. (Some of the anti-social activities for instance are being done by members of the capitalist class itself). In today’s underclass belongs the millions of people who have been hooked to shabu (methamphetamine, meth, ‘ice’ or ‘crystal’ in other countries) and are the ‘living zombies’ who carry out criminal activities under the influence of this drug or to support their vices. It is no wonder that even in the urban poor communities, people are supporting the war on drugs campaign of the government, as it provides them the peace and security that they long for.


3. The trading of shabu has replaced jueteng as a form of livelihood in urban poor communities where many people are chronically unemployed or unemployables. This increases the number of probable targets (three million pushers and users according to Duterte) of the war on drugs. In the government list, we do not add yet the police force and its generals who are the coddlers or main operators of the drugs trade. This only means that the Duterte government cannot really implement a successful war on drugs if the very forces it unleashes to stamp the drug trade are the main perpetrators.


4.  While we point to the underclass as the main target of Duterte’s war on drugs, the Left should never countenance a murder spree to get rid of these elements. We strike at the very root of the problem, which is the existence of a mongrel, backward type of capitalism which drives people into utter destitution and into a life of criminalities and drugs.


US intervention


1. The intensification of US intervention in the country is not only based on the human rights violations of the Duterte regime, although this is now being used as the main excuse for a possible “regime change” scenario. Duterte’s pronouncements go against the US consolidation of military might in the region and the containment of China through its “Pivot to Asia” (now called “Rebalance to Asia”) by the US imperialist forces.


2. The De Lima inquiry in the Senate is an attempt to launch an early impeachment proceeding against Duterte. This immediately lost ground as Duterte and his cohorts in the Senate ousted Senator Leila de Lima as chair of the inquiry and are now using every effort to shift the investigation away from Duterte’s role in the DDS (Davao Death Squad) killings. Then there is the Kangaroo court in the House of Representatives which is using every trick in the book to undertake a demolition job against De Lima (including resorting to personal, misogynistic, vilely sexist- shaming tactics). As to where this will head depends on the balance of forces that will arise in the unceasing faction fight among the trapos.


III.  Our Calls, Our Tasks


1. What is our stand in this tactical period?


2. We should intensify our campaign for a stop to the killings and the drift towards more authoritarian rule or the imposition of dictatorship by the Duterte government. But this campaign (Stop the Killings, No to Dictatorship) should not play into the hands of the Yellow forces, the oligarchs and the US imperialists who are using the campaign to their own advantage. We should lead the campaign as an independent force, so it will not be seen or used as just another plank of the US and the Yellow forces to discredit and bring down the Duterte government.


3. We do not discount the possibility of a coup d’etat, impeachment or assassination plot against Duterte. As Duterte reacts by further threatening to take an anti-US position, an independent foreign policy position, and even join up with the anti-US rival foreign powers, it will be a matter of time before the plot of “regime change” will be implemented. To this, we say No to US intervention in Philippine politics.


4. The tactical period is also characterized by the government continuing its neoliberal economic program despite pronouncements against labor contractualization and expansion of social welfare for the masses. There has been no improvement in the lives of the poor but the neoliberal program, which victimizes the poor, continues without letup. Duterte’s supporters in government and those in the legislative even want to impose more taxes against the poor, diminish welfare benefits for senior citizens, and change the constitution to accommodate foreign corporations and liberalize trade and investment.


5. We call for an End to Neoliberalism and all its attendant policies – privatization, liberalization, deregulation, regressive taxation, and contractualization. Our campaign against contractualization and all its forms should expose the entire neoliberal program of the government.


IV.  The Alternative


1. It should be clear to all that the alternative to the Duterte regime is not another form of coalition with the trapos, the oligarchy, the Yellow forces, or even the local trapos and the warlords themselves.


2. The genuine alternative is a Government of the Masses – for the masses, by the masses, and of the masses. We should be clear about this, although the present situation does not point to the possibility of such. The CPP has called for a Government of National Unity (GNU) which includes Duterte, i.e., if Duterte abides by an anti-neoliberal and pro-masses program of the government. The call for a GNU is in consonance with the multi-class provisional government or a ‘bloc/state of four classes’ (workers, peasants, petty-bourgeoisie, and national bourgeoisie) that the CPP adheres to in pursuing the national democratic stage of the Philippine revolution.


3. It is however problematic to base our call on the possibility of Duterte allying himself with the revolutionary movement, or abiding to a national democratic program of government.  At some point, CPP leader Jose Ma. Sison has even acknowledged a Duterte regime that merely undertakes “bourgeois reforms” as the only possible relief that the masses can get from the government today.


4. We have a choice. We can be pragmatic and accept the realities and limitations of the present political juncture. But when the heat and the opposition build up, Duterte will more likely take a Rightist position than align himself with the Left.  He’s not even a Peron, and perhaps will not be given time and opportunity to become one. [See my previous article,]


5. At this stage, it is perhaps better to put up the guidepost of the alternative society we want, including a strategic call for a Government of the Masses instead of a very tactical governmental call. A Government of the Masses is the only alternative to a series of regimes that merely continue to exploit, oppress and dehumanize the masses.


6. A Government of the Masses is a government of the broad working class and the peasantry and other oppressed sectors of society. It overturns the mongrel, backward capitalism and paves the way for a transition to socialism.


IV. An Independent Mass Movement


1. Our calls should be many-sided. We should go beyond single-issue calls and a single-issue movement as we are trying to develop a movement of a broad working class that seriously challenges the system and poses itself as an alternative power to the ruling class or its factions.


2. Lenin in What Is to be Done also called for an organization that conducts comprehensive and all-sided exposure against the tsarist regime, an exposure of issues that point to the need for a programmatic system change (towards socialism) instead of a regime change. In a sense, this is also what we need to do at this juncture.


3. In the present tactical period, we need a movement that can do this. The main tactic is to develop an independent mass movement carrying the independent class line of the broad working class masses. It is an erroneous tactic to ally or coalesce with any faction of the ruling class, with potentially disastrous consequences for the working class movement. It is bound to fail as the Left has experienced during the Cory period, the Erap period, the GMA period, and the Noynoy period.


4. Finally, the tactic is addressed to all Left and progressive forces and individuals – whichever blocs or parties they are aligned with -- who see the need for an independent mass movement that can take on the tasks of the present tactical period. This is where Left unity is crucial – if we can unite and combine our forces and resources, we can build a movement that can contest, even shift, the outcome of the present tactical period to our advantage. This is also the opportunity presented by the tactical period.#


October 3, 2016





Last Updated on Monday, 03 October 2016 12:43
September 20, 2016 PDF Print E-mail
Written by Partido Lakas ng Masa   
Tuesday, 20 September 2016 17:36

These packed goods prepared by PLM ( Partido Lakas ng Masa ) to be donated to fire victims of Brgy.546,Sampaloc Mla.

14380117_1050422551739327_3234607525976872978_o 14352586_1050422578405991_8860524931033662296_o


On the Extra-Judicial Killings PDF Print E-mail
Written by Partido Lakas ng Masa   
Saturday, 17 September 2016 21:08

The Matobato confessions confirm the failure of the entire trapo system

By Sonny Melencio


The statements of operative Edgar Matobato during the Senate hearings on extra-judicial killings have confirmed the existence of the Davao Death Squad (DDS) which we know have existed for a long time now. According to Matobato, the killings have been going on since 1988 starting with the Cory administration through to FVR's, Erap's, GMA's, Noynoy's, up until now.


This means that all these administrations must be held accountable. They all have blood on their hands.


The statements also expose the connivance of the police and government forces in perpetrating the killings. We also know that this connivance has been established in the operation of the illegal drug trade itself.


As to how the killings could remain unabated all through the years has to be explained not only by the Duterte government but also by the previous ones. The previous administrations have known what was happening in Davao all along, but they chose to ignore it. Some administrations even consorted with the drug lords and syndicates, until the drug issue became so significant that it catapulted Rodrigo Duterte to power.


The killings have become almost nationwide. Now its becoming clearer that these mass killings are in fact systemic. It's part and parcel of the system of trapo politics and elite rule in the country.


Davao is not the only case. There have been similar killings in Negros (Escalante), Isabela, Maguindanao and elsewhere. It might not have the same intensity and publicity as in Davao, but it points to the capacity of the ruling individuals in power to form their own death squads, bodyguards and goons to do their bidding. We have a term to describe this localized phenomenon, that is warlordism, reminiscent of an era when the landowning class in their fiefdom ruled through terror and violence.


We have to assess and therefore question the direction of the Senate hearings in this context. The hearings have degenerated into a jockeying of opposing factions within the ruling class in order to score points and advance their own agenda. This makes the Senate hearings an exercise in futility, as they are not meant to resolve the problem of the killings, but to lay the blame solely with the present administration. The motive is therefore suspect. The question is posed: Why didn't the elite factions which were previously in government, not so long ago, use their power to stop the killings?


Let's not fool ourselves. There has been an increasing polarization of forces within the ruling class. Even if the Liberal Party is in disarray, with a majority of its members having joined the Duterte faction, they are still powerful enough to destabilize the Duterte regime. Yes, there is a Plan B, as there is a Plan A, or even a Plan C that are a part of this faction's maneouvers to control power.


But where are the masses and the poor in all these designs? Our interests are not represented in any of these maneouvers. While they quarrel in the halls of the Congress, we continue to be the casualties of their system -- oppressed, exploited and even killed in the streets.


The solution is not to replace Duterte with another trapo via plans engineered by any of the elite factions. We must not be trapped into aligning ourselves with any of the factions. The masses must organize and mobilize for their own agenda and interests. This is the only way that we can protect our communities and win genuine peace and security. The unity of the Left and progressive forces is crucial to achieving this.#


« StartPrev12345678910NextEnd »

Page 1 of 69

A new party is born. A party for our times.

A party of Change! A party of Socialism!

“Pare-pareho lamang silang trapo!
Mangungurakot na naman yan!
Bobolahin na naman nila tayo!”

Sounds really familiar. We have heard this expression from people of all walks of life time and again. An automatic response, when one is asked about a certain politician or politicians in general.

For decades, generations of politicians from the same clan and some new ones have been deceiving the masses. Every election for them has been an opportunity to make more promises. And after every election, all these remain just that – promises.




Join the Campaigns!


anti-trpo icon

Anti Trapo Campaign!


Government of the Masses Campaign! icon

Government of the Masses Campaign!

Renewing Socialist Feminism


Visitors Counter

mod_vvisit_counterThis month19762

Your IP:
Today: Oct 24, 2016