---

Article in basicincomeweek.org (21.9.15)

Article in Liveable4All 28/8/2015

Blog article: BIEN basic income earth network  Germany: Ralph Boes Sanction starvation (11.9.15)

---

Information from August 2015:

From Wednesday to Sunday 18 – 21.00 Ralph Boes and his support are sitting in front of the Hotel Adlon near Brandenburger Tor, Berlin. 

                   

Boes didn´t eat something since the first of July. Why?, Please come along and sit down at Boes table. Talk with him about the German Employment Office, and why it starves him. Talk with him about human dignity, German basic law and whether you are allowed to excoriate capitalism by not acting under orders of the German labour market.

---

Flyer 1

for printing and distribute...

Flyer page 2                                                Flyer page 1

---

---

---

The main text of Ralph Boes "Brandbrief":

 

Human dignity is inviolable!

A “Brandbrief”* from a determined citizen (of Germany)

 

 

Dear President, Herr Christian Wulff,

Dear Chancellor, Frau Dr Merkel,   

Dear Minister of Employment, Frau von der Leyen,

Dear Chairman of the Federal Jobcentre, Herr Dr Weise,

Dear Director of the Jobcentre Mitte, Berlin, Herr Schneider,

(I)

We are all citizens of a country with a Constitution (Grundgesetz). Its first sentence is: “The dignity of man is inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all public authority.”

For many, such a sentence may seem like but a grain of sand which – under the pressures of time – has become worn down and immersed by immense sedimentary deposits of other political decisions and laws. Yes, one is all too readily marginalised and ridiculed if and when one attempts to judge contemporary political and economic developments with this sentence as a litmus test.

But we can’t just ignore it. Having, as it does, its roots in the lessons learned from those infamous deeds committed in the Third Reich and being, as it is, a declaration of intent and duty – to be abided by at all costs – it is the cornerstone of our Federal Republic of Germany.

So much so, indeed, that one day historians shall say:

“Neither a king nor an Emperor, nor even a dictator after them, was to give the Federal Republic of Germany its foundation and justification. Rather was it the common desire of the people and their courts to respect and defend the dignity of all people.”

And, undoubtedly, these historians shall judge the rise, flourishing and, possibly, fall of this Republic by this litmus test.

(II)

Dear President, Herr Christian Wulff,

Dear Chancellor, Frau Dr Merkel,   

Dear Minister of Employment, Frau von der Leyen,

Dear Herr Dr Weise,

Dear Herr Schneider,

 

I write in order to make public the personal consequences I shall take from a disgrace that has plagued our country for years: we pride ourselves on our constitution (Grundgesetz) being the foundation of our Republic although our citizens’ rights are systematically abused – I am talking of Hartz IV!

Hartz IV is, of course, ostensibly nothing more than a well meant attempt by the Government to assist the unemployed with money and careers advice. To this extent it is surely honourable and constitutional. After all, we could just leave these people in the gutters.

No less honourable – and, in view of the desired aim of “help to self-help”, at first sight even understandable – is that one is led by the notion of therapy (called “activation”), i.e. “as much help as necessary” on the one hand and “as little help as possible”. Indeed, we are bound to express our admiration when we see the tremendous sums spent “activating and qualifying” those out of work.

Alas, as great as the exertions are, so small are the positive effects. This is because these attempts are based on false assumptions. The problem is not to be found with the unemployed but with the changed means of production. The latter are the cause of current unemployment levels!

It is possible that in the 1970’s and possibly in the early 1980’s the causes of unemployment were different. They may well have lain with the unemployed. After all, in those days workers were sorely needed.

Had we then given the unemployed a chance to re-train or improve their qualifications as we do today; had we then assisted them to get back on their feet instead of just allowing them to vegetate on benefits, then it might have worked. Yes, overcoming unemployment would then have resulted in re-entering a flourishing and useful – and even well paid (!) – world of work.

(III)

 How different things are today! The labour market is more than saturated. The current jobless are generally not “losers” who are unemployable and in need of therapy. Rather are they redundant due to automation. The supermarket shelves are bulging with plenty to a degree that confounds all expectations. And all this: without need of many workers. That is the problem.

We are treating today’s problem with yesterday’s medicine, because we don’t see today’s problem. We are like a doctor treating a lung disorder although the patient is only lacking clean air. We are treating the unemployed with unsuitable instruments. This is commonly called torture!

(IV)

The jobless are not in need of therapy, but instead the system needs to be developed further. If we, as we surely do, expend great efforts in automating production and so free mankind from labour, so must we provide these “freed” people with an income which makes them independent of the so called labour market and thus allows them to feel genuinely free and not just redundant.

An unconditional citizen’s income would offer a solution. An income for all: the employed and the employed. An income that would allow everyone the freedom to live as they wish; independent of rationalising in industry. Yet more: it would encourage individual initiative.

Industrial rationalisation necessitates a universal unconditional citizen’s income, not just in Germany, but worldwide. Doubts about its plausibility have been variously refuted [1]; the advantages for people (through commerce and culture) have been reported manifold; as have ideas of implementation.

But instead of considering such a solution, our government tries to press-gang people in to the very labour market which has made them redundant. They are prevented from coming to their “senses”. We penalise and even punish their “healthy” chagrin at being bullied from one occupational training course to another – and then we wonder about the unsocial and shameful structural and human conditions arising in the sub-cultures of the unemployed and also amongst those who are paid but a pittance; and their number is increasing as if in a nightmare.

(V)

The dignity of man is inviolable? Due to the structurally misplaced treatment of those concerned we see quite different things arising.

Let us first mention the dignity of man itself: it is no secret that the “activating” programmes more often than not serve but one purpose: to control those involved![2] Having to live on a pittance but being yet fit to work, the danger is that these people might work on the black market.

To avoid the remaining workers in the labour market from being catapulted into redundancy via such a growth in the black market and to prevent government revenues from plummeting, it is necessary for the unemployed to be “activated”. And it is not enough that this should be artificial, it need be pointless, because it could/would otherwise undermine the legal labour market.

(VI)

To occupy people with pointless work is to suspend human dignity. More so still, when one remembers that participants who refuse can even face hunger and homelessness.

To make the matter abundantly clear; Hartz IV has formed the first “army” of slaves to be forced to perform pointless work. [3]And the threats of starvation and destitution (which are, quite simply, the result of penury) make these State programmes existence-threatening, whether they are well meant or not. [4]

Allow me to name those (Grundgesetz) paragraphs alone which are hereby made redundant and negated:

- Article 1 - Article 2 - Article 3 - Article 11  - Article 12  - Article 13

("Human dignity is inviolable ") [5] (Right to freedom of personal development) [6a] (The principle of equal treatment) [6b] (Free movement of persons) [7] (Free choice of work/profession / prohibition of forced labour) [8] (Inviolability of the home) [9]

As well as:

- Article 6

(Protection of the family) [10]

Not made redundant or negated, but simply ignored.

- Article 19

(“The requirement of citation”)

Referring to the precept – called “Zitiergebot”, in German (which requires, that for any regulation deviating from the constitution, the relevant article of the constitution shall be named and the deviation justified, without, however, ever violating the essence of any basic right). [11] The disregarding of this article alone renders large parts of the SGB II (Social Laws – Second Volume), and in particular the measures of sanctions contained therein (§ 31), invalid.

This means that more than a third of the 19 articles on human rights are thus invalidated! And the tone in which large sections of the press and politics speak of persons receiving Hartz IV is an integral part of this systematic violation of human rights. In publicly propagating the image of an unkempt [12], unreliable and lazy citizen, one that can only be motivated and manipulated through sanctions, in claiming that, “the increase in Hartz IV [has given] the tobacco and drinks industry a jump-start” [13], and, further, that those on Hartz IV ought not to be given money for their children, as this would only be misspent [14], we merely describe the dark-side of those conditions we ourselves have brought into

social existence through the debasing Hartz IV system. When applied to real people who are on Hartz IV, these are acts of incitement [15] and should be punished by the state!

 

(VII)

We live in times of globally enflaming revolutions. Even in Germany the situation is becoming so volatile that we may reasonably fear civil unrest, just because people demand their constitutionally guaranteed human rights – rights that would remain rights even without such a guarantee.

To wish for people to waive their rights and so refrain from civil unrest is one thing; to forebear from standing up for one’s rights, however, is to encourage despotism. Therefore, I have decided to take the following measures:

As from today, I dispute and refute any and all unreasonable demands from State authorities that require me to accept offers of work or “activation” or demands to abide by any such rules and stipulations as seem to me to be pointless. Furthermore, do I herewith reject the fixation on paid employment, which has long been shown to be based on an illusion.

I lay claim to an unconditional right to a free and self-determined life, one in which I may freely choose and follow an occupation which seems to me to be useful and rewarding and which is not proscribed for me by others – even if I am presently forced by commercial and political circumstances to apply for social security benefits known in Germany as Hartz IV.

I herewith proclaim all work that arises from an internal and serious need – regardless of whether it is visible or invisible and regardless of whether it sustains one’s pecuniary liquidity! – to be sacred.

A society based exclusively on “gainful” employment (in a pecuniary sense) digs its own grave, because it ignores the more fundamental purpose of work. Such a society attributes greater benefit to the production of toilet paper and jelly-babies than to a mother’s cares over her children or those of a friend or relative active in helping to nurse! [16]

I refuse to believe that Germany shall continue to follow a path that is annulling our so painfully achieved human rights and making the fear of sanctions, undignified work and working conditions, as well as State control an everyday issue for millions and I therefore call for the rescinding and annulling of:

-          all and any of the sections of the Social Act Book II (Sozialgesetzbuch II) impinging on the basic freedom and rights of our people. In particular paragraphs 2, 31 und 32 as well as paragraph 36a, Social Act Book (SGB) XII.

and for

-          the complete and full restoration and implementation of articles 1,2,6,11,12,13 and 19 of our constitution.

Of course, I reckon with sanctions, because according to the Social Act Book II hardly any other reaction would be possible.

In this eventuality, I declare the path to reinstating our human rights at the Federal Courts in Karlsruhe to be opened. At stake will be the question of whether our citizens have an unconditional right to exist or whether they must first earn it even under pane of suffering domination, forced labour or undignified working conditions. Furthermore; at stake will be whether the State may stipulate what citizens may see as meaningful or whether it is better to leave this question to each individual citizen, because only this would guarantee the right to a self-determined life.

If and when I should not be sanctioned, I herewith declare this to be a precedent: Immunity from sanctions for all!

Dear addressees – I imagine just how legion your questions may be; just how high the barriers for a re-thinking and turnabout in these social matters are. Therefore, I am loath to end my letter without pledging my full cooperation – and that of the great majority of my friends and supporters – often experts – (Sociologists, Lawyers, Economists, Entrepreneurs, Managers, Bankers, Civil Servants, Philosophers, Politicians, Clerics, Artists, Trade Unionists, and last but not least recipients of Hartz IV, etc.). [17] The time is rife to take up the social tools and instruments that we now have and bravely go where no one has ever gone before.

Now it’s your turn!

Yours sincerely,

Ralph Boes

Berlin, June 2011

 

Notes:

[1] E.g. regarding doubts about how financeable a citizen’s income (CI) is, we can – regardless of what opponents may claim – be sure that an appropriate “therapy” is always more cost-effective than an inappropriate one.

[2] Even Heinrich Alt, a member of the board of the German Federal Labour Market Authority, has recently admitted that the level of Hartz IV is degrading.

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/0,1518,759797,00.html

[3] In Hartz IV, we don’t just have history’s first army of slaves forced to perform meaningless work, but also one which costs the slave owners money.

[4] The threat of hunger and homelessness (cf. § 31SGB II) is graver than the threat of prison: prison can be survived with more dignity – unless one is tortured there.

[5] Art. 1 Grundgesetz [GG] (1): Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.

[6a] Art. 2 GG (1): Every person shall have the right to free development of his personality insofar as he does not violate the rights of others or offend against the constitutional order or the moral law.

[6b] Art. 3 GG (1): All persons are equal before the law. (3) No one may be discriminated on account of disability.

[7] Art. 11 GG (1): All Germans shall have the right to move freely throughout the federal territory.

This sentence is however qualified: (2) This right may be restricted only by or pursuant to a law, and only in cases in which the absence of adequate means of support would result in a particular burden for the community [...]

If, as per sentence (2), no particular burden for the community arises, then a person’s basic right of freedom of movement should not be allowed to be limited! With a basic income, however, everyone would have sufficient basic funding, and the passage could be completely expunged.

[8] Art. 12 GG (1): All Germans shall have the right to freely choose their occupation or profession, their place of work and their place of training. [...] (2) No person may be required to perform work of a particular kind except within the framework of a traditional duty of community service that applies generally and equally to all.

Wiki’s definition of forced labour runs as follows: a generic or collective term for those work relations, especially in modern or early modern history, in which people are employed against their will by the threat of destitution, detention, violence (including death), lawful compulsion, or other extreme hardship to themselves or to members of their families.

Since a refusal to accept an offer of work, or training, or meaningless occupation from the Jobcentre is sanctioned with the curtailing of unemployment benefit (eventually to zero), in most cases we are dealing with forced labour.

[9] The inviolability of the home is today systematically disregarded by the Jobcentre. Unannounced checks and sanctions if one does not cooperate unconditionally are common practice in Hartz IV.

[10] Art. 6 GG (1): Marriage and the family shall enjoy the special protection of the state. [...] (4) Every mother shall be entitled to the protection and care of the community. I mention this article, because the natural helpfulness of families in the context of underprivileged communities (“Bedarfsgemeinschaften”) within Hartz IV is neither protected nor encouraged, but rather twisted into enforced neediness, and on the part of the state, exploited through massive curtailment of welfare. Families are driven into existential need, which often breaks them apart. Even family work is not supported, but sanctioned. Such work is considered voluntary and is thus forbidden for those on Hartz IV.

If one family member is sanctioned, the loss of income affects the entire family, which means it is nothing other than “kin liability” (Sippenhaft). Children are taken from families thus driven into need, instead of supporting the family. Moreover, child support and alimony are only tolerated (by the authorities) when they are below adequate levels and even then are deducted from the parents’ income.

[11] Art. 19 GG (1): According to the Grundgesetz, should a law – per se or as a result thereof – impinge on a basic right, so must this law name this right by way of quoting the article of the Grundgesetz. Furthermore, this law must apply generally and not merely to a single case. In addition, the law must specify the basic right affected and the Article in which it appears. (2) In no case may the essence of a basic right be affected.

[12] Kurt Beck: “If they washed and shaved, they’d find a job...”

[13] Thus spoke Philipp Missfelder, Chairman of the young CDU/CSU (Junge Union), in February 2009.

[14] The entire body of law proceeds from this notion. Frank Steffel (CDU), MdB, even suggests that parents who have not applied for the “Education voucher” (Bildungsgutschein) should be sanctioned.

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article13226288/Bildungsgutscheine-lassen-sich-nicht-versaufen.html

[15] § 130 sec. 1 of the StGB (German criminal code) defines the corpus delicti of incitement to hatred as follows: Whosoever, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace 1. incites hatred against segments of the population or calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them; or 2. assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning, or defaming segments of the population, shall be liable to imprisonment from three months to five years. [The official English translation of the code differs from the original German, which includes in section 1 references to religious, racial and national segments of the population. Translator]

[16] Both are important: the direct socioeconomic significance of work (i.e. the production and sale of toilet paper and wine gums), which can therefore be immediately paid for – and the indirect socioeconomic significance of work (e.g. all forms of family work, neighbourly work, voluntary community work, cultural work, but also education, university study, psychotherapy), whose healthy effects often only later, and via various detours, be seen to benefit the people. The latter represents the bed-rock of the well-being of, as well as the entire societal and cultural development of, a people. To outlaw it, to deny it to those laid off, as in Hart z IV, is stupidity indeed!

Due to the heartfelt commitment with which such work is mostly performed, and from which valuable competence so often develops, indirect socioeconomic work should be seen as doubly valuable! Whosoever does not encourage such work, and instead forces people into artificial roles and undignified low-pay jobs – even the currently emerging “citizen’s work” (Bürgerarbeit) being nothing else – should apply for blind person’s benefit and is not fit to be Minister for Labour.

[17] E.g. by means of the basic income we shall be able to solve many problems with but one stroke.

 

*(Translator’s note) The German word “Brandbrief” cannot be directly translated, since it has no English counterpart. Literally, it means “letter of fire” or “blazing letter”. In practice, it is an open letter of passion and anger. I hope my translation of this Brandbrief explains the term far better than a translator’s note ever could!

 

 

 

A second version of the same Brandbrief here:

 >>
 

---

 

Aritkel auf Englisch:  (darunter der Artikel auf deutsch)

 

Good article in an englisch blog (little mistake: Ralph Boes isn´t member of the pirate party) 

 

Sell-out of morals and humanity – starvation accepted again in Germany

Germany enjoys aiming an accusing finger at other countries and drawing attention to their human rights shortcomings. Compliance with the Convention on Human Rights is required for accession to and trade with the EU. But while Germany aims her finger so accusingly at the outside world, she sells out Das Volk in her shadows.
"What should not be, cannot be"; the German Federal Government glossed over the poverty report. Facts are kept hidden by wilful blindness. The richer classes have enjoyed surging wage rises, while for the poor income has fallen. As it would be too much to read such facts in the poverty report on top of actually living its reality, the government snipped out such data to avoid offending "the population’s sense of justice".
The government also chose not to mention that the ideal of full employment can now only be feigned at the cost of an adequate income. It prefers to assert that decreasing real wages are an "expression of structural improvements" in the labour market.
As in the motto, "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil", the German folk stands before a government of deaf, dumb and blind politicians unable to comprehend that the situation in Germany has already changed dramatically. Das Volk lives in a country where no one need starve.
The social legislation dubbed Hartz-IV by the public and praised by economic pundits has not only opened the gates to forced labour, but, besides forcing salary decreases, expanding the low-pay sector, and exciting a mood of sedition towards benefit recipients, it has also reintroduced hunger and homelessness.
While one governmental hand cuts benefits, the other covers a face that refuses to see or hear the growing hardship in Germany. In light of justified taxpayer expectations that benefit recipients should ‘earn their keep’, there is public sympathy for further cuts to welfare benefits already proven too low. Thus more than 1 million sanctions were imposed last year (sanctioning is the curtailment of benefits when regulatory requirements are not obeyed). 10,400 people have been denied their right to any welfare assistance! Gripped by the well-tended prejudice that the poor are lazy good-for-nothings, those on welfare are constantly demonised. The high number of sanctions was reported as a success by the Federal Employment Agency.
Ralph Boes, a campaigner for unconditional basic income lecturing full time on a voluntary basis, recently made public the grave consequences of the "Hartz-IV" system. Instead of hiding away from the stigma of Hartz-IV sanctioning or choosing humiliating workarounds such as collecting returnable bottles, scrounging, or borrowing from friends, in reaction to a 90% sanctioning he starved publicly for over 3 weeks. Where those sanctioned normally drop off the statistics, disappearing from the politicians´ radar on being banished from the game, Boes wants to expose this inhuman practice as transparently and publicly as he can.
Not only does Hartz-IV render 8 articles of German constitutional law inoperative, the Conventions on Human Rights, so quickly referenced when highlighting the failings of others, are treated with contempt by Germany. We are to forgo our rights to food, clothing, shelter, and medical treatment when we sign on. Article 5 of the Conventions on Human Rights states that no one may be subjected to humiliating treatment or punishment. Sadly, German human dignity has little value. Human rights are only granted to those who can afford them. We are a people divided into taxpayers and benefit recipients. The latter are forced to forfeit their basic rights.

" Moreover, the Committee calls on the State  party [Germany]to integrate human rights into the implementation of the anti-poverty programme, paying thereby particular attention to the disadvantaged and marginalized groups."
United Nations’ Economic and Social Council, May 2011.

 

Diana Aman

 

---

Der deutsche Orignaltext:

 

Ausverkauf der Moral  und Menschlichkeit – Hungern in Deutschland wieder üblich

Deutschland zeigt mit dem Finger gerne auf andere Länder, um die dortige Menschenrechtslage anzuklagen. Für einen EU-Beitritt und sogar für den wirtschaftlichen Handel wird die Einhaltung von Menschenrechtskonventionen verlangt. Doch während man nach vorn noch mit dem Finger zeigt, wird hinter dem Rücken die Menschlichkeit schon längst verkauft.
Nach der Devise: es kann nicht sein, was nicht sein darf, beschönigt die Bundesregierung nun den deutschen Armutsbericht. Die Tatsachen sollen verschleiert werden, indem man die Augen vor ihnen einfach verschließt. Die Lohnentwicklung war im oberen Bereich positiv steigend. Hingegen sanken die Löhne im unteren Bereich. Da es gar zu schrecklich wäre, würden die Menschen diese Tatsache, die sie täglich erleben auch noch in einem Armutsbericht lesen müssen, streicht die Regierung diese Passage lieber,  aus Angst, das „Gerechtigkeitsempfinden der Bevölkerung“ zu verletzen, heraus.
Auch die Tatsache, dass das Ideal Vollbeschäftigung nur noch auf Kosten eines angemessenen Einkommens vorgetäuscht werden kann, wurde lieber heraus genommen. Lieber möchte man verkünden, dass sinkende Reallöhne „Ausdruck struktureller Verbesserungen“ am Arbeitsmarkt seien.
Nach dem Motto: Nichts sehen, nichts hören, nichts sagen, steht die deutsche Bevölkerung vor einer Regierung von blinden, tauben und stummen Politikern, die nicht begreifen können, dass sich die Lage in Deutschland schon längst dramatisch geändert hat. Wir leben nicht mehr in einem Land, in dem niemand verhungern muss.
Die als wirtschaftlich förderlich gepriesenen Sozialgesetze, in der Bevölkerung Hartz-IV genannt, haben nicht nur das Tor zur Zwangsarbeit geöffnet, sondern führen neben der Senkung der Löhne, dem Ausweiten des Niedriglohnsektors und einer Stimmung der Volksverhetzung gegenüber den Leistungsempfängern zu Hunger und Obdachlosigkeit.
Während man auf der einen Seite die Sozialleistungen streicht, stellt man sich blind und taub, wenn es darum geht, die Zunahme des Elends in Deutschland zu realisieren. Mit Verweis auf eine berechtigte Erwartung seitens der Steuerzahler auf Gegenleistung der Leistungsempfänger fühlt man sich berechtigt, die ohnehin schon als zu gering erwiesenen Sozialleistungen zu kürzen. So wurden im letzten Jahr über 1 Millionen Sanktionen verhängt, was Geldentzug bedeutet, wenn den Anforderungen der Behörden nicht nachgekommen wird. 10.400 Menschen verloren ihren Anspruch auf Unterstützung vollständig! In dem Wahn, Menschen seien zu faul zum Arbeiten und ruhten sich nur auf Sozialleistungen aus, straft man die Leistungsbezieher aufgrund eines Generalverdachtes gerne ab. Die hohen Sanktionszahlen wurden von der Bundesagentur für Arbeit als Erfolg vermeldet.
Ralph Boes, ein Dozent für bedingungsloses Grundeinkommen, der vollzeit, ehrenamtlich arbeitet, hat die fatalen Konsequenzen des Hartz-IV-Systems nun öffentlich gemacht. Anstatt sich unter dem Stigma der Hartz-IV-Sanktion zu verstecken, erniedrigende Auswege wie Sammeln von Pfandflaschen, Betteln oder Verschuldung bei Freunden zu wählen, hungerte er über 3 Wochen öffentlich. Während alle Betroffenen normalerweise einfach aus der Statistik verschwinden, in die Vogelfreiheit vertrieben aus dem Blickfeld der Politiker entfallen, wollte er diese menschenverachtende Praxis gesellschaftlich vorführen.
Nicht nur das deutsche Grundgesetz wird in 8 Artikeln außer Kraft gesetzt. Auch die Menschenrechtskonventionen, die Deutschland sich so gerne nach außen auf die Fahne schreibt, werden mit Füßen getreten. Wir müssen uns von dem Glauben verabschieden, dass es in Deutschland ein Recht auf soziale Sicherheit, ein Recht auf Nahrung, Kleidung, Wohnung und ärztliche Versorgung gibt. Niemand dürfe erniedrigender Behandlung oder Strafe unterworfen werden, heißt es im Artikel 5 der Menschenrechtskonvention. In Deutschland hat man die Menschenwürde verkauft. Die Grund-und Menschenrechte gelten nur noch für die, die sie sich leisten können. Das Volk wird gespalten in Steuerzahler und Leistungsempfänger. Letztere haben ihre Grundrechte verwirkt. 

 

Diana Aman

---

Hunger Strike Against the Welfare State  - article 13.12.2012