„Die Kluft zwischen Verfechtern sozialer Gerechtigkeit und der linken „Anti-Woke“-Gemeinschaft verstehen“

Ein Artikel stellt aus meiner Sicht ganz passend die „Woken“-Ansichten gemäßigten Ansichten gegenüber:

1. On offending others

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Offensive language – including discriminatory remarks, threats of violence, and jokes that play on reductive stereotypes – often harm others, can traumatize people, and can normalize prejudice against discriminated groups.

  • When people make offensive remarks or act offensively without intending to, the lack of intent doesn’t necessarily reduce the harm they cause. Systematic exposure to offensive remarks and „microaggressions“ can further marginalize members of groups that are discriminated against, and cause serious negative effects over time.

  • We should strive to reduce instances of offensive language by calling attention to it, educating ourselves on how our remarks and behavior can hurt others, boycotting individuals and institutions that endorse offensive language and, in some cases, banning, punishing or ostracizing those who are severely and/or routinely offensive.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • If someone is offended by a remark or a joke, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the speaker did something wrong (the problem might actually lie with the person who feels offended and their emotional responses). Lots of humor can be offensive to someone and we should not take such humor to mean that people are seriously advocating for a position that harms others.

  • Interpreting interactions in terms of microaggressions has negative practical consequences, because it primes people to look for offensive language and behavior, rather than trusting that most people have good intentions. The resulting focus can produce more harm than good.

  • „Canceling“ those that offend others may have substantial negative effects, including damaging a culture of open communication and debate, reducing exposure to diverse perspectives about the world, and preventing us from learning how to calmly engage with and refute the arguments of people we disagree with.

2. On who has the authority to speak about certain issues

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • When it comes to speaking about the experiences of a particular marginalized group and how that group can be supported, the people within that group are the ones who have by far the most authority to do so; they have unique access to knowledge about the needs and issues of that group as a result of their group membership.

  • People from outside a marginalized group cannot truly understand the lived experience of those within the group and should not be the ones deciding what is best for that group. Attempts by outsiders to explain what they think is best for that group are often naive, inaccurate, or reductive. When outsiders have had decision-making authority over marginalized groups historically, it has often lead to substantial harm.

  • Society has consistently platformed white cisgender men at the expense of other people. In contrast, people of color have had their voices ignored for far too long in the U.S.; it is time to finally listen to them.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • We should be careful not to overestimate the degree to which people from a marginalized group have similar experiences or opinions on how society should change in order to accommodate them. Someone being a member of a marginalized group doesn’t automatically mean that person has good suggestions or ideas from improving the discrimination faced by that group. People from the same group often disagree with each other and we can’t think of one member of a group as speaking on behalf of that group.

  • When it comes to speaking about the experiences of a particular marginalized group and how this community can be supported, anyone in society who has relevant expertise or information should be able to make suggestions, even if they are not themselves part of that group.

3. On group labels

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • It is important to recognize the group status of individuals as this helps us better understand the social experiences and explain any discrimination that, for example, people-of-color, women, or trans people might face. Identifying group membership is useful in our efforts to protect these groups from discrimination.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • Too much focus on grouping people by shared social experience (or another feature of their identity) creates artificial distinctions that might actually increase the likelihood of some groups facing discrimination. While it can occasionally be useful to talk about group membership, what matters is that all individuals are able to flourish regardless of their group status, and this should be our focus (rather than focusing on improving society for certain groups).

4. On diversity

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Having people from diverse sets of backgrounds (including gender, race, ethnicity, class, and sexuality) makes institutions more likely to function fairly, takes the needs of everyone into account, helps rectify historical injustice, and helps groups come up with more creative solutions to problems.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • While racial, ethic, and gender diversity is helpful to correctly represent everyone’s views, diversity of thought is just as important. Additionally, diversity of thought and ideas is not necessarily correlated with having a diverse set of backgrounds; focusing on the latter is less likely to result in institutions that have genuinely diverse problem-solving approaches, maximal creativity, and fair outcomes. An overemphasis on a social justice oriented philosophy tends to produce a narrow range of views, rather than diversity of thought.

5. On differences in outcome

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • The fact that some groups have different outcomes in society (for example, earning less money or having less higher education) is a strong indication that systemic discrimination and societal or institutionalized prejudice has prevented members of these groups from having better outcomes in life.

  • To improve outcomes for marginalized groups, we should use affirmative action to correct for the prejudice in systems that have typically favored people from privileged groups or required qualifications that are only accessible to those with privileged backgrounds. Abandoning standardized tests may also help reduce outcome inequality. Changes like these are a starting point to help make up for past discrimination that has held some groups back.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • The fact that some groups have different outcomes in society is not always explained by systemic discrimination and societal prejudice. For instance, a difference in outcomes might sometimes be explained by different interests, attributes, or culture. While prejudice is real and still produces many negative consequences, we need to remember to look for additional explanations.

  • There are many valid forms of success, and we shouldn’t assume that one person’s version of success will match another person’s version, and that’s okay (e.g., if a particular woman makes less than a particular man because of her true, uncoerced preference is to stay at home and raise children, there is nothing wrong with that).

  • Using affirmative action can backfire by leading some to believe that people who have been admitted to a particular institution are only there based on their group identity (as opposed to their merits). It is good for institutions to take into account the hardship that people face when considering their applications, but hardship doesn’t always follow from, for example, having membership to a particular racial group.

6. On cultural appropriation

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Appropriating clothing, behaviors or customs of a marginalized group can be harmful for several reasons, including: (1) it allows already privileged groups to benefit financially and socially off of the labor, culture and ideas of the originators of those ideas (without benefiting those creators), and (2) it fails to take into account the significance that some outfits or practices have in their original cultures, trivializing their original meaning. Cultural appropriation causes harm to marginalized groups.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • Most instances of people dressing or acting in a way that has been associated with a marginalized group is just people appreciating that particular culture, and we should not see that as inherently negative. We are all better off if we adopt those practices and customs that we find beneficial.

  • In many instances, people from marginalized groups aren’t offended by those who incorporate aspects of their culture and, in some instances, even encourage others to adopt aspects of their culture.

7. On complicity in discrimination

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Members of privileged groups (i.e., those who have more power in society based on their gender, race, or class) benefit from discrimination against other groups even when they themselves are not explicitly engaging in discrimination. Additionally, many members of privileged groups will have had ancestors that did explicitly engage in discriminatory practices.

  • As a result of this complicity, members of privileged groups have an obligation to help rectify the wrongs done to the living members of marginalized groups, which includes helping to dismantle oppressive institutions and social systems. It is appropriate for people who do not act on this obligation to feel guilty.

  • White supremacist culture is a prevalent and significant problem in U.S. society today, causing a great deal of harm to people of color.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • Most members of privileged groups are not responsible for the discrimination that is still present in our current societal structure, as they did not cause it. Nor are privileged individuals responsible for harmful actions their ancestors might have committed, since they were not alive at the time.

  • While it is admirable and important for people to work to improve society for, and reduce discrimination against, marginalized groups, people do not have an obligation to work towards this, nor should they feel guilty merely because of belonging to a „powerful“ group.

8. On power structures in society

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Society is organized in a way that benefits particular identity groups at the expense of other identity groups; many of the laws, policies, and social norms we live with were set up and are maintained in order to serve those in power. Powerful people are deliberately trying to perpetuate systems of inequality within the U.S.

  • Claims of „objectivity,“ „rationality,“ and „reason“ are sometimes used to argue in favor of what benefits those who are already in power, and to undermine or silence the voices of marginalized people who are not served by the way society currently operates.

  • One helpful way to combat these systems of power and the people that maintain them is to disrupt the norms, knowledge systems, and processes that they use. This might sometimes include protesting and extreme activism.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • Given that the world is incredibly complex, people’s actions can often have unintended consequences and interact in unexpected ways. The best way to figure out what to do to improve society is to engage in rigorous debate about policies, with all reasonable perspectives being heard, and arguments and counterarguments being made.

9. On group generalizations

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • The power dynamics of groups in society must be taken into account when considering whether a generalization is an instance of racism. If a person from a historically oppressed group believes that all white people are racist that is not itself necessarily a form of racism – the history between the two groups, and the asymmetry in power between them, must be taken into account.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • There is no difference between making generalizations about marginalized groups and generalizations about privileged groups when it comes to evaluating what is or is not racist; negative generalizations about entire groups are not helpful and should be avoided.

10. On national pride

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • The United States was founded on a bedrock of prejudice and oppression, with mistreatment of women, Black people, and native communities baked in from the very beginning. U.S. citizens should not be proud of their roots.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • The United States played an incredibly unique and important role in history and has helped to improve the state of the world. America is far from perfect, and has participated in numerous injustices. Despite these terrible events, we should be proud of the many positive contributions made by the U.S., including it being the world’s longest standing modern representative democracy.

11. On historical figures

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Given that many people we celebrate today – for example, teaching young children about them or maintaining monuments in their honor – did terrible things, the appropriate response is to stop commemorating these individuals (for example, by removing their statues and renaming buildings). Continuing to make these individuals visible in society – even if we are not explicitly celebrating all of their actions – is harmful to those people whose ancestors were hurt by their actions.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • It is not fair to judge historical figures by our own moral standards; their behavior, while we may know it to be highly immoral, may have been entirely ordinary for their society at the time. We should teach both the good and the bad about historical figures that had an important role in society. We should commend them for their great achievements while not minimizing or ignoring their many flaws, which might mean continuing to maintain monuments erected in their honor.

12. On the meaning of gender

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • Gender is a social construction that is separate from whether someone is biologically male or female (and even biological sex is not as binary as it is often assumed to be). Biological sex should not determine the social reality of individuals, like how they should dress, what pronouns they are able to use, or how they are treated in professional and non-professional settings.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • We should respect people’s gender identities, but it is harmful to pretend that there are no biological differences between males and females when we plainly can see such differences across most animal species, including humans. There are some important situations where we need to treat males and females differently (such as in medical environments: the probability and management of different diseases differs across the sexes ). Males and females are, of course, deserving of equal respect and treatment, but that is not the same as saying they are identical.

13. On the harm of cancel culture

Commonly Occurring Social Justice Advocate Views

  • So-called „cancel culture“ – where members of the public attempt to ostracize a person in response to harmful or prejudiced behavior they have engaged in – occurs a lot less than is sometimes claimed in the media. And when it does occur, it is usually justified. Individuals that say they are „cancelled“ are often people that still possess a lot of power; they can find good jobs and live a fulfilling life, even if they have been criticized publicly or lost one particular job. It is right for people to stand up against those who act in harmful, prejudiced and offensive ways.

Commonly Occurring Left-leaning Anti-Woke Views

  • Cancel culture often harms people unfairly. Justice is not best served by mobs harassing a person or trying to get them fired. When this is seen as an acceptable way to settle disputes, people become afraid to express reasonable opinions (fearing they will be misinterpreted and harassed). The best way to handle statements that you think are offensive or harmful is to make arguments against them, not to try to get the person that said them fired or ostracized. We need to make it safe for people to debate with each other, and we can’t trust anyone to be the arbiter of what ideas are „off limits“ – if we do that then eventually some of our own ideas will end up being off limits according to whoever happens to be in power at that moment.

Eine aus meine Sicht ganz gute Zusammenfassung und für mich klingen die „gemäßigten“ Theorien ganz überwiegend so viel logischer.

23 Gedanken zu “„Die Kluft zwischen Verfechtern sozialer Gerechtigkeit und der linken „Anti-Woke“-Gemeinschaft verstehen“

  1. Die Erklärungen, wie echte Linke eigentlich sind, erinnern mich an die Erklärungen, was Gender Studies eigentlich sind. Vor allem Punkt 5.

    Feld und Festung scheint ebenso zutiefst menschlich wie Gruppendenken…

  2. Hier, beim Erfinder der ersten 3D Beschleuniger Karte für den PC, geht’s um’s Zusammenspiel der beiden Gruppen, also Linkender und Linkenderster. Passender Zufall.

    „I’ll admit to occasionally getting frustrated with Larry Correia’s insistence on abiding with the mainstream platforms that hate him rather than throwing in with the alternative economy and friendly platforms, but I also have to admit that there is no one like him for pure literary vituperation and excoriation, be it personal or political.

    ‚Anytime there is a breaking news story, there will be legions of howling leftists, and blue check mark idiots, lying their asses off and saying the most horrific things imaginable. And since they literally own social media, they get an official pass while the uppity on the right get officially squashed. We’ve all seen it. From trending hash tags that mysterious vanish, shadow bans, to ultra-biased fact checkers, to Youtube demonetizing wrong thinkers or even getting rid of the thumbs down button.

    Yet as your fellow travelers are saying all this horrid shit, where are you? You’re supposedly sane. You claim to have a voice of moderation, but it must be a whisper because we certainly can’t hear it.

    Social media is a constant barrage of Common Internet Shit Gibbons popping in and screaming at everybody who diverges from the accepted leftist narrative. They work off a standardized playbook and repetitive talking points, sneering derision, and passive aggressive insults designed to get around algorithms, and it is all designed to shame people into silence.

    Yet many people on the right are slowly waking up to this game, and they’re beginning to fight back, skipping the false civility, and getting right to the meat of things, and returning insult for insult… Oh THEN I can count on the Caring Liberals to show up! Inevitably, every fucking time. Whenever someone on the right fights back, that’s when the real-life liberals you know magically appear to cry about “civility” and “tone” and such rudeness!

    Gee whiz, Aunt Margaret/coworker #7/guy from the gym. Where the fuck were you when the leftist assholes were screeching at me and wiping their diseased anus on my carpet? Nowhere. Oh yeah, that’s right. It’s because you voices of reason don’t actually care about civility, you just care about shaming your wrong thinking friends and family into compliance. You emotionally manipulative motherfuckers.

    Why do I have such scorn and derision for the so-called reasonable voices on the left? A. I don’t believe most of you. B. If you do exist, you’re cowards, who do nothing, say nothing, and then maybe show up after the dust settles to chide the rest of us about our tone.

    Anybody with the courage to speak up on the left is swiftly set upon by the rest and devoured. They’re the cow and social justice warriors are the piranhas.

    Sad part is I know many liberals in real life who will admit that they helped create a monster, and its now gone out of control, and the beast will eat them if they draw its ire. Oh, they’ll tell me this in person, but they won’t say shit in public. Because they know they’ll get cancelled, boycotted, fired, mocked, threatened, and kicked out of the Goodthinkers Club.‘

    There is more. There is a LOT more where that came from. And it’s all true. The key line: “Liberal “friends” will sell you out in a heartbeat.”“


    Murdoch’s native Americans in Tech 😉

    • Murdoch, Kniggeldi, nouseforislam usw. – Christian, kann man den Nazi mit multiplen Persönlichkeiten nicht einfach mal rauswerfen?
      Seine Persönlichkeitsstörungen liefern keinen einzigen Beitrag in ihren Antworten, weil er – was er selber zugibt – die Beiträge noch nicht einmal liest.
      Es ist alles nur Anlass für ihn, seinen rechten Müll ins Forum zu verklappen.

      • Christian zieht solche Luftheuler an, weil er jede Woche mal einen Artikel zu den woken Spinnern einstellt, aber die Pappnasen und Aluhüte auf der rechten Seite sind nie ein Thema. Zwar bemüht sich Christian um eine sachliche Diskussion, aber er hat eben doch gehörig Schlagseite. Halbkritisch halt, die Seuche unserer Zeit.

        • Christian zieht solche Luftheuler an, weil er jede Woche mal einen Artikel zu den woken Spinnern einstellt, aber die Pappnasen und Aluhüte auf der rechten Seite sind nie ein Thema.

          Das mag daran liegen, dass die „woken Spinner“ die gegenwärtige Lebensrealität nicht unerheblich beeinflussen, die rechten „Pappnasen und Aluhüte“ dagegen nicht bzw. kaum.

          • Fahr mal über die Grenze nach Polen und habe das Pech schwul zu sein.
            Da gibt es „LGBT freie Zonen“ und eine große Koalition der Rechten, Religiösen und Reaktionären gegen alles, was von „normal“ abweicht und selbstredend alles, was auch nur ein Hauch links ist.
            Ich glaube, auch die größten Hasser der „woken“ leben lieber in einem liberalen Land, als in einem solchen.

            Das Problem an den „woken Spinnern“ ist, sie haben ein Klima des Irrationalismus verbreitet, das den Rechten in die Hände spielte. Bspw. der religiöse Glaube an die „Herrschaft des alten weißen Mannes“, der hinter dem Bösen (TM) in der Welt steckt, könnte sich in rechts gewendet locker als = Juden verkaufen lassen.
            Auch bei der Leugnung des Einflusses der Biologie, bzw. der Evolution in der Frage des Geschlechts sind wir doch auf dem Stand angelangt, dass sich mit dem „linken“ Voluntarismus (gefühltes „gender“ = „gender“ = „sex“) eine Variante des Kreationismus/“Intelligent Designs“ herausgebildet hat.

            Das Problem an den religiösen Spinnern beider Seiten, aber gerade auf der „linken“ Seite, ist aus meiner Sicht, dass sie so viel mit der anderen gemeinsam haben, ohne es zu merken oder wahr haben zu wollen.

          • Fahr mal über die Grenze nach Polen…

            Stimmt natürlich. Ich präzisiere: Das mag daran liegen, dass die „woken Spinner“ unsere gegenwärtige Lebensrealität nicht unerheblich beeinflussen, die rechten „Pappnasen und Aluhüte“ dagegen nicht bzw. kaum.

            Wenn wir in Polen, Afghanistan etc. leben würden, wäre die Themenwahl sicherlich etwas anders.

      • Es ist doch, dieser gemütliche Sozialismus, also das gemäßigte Linke, nur das Vehikel um in den tikkun olam Zustand des kommunistischen Utopias zu kommen, inklusive des Gulag. (Ich habe gehört, die hatten weder Theatergruppen noch Schwimmbäder für die Gegulagten, vermutlich gab’s ne GoKart Bahn oder so)

        • Bullshit.
          Leszek hat die „politisch korrekte“ Linke ausführlich kritisiert, da hast du nicht einen einzigen Satz radebrechen können.
          Jetzt um die Ecke kommen und deine Haltung per „copy&paste“ kund zu tun, ist faul und erbärmlich.
          Deine komplett widerliche Art, deine Nazi-Ideologie zu retten, indem du Gulags mit Vernichtungslagern vergleichst ist das Sahnehäubchen auf dem bullshit, den du hier regelmäßig verklappst.

  3. „Society is organized in a way that benefits particular identity groups at the expense of other identity groups; many of the laws, policies, and social norms we live with were set up and are maintained in order to serve those in power.“

    Irrsinn, nackter Irrsin. Es gibt also keine Kooperation im beiderseitigen Interesse, höchsten Solidarität im Kampf gegen einen gemeinsamen Feind. Im Umgang von Menschen miteinander ist immer einer der Sieger und einer der Looser. Wenn die Unterdückten die Unterdrücker beseitigt haben, ergeben sich automatisch wieder neue Unterdrückungsverhältnisse.

    Was für ein deorimierendes Weltbild. Ist eigentlich nur Als Ideologie im politischen Kampf zu verstehen; jder derartige Anspruch sollte umgehend zurückgewisen werden.

    • „keine Kooperation“
      Da schiessen sie sich schon selbst ins Knie, da Woke im Gegensatz zu frühen NS, Kommunisten, Sozialdemokraten keine in irgendwelchen Kämpfen gestaehlten Truppen aufzuweisen haben. Sprich, wenn die Gesellschaft ihnen ihre ganzen Gelder streicht, bleibt nur noch ne kleinlaute Twitter-Truppe übrig. Polizei und Armee werden sich nicht fuer sie einsetzen, woke Denunzianten aus den eigenen Reihen erleichtert rauswerfen..

  4. Die linke Anti-Woke-Gemeinschaft ist in der Situation von verplanten Wattwanderern die von der Sprintide „überrascht“ werden und glauben dass es langt wenn sie auf der Sandbank ein wenig höher gehen.

  5. 6. On cultural appropriation
    hier finden ich es immer wieder interessant das das immer nur gegen Weiße gerichtet ist.
    Chinesen obwohl es davon über 1 Mrd gibt dürfen sich „Weiße“ Kultur aneignen aber Weiße dürfen keine Chinesische Kleidung tragen u.ä.

    Die Ganze „Woke“ Gesichichte ist doch nur ein Schuld- bzw. Erbsünde-Kult bei dem die Weißen die Bösen sind und für ihre Erbsünde „Weiß sein“ buße tun sollen/müssen, während alle nicht Weißen die Schuldlosen Guten sind.

  6. Gibt ja bestimmt ‚vernünftige‘ Linke hier.

    Sollte nicht nach linker Lesart die Geschichte der Sklaverei in den USA ganz anders interpretiert sein?
    Wenn sich wenige schon reich startende Großgrundbesitzer für von Afrikanern (was verdient so einer im Schnitt im Jahre 2021?) verkaufte Sklaven entscheiden (Wie war deren Versorgungslage, als freie Schwarze in Afrika wohl?), ist dann nicht der Gearschte als erstes der europäische Kolonialist, der nun mit Umsonstarbeitenden (Abgesehen von der Versorgungslage) im Wettbewerb steht.

    Was verdient so ein echt Deutschender im Schnitt? Also heute. Im Mainstream Märchenland gab’s da ja nen Krieg, der nix mit Steuern und nem, quatsch, dem Urfaschisten Abe Lincoln zu tun hatte, sondern bei welchem ja schlimm schlechte Generäle Massen von Hessen zerheizten, um den Afrikaner zu befreien.

    Meine Vermutung ist ja, die großen Gewinner, die mit phatten Privilegien aus der Nummer raus gingen, sind ne Superminderheit Weißer (lauscht man mal nem Afrikaner, wie Professor Toni Martin, dann sind’s gar oft fellow Weiße) und die afrikanischen Sklaven.

    • Hört sich für mich irgendwie an als ob du Bürgerkrieg und Unabhängigkeitskrieg ein wenig durcheinander bringst.

      Hessischen Söldner waren im Unabhängigkeitskrieg unterwegs (der wegen der Steuern stattfand)
      aber nicht auf der Seite der Kolonien sondern auf seiten der Briten.
      Beim Bürgerkrieg, (der Wegen der übergriffigkeiten der Bundesregierung auf die Einzelstaaten sttattfand) gabs soweit ich weiß keine Hessischen Söldner.

  7. Das Ding ist ja, immer wenn man sich an den Ecksteinen Holocaust, Faschismus, Nazi, Hitler und Juden als moralischem Kompass orientiert, gewinnen bei Default die friedlichen und woken Antifanten.

    Ich mag da jemanden bemühen, den ich absolut zum Kotzen finde, Sam Harris.
    Kennen ja bestimmt viele hier. Der macht das Argument als Atheist, Regionen sind irr, aber manche irrer als andere. So sind laut Sam Christen zwar irr, aber nicht so irre wie Muslime. Was er an Terroristen oder so festmacht.

    Guckt man ins Schwarzbuch(?) des Kommunismus, dann hat hat der 2-3 mal so viele Menschenleben gekostet wie der Faschismus. Man könnte gar noch anmerken das er das ohne einen zweiten Weltkrieg geschafft hat, der den Faschisten ja die Zahl, lastet man ihnen 60 Millionen komplett und ganz alleine an, nach oben getrieben hat.

    Oder man wertet rechnerisch jemand als wertvolleres Leben, wird man von Nazis ermordet, statt von Kommunisten.

    Fast wie bei Floyd, dessen Tod ja viel tragischer war als die all der Schwarzen die durch Schwarze sterben.

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:


Du kommentierst mit Deinem WordPress.com-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Verbinde mit %s

Diese Seite verwendet Akismet, um Spam zu reduzieren. Erfahre, wie deine Kommentardaten verarbeitet werden..