["September" met with mathematician and Russian left-wing
politician Mikhail Lobanov to discuss his foreign agent status, his
dismissal from Moscow State University and potential approaches to
anti-war political organizing in Russia.]
[[link removed]]

MIKHAIL LOBANOV: “SOON THE MOMENT WILL COME WHEN WE WILL CHANGE
EVERYTHING”  
[[link removed]]


 

September Collective
August 7, 2023
September
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ "September" met with mathematician and Russian left-wing politician
Mikhail Lobanov to discuss his foreign agent status, his dismissal
from Moscow State University and potential approaches to anti-war
political organizing in Russia. _

,

 

_"September" met with mathematician and Russian left-wing politician
Mikhail Lobanov to discuss his foreign agent status and his dismissal
from Moscow State University. We also discussed the potential
approaches to anti-war political organizing in Russia and beyond, and
learned about Mikhail's plans for the "long-term political mission
trip" he embarked on a month ago._

S: WHY DID YOU AND SASHA [ZAPOLSKAYA - SOCIOLOGIST, MIKHAIL LOBANOV'S
WIFE, ED. NOTE] DECIDE TO LEAVE NOW? WAS THE OFFICIAL BRANDING OF
YOU AS A “FOREIGN AGENT” AND YOUR SUBSEQUENT DISMISSAL THE LAST
STRAW, AFTER WHICH IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO STAY? OR WERE THERE ANY OTHER
SIGNALS MAKING CLEAR THAT IT WOULD BE TOO DANGEROUS FOR YOU AND SASHA
TO STAY IN RUSSIA?

ML: Signals have been coming continuously for the last six months,
starting in December when the police searched my house and beat
me. But yes, indeed, my “foreign agent” status brought the
realization that I wouldn't be able to work in any school, to lead
maths student circles - it's actually a ban on my being in the
profession. And the way the dismissal took place at Moscow State
University, the unprecedented pressure exerted on the university and
its leadership, also made it clear that I would most likely not be
allowed to work anywhere at all. It became clear that the only thing
I could count on in Russia now was to live my life while waiting for
the final step in the arsenal of the security forces: fabrication of a
criminal case and imprisonment in a pre-trial detention center or
under house arrest.

And a pre-trial detention center and a criminal case is an exclusion
from politics for many months, if not for several years. Yes, we had
a plan in case I would suddenly find myself in a pre-trial detention
center or in prison, but that was not really an option we wanted to
follow. We wanted to continue our activities as long as possible, as
long as there was an opportunity, taking into account all the
risks. Now that opportunity is gone. So we went with the main
scenario, which is a long-term political assignment abroad.

S: YOU MENTIONED THE UNPRECEDENTED PRESSURE ON YOUR FACULTY
COLLEAGUES. WHAT WAS IT EXPRESSED IN? WERE THEY THREATENED WITH
DISMISSAL?

ML: The pressure was on the rector [Viktor Sadovnichy], on the
university administration as a whole. And then the rector spent a
week of his time, a week of the work of several vice-rectors who put
pressure on the faculty to force me to resign of my own accord or to
force the faculty (of Mechanics and Mathematics) to take
responsibility for my dismissal. Sadovnichy is a federal-level
political figure. Of course, now he does not have the same weight as
in the late 90s, at the peak of his popularity and his political
career, but nevertheless, he cannot be given an ultimatum by some
colonel of the police, and it is obvious that the list of those who
can really scare him is not that large. And the rector is apparently
frightened, and has taken the threat seriously.

The faculty and departmental leadership, on the other hand, have shown
unprecedented shop-floor solidarity. Politically, we may have
different positions with many of the faculty administration, but they
all believe that it is absolutely unacceptable to dismiss a person
from the faculty for his political views, for his statements, for his
activities outside the university, and that the faculty should not be
involved in this process in any way. The faculty has been subjected
to waves of pressure from time to time during the last year; it has
fought them off, even gotten used to them. But now the only thing the
faculty leadership could do was to try to inform the rector that I
should not be fired, that there are ways out of this situation that
are in accordance with the law, on the one hand, and the interests of
MSU in terms of preserving its reputation, on the other. But the
pressure was so strong that Sadovnichy decided to carry out the
dismissal over the head of the faculty, at his own level. At the same
time, he himself did not want to sign the dismissal order and
delegated the authority to one of his vice-rectors.

S: IF WE TALK ABOUT ALL THE SEARCHES, BEATINGS, DETENTIONS, IT IS
CLEAR THAT YOU AND SASHA WERE ALSO UNDER INCREDIBLE PRESSURE, AND YOU
LIVED UNDER CONSTANT STRESS. WHAT HELPED YOU TO WITHSTAND IT ALL THIS
TIME?

ML: People's support, of course. On the one hand, it's really scary,
unpleasant, sometimes painful, but on the other hand, as soon as each
next wave of pressure started, we felt tremendous support from the
people around us, from our relatives, from our loved ones, from our
like-minded people, from our comrades with whom we have been fighting
together for many years, and from all kinds of people from all sides,
from Russia, from outside Russia, from foreign trade unions, from
Russian trade union initiatives. And naturally, this is important for
anyone, it helps them to get over the troubles that happen to them and
move on. It helped us too, and that's why I again say thank you to
everyone who did something with their efforts, kind words, specific
offers of help, reposts, likes or any other gestures. It was
important to us it will continue to be important. During this year I
have felt that in fact the solidarity of ordinary people, our
comrades, our colleagues, is stronger than any repression. It helps,
if not to overcome them, then at least to survive them and not to fall
apart.

[image_2023-07-28_17-13-25.png]_Mikhail Lobanov and Alexandra
Zapolskaya. Photo: __facebook.com/mlobanov84_
[[link removed]]

S: LET'S NOW TALK ABOUT VYDVIZHENIE, THE POLITICAL PROJECT OF WHICH
YOU AND SASHA ZAMYATIN BECAME THE FACES. AS AN OUTSIDE OBSERVER, IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT VYDVIZHENIE'S ACTIVITIES ARE PRIMARILY RELATED TO
SPECIFIC PROJECTS - ELECTIONS OR ACTIVIST SCHOOLS. WAS THE CHOICE IN
FAVOR OF A NON-PERMANENT PROJECT STRUCTURE A CONSCIOUS CHOICE ON YOUR
PART? AND IS IT NOT THE CASE THAT IN BETWEEN WAVES OF ACTIVITY YOU
LOSE THOSE WHO MOBILIZED FOR PREVIOUS PROJECTS?

ML: It was indeed largely a conscious choice in favor of project
structure. But I certainly don't mean to suggest that only
associations and initiatives of this type should exist in Russia
now. There are groups with permanent membership and organizational
structure. But it seemed to us that for the purposes we had set for
ourselves in our long-term political strategy, project activity was
more suitable. We were among the few people with left-democratic
views in Russia who decided to seriously try to use elections, an
institution that the left is critical of in one way or
another. Nevertheless, we realized that it offered great
opportunities to build teams, to bring people together, to promote an
agenda.

That is, if we don't fetishize elections and representative democracy,
but treat them as a given that can and should be used in the interests
of the movement, then we can work with them. And elections are a
project thing. And there is a certain plus in the fact that it is a
story with clear start and finish, that produces a measurable,
tangible result either in the form of victory, or in the form of a
good result, or, on the contrary, in its absence. When there is a
final, clear, tangible goal, it is easier to involve new people and
unite them. The next question is how to make the team that was formed
at the first election flow into the next project and the one after
that, so that these projects are not just about elections. It seems
to us that we have managed to find this mechanism. A very significant
percentage of those people who joined the team in 2021 continued to
work on our next projects or created their own projects with which we
are in direct contact. Such as the podcast "This is the Basis",
almost all of whose active participants were part of the 2021
campaign. Or the Cipollino Library: some of the organizers of this
interesting open space-based project were also involved in the 2021
campaign. There is no need to list them all, but so many other
initiatives have indeed grown out of the 2021 campaign. some of the
organizers of this interesting open space-based project were also
involved in the 2021 campaign. There is no need to list them all, but
so many other initiatives have indeed grown out of the 2021
campaign. some of the organizers of this interesting open space-based
project were also involved in the 2021 campaign. There is no need to
list them all, but so many other initiatives have indeed grown out of
the 2021 campaign.

The project approach we have chosen is certainly not the only possible
one. The situation is such that you have to try different ways. If
you have your vision, try to realize it, let's take different paths in
this forest we do not fully know. Not arguing about being right, but
being in contact with those who have taken a different path,
exchanging information and experience. And someone - maybe more than
one - will find a path along which we will arrive at the world we
dream of.

S: NOW IT SEEMS THAT ELECTIONS HAVE LOST THEIR RELEVANCE BECAUSE OF
THE UNPRECEDENTED REACTION OF THE REGIME IN RECENT HISTORY, WHICH IS
TRYING TO CRUSH ALL REMNANTS OF SELF-ORGANIZATION. AND THERE IS A
FEELING THAT YOUR POLITICAL PROJECT HAS SHIFTED MORE TO EDUCATIONAL
AND MEDIA ACTIVISM. IS THAT TRUE, OR DO YOU THINK THAT ELECTIONS IN
THE FUTURE WILL STILL PLAY A ROLE?

ML: What will happen next, how the inevitable transformation of the
regime will take place, and whether there will be elections that will
be important in that transformation is impossible to say now. There
are a number of scenarios we are thinking about in which elections
will matter. And so we continue to keep the electoral pathway as the
focus of our attention. But that doesn't mean we have to get involved
in every election right now. For example, this spring we did not see
a single region where there were candidates close to us and where
there was a request from them to roll out our platform and start
working on an election campaign. In the Moscow mayoral election, we
had an understanding of how to develop the campaign, but the
authorities poured concrete on the whole process, made deals with the
parliamentary parties, and in the end there was nothing to work
with. It is obvious that if there had been at least one candidate who
commanded the respect of the politically active environment in Moscow,
s/he would have become a point of consolidation, and we would have
joined in and to build the electoral machine.

So, yes, we are now focusing on projects such as the VyDvizhenie
school. These are not just educational projects, they are part of a
long-term strategy. We don't just hold lectures for a few hundred
people to pass their leisure time by learning some interesting
facts. In our political strategy, activism and political struggle are
inextricably linked to modern academic research and worldviews. It
can't be otherwise, and when we say that we gather interesting
professors and we ourselves understand some things we are interested
in and are ready to help others understand, it means that there will
be next steps of transition from this interest to direct practical
collective action.

_[image_2023-07-28_17-16-45.png]Photo: __facebook.com/mlobanov84_
[[link removed]]

S: GOING BACK TO YOUR LONG-TERM POLITICAL ASSIGNMENT ABROAD, ARE YOU
GOING TO PURSUE PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES WITHIN IT OR WILL YOU FOCUS
ENTIRELY ON THE POLITICAL PROJECT?

ML: I have a need for mathematical creativity, I have a need for
teaching, and I really hope that the world and Russia will change, and
I will be able to return to Moscow University and teach there. But in
order to make this possible, it is necessary to engage in politics
first. So now I will be concentrating on politics first and foremost,
in the hope that one day we'll get closer to a situation where I can
return to teaching.

S: YOU WERE ONE OF THE FEW PUBLIC ANTI-WAR POLITICIANS WHO STAYED IN
RUSSIA TO THE LAST. AND, AS YOU SAID, YOUR DEPARTURE MEANT THAT THERE
WERE NO MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOU TO PARTICIPATE THAT DIDN'T LEAD YOU
TO THE SIZO, TO PRISON. DO YOU THINK THERE IS STILL SUCH AN
OPPORTUNITY IN PRINCIPLE, FOR OTHER ANTI-WAR ACTIVISTS AND MOVEMENTS,
TO STAY IN RUSSIA AND FIGHT?

ML: The answer is unequivocally yes. We see that there is such an
opportunity, and tens of thousands of people take advantage of
it. For a year, I was the focus of attention of people who, on a
professional basis, for money and professional advancement, sought to
destroy political life in the country. We lasted a year, and during
that year we did, in my opinion, a lot. Others are still out of sight
of these people and continue their activities. This, it seems to me,
is a perfectly acceptable tactic: as long as there is an opportunity,
then act inside Russia. If you have attracted attention, if there is
a real danger that cannot be ignored, then you can change direction,
and others will continue. This is the only way I see.

S: THERE IS A DISCOURSE, YOU PROBABLY KNOW IT YOURSELF: "WELL, ANOTHER
ANTI-WAR POLITICIAN HAS BEEN JAILED OR EXPELLED FROM THE COUNTRY. SO
THERE IS NO POINT IN DOING ANYTHING POLITICAL WHILE IN RUSSIA. IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS IS A FAIRLY WIDESPREAD BELIEF.

ML: Of course, when we discussed leaving, we also kept it in mind. We
understood that if I ended up in prison, it would demoralize some of
the active people: "Here's another political prisoner. He resisted,
didn't leave, and now he's in prison. Now we will have to give him
some kind of solidarity campaign, gather a support group and so
on". This is not a situation in which the imprisonment of another
politician can change anything. But my forced political assignment
abroad should be looked at differently. In our case, it definitely
made sense. We made a platform, participated quite successfully in
municipal elections, created the VyDvizhenie school, and some other
projects. It all mattered, because people inside Russia felt that
life went on, that our forces had not scattered. Maybe some of us had
to leave but we are in touch, we feel one and we continue to move
forward. No Putin, no Kremlin, with their military ventures and the
horrors they inflict upon the population, will break us. One day the
moment will come when we will change everything.

S: SPEAKING ABOUT YOUR STATEMENT BEFORE YOUR DEPARTURE, DO I
UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO UNITE THE LEFT-WING
ANTI-WAR OPPOSITION THAT IS NOW IN EXILE IN ORDER TO FORM SOME KIND OF
POSITIVE AGENDA AND SET OF DEMANDS? HOW DO YOU IMAGINE THE STRUCTURE
OF THIS ASSOCIATION? A FORUM, A PLATFORM, A POLITICAL PARTY,
SOMETHING ELSE?

ML: What we are envisaging is not a unification of the left political
opposition that has left, that is, it's not a unification of people
who have been involved in politics or individual small left
groups. Such an attempt is not going to give us a qualitative
breakthrough. We are seeking to create a new organizational structure
so that thousands or even tens of thousands of people who are close to
us in their views find a place in it. In my article you referred to,
I said that such a structure does not arise because there is a problem
of non-representation in public politics due to a certain historical
inertia within Russian society as a whole, and especially in its most
active part, which has been rapidly turning left in recent years. And
in these conditions the responsibility for offering solutions to this
problem lies with the numerous Russian leftist politicians and public
intellectuals. Because it is they who can create focal points around
which crystallization will begin and the process of self-organization
will manifest itself in a structure. This is what I mean. And the
second direction of the work we envision is negotiations with foreign
progressive political forces on the left part of the political
spectrum, with the aim of forming a certain package of positive
proposals directed to ordinary people in Russia, in Ukraine and in
other countries.

This is some kind of positive way out of the current catastrophe, so
that people feel that not everything is decided at the top. That the
elites in the West are not thinking only about how they can make a
deal either with a handful of people in the Kremlin or with another
handful of the very rich, powerful and violent people who can replace
them. And for there to be forces in the world that would offer a way
out at the international level in the interests of all, not of the
very rich and very famous, but of ordinary people who what wonder will
happen next, who are frightened by the fact that they want to divide
Russia into parts, that we will all pay reparations for decades, and
so on and so forth. It is necessary that some things that concern
both Russians and Ukrainians should be voiced and guaranteed from such
an international platform.

_[image_2023-07-28_17-12-22.png]Photo: __facebook.com/mlobanov84_
[[link removed]]

S: THE QUESTION WAS MORE ABOUT HOW YOU SEE IT ORGANISATIONALLY. OR
WILL THE CONCRETE IMPLEMENTATION DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES?

ML: In the beginning, it will be a set of specific projects, which can
initially be done only by a few dozen people with certain skills,
specific activities, in some - for hundreds and thousands of
participants at once. When we have the developments, we will launch
them, try to achieve them, and if some of them take off, it will
become a concrete foundation on which to build a more massive
structure. Nowadays people are afraid of the word "party", so we will
consider it a movement. The movement is organized after all.

S: SO IT'S A "VYDVIZHENIE" ONLY ON AN INTERNATIONAL SCALE, RIGHT?

ML: "VyDvizhenie" solves other tasks, as I have already suggested,
project-specific, concrete, long-term and within Russia. We'll be
going in a different direction right now, one that cannot be realized
inside Russia, so this is not a transfer of the project from
there. It is clear that strategically these are overlapping
initiatives, but there is no direct connection between them. Part of
our team that left Russia will participate in the activities
developing abroad, but no more than that.

S: YOU ALSO MENTION THE NEED TO FORM A MASS POLITICAL FORCE. BUT HOW
CAN THIS MASS POLITICAL FORCE BE CREATED IN THE CONDITIONS OF MASS
DEPOLITICISATION, WHICH HAS BEEN CULTIVATED BY PUTIN'S REGIME FOR THE
ENTIRE DURATION OF ITS EXISTENCE?

ML: The depoliticization factor is really important, but we have a
noticeable percentage of politically active people in society. I'm
not even talking now about those tens of millions who are not
represented, but who feel a general dissatisfaction with their lives,
with the current situation, and who don't see how it can be
influenced. At the first stage, we are talking about uniting a
noticeable number of already politicized people who have expressed a
demand for participation. They had to leave, but they have not broken
their ties with Russia and are following what is happening there, they
are experiencing this tragedy, the biggest common tragedy in the lives
of our generations, and they want to do something. There are a lot of
them. The people who left were mostly middle-aged or even young
people. These are statistically the most politicized ages in Russia,
even before the war. Among those who left, the percentage of the
politicised is even slightly higher than the average in these age
groups. Accordingly, we will be looking for formulas in which they
can show their political participation together with other people,
drawing on their views, their ideas, offering reinforcement.

S: SO FIRST WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF POLITICAL
PARTICIPATION FOR THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY POLITICISED AND ACTIVE, AND
THEN AS THE NEXT STAGE WE PLAN TO REACH A MORE MASS AUDIENCE IN
RUSSIA?

ML: Yes, because what happens both outside and inside Russia is that
the political call first ignites those who are closer. A certain team
emerges, and then, when everything has worked, we can start mobilizing
people with no experience of participation. They see that something
is already happening, that there are people who are serious, that they
see hope, that it makes sense. I've seen this repeatedly, at many
different levels, from the university level to the level of federal
election campaigns. If people see that work is already being done,
and those who are doing it believe in what they're doing, it's much
easier for them to connect and embed.

S: IF WE TALK ABOUT THE SECOND PART OF YOUR PROJECT NOW, ABOUT
COOPERATION WITH FOREIGN POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS, WHICH FORCES ARE YOU
PLANNING TO COOPERATE WITH? AND WILL YOU LIMIT YOURSELF TO EUROPE
ONLY, OR DO YOU PLAN TO MAKE CONNECTIONS WITH LEFTISTS FROM OTHER
PARTS OF THE WORLD?

ML: We will be in contact with all forces that are ideologically close
to us, especially those who, like us, aim to talk not only about
armaments, but about the world after the war and the changes it
needs. There are such people and organizations in many countries,
from Spain and France to Brazil.

S: VARIOUS DECOLONIAL MOVEMENTS WITHIN RUSSIA ITSELF ARE NOW GAINING
POPULARITY. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS?

ML: Certainly the people of Russia need more cultural and
administrative independence. But at the same time, talk of
decolonization is increasingly being used by the authorities to
establish public fear of any change - "it's better to leave things as
they are, because the situation can only change for the worse". This
message needs to be countered.

S: YOU WRITE THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO FORM A SET OF PROPOSALS AND
GUARANTEES FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE, TO SHOW A WAY
OUT OF THE WAR THAT IS ATTRACTIVE TO ALL PEOPLES AFFECTED BY IT. HOW
DO YOU SEE THE IMAGE OF THIS FUTURE? WHAT IS THIS VISION BASED ON?

ML: First of all, it's not ordinary Russians who should pay for the
destruction and grief brought about by this war unleashed by the
Kremlin, but those very rich people, those very rich corporations who
have been the main beneficiaries of the regime all these years and on
whom it has primarily relied. Many of them have Russian citizenship
and are under Russian jurisdiction. Many of them have jurisdiction
and citizenship of other countries. People and corporations who have
made very large profits over the last 20-30 years from unfair
privatization in Russia and Ukraine, from exploitation of people in
Russia and Ukraine. They bought state companies and sold them for
profit, paid taxes at unfairly low rates and took capital
offshore. This should be some sort of worldwide tax after proper
calculations and computations. The money received should be used to
rebuild the infrastructure of Ukraine, the infrastructure of the part
of Russia that is also being destroyed, and to rebuild the social
sphere of both countries that has suffered over the past 30
years. This can and should be the solution. So that in any country
big businessmen, oligarchs and officials understand that the next time
they decide to start a war, it will not be their poorer fellow
citizens who will pay for it, but they will simply agree and go to
some islands, to their mansions and villas. And that they will pay
for it themselves - with what they have appropriated for
themselves. This will be a good deterrent, an excellent precedent, in
addition to allowing the restoration of infrastructure. Of course, no
one can bring back the dead people,

S: OUR LAST QUESTION OVERLAPS WITH YOUR ANSWER TO THE PREVIOUS
ONE. HOW DO YOU SEE THE RESTORATION OF RELATIONS BETWEEN RUSSIA AND
UKRAINE AFTER WHAT THE RUSSIAN STATE HAS DONE TO UKRAINE? YOU
MENTIONED PROGRAMS THAT HAVE MADE IT POSSIBLE TO AT LEAST REPAIR
INFRASTRUCTURAL DAMAGE, PERHAPS HELP WITH REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL
DAMAGE. BUT WHAT REMAINS IS A LOT OF MANGLED FATES AND IMMEASURABLE
PAIN.

ML: This is a hard thing, it won't happen quickly. I think one of the
ways to do it is to gradually - I hope it will happen - realize that
the problems and processes that have been going on in Russia for the
last 30 years have largely affected Ukraine as well. That the
problems that people experienced both before and during the war in
both countries have a common nature and cause. And Putin's regime and
the war unleashed by him have the same nature, that low and unfair
wages in Ukraine for the last 30 years are the result of the same
processes that led to a huge social stratification in Ukraine and
Russia. And that people in Russia and in Ukraine all these 30 years
have been falling victim to the same trends, which were the
consequence of our countries becoming sanctuaries of practices called
neoliberal. I am referring to management practices based on the
penetration of market instruments where they should not penetrate,
where they bring real destruction, widespread market penetration,
widespread precariousness of the majority of workers. Our problems
prior to 24 February stem from this very thing. And 24 February
itself was the result of exactly the same processes.

Yes, the residents of Ukraine suffered double in this
situation. First, like the residents of Russia, they suffered from
the processes related to privatization and the unfair structure of the
economy, and then they suffered from Putin's regime and the military
destruction it inflicted upon them. In Russia there was only the
first part, the war has not come here much yet. But if this
understanding emerges, if such an optic, a left-democratic view of the
world gains popularity, it will contribute to the fact that the
further, the more people in our countries will see and feel that the
problem is not that something is wrong with Russians, that the problem
is in the world economic system, which gives rise to such
regimes. And it is not only in Russia, but in dozens of other
countries. And understanding this, I hope, will help us find a
rapprochement and move forward together.

_Translation: __lefteast_
[[link removed]]

_ABOUT SEPTEMBER_

_• September is a collective of Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian,
Azerbaijani, and Kyrgyzstani left-wing authors, journalists,
activists, and researchers_

_• Our aim is to provide an in-depth analysis of recent events in
economics/politics/culture, socialist theory, investigations,
retrospectives, reviews, and popular science articles with a staunchly
left-wing perspective_

_• Our focus is on post-Soviet countries but we don't plan to
restrict ourselves to this area only_

_• We've been working since 2016 and believe that at the moment a
joint platform for analysis and discussion is needed more than ever
before._

_Join us:_

_We encourage comrades from all over the world to write for us and to
participate in the discussion. We firmly believe that only together we
can come up with a complete and fair picture of the current crisis and
find a way out of it. We aim to maintain a permanent publication in
— at least — three languages: Russian, Ukrainian, and English, in
order to reach as many readers as possible._

_You can also contribute as a translator and/or editor._

_To learn more about terms and conditions, demands, and work tasks
write us at: [email protected]_

_Make a donation to support or work: SUPPORT
[[link removed]]_

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]