Capital

Capital Plot Summary

Introduction

In the dimly lit workshops of 16th century Europe, a profound economic transformation was quietly taking shape. Craftsmen who once owned their tools were gradually becoming wage laborers, while merchants who previously simply transported goods between markets began organizing production itself. This subtle shift represented the embryonic stage of what would become the dominant global economic system - a system where money transforms into means of production, labor power, and ultimately more money in an endless cycle of expansion. This exploration takes us through the dramatic evolution of capital across five centuries, revealing how economic organization fundamentally reshapes social relations and human experience. We'll witness how the separation of workers from production means created modern class structures, how industrial mechanization revolutionized not just manufacturing but society itself, and how financial systems eventually gained primacy over productive enterprises. Whether you're a student of economic history, a business professional seeking historical context, or simply someone curious about the forces shaping our modern world, these pages offer insight into capitalism's remarkable adaptability, its inherent contradictions, and the historical patterns that continue to influence global economic development today.

Chapter 1: Origins of Capital: The Separation of Labor from Production (1500-1750)

The foundations of capitalism emerged during the tumultuous period between 1500 and 1750, as medieval economic structures gradually dissolved across Western Europe. This era witnessed the slow but inexorable separation of direct producers from their means of production - a process that would fundamentally transform economic and social relations. In England, the enclosure movement converted common lands into private property, forcing peasants from subsistence farming into wage labor. Similar processes unfolded across Europe, though with significant regional variations reflecting different political structures and resistance levels. Key figures driving this transformation included not just monarchs like Henry VIII, whose dissolution of monasteries transferred vast lands to private ownership, but also the emerging merchant class. These early capitalists accumulated wealth initially through long-distance trade rather than production. The Dutch East India Company, established in 1602, exemplified this development as one of the first joint-stock companies, pooling capital from multiple investors to finance commercial ventures too large for individual merchants. Meanwhile, in the countryside, yeoman farmers and improving landlords introduced new agricultural techniques that increased productivity while reducing labor requirements, further displacing rural populations. The fundamental dynamic underlying this period was what historians later termed "primitive accumulation" - the historical process that created the preconditions for capitalist production by separating workers from means of subsistence. Unlike later capital accumulation that occurs through the reinvestment of surplus value, this initial phase often involved direct force and state power. The Navigation Acts in England, colonial conquest abroad, and the slave trade all contributed to concentrating wealth in the hands of an emerging capitalist class. This accumulation wasn't simply quantitative but represented a qualitative transformation in social relations, creating both a class dependent on selling labor power and a class possessing sufficient wealth to purchase and organize that labor. This period established the basic circuit of capital that would define the emerging economic system. Money was advanced to purchase commodities (including labor power) and means of production, which entered a production process resulting in new commodities with greater value, ultimately converted back into expanded money capital. This circuit (M-C...P...C'-M') contained the essential logic of capitalism - the self-expansion of value through the exploitation of labor. By 1750, this pattern had become firmly established in parts of England and the Netherlands, though it remained embedded within societies still dominated by older economic forms and social relations. The transformation was neither smooth nor inevitable. Peasant rebellions, food riots, and various forms of resistance repeatedly challenged the dispossession process. Traditional authorities often viewed early capitalist activities with suspicion, imposing regulations to limit their disruptive effects. Yet the new economic relations gradually gained ground, proving more dynamic and productive than previous forms. The increasing division of labor within manufacturing workshops, though still based primarily on hand tools rather than machinery, demonstrated capitalism's capacity to reorganize production for greater efficiency even before the technological breakthroughs of industrialization. By the mid-18th century, the foundations had been laid for the dramatic acceleration that would follow. The separation of labor from production had created both the social conditions (a class of wage laborers) and the material conditions (concentrated wealth seeking profitable investment) necessary for industrial capitalism. What had begun as scattered commercial ventures gradually coalesced into a new economic system with its own distinctive logic and momentum. The stage was set for the revolutionary transformations that would unfold in the coming century.

Chapter 2: Industrial Revolution: Mechanization and Class Formation (1750-1850)

Between 1750 and 1850, Western Europe, particularly Britain, experienced an unprecedented economic transformation that fundamentally altered not just production methods but the entire social fabric. This period witnessed the shift from manufacturing based on hand tools and limited division of labor to factory production powered by steam engines and organized around machinery. The textile industry led this revolution, with inventions like Hargreaves' spinning jenny (1764), Arkwright's water frame (1769), and Cartwright's power loom (1785) dramatically increasing productivity while transforming work processes. By 1830, Britain had become the "workshop of the world," producing manufactured goods at volumes and prices that overwhelmed traditional producers globally. Key figures of this transformation included not just inventors like James Watt, whose improved steam engine provided reliable power for factories, but also industrialists who organized new production systems. Men like Richard Arkwright, who combined technological innovation with new labor discipline in his cotton mills, and Josiah Wedgwood, who applied systematic division of labor to pottery production, represented a new type of capitalist. Unlike earlier merchant capitalists who primarily organized exchange, these industrial capitalists directly controlled production processes. Meanwhile, workers experienced profound dislocation as traditional skills were devalued and work increasingly occurred in centralized factories under strict discipline. The Luddite movement (1811-1816), where textile workers destroyed machinery they viewed as threatening their livelihoods, represented one response to these disruptive changes. The driving force behind industrialization was capital's inherent need for self-expansion. Competition between capitalists created relentless pressure to reduce costs through technological innovation and reorganization of labor processes. The factory system emerged not simply because it was technically superior but because it enabled greater control over workers and intensification of labor. The extension of working hours, employment of women and children at lower wages, and imposition of fines and penalties for infractions all served to maximize surplus value extraction. This period saw the real subsumption of labor under capital, as production processes themselves were redesigned according to capital's requirements rather than traditional craft logic. Class formation accelerated dramatically during this period. The industrial proletariat emerged as a distinct social class with shared experiences and interests, concentrated in new industrial cities like Manchester, Birmingham, and Glasgow. Living conditions in these rapidly growing urban centers were often appalling, with overcrowding, poor sanitation, and pollution creating health crises documented by reformers like Edwin Chadwick. Simultaneously, the industrial bourgeoisie consolidated as a class with increasing economic power but initially limited political influence. The Reform Act of 1832 in Britain represented a partial victory for this class, expanding political representation based on property ownership while still excluding workers. Class consciousness developed unevenly, with workers organizing initially through friendly societies and trade unions focused on immediate economic concerns before developing broader political movements. The transformation extended far beyond factory walls to reshape entire societies. New transportation systems - first canals, then railways - created integrated national markets and accelerated capital circulation. Banking and credit systems expanded to finance industrial development, while joint-stock companies emerged to mobilize capital for larger enterprises. Family structures adapted to industrial discipline, with the separation of workplace and residence creating new gender divisions as men's work was increasingly performed outside the home for wages while women's domestic labor became invisible in economic terms. Traditional communal rhythms gave way to the mechanical time discipline of the factory clock, fundamentally altering experiences of time itself. By 1850, industrial capitalism had established itself as a distinctive economic system with unprecedented productive capacity but also new forms of exploitation and social dislocation. The transformation demonstrated capitalism's revolutionary character - its ability to continuously overturn existing production methods and social relations in pursuit of profit. This dynamic would continue to drive capitalist development through subsequent phases, though the particular forms of technology, organization, and class relations would evolve. The industrial revolution thus represented not a one-time event but the beginning of a continuous process of creative destruction that remains characteristic of capitalist development.

Chapter 3: Capital's Golden Age: Global Expansion and Imperial Competition (1850-1914)

The period from 1850 to 1914 marked capitalism's first true golden age, characterized by unprecedented global expansion and integration. During these decades, industrial capitalism spread beyond its original centers in Britain and northwestern Europe to North America, Japan, and parts of the global periphery. This expansion was facilitated by revolutionary developments in transportation and communication - the steamship, railway, and telegraph dramatically reduced the time and cost of moving goods, people, and information across vast distances. By 1900, a unified world market had emerged, with commodities, capital, and labor flowing across borders at previously unimaginable scales and speeds. Key figures of this era included not just industrialists like Andrew Carnegie and Alfred Krupp, who built massive steel empires, but also financiers like J.P. Morgan and the Rothschild family, who orchestrated increasingly complex international capital flows. Colonial administrators like Cecil Rhodes in Africa and Lord Curzon in India extended European political control over vast territories, integrating them into global capitalist circuits. Meanwhile, millions of ordinary people participated in unprecedented migration flows - from Europe to the Americas, from countryside to cities, and from colonized regions to imperial centers. Between 1850 and 1914, approximately 50 million Europeans emigrated to the Americas, Australia, and elsewhere, constituting one of history's largest voluntary population movements. The fundamental driver of this global expansion was capital's inherent need to overcome barriers to accumulation. As industrialization matured in core countries, capital faced several challenges: market saturation for manufactured goods, rising wages due to worker organization, and declining profit rates from intensifying competition. Geographical expansion offered solutions to these problems by providing new markets for goods, access to cheap raw materials, and profitable investment opportunities in regions where capitalism was still developing. This created what theorists later called a "spatial fix" for capitalism's internal contradictions - temporarily resolving problems in core regions by incorporating new territories into capitalist circuits. This expansion took different forms across regions. Formal colonization predominated in Africa, where the "Scramble" after 1880 saw European powers partition nearly the entire continent. In Latin America, political independence coexisted with economic dependency, as British and later American capital dominated key sectors through investment and trade relationships. In Asia, responses ranged from direct colonization (India, Indonesia) to forced "opening" (China, Japan) to varying degrees of autonomous development. These different integration patterns created a hierarchical world system with industrial core regions, semi-peripheral zones of partial industrialization, and peripheral areas primarily producing raw materials. The period also witnessed significant transformations within capitalist organization itself. Individual and family firms increasingly gave way to joint-stock companies and corporate forms that mobilized capital on unprecedented scales. Banking capital merged with industrial capital to form what theorists called "finance capital," exemplified by German universal banks that directly controlled industrial enterprises. Cartels, trusts, and monopolies emerged in key industries, partially displacing earlier competitive capitalism with more planned forms of production and distribution. These organizational changes reflected capital's increasing concentration and centralization - the tendency for successful capitals to grow larger and absorb or eliminate smaller competitors. By 1914, these developments had created a highly integrated yet deeply unstable world system. The contradiction between increasingly socialized production (now organized on a global scale) and continued private appropriation of surplus value intensified. Competition between national capitals, backed by their respective states, generated geopolitical tensions that would ultimately explode in World War I. The golden age demonstrated both capitalism's remarkable dynamism - its ability to revolutionize production and incorporate vast new territories - and its inherent contradictions that would lead to unprecedented crisis in the coming decades.

Chapter 4: Crisis and Reconstruction: Depression, War and Recovery (1914-1945)

The period from 1914 to 1945 represents perhaps the most tumultuous phase in capitalism's development, encompassing two world wars, the Great Depression, and dramatic political transformations across multiple continents. This era began with the collapse of the first globalized economy as World War I shattered international trade networks, financial systems, and political arrangements that had facilitated capital's golden age. The war itself, lasting from 1914 to 1918, destroyed enormous amounts of physical capital while mobilizing industrial economies for unprecedented military production, demonstrating both capitalism's destructive potential and its productive capacity when directed by state planning. Key figures navigating this turbulent period included political leaders like Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal represented a significant attempt to reconstruct capitalism through state intervention, and John Maynard Keynes, whose economic theories provided intellectual justification for such interventions. Business leaders like Henry Ford pioneered new production methods based on assembly lines and mass production, while labor leaders like John L. Lewis organized industrial unions that forced capital to share productivity gains with workers. Meanwhile, revolutionary leaders like Vladimir Lenin and later Mao Zedong established alternative economic systems that challenged capitalism's global dominance and influenced its internal development through competitive pressure. The fundamental contradiction driving this period's turbulence was the growing mismatch between capitalism's productive capacity and its ability to generate sufficient demand for what it could produce. The 1920s witnessed remarkable productivity growth through electrification, assembly line production, and scientific management techniques, but wage growth failed to keep pace. In the United States, the share of national income going to the top 1% reached historic highs by 1928, creating structural weaknesses in consumer demand despite apparent prosperity. When the stock market crashed in 1929, these underlying contradictions surfaced dramatically, triggering a downward spiral of declining production, rising unemployment, and financial collapse that spread globally through trade and financial linkages. The Great Depression (1929-1939) revealed the limits of self-regulating markets and prompted fundamental reconsideration of capitalism's institutional framework. Unemployment reached 25% in the United States and similar levels across industrialized nations, demonstrating market mechanisms' failure to utilize available productive resources. Various reconstruction efforts emerged: Roosevelt's New Deal in America, Nazi economic policies in Germany, and more modest social democratic reforms elsewhere all expanded state economic roles. These diverse responses shared certain features - increased government spending, expanded social welfare provisions, and greater regulation of financial markets - that collectively represented a significant transformation of liberal capitalism into more managed forms. World War II (1939-1945) paradoxically resolved many of the Depression's economic problems through massive state-directed mobilization while causing unprecedented human suffering and physical destruction. War production finally absorbed excess capacity and unemployed workers, demonstrating that the problem had never been insufficient productive capability but inadequate effective demand. The war also accelerated technological development, management innovations, and international economic coordination. The Bretton Woods conference in 1944 established a new framework for post-war international economic relations, with fixed exchange rates, controlled capital movements, and new institutions like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank designed to prevent the instabilities that had plagued the interwar period. By 1945, capitalism had been fundamentally transformed through crisis and reconstruction. The laissez-faire model had given way to various forms of managed capitalism with expanded state economic roles, stronger labor protections, and more comprehensive social welfare systems. International economic relations were more institutionalized and regulated than before. These changes created the foundation for the remarkable post-war economic boom while incorporating elements of the socialist critique that had gained influence during capitalism's crisis years. The period demonstrated capitalism's remarkable adaptability - its capacity to transform its institutional structures while preserving its fundamental class relations and accumulation imperatives.

Chapter 5: Financialization: Capital's Transformation in the Modern Era (1945-Present)

The period from 1945 to the present has witnessed capitalism's remarkable recovery from mid-century crises followed by profound structural transformations. The immediate post-war decades (1945-1973) represented capitalism's second golden age, with unprecedented growth rates, rising living standards, and relative stability across developed economies. This "Fordist" model combined mass production with mass consumption, supported by Keynesian demand management policies, strong labor unions, and expanded welfare states. The international framework established at Bretton Woods provided stable exchange rates and controlled capital movements that facilitated trade growth while giving nations policy autonomy to pursue full employment. Key figures shaping this transformation included policymakers like Paul Volcker, whose Federal Reserve policies in the early 1980s prioritized inflation control over full employment, signaling a fundamental shift in economic governance; corporate leaders like Jack Welch of General Electric, who pioneered "shareholder value" approaches that prioritized stock prices over production; and political figures like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, who implemented neoliberal policies dismantling many post-war economic regulations. Meanwhile, financial innovators created increasingly complex instruments - from junk bonds to credit default swaps - that facilitated capital's growing autonomy from productive constraints. The fundamental shift driving this period has been the growing dominance of financial capital over productive capital - a process termed "financialization." This transformation emerged from contradictions in the post-war growth model, which began experiencing declining profitability in productive sectors during the late 1960s and early 1970s. As manufacturing faced intensified international competition and rising labor costs, capital increasingly sought returns through financial channels rather than productive investment. The breakdown of the Bretton Woods system in 1971-73 removed constraints on international capital movements, while subsequent deregulation of domestic financial markets created new profit opportunities in finance. By the 1990s, financial assets had grown dramatically relative to GDP across developed economies, with financial sector profits constituting an unprecedented share of total corporate profits. Financialization has manifested through multiple interconnected processes. Corporations increasingly focus on financial metrics and activities, with non-financial firms deriving growing portions of their profits from financial operations rather than production. Households have become more directly integrated into financial markets through retirement accounts, mortgage debt, student loans, and consumer credit. Daily life itself has been increasingly financialized, with activities from education to healthcare increasingly mediated through financial products. Meanwhile, governments have become more dependent on financial market approval, constraining policy options and prioritizing creditor interests. These developments represent not just quantitative growth in finance but qualitative changes in how capitalism functions. The consequences of financialization have been profound and contradictory. Financial innovation has increased capital mobility and allocation efficiency in some respects while simultaneously generating new forms of instability and crisis. Income and wealth inequality have increased dramatically, as financial assets concentrate in upper income brackets while debt burdens fall disproportionately on lower and middle classes. Economic growth has become more dependent on asset price appreciation and debt expansion rather than productive investment, creating "bubble economies" vulnerable to periodic crashes. The 2008 global financial crisis represented the most severe manifestation of these contradictions, temporarily threatening the entire financial system before massive government interventions stabilized markets at enormous public cost. The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed and intensified financialization's contradictions. Central banks' unprecedented monetary interventions prevented financial collapse but further inflated asset prices, exacerbating wealth inequality. Supply chain disruptions revealed the vulnerabilities created by decades of globalization and just-in-time production systems optimized for financial efficiency rather than resilience. As we move further into the 21st century, capitalism faces mounting challenges from financial instability, environmental limits, technological disruption, and social resistance - suggesting that another major transformation may be underway, though its specific form remains uncertain.

Chapter 6: Contradictions Intensify: Environmental Limits and Systemic Instability

The contemporary period has witnessed an intensification of capitalism's fundamental contradictions, with environmental limits and systemic instability emerging as defining challenges. Since the 1970s, the ecological consequences of endless capital accumulation have become increasingly apparent. Climate change, biodiversity loss, resource depletion, and pollution represent not merely technical problems but structural contradictions between capitalism's growth imperative and the finite nature of planetary systems. The carbon emissions driving climate change correlate directly with economic growth patterns, creating a fundamental tension between conventional development and environmental sustainability. Despite growing recognition of these issues, culminating in agreements like the 2015 Paris Climate Accord, actual emissions have continued rising globally, demonstrating the difficulty of addressing environmental limits within capitalism's existing framework. Key figures grappling with these contradictions include both those working within the system and those challenging it fundamentally. Economists like Nicholas Stern have attempted to quantify climate change's economic costs, arguing that early action represents a sound investment even in conventional terms. Business leaders like Elon Musk have pioneered potentially transformative technologies in renewable energy and transportation, though often reproducing capitalism's existing social relations. Meanwhile, activists like Greta Thunberg and movements like Extinction Rebellion have pushed for more radical responses, arguing that incremental reforms remain inadequate given the scale and urgency of environmental crises. Indigenous leaders from the Amazon to the Arctic have connected environmental struggles to broader questions of colonial history and alternative relationships with nature. The fundamental contradiction driving these crises lies between capital's need for endless compound growth and the material reality of a finite planet. Capitalism's dynamism has historically depended on continuously expanding production and consumption, with profit reinvestment generating exponential growth trajectories. This expansion increasingly confronts absolute resource limits and waste absorption capacities. While technological optimists suggest decoupling economic growth from material throughput, empirical evidence indicates that absolute decoupling at necessary scales remains elusive. The contradiction manifests not just in climate change but in multiple interconnected crises - from ocean acidification to topsoil depletion to freshwater scarcity - that collectively constitute what some theorists call "metabolic rifts" in humanity's relationship with natural systems. Financial instability has emerged as another defining feature of contemporary capitalism. The 2008 global financial crisis represented not an anomaly but a systemic outcome of financialization processes. The growing complexity and interconnectedness of global financial markets have created new forms of systemic risk that transcend individual institutions or national boundaries. Despite post-crisis regulatory reforms, fundamental drivers of instability remain: the inherent tendency toward speculative excess when finance becomes self-referential; the procyclical nature of credit creation that amplifies both booms and busts; and the growing divergence between financial asset valuations and underlying productive realities. Central banks have responded with unprecedented interventions - quantitative easing, negative interest rates, and massive asset purchases - that have stabilized markets but potentially created new vulnerabilities while exacerbating wealth inequality. These environmental and financial contradictions interact with technological transformations that simultaneously offer potential solutions and generate new problems. Digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and automation create possibilities for more efficient resource use and new forms of economic coordination beyond market mechanisms. However, under existing social relations, these technologies often accelerate environmental degradation through increased consumption while concentrating economic power and displacing workers without adequate alternative livelihoods. The platform monopolies that have emerged in the digital economy - Amazon, Google, Facebook - represent unprecedented concentrations of economic power with ambiguous implications for capitalism's future development. As these contradictions intensify, capitalism faces mounting legitimacy challenges across multiple dimensions. Growing inequality undermines meritocratic justifications for market outcomes. Environmental crises question the system's basic sustainability. Financial instability contradicts claims about markets' efficient capital allocation. These challenges have fueled both right-wing nationalist movements promising to restore past stability and left-wing alternatives seeking more fundamental transformations. Whether capitalism can once again adapt through internal reforms or whether its contradictions will necessitate more fundamental system change remains the central question of our historical moment.

Summary

Throughout its five-century evolution, capitalism has demonstrated both remarkable adaptability and persistent contradictions. The system has continuously transformed itself - from merchant capital accumulating through trade to industrial capital reorganizing production, from competitive markets to monopolistic structures, from national economies to global integration, and finally to finance-dominated configurations. Each transformation has resolved certain contradictions while generating new ones. The fundamental tension between social production and private appropriation has remained constant, though manifesting differently across historical phases. This dialectical process of crisis and adaptation has driven capitalism's unprecedented dynamism while simultaneously creating recurrent instabilities that periodically threaten the system's reproduction. These historical patterns offer crucial insights for navigating our present challenges. First, environmental limits represent not just another problem for capitalism to solve but a fundamental contradiction with its core growth imperative - suggesting that addressing climate change and related crises may require transforming basic economic structures rather than merely adjusting market incentives. Second, financialization's dominance reflects deeper problems in capital accumulation that cannot be resolved through simply "regulating finance" while leaving underlying production relations unchanged. Finally, technological changes that could potentially address many current problems will likely generate equitable and sustainable outcomes only if embedded within new social relations that prioritize human development and ecological balance over profit maximization. By understanding capitalism as a historical system rather than a natural or eternal arrangement, we gain the perspective necessary to imagine and create economic forms that preserve modern productive capabilities while transcending the contradictions that increasingly threaten both social and ecological well-being.

About Author

Loading...

Karl Marx

With the help of Friedrich Engels, German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto (1848) and Das Kapital (1867-1894), works, which explain historical development in terms of the interaction of contradictory economic forces, form many regimes, and profoundly influenced the social sciences. German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works. Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy. Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941). The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx. Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition. Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published. Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States. He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party. Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell . People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects. Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956). More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marxhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...

Read more

Related Books by Karl Marx

Loading...

The Communist Manifesto

Karl Marx

Workers of the world unite!

★★★★☆4.2