Podcast | Demon of the Moon (Ep 2): Over the Longue Durée

Some of you will remember what I’m doing. I’m deducing, from transcripts, from millions of words of Volya Radio transcripts, what I call the principles of Infolklore.

I have re-recorded this podcast, due to audio issues with the original recording of 16 September. I’ve posted it as two parts. This is the second part. The first part is here.

Continued from:

Infolklore, I remind you, is not just the opposite of Disinfolklore. It’s a positive creative practice. I try to practise it. Most of us probably listen on Volya Radio to Will or Mockers every day. They’re the very epitome of Infolklorists, from my perspective.

So the law that we honour on Volya Radio is basically the same since the beginning, since SBU Crime and Punishment. Then it was taken on by other segments on Volya Radio. On the 16th of January 2025, for instance:

“In any case, there’s no legitimate target on Russia’s part. Nothing that Russia hits is legitimate because the war itself is a crime. It’s a crime of aggression.”

So the war is a crime. This is true. It is the crime the UN Charter was written to forbid. The law of armed conflict binds both sides. The law of armed conflict. The post-World War II legal order. The Geneva Conventions. Regardless of who started the war. This is the whole reason the laws of war exist. A rule that only bound the innocent side would bind nobody.

So a russian shell that lands on a Ukrainian artillery position is a lawful act inside an all-unlawful war. But a russian artillery shell that lands on a Ukrainian school is not. It is an unlawful act in an unlawful war. The sentence I read you says it cannot be.

Principles of Infolklore - Series so far:

Ep 1 - Aug 20

Ep 2 - Aug 27

Ep 3 - 3 Sept

Ep 4 - 10 Sept

Ep 5 - 17 Sept

An error in rightness

This is an error in rightness. We all make mistakes. And it was made by a person who, in the same hour, refused to show prisoners of war on air, because the Geneva Conventions forbid this. Same mouth, same morning, keeping one article and arguing away the whole of the other.

The argument has a second limb, which is the one that costs. In This Week in Absurdistan, on the 13th of December 2024. In the first winter of Volya Radio on X:

“Russia invaded Ukraine and Ukraine has every right to occupy Russian territory, Belarusian territory, North Korean territory and fire any goddamn weapon it wants to [?] any of those territories to end this war of aggression against them. That’s what the rules of armed conflict in Geneva and the Hague Convention say.”

Any weapon, anywhere in those territories, and the conventions invoked to bless it. The conventions forbid exactly that, in so many words. They forbid reprisals against civilians and objects in particular.

Blackout Sunday, and the hostage dialectic

Ten months later, on Booms & Woe, the same idea arrived in a plainer coat. If you hit our electricity and our gas, we do the same to you. The russians understand a knife for a knife. Our word for this on Volya is Blackout Sunday. It was said on the show a hundred times before it came true. Every one of those hundred was a wish for a civilian grid to go dark.

Although I note it is usually in the context of the civilian grid, which is helping to feed the russian war machine. If the russian war machine does not separate its electricity substations from those that serve civilians, then Ukraine cannot be expected only to hit electricity substations that only serve the military. Especially if there are none.

This is the hostage dialectic, which the russians are so good at. They create of civilians guards. They surround themselves in civilians. Then, after they hit civilians in Ukraine, they cry when Ukraine hits them. That is the russian hostage dialectic.

You cannot win a war provided you take proper precautions not to kill any civilians. But civilians are being held hostage, as they are in russia, and indeed in Ukraine and Oleshky. People there are starving to death. There is a famine in russia-occupied Ukraine. That is despite russia’s duty in law, as the occupier, to ensure the conditions of sustainable existence for those people unlucky enough to be under russian occupation. You cannot stand back while that is going on without trying to liberate them.

A question for the Code of Positive Trolls

So whether the wish was Infolklore is a question for the Code of Positive Trolls. It sits on the record beside these conventions. I make no judgement about this.

What I’m looking at is transcripts of thousands of hours of talking. I’m looking at the main immanence in them, not the variations from those immanences. All of us are dealing with this war. We are part of this terrible, terrible data stream of appalling acts that russia is responsible for every day. We all have emotional reactions to them.

So I’m not going to sit in judgement on the particulars when the whole itself is determinable as Infolklore, and as conforming to the Code of Positive Trolls.

Drone safaris, and the laws of war

I posted after one of Zarina Zabrisky’s amazing articles. She is the American journalist who has catalogued russia’s drone safaris. They have killed over 2,000 to 3,000 people in Kherson. There russia uses humans to train its drone pilots, by killing children, babies, buses. This is happening every day, and the world hasn’t taken notice.

NATO, if it was a serious organisation, even if it didn’t care about Ukraine, would be trying to find a way of solving this problem. How do you solve the problem when you have these genocidal maniacs using first-person view drones, which cost about 500 euros each, and they are hunting civilians in a city?

Zarina Zabrisky did an amazing article on how the russians have mined all the rivers, and the Dnipro, and the riverbeds all around occupied territories. I asked the question carefully, as a lawyer does. It was something along the lines of, well, maybe it’s time to change the Geneva Convention on the laws of war.

Laws do change and transform over time. If the ICRC and those signatories of the 1949 Geneva Conventions on the laws of war will not defend them and enforce them, then we may need to change them to laws which they are prepared to enforce.

So Ukraine is tied to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the only country actually enforcing them and staying true to them, while their enemy uses them basically as a guide of what to do the opposite of. Then you can’t win a war by doing this. The Geneva Conventions themselves become an instrument for the enemy. So these are questions we must raise and talk about and think about in a free society.

If the russians are taking advantage of our adherence, our blanket adherence to them, then a lawful government or a lawful operation may decide to change those laws. Understand this about people like me. russia invaded Ukraine in March 2014 (or, as the European Court of Human Rights now finds, in February 2014). In the first moment, the first milliseconds of hearing about russia’s invasion, I understood that unless international law was defended at that moment, then we would enter a realm in which no laws applied. That was part of russia’s objective.

Our countries have a legal duty to enforce international law. Ukraine is actually enforcing international law. So if we are not prepared to enforce these laws, then we cannot cry when Ukraine acts in ways which seem, on the surface, to be a violation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Instead, we should be supporting Ukraine properly. We should be enforcing the laws ourselves, or accepting that these laws are constraints and instruments by the enemies of everything we hold dear.

So I do not stick religiously to the letter of the law in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. There is this concept in European human rights law called the margin of appreciation. In this case, a state like Ukraine would have to have a very wide margin of appreciation by a court, which the Rashists, as the initiators of this invasion, do not have. Not least because, as I’ve just said, the war itself is unlawful. But activities, any activity within that unlawful war, must be lawful. All of us know practically nothing russia does adheres to the Geneva Conventions, even if you put brackets around the lawfulness of the war itself.

Relief, and a wall of dead bodies

On Booms & Woe, on the 9th of December 2025:

“Anyway, this soldier with his leg torn off is really, really happy that he’s in hospital. Really happy, he says, really finally at hospital. Woohoo!”

She gives him relief. She gives him a reason and an inside. Interiority is the posh way of putting it. He was in the trenches and then he got injured, not killed. He got captured by Ukraine, and he’s now in the hospital recovering.

So seven months later, on the same show, a different reader on the same men. “And the only thing they’re building is a wall out of their dead bodies.”

A wall out of their dead bodies. There’s no inside there, though it is a description of the reality. The aim of the war splits along the same seam.

russia has lost 10,000 souls over the past week, as I speak to you. They’re up to around 1,400 a day at the moment, because they’re throwing human beings against a wall of defensive drones, knowingly, every day. They’re losing land. They’re not even taking land. So to blame Ukraine for defending itself is not appropriate.

The aim of the war splits along the same seam in Good Morning Kyiv and Booms & Woe, on the 12th of October 2025:

“That’s really the only way you can survive is by, interestingly, prosecuting a policy of trying to annihilate them, not just defeat them and get them to run off is actually a defensive strategy.”

Annihilate, not just defeat.

Beside that, in the same year, on the same show, someone reading the youngest russian dead off a Ukrainian intelligence agency list:

“Born in 2006, I’ve got socks older than that. So when they published this information, the main intelligence directorate of Ukraine also wants to remind everybody that any Russian soldier who does not want to die in the meat assaults has a chance to save his life.”

Leave Ukraine, surrender. The joke ages a boy of 18. Ten seconds later, the exit is read out as if he could hear it.

Generosity, over the longue durée

So we hold both in our minds at both times. The man given his relief. He is captured, and may recover in hospital as a prisoner of war. The men made into a wall, the exit read aloud and the annihilation prescribed.

What the Code of Positive Trolls asks here is generosity, which in its oldest sense means protecting other beings from harm. So we answer yes and no, depending on our interpretation of alternative meanings, mornings. But of course, on the longue durée, if we surrender part of Ukraine to russia, as we did in March 2014, the inevitable is that millions would die. I and many others saw that at the very first moment we heard about this. And so it goes.

At every moment in this war, if we appease the aggressor, that guarantees the aggressor will continue even more intensively. The cost of not appeasing them becomes higher. The cost of sending the Tommies or the US Marines into Crimea in March 2014. The United States and the United Kingdom, as signatories of the Budapest Memorandum, were obliged to do that, morally and legally. The cost of not doing that goes up every moment we refuse to arm Ukraine properly. Everything that has happened since was immanent in that weakness, in that refusal.

Of course, russia is 100% to blame. But we are also to blame for not standing up properly. The Code of Positive Trolls adjudicates over the longue durée as well as over the quotidian durée, when I’m looking at Volya Radio scripts, for instance.

Where the line drifts

So there’s one place where the line drifts. It’s a particular place, and it’s not on the front. It’s in russia’s own misfortunes at home.

On Booms & Woe, on the 7th of April 2026, a block of flats in Dagestan slides into the ground. “What they did was just piled it. So they put concrete piles about 10 feet down into the ground and they built high rises on top of it.”

That is a mechanism, given where an adjective would have done. It’s exactly what Volya Radio on X, every morning, is best at.

Then a minute later, in the same passage:

“The problem is it’s all issues of their own making. And you just can’t have sympathy for that, can you?”

This, for me, is the key. This is archetypal Infolklore. The problem is it’s all issues of their own making. This is exactly the same kind of morality tale we read in Grimm, or that is in every Disney or romantic comedy.

Disinfolklore is trying to teach us to be mean to one another. It’s trying to hack our minds, so that we begin reading the article wanting to be generous and to help Ukraine. By the end of the article, we are mean and we are angry. That is what Disinfolklore does to us.

This, on the other hand, is archetypal Infolklore. It’s not just folklore. If it was just folklore, it might be about an old person in a forest and a well. But this is about the information space and information warfare.

This was my insight in eastern Ukraine, where I worked as a diplomat between 2015 and 2022, and in russia-occupied Ukraine between 2015 and 2018. The same kinds of reactions and immanences, morality and the Other, in the stories that I was reading in russia-occupying media, were pretty similar to folklore. But there was a difference.

So the problem is it’s all issues of their own making. You just can’t have sympathy for that, can you? Families in the flats. Their own making. The same host who gave the engineering also said, “As they do with everything.” Both in one minute.

This is karma. This is explaining and giving lessons. Do not invade your neighbour. Invest the billions you’re spending killing Ukrainians in building proper apartments in Dagestan. If you want to occupy Dagestan in the Caucasus, then look after the people you are occupying. After you’ve spent enough money on ensuring that every village in the russian Federation has at least one flush toilet. That’s all we’re looking for. Then perhaps you can think of war.

Gamers, tourists, mothers, villagers arming themselves against the press gangs, a family in a hole in the ground. The contempt clusters there, on their domestic suffering. It’s a mood the show drifts into, rather than a thing anyone decides.

Turning the tables

However, understand what Volya is doing over the longue durée. Volya is trying to turn the tables on russia, and say to them what I’ve just said.

You think you are coming into our lands to civilise us. Well, look what’s happening in your land. You think that by closing down your media, and feeding us a diet of the Bolshoi Ballet and Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, we will go, oh, russian culture is so great. So it doesn’t matter that you murder millions of Ukrainians.

No. We’re turning the tables on you. We’re elucidating what’s happening in russia, to show you what a basket case you are, how awful you are. You’re promoting this pride through your actor philosophers and your actor spokespeople. And look at the beauty of russia. Look at its great culture. You’re trying to use this as a reason to allow you to kill Ukrainians, and to invade our lands, and to do appalling things. Well, we’re turning the tables on you. We are showing you Infolklore about what is going on in russia.

This is the importance, over the longue durée, of Volya. I will not judge the presenters when they drift into this contempt, because this contempt is merely words. Whereas russia’s contempt for us turns into drone strikes, turns into election interference, gives us Donald Trump, undermines everything which is good about our world. We are at war.

So our own fence is on the record too, said once during an Accidental Ukrainian. “I’m not trying to turn Russia and Russians into dehumanising them. I’m not saying blame. I’m saying they own it.”

They own it. That is the fence.

That is how we must judge

On the last morning of all, someone said Ukraine should perhaps stop holding back. Then they caught themselves and said, that sounds awful. They said both halves in the same sentence.

Everything in this part was said by people who also keep the books that I read last week. So the line is patrolled. It’s not kept to all the time. But it is patrolled in real time over the short durée, but also over the longue durée. That is how we must judge. That is one of the principles of Infolklore. These are lexical units inside lexical units inside lexical units, over multiple timestamps. Our judgements must be made over the course of them.

I’ve cited March 2014, when our countries thought they could appease russia. There’s many today who still think they can appease russia. Well, I’m sorry, I will not be held hostage by the naive, or perhaps the deliberately naive, who are concealing their fear, or their adherence to Russianism [?], or their weakness. The rest of us have a right and a duty to defend the post-World War II legal order. Thanks to the Ukrainians, this is happening.

So we’re giving enough information for all of us to make decisions. These are humans, real people, all of us who can react in real time to this terrible information. We all keep each other right on it. I’m reminded by someone, when I’m listening to that, what actually the Geneva Conventions forbid, this or that. Or I’m trying to work out whether it is proper for russia to hit this particular target. Then someone reminds me, no, it’s not, because the whole war is unlawful.

This is what a community, an Infolklore-based community, does. We remind each other when we go astray. We look at things over different timeframes, and all in the context of the longue durée. By contrast, certain Telegram channels or newspapers do the exact opposite.

Where the Code of Positive Trolls cannot settle a question in real time, I leave it open. That goes for all of the cases I’ve just left now. If I’ve left them open, these are tough cases. But they’re all the things I am guilty of myself, at different moments. The law binds both sides. We say so on the mornings we remember, and all the times that we can remember.

The averaging engine

We talked last week a bit about AI and various things. I wanted to speak about something that relates to that, if you’ll indulge me on this.

There is a piece in this English newspaper called Byline Times recently, called The Tyranny of Literacy. It talked about the fear of algorithmically determined information distribution. In my six years chasing inherent Indo-European sounds, I also had some of the same fear. The fear is that a large language model is an averaging engine that teaches us to average too, until the plausible crowds out the true.

Peter Jukes published my first written episode of Disinfolklore in Byline Times, in May 2023. I’ll be eternally grateful to him for doing that. He wrote a piece recently in Byline Times, which I subscribe to, called The Tyranny of Literacy. It cites an excellent piece of science to sharpen it. Brain scans show the human mind is nothing like a next-word predictor. It’s a meaning organiser that leaps sideways at the edges of phrases, in ways no machine forecasts.

Again, this is something all of us hear on Volya. None of us begin a show believing, oh, we’re going to say this, we’re going to say that. We fire off each other all the time. The mind, it says, “does not optimise. It explores.”

There’s a joke buried in my own project’s name, which is Reversion to the M-N-. You can read about it on PowerofMana.net. It leaks into this project by my use of mana. But also, when I look at the Cheburashka artefact, and Dugin’s use and characterisation of Cheburashka as a demon of the moon, I can turn to Power of Mana. There I’ve spent the last decade looking at what the moon means in Indo-European cultures, going back 6,000 years. That M-N- sound belongs exactly to this argument.

I call that work, into which my Finding Manuland travels fit, Reversion to the M-N-. It’s my arch play on the phenomenon in data analytics and statistics called reversion to the mean. That is the statistical recurrence at the very core of how these artificial neural network algorithm driven large language models work. Everything is pulled back towards the average, the expected, the already seen.

The joke folds in on itself because mean wears that M-N- sound. It’s clearly related to its etymon in the reconstructed forebear of all Indo-European languages. I call that forebear Ancient Ukrainian, because that is where Proto-Indo-European was first spoken, in Mykolaivka village, south of Zaporizhzhia city.

So *meh₁- means measure. That’s the meh component of *méh₁nōt, which is how the first Indo-Europeans sounded the moon. Etymon, by the way, the technical word for a root, has M-N- in it too. It is the very unit whose rules kept the pattern invisible. You see, once you get your eye in, that M-N- pops up again and again!

For the phenomenon I’ve spent six years documenting is the opposite of a decay towards the average. It’s the M-N- regenerating itself everywhere you look, across 6,000 years. It surfaces again and again in places that root-by-root etymology could never predict and was never going to find. The root-by-root etymology traces each etymon down to its permitted pathway. This M-N- pattern lives exactly at the level that lens excludes.

The human outside the loop

Their method was not wrong. It’s a lens ground for a different path. That’s why it waited for a writer like me.

So this summer I spent an extraordinary fortnight proving the truth of my belief that there was something important and different about this M-N- immanence, in so many monikers and words that we use in almost every sentence.

The assertion is that there is a solution to the Oxford English Dictionary’s crisp explanation of the recent origin of man. The OED has it as a word inherited from Germanic, M-N- and [?] Germanic, from Mannus, the first of the Germans, according to Tacitus, in the first century of the Common Era. And the OED says that the pre-Germanic etymology of the word man is problematic.

I stood exactly where the OED was, and where a machine cannot go. I spent years looking into it. I used the machine then, after those years, to get there faster than any writer working alone ever could.

I ran a test, using a frontier model, of the statistical likelihood of the recurrence of that M-N- sound-meaning bundle. So it’s not just the sound M-N-. It’s a meaning attached to it. This idea of mana or energy or light shining through a moon, or a mind, or a measure of something else.

In a heap of words, the etymologists, with their old-fashioned toolkit and strict rules, kept those words apart. Man, meaning, measure, human, name. Even when their senses overlap. Even when you can use the idea of spirit, or immanence, or mana, or energy, or light, all as synonyms, to join all of these same words and their meanings. All with M-N- sounds in them.

Every idea in the test that was run was mine. Not one came from the neural network model. For all its power, it originated nothing.

What it did superbly was test. The frontier model ran, in an afternoon, the checks that it would have cost me a year to do manually. It told me plainly when I was wrong. It killed several of my favourite ideas outright. That is exactly what a true instrument is for.

I explored. It measured. I brought the possibilities. It supplied the probabilities. These are not rivals. They’re two halves of the sentence about the mind, finally set to work together instead of one impersonating the other.

I’d name the good side of the coin the human outside the loop. The anxious picture of our moment puts a person inside a machine’s process, nodding its outputs through, slowly de-skilled. Turn that inside out. Put the human on the outside, holding the machine the way an astronomer holds a telescope. The theory, the questions, the wild sideways guess belong to the human. The instrument only lets her see further.

The model, the frontier model, powerful as it is, could not have got there without visiting Menua’s canal in Van in Turkey, in the old Armenian highlands. It’s the most capable model yet built. The generation its makers called Mythos. Perhaps humanity’s finest ever instrument is now available to a solitary writer in their garret. It is not, and cannot be, the decider.

The measurement

I, a writer chasing an idea, discovered this. The NorthEuraLex database holds 43,251 Indo-European word forms and 1,016 meanings. Across it, the words for the pre-registered meaning field carry the consonantal skeleton M-N-. That meaning field is moon, month, mind, think, memory, remember, meaning, measure, count, man, human, spirit and name. The two consonants M-N- keep company together in any order at 17.8%, against 2% for all other meanings. That result corresponds to Fisher’s exact test, p equals 4.9 multiplied by 10 to the power of minus 75.

Or, in writerly language, the probability that this M-N- pattern and its associated meaning, as part of that meaning field, is a coincidence is zero, and then 74 zeros after the decimal point, and then a 4.9. So if sound and meaning had nothing to do with each other, as the traditional view of Indo-European etymology holds, you could rerun this experiment on fresh data once a second since the Big Bang. That’s about four by 10 to the power of 17 replays. And you’d still be short of one expected fluke by a factor of a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.

The etymologists assert that this is a coincidence. The words on this semantic field are moon, month, mind, think, memory, remember, meaning, measure, count, man, human, spirit and name. The subset is 43,251 Indo-European word forms, which comprises 1,016 meanings. They say it’s a coincidence that M-N- pops up on that semantic field, moon, month, mind, think, memory, remember, meaning, measure, count, man, human, spirit and name, 17.8% of the time, against 2% for all other meanings. If so, then we can say, well, that is not just one chance in a million that that happens. It’s a chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.

That is scientifically, statistically established by an instrument. I did the experiment. Anyone can reproduce that experiment. It’s registered in Zenodo, which is a repository held by CERN. So, on the one hand, you could believe it’s chance, even though it’s a one in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion chance. Or you think, well, maybe it all emanates from the same root. That’s the stakes.

So all of this worked because I did the six years of work first. I was able to task the Mythos model with the question that had been puzzling me for years. That’s the hinge of everything I do in my Automating Disinfolklore. I first notice patterns. I form ideas. I read thousands of papers. In the case of Finding Manuland, which you can look at on PowerofMana.net, I physically walk the road between, say, Van and Mesopotamia and back. All of it comes before the machines can do anything useful. The model amplifies a prepared mind. It could not have prepared one.

You could run that experiment every second since the Big Bang, and you would still be short of one expected fluke by a factor of a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion. So that is going back to the beginning, supposedly the beginning of the earth, whatever it is, 12 billion years ago, and running the experiment every second. And the chances of M and N popping up 17.8% of the time on that semantic field of moon, month, mind, think, memory, remember, meaning, measure, count, man, human, spirit and name. Across the entire NorthEuraLex database, which holds 43,251 Indo-European word forms and 1,016 meanings. Against 2% for all other meanings. That is after running that experiment every second since the Big Bang, and not arriving at M-N- being with those meanings. You would still be short of an expected fluke by a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.

So Peter Jukes’s essay is diplomatically expressed. The warning is real. Surrender your thinking to the averaging engine before you have any of your own, and you’ll indeed be an avatar of the average. But that’s only half the story.

The other half is the writer who has spent her life looking hard into the material of her craft. The material is the sounds, the roots, the buried systems beneath the plainest words she writes the world with. She is not necessarily diminished by these machines. She is, for the first time, equipped. The lonely figure in the attic, pram in the hallway, alone with the page, can now reach past the edge of what any single lifetime could grasp at, in an afternoon. Not by handing over her mind, but by keeping it and pointing the instrument at what she alone can see. The cure for granting ourselves too little mind is to go and use the mind we have, with better tools than any writer before us has owned.

Enheduanna

Four thousand three hundred years ago, Enheduanna was the first named author in human culture. She was Sargon the Great’s daughter. She was a priestess to the moon god Nanna in Mesopotamia, in 2400 BCE. Enheduanna heaped the coals on the censer, prepared the offering and, in her own phrase, conceived the word. A hymn from the moon god’s house, written to true a world a usurper had wronged.

The office of the writer has not changed since 2400 BCE. I consider myself primarily a writer, an artist. I write on information warfare. I look at the constituent elements of meaning and monikers and information warfare. I look at how they affect people’s minds, including my own. I write about that, and I speak about it.

The writer still exists to recouple the legal with the moral, the right to right the world through writing. Writers have always had the mana to bring communities together rather than to divide them. What has changed, only now, is how far a single prepared mind can reach while doing it. It is the age these machines, these frontier models, have opened. The age of Mythos.

Enheduanna righted her city with a song. She had only her own two hands and a reed to press into clay. I have the whole span of Manuland between Ireland and India to walk, and an instrument steady enough to test my hypothesis. This era has opened both halves of the work, the sound beneath our words and the very patterns beneath our politics. And for both I have the strong and the slightly vertiginous sense that I’m only getting started.

At bottom, tyranny or not, the writer’s job in Mesopotamia, as in Europe today, has not changed. Only our reach.

I’ll leave it there for this week. I never got back to the Ukraine Centre for a disinformation review. But we’ll come back to that next week, with your indulgence, and inshallah.

Continued from:

Ep 1 - 27 Aug 2026

Ep 2 - 10 Sept

Principles of Infolklore

Ep 1 - Aug 20

Ep 2 - Aug 27

Ep 3 - 3 Sept

Ep 4 - 10 Sept

Ep 5 - 17 Sept

Get full access to Disinfolklore at www.disinfolklore.net/subscribe