teacup. [ 掲示板 ] [ 掲示板作成 ] [ 有料掲示板 ] [ ブログ ]

新着順:21/1478 記事一覧表示 | 《前のページ | 次のページ》

英語版 資本論 4.商品の魅力とその秘密

 投稿者:杉本  投稿日:2018年 7月 4日(水)09時56分30秒
  通報 返信・引用 編集済



  Karl Marx  Das Kapital. Band I

 ①At first glance, a commodity seems a self-evident, trivial thing.

Her analysis shows that she is a very tricky thing, full of metaphysical sophistry and theological twists. As far as use value is concerned, there is nothing mysterious about it, whether I consider it from the point of view of satisfying human needs by its properties, or of obtaining these qualities as the product of human labor. It is perfectly clear that man, through his activity, alters the forms of natural substances in a manner which is useful to him. The shape of the wood e.g. is changed when you make a table out of it. Nonetheless, the table remains wood, an ordinary sensual thing. But as soon as he appears as a commodity, he transforms himself into a sensually supersensible thing. Not only does he stand on the ground with his feet, but he turns himself upside down to all the other commodities and grows crickets out of his wooden head, much whimsical than when he begins to dance of his own free will.(25)


②The mystical character of the product does not spring from its use value. It does not arise from the content of value determinations. For, first of all, how different the useful works or productive activities may be, it is a physiological truth that they are functions of the human organism, and that every such function, whatever its content and form, is essentially expenditure of the human brain, nerve, muscle , Sense organ etc. is. Second, on the basis of the determination of value-value, the duration of that expenditure, or the quantity of labor, quantity is even plainly distinguishable from the quality of labor. In all states, working time, which costs the production of food, must interest men, though not evenly, at different stages of development. (26) Finally, as soon as men work for each other in some way, their work also receives social benefits Shape.



第ニに、その支出、または仕事の量の継続時間に基づく価値の大きさなどの量の決定では、仕事の品質と区別も明らかです。 すべての州で、食糧の生産にかかる作業時間は、開発のさまざまな段階で男性が均等には関わらず、関心を持たなければなりません。(26)最後に、人々が何らかの形でお互いに働くと、すぐに人々がお互いのためにどのような方法で作業しても、自分の仕事は、社会フォームを持っています。

 ③So where does the enigmatic character of the work product come from, as soon as it takes on commodity form? Apparently out of this form itself.

The equality of human works preserves the objective form of the same value-objectivity of the products of labor; the measure of the expenditure of human labor through its duration is given the form of the value-magnitude of the products of labor, and finally the relations of the producers, in which those social determinations of their labor are obtained, receive the form of a social relationship of the work products.

 ④The mystery of the commodity form is thus simply that it reflects back to humans the social characters of their own labor as representational characters of the labor products themselves, as the social nature of these things,

hence the social relation of the producers to the total labor as a social relationship of them objects.

Through this quid pro quo, the work products become goods, sensually psychic or social things. Thus, the light impression of a thing on the optic nerve does not present itself as a subjective stimulus of the optic nerve itself, but as an objective form of a thing outside of the eye. But in seeing, light actually becomes from one thing, the outer object, to another thing, the eye , thrown. It's a physical relationship between physical things.

On the other hand, the commodity form and the value of the products of labor in which they are presented have absolutely nothing to do with their physical nature and the consequent tangible relations. It is only the definite social relationship of the human beings themselves which here assumes for them the phantasmagoric form of a relation of things.

Therefore, to find an analogy, we must flee to the foggy region of the religious world. Here the products of the human head seem to have independent forms endowed with their own lives, among themselves and with human beings. So in the commodity world the products of the human hand.

This is what I call fetishism, which sticks to working products as soon as they are produced as commodities, and which therefore is inseparable from commodity production.

 ⑤As the preceding analysis has already shown, this fetish character of the commodity world springs from the peculiar social character of labor, which produces commodities.

 ⑥ Everyday goods only become goods because they are products of independent private work. The complex of these private works forms the total social work. Since the producers only come into social contact through the exchange of their work products, the specific social characters of their private work appear only within this exchange. Or, in fact, private works only function as members of social work through relationships, in which exchange places the products of labor and, by means of them, the producers. The social relations of their private works therefore appear to the latter to be what they are; not as directly social relations of persons in their works themselves, but rather as factual relations of persons and social relations of things.
 ⑥日常品は、独立した私的労働の産物であるため、商品にしかなりません。 これらの私的労働の複雑さは、社会的労働の全体を形成します。 生産者は作業成果物の交換を通じて社会的接触を得るに過ぎないので、彼らの私的労動の特定の社会的性格はこの交換の中でのみ現れる。

あるいは、実際には、私的な諸労働は、人間関係と生産者との関係によって、社会的活動のメンバーとしてのみ機能します。 したがって、私的労動の社会的関係は、後者にとって彼らのものであると思われます。 むしろ、人間の直接的な社会関係としてではなく、事実上の人間関係と物事の社会的関係とである。

 ⑦Only within their exchange do the working products acquire a socially equal value-objectivity, separated from their sensually distinct utilitarian objectivity.
彼らの交換の中でのみ、作業成果物は、彼らの官能的に異なる功利主義的客観性から分離された、社会的に等しい価値 - 客観性を獲得する。

This splitting of the work product into useful thing and value works only practically, as soon as the exchange has already gained sufficient extent and importance, so that useful things are produced for the exchange, the value character of the things thus comes into consideration even with their production. From this moment on, the private works of the producers actually have a double social character.
この作業成果物を有益な物と価値に分割することは、交換所が既に十分な程度と重要性を獲得した時点で実用的にしか機能しないため、有用なものが交換のために生み出されるため、 その生産がなされるようになります。 この瞬間から、プロデューサーの私的な作品は、実際には二重の社会的性格を持っています。

 On the one hand, they must, as certain useful works,
satisfy a particular social need and thus prove themselves to be members of the total work, of the natural system of the social division of labor.

On the other hand, they satisfy only the manifold needs of their own producers, provided that every useful private work is interchangeable with every other useful kind of private work, and thus is indifferent to it. The equality of completely different works of art can exist only in an abstraction of their real inequality, in the reduction to the common character which they possess as the expenditure of human labor power, abstractly human labor.
他方、彼らは、すべての有用な私的な仕事は、他の有用な種類の私的な仕事と交換可能であり、従ってそれに無関心であるという条件で、彼ら自身の生産者の多様なニーズだけを満足させる。 完全に異なる芸術作品の平等は、人間の労働力の支出、抽象的な人間の労働として所有する共通の性格への縮小において、実質不平等を抽象化してのみ存在することができる。

The brain of private producers reflects this dual social character of their private work only in the forms which appear in practical intercourse, in the exchange of products - the socially useful character of their private works, in the form that the product of labor must be useful to others social character of the equality of the different kinds of work in the form of the common value character of these materially different things, the products of labor.

the common value character of these materially different things

 ⑧So people do not relate their products of labor to each other as values, because these things are considered to them merely the factual covers of similar human labor.
  Vice versa. 逆に。







In equating their diverse products as values ??in exchange, they equate their different works as human labor. They do not know that, but they do. (27)
彼らの多様な製品をーー価値の交換の対象にするには、彼らの異なる作品を人間の労働と見なします。彼らはそれを知らないが、彼らはそうする。 (27)

It is therefore not written on the forehead of what it is.

Rather, value transforms every work product into a social hieroglyph.
Later, people seek to decipher the meaning of the hieroglyph, to go beyond the secret of their own social product, for the determination of commodities as values ??is their social product as good as language.

The late scientific discovery that labor products, insofar as they are values, merely objective expressions of the human labor expended in their production, makes an epoch in the history of human evolution, but in no way shuns the objective semblance of the social character of labor.


What is valid only for this particular form of production, the production of commodities, that the specifically social character of independent private works consists in their equality as human labor and takes on the form of the value character of the labor products, appears before and after that discovery in the Conditions of commodity production are just as final as that the scientific decomposition of the air into its elements leaves the air-form as a physical form of body.
   independent private works consists in their equality as
   human labor and takes on the form of the value character
   of the labor products,

  ーーウィキペディア フリー百科事典 >

 <89>⑨ What initially interests the product exchangers is the question of how much foreign products they receive for their own product, in which proportions the products exchange.

Once these proportions have matured to a certain habitual firmness, they seem to spring from the nature of the work products, so that e.g. a ton of iron and 2 ounces of gold equivalent, as one pound of gold and one pound of iron are equally heavy despite their various physical and chemical properties. In fact, the value character of the work products only attaches to their value as actuators.

   ウィキペディア フリー百科事典>

The latter change constantly, independently of the will, foreknowledge, and action of the exchanging people. Their own social movement has for them the form of a movement of things they control, not control.
後者は、交換人の意思、予知、行動とは無関係に絶えず変化しています。 彼ら自身の社会運動は、自分たちがコントロールするものではなく、コントロールするものの動きの形を持っています。

It requires a fully developed production of commodities before the scientific insight grows out of experience itself that the private works, which are independent of each other but as natural members of the social division of labor, are continually reduced to their socially proportional measure, because they are found in the accidental and The fluctuating conditions of exchange of their products forcibly enforce the socially necessary working time as a regulating law of nature, such as the law of gravity, when the house collapses over one's head. (28)
それは、相互に独立しているが、社会的分業の自然な構成員である私的な仕事が社会的に比例した尺度に継続的に縮小されるという、科学的洞察が経験自体から成長する前に、商品の完全に開発された生産を必要とする。 偶発的に発見され、その製品の交換条件が変動すると、家が倒壊したときに、重力の法則などの自然の規制法として社会的に必要な労働時間が強制的に強制されます。

The determination of the value by working time is therefore among the appearing Movements of relative commodities hidden secret.
His discovery removes the semblance of mere accidental determination of the values ??of value to the working products, but by no means their objective form.

 ⑩ on the forms of human life, including their scientific analysis, in the first place proposes a path contrary to real development. It starts post festum and therefore with the finished results of the development process. The forms, which stamp products of labor into commodities and are therefore exposed to commodity circulation, already possess the firmness of natural forms of social life, before men seek to give an account of the historical character of these forms; are considered immutable, but about their content. So it was only the analysis of the commodity prices, which led to the determination of the value, only the common monetary term of the goods, which led to the fixation of their value character.
  <post festum 祭りの後で・・仮想現実のこと>

人間がこれらの形態の歴史的特徴を説明しようとする前に、労働生産物を商品に刻印して商品流通にさらされている形態は、すでに社会生活の自然な形態の堅さを持っている。 不変ではなく、その内容に関するものとみなされます。 したがって、商品価値の分析だけが価値の決定につながりました。商品の共通の金銭的条件であり、価値のキャラクターの固定につながったのです。

But it is precisely this finished form - the money form - of the world of commodities, which obscures the social character of private work and therefore the social conditions of private workers instead of revealing it.

When I say that rock, boots, etc., refer to canvas as the general embodiment of abstract human labor, the craziness of that expression catches the eye.
  ネルに関係するーーとの訳出では、virtual reality 仮想現

But if the producers of rock, boots, etc., refer to these commodities on canvas - or gold and silver, which does not change anything - as a general equivalent, the relationship of their private works to the overall social work seems to them exactly in this crazy form.
しかし、ロックやブーツなどの生産者が、これらの商品をキャンバス、つまり、一般的な等価物としての、それと何ら変わらない金や銀とを参照すれば、彼らの私的労動と社会的な労動の関係は、 この狂った形態で示されている。

  <A Form of what exactly  in this crazy form.

 ⑪Such forms constitute the categories of bourgeois economy. They are socially valid, that is, objective thought-forms for the relations of production of this historically determined social mode of production, the production of commodities. All the mysticism of the world of commodities, all the magic and hauntings that enveloped labor products on the basis of commodity production, therefore vanishes immediately as soon as we flee to other forms of production.
彼らの示すものは、それは社会的に妥当であり、つまり、この歴史的に決定された社会生産方式の生産関係、商品の生産関係に対する客観的思考形式である。 商品の世界のすべての神秘主義を示すそれらは、すなわち商品生産に基づいて労働生産物を包み込んだすべての魔法や憑依は、他の生産形態に逃げるとすぐに消滅します。

 ⑫As the political economy loves Robinsonades (29), Robinson first appears on his island. Humble as he is by nature, he has various needs to satisfy and must therefore perform useful work of various kinds, make tools, make furniture, tame lama, fish, hunt, etc. On prayer and the like. We do not speak here because our Robinson finds pleasure in doing so and sees such activity as rest. In spite of the diversity of his productive functions, he knows that they are only different types of activity of the same Robinson, that is, only different ways of human labor.

The need itself forces him to divide his time precisely between his various functions. Whether one more, and the other takes up less space in its overall activity, depends on the greater or lesser difficulty to be overcome in order to obtain the intended benefit. Experience teaches him that, and our Robinson, watch, ledger, ink and quill rescued from shipwreck, as a good Englishman, soon begins to keep a record of himself.

His inventory contains a list of the commodities which he possesses, the various activities required for their production, and, finally, the labor-time, which on average costs him certain quanta of these various products. All relations between Robinson and the things that make up his self-created wealth are here so simple and transparent that even Herr M. Wirth might understand them without any special mental effort. And yet it contains all the essential provisions of value.

⑬Now let us move from Robinson's bright island to the dark European Middle Ages. Instead of the independent man, we find everyone here dependent - personal property and lord, vassals and lenders, laymen and priests.

Personal dependence characterizes just as much the social relations of material production as the spheres of life built upon them. But precisely because personal relationships of dependence constitute the given social basis, works and products need not assume a fantastic form different from their reality.

They enter the social gear as natural services and benefits in kind. The natural form of labor, its peculiarity, and not its generality, as on the basis of commodity production, is its immediate social form here. Labor is as well measured by time as labor-producing labor, but every bodily aptitude knows that it is a certain quantity of his personal labor which he spends in the service of his master. The tithing to be paid to the priest is clearer than the priest's blessing.

Just as one may always judge the character masks in which people confront each other here, the social relations of the persons in their works in any case appear as their own personal relations and are not disguised in the social relations of things, the products of labor.

⑭For the consideration of common, i.
We do not need to go back directly to the naturalistic form of this work, which meets us at the threshold of history of all civilized peoples. (30)
私たちは、文明化されたすべての人々の歴史の限界に遭遇するこの作品の自然主義的な形に直接戻る必要はありません。 (30)

A more obvious example is the rural patriarchal industry of a peasant family, for its own needs grain, livestock, yarn, canvas, garments etc. produced.

These different things confront the family as distinct products of their family work, but not mutually as goods.

The various works which produce these products, agriculture, livestock, spinning, weaving, tailoring, etc., are in their natural form social functions, because functions of the family possessing their own natural division of labor are as good as commodity production. Gender and age differences, such as changing natural conditions of work with the change of season, regulate their distribution among the family and the working time of the individual members of the family.

However, the expenditure of the individual labor force, which is measured by the length of time, appears by its very nature to be the social determination of the work itself, because the individual labor force is inherently only an organ of the collective labor power of the family.

⑮Finally, for a change, let us imagine an association of free men who work with common means of production and self-confidently expend their many individual workers as a social labor force.

All the rules of Robinson's work are repeated here, only socially rather than individually. All Robinson's products <93> were his exclusively personal product and therefore immediate commodities for him. The overall product of the association is a social product. Part of this product is again used as a means of production. He remains social. But another part is consumed as food by the club members. He must therefore be distributed among them. The nature of this distribution will alternate with the particular type of social production organism itself and the corresponding historical level of development of the producers.

Robinsonの作業のすべてのルールは、ここで繰り返され、個別にではなく社会的にのみ繰り返されます。 Robinsonのすべての製品は、彼の独占的な個人的な製品であり、したがって、彼のための直接の商品でした。協会の全体的な製品は社会的な製品です。この製品の一部は再び生産の手段として使用されます。彼は社会的なままです。しかし、他の部分は、クラブのメンバーによって食物として消費されます。したがって、彼はそれらの中に分散されなければならない。この分布の性質は、特定のタイプの社会生産生物そのものと、それに対応する生産者の発展の歴史的レベルと交互になるだろう。

For the sake of parallel with commodity production, we assume that the share of each producer in food is determined by his working time. Working time would therefore play a dual role.

Their socially planned distribution regulates the correct proportion of the various work functions to the different needs.

On the other hand, working time also serves as a measure of the individual share of the producer in the joint work and therefore also of the individually consumable part of the common product. The social relationships of people to their work and their products of work remain transparently simple in production as well as in distribution.

⑯For a society of commodity producers whose general social relation of production consists in behaving towards their products as commodities, that is, as values, and in their factual form relating their private work to each other as equal human labor, Christianity is with its cult of abstract man especially in its bourgeois development, Protestantism, Deism, etc., the most appropriate form of religion.

In the ancient Asiatic, ancient, etc. modes of production, the transformation of the product into commodity, and therefore the existence of men as commodity producers, plays a subordinate role, which, however, becomes all the more important the more the polities enter the stage of their demise. Genuine trading peoples exist only in the interludes of the old world, like Epicurus gods or Jews in the pores of Polish society.

Those old social production organisms are extraordinarily simpler and more transparent than the bourgeois, but they rest either on the immaturity of the individual man, who has not yet broken away from the umbilical cord of the natural species-connexion with others, or on direct relations of domination and bondage. They are conditioned by a low level of development of the productive forces of labor and correspondingly disproportionate relationships of human beings within their material life-generating process, hence to each other and to nature.

This real self-consciousness is reflected in the old natural and folk religions. The religious reflection of the real world can only disappear as soon as the conditions of the practical life of the daily work of the day provide transparent and transparent relationships with each other and with nature. The shape of the social life process, i. of the material production process, only strips off its mystical haze as soon as it is under the productively conscious control of the product of freely socialized people. For this purpose, however, a material basis of society is required or a series of material conditions of existence, which are themselves the natural product of a long and painful history of development.
この本当の自意識は、古い自然や民俗宗教に反映されています。 現実世界の宗教的な反映は、今日の日々の仕事の実用的条件の条件が、お互いに、そして自然と、透明で透明な関係を提供するとすぐに消滅することができます。 社会生活プロセスの形、すなわち、 自由に社会化された人々の製品を生産的に意識して支配するとすぐに、その神秘的な霧を取り除くだけです。 しかし、この目的のためには、社会の物質的基盤が必要であり、一連の物質的存在条件が必要であり、それ自体が長く痛みを伴った発展の歴史の天然産物である。

⑰<94> The political economy, though imperfect (31), has now analyzed value and value and discovered the hidden in these forms. It has never even asked why this content takes that form, so why does work in value and the amount of labor in its duration represent the value of the product of labor? (32) Forms written on the forehead that they belong to a social formation in which the process of production controls human beings, and man does not yet control the production process, are considered by their bourgeois consciousness to be as self-evident natural necessity as the productive labor itself. Pre-bourgeois forms of the social organism of production are therefore treated by it such as pre-Christian religions from the Fathers of the Church.
政治経済学は、不完全ではあるが(31)、価値と価値を分析し、これらの形で隠れたものを発見した。 なぜこのコンテンツがその形態を取るのか尋ねたことはありませんでした。なぜ価値のある仕事とその期間中の労働の量は労働生産の価値を表していますか? (32)額に書かれている、生産過程が人間を支配し、人間がまだ生産過程を制御していない社会形成に属する形式は、彼らのブルジョワ意識によって、自明な自然の必需品とみなされる 生産労働そのもの。 したがって、生産の社会的生物のプレブルジョアの形態は、教会の父からのキリスト教以前の宗教など、それによって扱われる。

 ⑱<97> Wie sehr ein Teil der Ökonomen von dem der Warenwelt anklebenden Fetischismus oder dem gegenständlichen Schein der gesellschaftlichen Arbeitsbestimmungen getäuscht wird, beweist u.a. der langweilig abgeschmackte Zank über die Rolle der Natur in der Bildung des Tauschwerts. Da Tauschwert eine bestimmte gesellschaftliche Manier ist, die auf ein Ding verwandte Arbeit auszudrücken, kann er nicht mehr Naturstoff enthalten als etwa der Wechselkurs.
 ⑱商品界に付随するフェチシズムや社会的労働条件の客観的外観によって、エコノミストの一部が欺かれていることは、とりわけ証明されます。 交換価値の形成における自然の役割についての退屈で愚かな争い。 交換価値は、物事に関連する仕事を表現する社会的な方法であるため、換算レートよりも多くの天然物質を含むことはできません。

 ⑲Since commodity form is the most general and undeveloped form of bourgeois production, for which reason it appears early, although not in the same dominant, characteristic manner as it does today, its fetish character still seems to be relatively easy to see through. In more concrete forms, even this appearance of simplicity disappears. Where did the illusions of the monetar system come from? It did not look to gold and silver to represent money as a social relation of production, but in the form of things of nature with strange social qualities. And the modern economy, which grins down nobly on the monetar system, does not its fetishism come to fruition as soon as it treats capital? For how long has the physiocratic illusion disappeared that land rent grows out of the earth, not out of society?
 ⑲商品形態はブルジョワ生産の最も一般的かつ未開発の形態であるため、今日と同じ支配的で特徴的な方法ではないが早い時期に出現するため、そのフェティッシュな性格は依然として比較的容易に見える。 より具体的な形では、この単純さの外観さえも消えてしまう。

monetarシステムの幻想はどこから来たのですか? それは、生産の社会的関係として貨幣を表現するのではなく、奇妙な社会的特質を持つ自然のものの形で金と銀を見ていました。 そして、モンテカル・システム<重金主義>をめちゃくちゃ笑っている近代経済学は、そのフェティシズムが資本を扱うとすぐに結実するのではないのですか?

 ⑳Since commodity form is the most general and undeveloped form of bourgeois production, for which reason it appears early, although not in the same dominant, characteristic manner as it does today, its fetish character still seems to be relatively easy to see through. In more concrete forms, even this appearance of simplicity disappears. Where did the illusions of the monetar system come from? It did not look to gold and silver to represent money as a social relation of production, but in the form of things of nature with strange social qualities. And the modern economy, which grins down nobly on the monetar system, does not its fetishism come to fruition as soon as it treats capital? For how long has the physiocratic illusion disappeared that land rent grows out of the earth, not out of society?
 ⑳商品形態はブルジョワ生産の最も一般的かつ未開発の形態であるため、今日と同じ支配的で特徴的な方法ではないが早い時期に出現するため、そのフェティッシュな性格は依然として比較的容易に見える。 より具体的な形では、この単純さの外観さえも消えてしまう。
monetarシステムの幻想はどこから来たのですか? それは、生産の社会的関係としてお金を表現するのではなく、奇妙な社会的特質を持つ自然のものの形態で金と銀を見ていました。 そして、モンテカル・システムをめちゃくちゃ笑っている近代経済学は、そのフェティシズムが資本を扱うとすぐに結実するのではないのですか? どのくらいの間、土地賃貸が社会からではなく地上から成長するという、フィジカルクラスの錯覚が消えてしまったのか?

However, in order not to anticipate, suffice here an example of the commodity form itself. If the goods could speak, they would say that our utility value may interest people. He does not come to us as things. But what we really deserve is our value. Our own traffic as a commodity proves that. We refer only to one another as exchange values. Now listen to how the economist speaks out of the merchant soul:
しかし、予期しないように、ここでは商品形態そのものの例で十分である。 商品が話すことができれば、私たちのユーティリティ価値は人々に関心を持つかもしれないと言います。 彼は私たちに物事として来ません。 しかし、私たちが本当に値するのは、私たちの価値です。 商品としての私たち自身のトラフィックはそれを証明します。 私たちは交換価値としてお互いを参照します。 経済学者が商人の魂からどのように語っているか聞いてみましょう。

 ?"Value" is "property of things, wealth" of "man." Value in this sense necessarily includes exchange, not wealth. "(34)" Wealth "(use-value)" is an attribute of man, Worth an attribute of goods A human or a community is rich, a pearl or a diamond is precious ... A pearl or a diamond has value as pearl or diamond. "(35)
「価値」は「人の財産、財産」です。 この意味での価値は必然的に富ではなく交換を含む。 "(34)"富 "(use-value)"は人間の属性であり、物の属性である人間や地域社会は豊かで、真珠やダイヤモンドは貴重です...真珠やダイヤモンドは、 真珠またはダイヤモンド。 "(35)

<98> ?今のところ、化学者は真珠やダイヤモンドの交換価値を発見していません。
しかし、この化学物質の経済的発見者は、特別な主張を臨界深度まで行うが、物的資質とその価値にかかわらず、物質の使用価値は物としてそれらに属していることを見出している。 彼女がここで確認しているのは、物事の使用価値が交換なしに、すなわち物と人との間の直接的な関係において、逆にその交換の価値のみで実現されるという特別な状況です。 社会的な過程で 誰が夜の警備員シーコアールを教える良いdogberryを覚えていない:

「ハンサムな人間は状況の贈り物だが、読書は自然である」 (36)



       『資本論』第一章「商品」のディアレクティーク  丹野, 正


新着順:21/1478 《前のページ | 次のページ》