>Nothing in the politics of a country wasn't first in

>>8481414

america

>>8481417
Elaborate

>>8481414
Who is this semen demon

>>8481414
>it's

>>8481414

I've passed by this twice, and yeah, it's stupid. A stupid thought, that one.

>>8481414
some countries don't/didn't have literature, checkmate.

>>8481414
>this Russian novelist prefigured Bolshevik centralization

Well OP ?????

am i retarded because i am having so much trouble understanding this sentence? it seems so unclear...

>nothing in the politics of a country "wasn't" first in it's(sic) literature.

the double negative is confusing...it doesn't make sense even without the double negative...

is this some meme quote?

im going to bed.

ok i just looked at it again and got it instantly.

too tired and dumb for this

>>8481992

Anything found in X was already in Y

>>8482014
yeah i got it. thank