Owfism

=Introduction= Owfism is the official ideology of Owfed2. It is a eco-cooperativist,  mutualist,  ultra-internationalist and  progressive ideology. It inhabits the Libertarian Left section of the political compass. The main goals of this ideology are:
 * [[File:Eco-Cooperativism-small.PNG]] Establishment of an eco-friendly, co-operative based economy with few government intervention.
 * [[File:Cybercom.png]] Digitalization of economic planning and distribution.
 * [[File:World_Federalism2.png]] Creation of a World Federation and the abandonment of the nation state.
 * [[File:Laicism.png]] Formation of a more rational and secular society.
 * [[File:Civlibert.png]] Creation of a free, unfettered world.
 * [[File:Neotechnocracy.png]] The acceleration of technological growth.

=Figures= Heraclitus (535 BCE-475 BCE)  Socrates (470 BCE-399 BCE)  Democritus (460 BCE-370 BCE)  Aristotle (384 BCE-322 BCE)  Marcus Aurelius (121-180)  William of Ockham (1285-1347)  Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)  Rene Descartes (1596-1650)  Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)  Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)  G.W.F Hegel (1770-1831)  David Ricardo (1772-1823)  Pierre Joseph-Proudhon (1809-1865)  Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)  Karl Marx (1818-1883)  Henry George (1839-1897)  Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)  Sun Yat-sen (1866-1925)  Albert Einstein (1879-1955)  Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (1881-1938)  Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945)  John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946)  Clement Attlee (1883-1967)  Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)  Albert Camus (1913-1960)  Gene Rodenberry (1921-1991)  Mikhail Gorbachev (1931-2022)  Nikolai Kardashev (1932-2019)  Stephen Hawking (1942-2018) Julian Assange (1971-)  Andrew Yang (1975-)  Ivan Bartos (1980-)  Andrewism (?-)  BritMonkey (?-) 

=Beliefs=

[[File:Anticap.png]] First Off [[File:Anticap.png]]
Let's start off with the obvious capitalism has basically failed us, it has failed us basically on everything, on things like the  environment,  human mental health and also on  work. It has destroyed the environment and is basically destroyed our mental health and it has basically poisoned many generations first with lead now with fossil fuels and microplastics. We genuinely need to abandon it. You have not only made the 3rd world be far behind the rest of the world but are also destroying the same communities that you claim benefit from your system. Wait? Why am I saying we are capitalist system? Hogwash! We are even worse than that! We don't even have economic competition, the essence of capitalism. We are a damn corporatocracy, who has basically peddled 2 sides of the political aisle to focus on  culture wars  to move people's interests away from the economy, as a distraction. Genuinely, WHY DID WE HAVE TO BE LIKE THIS? AAAAAAA

[[File:Partip.png]] Our Alternative [[File:Partip.png]]
Now, it is easy to just spat stupid words on hating the current system, its easy to talk smack, but what is my better system? Simple. I believe in participatory economics (or participism). I believe that production, consumption and allocation of resources should be done on a participatory and democratic decision-making, I also would combine this with a  socialist-like computer planning system. The workers deciding these things would be in the form of worker co-ops and even  co-operative federations. Most of these businesses would be Small-Medium Enterprises (SMEs) thus ensuring economic competition. If these businesses become big you know what time it is: UNLEASH THE TRUST BUSTING! Also, a land value tax is very based let's implement that thank you.

[[File:NatProg.png]] Trust Busting [[File:NatProg.png]]
I mentioned a little bit about trust busting and I am telling ya, this is very necessary. We live in a corporatocracy, a 2nd gilded age. Everything from technology to the airline industry is literally a monopoly. WE NEED TO TRUST BUST IT ALL. Break it all up. Amazon, Facebook, Twitter whatever! A company at most should only have a 5% market share, not like idk, 50%!?!. The only difference between this gilded age and the first is that these guys are philan- oh wait the first gilded age people were also that!?! Ok nvm, the only difference is that now we're a surveillance state with our every move being spied on, not just on the internet but also in real life. We need to trust bust all of them just like we did in the 1910s to the 1930s, under Roosevelt, Wilson and Taft. We did it then. We can do it now.

[[File:Statecap.png]] State-Owned Enterprises [[File:Statecap.png]]
Although, there are still some industries that are better off as monopolies, although, no, they shouldn't be under private control. They should be under the state. These include things like water, electricity, rail and telecommunications. These just cannot be under competition, as things will genuinely be worse without them.

[[File:WorkWelf.png]] Public Works and Investments [[File:WorkWelf.png]]
In my opinion, public works are a very good thing as they not only offer economic stimulus, they also technically reduce  inflation as it allows supply to flow easier thus balancing supply and demand and it thus keeps prices low. So yea, a plus and a plus. It also reduces unemployment (as seen in the New Deal). In conclusion, it not only makes the transportation of supplies quicker (which eases inflation) it also offers jobs and economic growth.

[[File:Postkeynes.png]] Work [[File:Postkeynes]]
Yes, I believe everyone should be guaranteed a job, how did you tell? This reduces unemployment, boosts economic growth and allows more people to have a stable economic foundation that they can build on further. I also believe workers should own the businesses they work in, in the model of co-operative socialism. Although, we are to eventually abolish work itself because of automation. (Although, there will still be robot maintenance workers, the robots don't repair themselves!) As such, I would support an universal basic income although I think a  Negative Income Tax could maybe do the job better.

=Other=

[[File:Antinat.png]] The Death Toll of the Nation State [[File:Antinat.png]]
What is the death toll of the nation state? How such thing can be classified? Well, these things are inherent to the notion of a nation state and are thus taken into consideration: War (basically every nation state in history), Genocide (tyrannical regimes like the Nazis or  Stalinist USSR), Imperialism (practices done by countries like the  British Empire,  modern-day United States and  Soviet Union) and finally Hunger. The last one is because of the fact that while we produce 2 billion more food than there are people, 800 million people are still hungry. In their opinion, problems like food waste and resource distribution could be solved far easier in a world federation and a nation state hinders that. So what is the death toll? The conservative estimate for war deaths is 150 million in total. Imperialism has killed 56 million people, 15 million people have died from genocide. Hunger kills 9 million people/year or if we measure it till 1900 using this (and only this) that would be quite a lot of people. So yea, the nation state has killed at least 200 million people in its history. We must abandon it, and to do that, we must create a world federation. For example, Communism (or Marxism) is said, according to the estimates of the Black Book of Communism (which I know isn't the most accurate) to have killed 100 million people. The 200 million deaths of the nation state are merely a conservative if not very conservative estimate. However if we go by the highest estimates, this already goes into the billions of people. All for one concept, for just one concept this many people died.

[[File:ConstLib.png]] Bill of Rights [[File:ConstLib.png]]
The  bill of rights needs desperate reform so that it can truly guarantee the rights of not just every human in the world but also the rights of nature, to allow us to build a relationship of harmony with nature. This is through an idea called neo-human rights and this will not just fight for the rights of humans, but also for the rights of animals, plants and the nature around us. This is to also eradicate our antrophocentric views and embrace  bioequalist views. (This will just be a basic TLDR and won't include all of my proposed rights)

[[File:Humanismpix.png]] Rights for Humans [[File:Humanismpix.png]]

 * [[File:Civlibert.png]] Right to Free Speech
 * [[File:GRights.png]] Right to Bear Arms
 * [[File:Equality.png]] Right to Equality
 * [[File:FDF-Pirate.png]] Right to Privacy
 * [[File:Eudaimonia.png]] Right to Life
 * [[File:Gay.png]] Right to Marriage
 * [[File:Edu.png]] Right to Education
 * [[File:Bpop.png]] Right to be free from Discrimination
 * [[File:Abol.png]] Right to be free from Slavery
 * [[File:Liberty.png]] Right to Liberty
 * [[File:Pac.png]] Right to Peaceful Gathering
 * [[File:Dem.png]] Right to Vote
 * [[File:Activm.png]] Right to Protest
 * [[File:Welf.png]] Right to have a Safety Net
 * [[File:Merit.png]] Right to have an opportunity
 * [[File:Fat.png]] Right to have access to food
 * [[File:Earth.png]] Right to have an opinion
 * [[File:Urbanism.png]] Right to Free Housing
 * [[File:Secular.png]] Right to have freedom of religion

[[File:Prim.png]] Rights for Animals/Plants [[File:Prim.png]]
(and others)
 * [[File:Liberty.png]] Right to live Free
 * [[File:Welf.png]] Right to Welfare
 * [[File:Protect.png]] Right to Protection

[[File:Ego.png]] Rights are Made up. So what? [[File:Ego.png]]
Yea I understand that stuff like human rights are not part of human nature, but in my opinion I believe society is better off having these rights as without them morals may become completely blurred for some, and society, before the concept of social contracts or human rights wasn't particularly good either. The freedoms given up in the "State of Nature" aka the era before things like human rights are mostly and only  negative liberties (freedom from thing), and as the saying goes: good luck having only negative liberty in the middle of the desert. Human rights balance things and makes it so that society doesn't have only negative liberty (freedom from) but also positive liberty (freedom to). Through this, I follow a political philosophy of  Social Libertarianism, balancing positive and negative liberty.

=Philosophy=

Metaphysics
When it comes to metaphysics and the problem of universals and particulars, they come to believe in the idea of nominalism, the idea that universals and general ideas are just mere names without any corresponding reality. Only the particulars are ones which have a corresponding reality. I believe in the Hobbesian notion that everything is made of matter. Now let's descend to another level, that being the meaning of life. When it comes to this, Owfism believes in the existentialist notion that there is no universal meaning of life given by a higher being/authority, and is merely made by the individual which is living that life through his own lifestyle. They also believe in absurdism, our existence is absurd and a fluke and that the things we do in life are just an absurd, but that we should embrace it and not seek suicide or a leap of faith, as said in the  Camusian interpretation of the Myth of Sisyphus. Let's descend down to the level of ontology and to the main question: Do we have free will? Owfism believes that we have free will. Why? Well, if everything was determined, wouldn't we be determined to not think about if our actions are just determined? What makes it so that we can do that? That is their main reason as to why they believe we have free will.

Epistemology
When it comes to epistemology, my beliefs can easily be summed up to follow the ideas of epistemic existentialism, this is the idea that what is rational and what is not is merely down to  the individual himself as we have free will. When it comes to knowledge, I believe that humans either have a stable foundation of knowledge or that they live in chaos and confusion. This is called Cartesian anxiety. We cannot know everything as every time we know something a new unknown is discovered.

Overview
When it comes to the notion of Logic, I believe in Hegelian Dialectics.

[[File:HegelianPhilosophy.png]] Hegelian Dialectics [[File:HegelianPhilosophy.png]]
As I said, I believe in Hegelian dialectics. Through dialectics we discover the truth about things and modern society in of itself. Hegelian dialectics has 3 main phases: Abstract, Negative and Concrete. Let's sum them up. The abstract is the initial idea and belief that emerges. The negative is either the reaction against it or the thing which allows the abstract to finally express itself into the concrete. The final result. Whether its good or bad. The cycle, of abstract, negative and concrete continues and continues over the course of human history. We, today, are currently living through and will always live in this cycle.

Sociology
Let's first start with how a human is developed, according to Owfism, a human develops his essence through the socio-economic conditions he is born in. This view is largely in line with the ideas of social constructivism. An individual's essence is based on the conditions he was born in. Which, always succeeds existence. Now let's descend down to a broader human level, that being the developments in culture, art, philosophy and other things. Modernism and post-modernism do raise some good points, but according to Owfism, are not good enough. Through this, they conclude that meta-modernism is the right set of beliefs to be followed when it comes to this. When it comes to individual desires, they are firmly an individualist, this is because of their beliefs in free will, existentialism and moral relativism. Individuals in their society are free. They go by the slogan of "Live and let live." Their policies seek to maximize individual liberty and privacy, allowing them to enjoy the things they want to enjoy without unnecessary state intervention.

Ethics
Let's begin with the main ethical level, that being the level of morals. Morals, like  time are to be relative, views are only determined by the society we grow up, and not otherwise. There are no universal morals. Moral standpoints are only true or false only to some relative standpoint. This view is to be called moral relativism. Now let's descend down to the level of my own personal moral code, this is based on two ideas: The idea of the  virtuous golden mean and the idea of  human flourishing. Through these ideas they seek to find a meaning to life, only for myself however, as I said, there is no inherent meaning to life. With this, they believe there are 12 virtues (or 12 golden means) each in between 2 vices.

Overview
When it comes to aesthetics, that being the study of art, my beliefs in art tend to be that of solarpunk.

[[File:Ectrans.png]] Solarpunk [[File:Ectrans.png]]
=Personality=

MBTI
INTP-T "Turbulent Logician"

INTJ-T "Turbulent Architect"

(I don't know which fits me more)

Enneagram
5w6 "Troubleshooter"

=Relations=
 * -| Self-Inserts

Friends
Yoda8soup Thought (//) - Surprisingly, we are actually pretty similar, on economics, we both support market socialism and georgism. De-central computer planning is an interesting concept, socially, we are pretty much the same, however, you should be more libertarian. Civically, we are the same, except for defensive democracy, I don't like that. Although, you should be more internationalist. TLDR: Pretty similar, with some minor differences. (//) - Not bad! Especially on economics and a bit on social policy, we are actually in agreement, however you need to be more progressive and more internationalist, otherwise, not bad, as said before. Mattism (//) - Not a bad ideology, we are pretty similar, the only difference we have is that you're too protectionist for me and are also in favor of defensive democracy, you are also more economically moderate but other than that, you are a good ideology.

Celfloskyism (//) - Pretty nice ideology, and it clearly seems you want not just equality but also freedom for the Chinese people, although I don't really like the ideas of Irredentism, your cycle democracy is not really something I like. You support virtue ethics and existentialism, although I am not that utilitarian though. Otherwise, pretty good!

AshleyHereism (//) - Yo, this is actually based for an anarchist, existentialism and absurdism are very based! Oscar Wilde is also based! I don't agree with Diogenes, but he was savage and independent, and I like that. It's nice how you support some Stoicism. Overall, you're mostly an anarchist version of me, which is pretty interesting.

Uzarashvilism (//) - Economics wise, you are pretty similar to me, as we both believe in a socialist market economy, and the fact that we both believe that the Nordics are just (for now) the countries with the best economic model (or rather, least evil) in the world. Not bad, however, our difference comes in social and international issues, first off, you are too conservative, you can at least be more progressive by supporting SJW-Lite. Also on international issues, you can still be a globalist and oppose "economic globalization" (like me). So yea, too isolationist. But yea, pretty good overall.

Glencoeism (//) - Wow, you are pretty based! I agree with you on PWA, we both stride for a sort of Co-operative, meritocratic society, if only you were more global... BE MORE GLOBAL!

Inexistent Ideology (//) - Not bad, just be less nationalist, more progressive and also more pro-market. Oh and more democratic. In rest pretty good.

Rocksism (//) - Not bad, and yes, Camus is based. You may be too communalist and marxist for my liking, but overall, pretty good!

BrainRustism (//) - Some of your stances on education are pretty admirable, yes, you should be able to sell candy at school, it improves competition and prevents a school monopoly engaging in unfair price gouging. You're actually not that bad, even if I disagree with you on some things.

Neo-Kiraism (//) - Your philosophy of absurdism is based, you're agreeable in some areas like eco-socialism,  but I am not that Marxist overall, preferring mutualist socialism instead. Internationalism is based, but come on, you got to support a world federation. Overall, not too bad.

Pantheonism (//) - Pretty interesting ideology and not that bad at all, pretty based when it comes to diplomacy, but still, why monarchism and why can't you be more progressive?

Atronism (//) - Marxist-leninist, I know, you seem to be slightly authoritarian and not libertarian, but hey at least you're progressive (even if way too progressive) and are Laicist, like me. Which is absolutely based. A more leftist and slightly more authoritarian version of me. Not bad.

Braun Spencer Thought (//) - You are basically reincarnated LBJ, your economic policies are not that bad but you should be Socialist and while you support a world federation I despise your support of tariffs and also your support of interventionism. Interventionism should typically be the last call not the first call. Pretty close onto being in frenemies.

Frenemies
Post-Councilism (//) - I hate vanguard centralism, and I am just generally not really into Communism in general, nor do I agree with Zizek, although you're quite literate in political/philosophical theory, which I admire. I wish to have said more but sadly I am not that literate in the beliefs you have so...

HelloThere314ism (//) - Your beliefs are not really beliefs that I tend to agree with, and also, on some parts, your page is unfinished so I don't really know how to rate you, but it is clear you know theory, so that's nice.

Ultroneism (//) - You are the most literate user on here on basically anything, now that's something, however, my opinions on your ideolo- I mean philosophy. In rest, my ideology disagrees with your ideologies on many things or I am just too illiterate on some things to give a proper opinion.

BasedManism (//) - I am just gonna beyond the ideas of based and cringe and just put you in frenemies tier definitely not because of the fact I am too lazy to read your page right now although I don't know, your page doesn't seem to mention ethics for example, only seems like it mentions metaphysics and logic. So, I can't completely judge your philosophical beliefs, so yea, you go here. Also come on at least I have some influence from Kant in epistemology

FinalFantasy24ism (//) - Your ideology is literally just Hu Jintao as a self-insert. No really, that's what it is. So you belong here.

Enemies
Implianium (//) - Its nice how you hate religion, but bruh why state atheism? And come on, why do you support genocide, ultranationalism and anti-urbanism!?! And god dang it you want psychopaths to be their own class, what is this? I really hope this is LARP.

New Model Of Cheesenism (//) - Unironic islamo-fascist. You are no good.

Lanceism (//) - I am an international socialist, you're a national capitalist. COMPLETE OPPOSITE DETECTED! AAAAAAAA
 * -| Figures

95-100
Stephen Hawking (100/100) - You contributed a lot to science, that is no lie, but your political beliefs are also very based. Democratic socialism and space all the way!

Alexander Dubcek (98/100) - Yo! This is very based! You supported liberal democratic socialism, while also supporting Esperanto and market socialism. Shame that Soviet Imperialists took you down. While yes I am not really a Marxist it wouldn't be that bad to be under your rule.

80-95
Mikhail Gorbachev (88/100) - You brought democracy and market socialism to the USSR, although you did make some mishaps and did not avert the collapse of the Soviet Union.

60-80
Thomas Sankara (75/100) - Probably the best ML out there, re-forested Burkina Faso, promoted equal rights, reduced infant mortality and poverty and didn't use a cult of personality. Sad that the west saw you as a threat and ousted you. Still, your human rights violations were not good to say the least and your state socialism.

0-10
Ion Iliescu (2/100) - Fuck you. You ruined Romania in the 1990s, you privatized a shit ton and allowed for corrupt robber barons to develop. And you were a former ally of Ceausescu. You even wanted to keep Communism at first until the people said they had enough. At least you chose to live modestly during your tenure as President.

Elena Ceausescu (0/100) - Fuck you, like genuinely, I hope you are rotting in hell. You have literally ruined the Bucharest metro along with your smooth brain husband who is a Juche wannabe, you ruined Romanian science, agriculture and education. All of them. You stupid moron. You're one of the main factors as to why Romania sucks.

Nicolae Ceausescu (2/100) - Initially, you were ok-ish, you continued Dej's reforms and made Romania more independent from the USSR and also denounced Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia. But then you just became shit after your stupid austerity, anti-abortion decree and you basically allowing your dumb as a rock wife to be the head of important sectors and also deputy prime minister. You were also very corrupt and led to the 90s corruption.

Test results
Closest match : Democratic Socialism

Closest match : INTP

Closest match : Libertarian Socialism

Closest match : Liberal Socialism

Closest match : Left-Libertarianism

Announcement

 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - I need an ideology image (you know, like this: [[File:OwfBall.png]]) but one which actually encompasses my ideological beliefs. The ideologies that would be part of it are to be Geolibertarianism and Libertarian Market Socialism. (Can include 2 other ideologies in the combination, of your personal preference, must be ideologies Owf adheres to)
 * - [[File:Owff.png]]
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Thank you!

Comment
Owfism - Deleted old comments

Rocksism - Add please (also is that the Limberwisk flag?).

Owfism - Yes it is, I thought it was cool since I couldn't think of another thing other than that (and I will add you soon, kinda busy rn)
 * [[File:Rocksismicon.png]] Rocksism - It is cool (if it existed I'd move there too).

Implianium - Add me

- Add me? :)

- Hi, I re-added you. Would you mind adding my ideology again?

- Readd me please.

- Btw, the geolibertarian market socialism page was my very old self insert, idc about it anymore so you can revamp it if you want, kinda like what Aaron did with Bleeding Heart Geolibertarian Market Socialism.
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Wow, I actually didn't know that, I just saw the page and just saw how accurate it was to my ideology, so I just adopted that. Yea, I could maybe revamp it.
 * - Also, could you please add me?


 * - Add me?


 * - Add Please.


 * [[File:BasedMan.png]]BasedManism - add me?


 * [[File:Uzarashvilism.png]]Uzarashvilism - Yo there, add me?


 * - Re-add me fellow Wilde enjoyer.


 * - Monism isn't the principle that mind and body are united in each "individual" human. It is the principle that all of reality is one thing, that there is no body or mind but rather these are modes or aspects of the one thing, as such you and I and every other human are actually one "object" or thing and thus we do not have bodies, but rather each seemingly individual body is actually just a "limb" or part of the whole.


 * - Could I use text of your ideology to my policies?
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Yes you very much can.


 * - "Let's first begin with the definitions of both ideas, first off, rationalism is the practice of basing actions and opinions on reason and knowledge. Then, empiricism is the opposite, with it being the practice of basing actions and opinions on belief or emotional response." WHAT? - Rationalism is the principle that knowledge derives from reasoning, as such logical reasoning. While Empiricism is the epistemological belief that sensory experience such as scientific observation is the source of knowledge - it has nothing to do with belief, emotion, or opinions. What utter dribble, as if Descartes didn't also utilise empirical arguments and Locke didn't use rationalist principles.

- Yo! You're a cybersocialist now too that's based as hell! :D
 * - Gorbachev is based [[File:Gigachad.png]]
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Indeed [[File:Gigachad.png]]
 * [[File:Neokira2.png]] Neo-Kiraism - add me lol

- Add me plz

Glencoe- add me Plz


 * - This is definitely me when I confuse conceptualism and nominalism.
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - I never heard of that term before, I had heard of nominalism and I thought that would fit, I will change that.
 * - "The main problem of metaphysics, which precedes the essence of objects is the problem of universals and particulars." - Essences are univerals so it doesn't precede, but is simultaneous - and if one was taking a purely historical look at the evolution of the problem, essence actually precedes.  "There is a view however, that asserts that universals don't exist, that being conceptualism" - Neither Conceptualism nor Nominalism assert that universals do not exist. let me go over the quadrants; Platonic or Strong Realism holds that universals are mind independent and transcendent, that is they are abstract and exist as neither material or immaterial objects. Then you have Aristotelian or Immanent realism that holds that the "form" or essence or universal of lets say a cat does not exist in and of itself, but is rather immanent and never seperate from the particular. Then you have a range of Nominalisms which can include conceptual nominalism or conceptualism. Conceptualism holds that the concepts within the mind are univerals, i.e. I imagine a cat as a universal cat that is neither a tabby or a simese or black or tall or etc. While the nominalist holds that the only universal is the actual word cat, and thus the imagined cat is always a particular cat that you have experienced or can mitch-match together.  "And even if there was a form, what would the perfect form of "cat" be?" Plato's 'Forms' may be perfect (even this is not strictly true, because Plato's Forms are just the absolute form i.e. a cat and nothing else, or the "Good" and nothing else, unlike say a small cat which is both a cat and small) - but universals are just shared properties that all the particulars have, i.e. a tall cat and a small cat are both cats, doesn't make "cat" perfect.  "In conclusion, I believe that the only thing that actually exists are merely material particulars" Nominalism nor Conceptualism leads to materialism, All nominalists historically have been empiricists, but not materialists. As such Ockham believes in immaterial objects such as God and the Angels, Berkeley was a subject Idealist, but someone like Hobbes thought everything was matter.

FinalFantasy24-Please Add me:https://polcompballanarchy.miraheze.org/wiki/UserWiki:FinalFantasy24 BrainRustism - Add?
 * - Am I missing something? Where Neokira supports Juche?
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - When I added Neokira, it said on their page that they are sympathetic to Juche, maybe they have removed that or something, I should probably look. Edit: Yea, they removed that, I will adjust that in my relations soon

- Do you have discord? BrainRustism - What is it that you disagree?
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Sorry I don't.
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - I don't really agree with an armed insurrection against the school system, and also its not school that is causing us to fail its the un-meritocratic system that we live in, which sadly, school doesn't mention us. The problem with school can be solved through reforms not armed insurrection.
 * [[File:Glencoe.png]] Glencoe- Hydrogen Powered planes are green they should be used
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Yea I kagree, I know, I said the thing I said because well even those are not that common compared to regular planes.

Pantheonism - Add me?

New Model Of Cheesenism - re added me

Atronism - Seems like you've shifted a little bit more to the left, which is based. Add me?

- I arrive with a question. Is your flag supposed to be a reference to this?
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - Yes

Braun Spencer Thought - Add me, maybe?

Lancebarnett - Trash economics and social ideas
 * [[File:OwfBall.png]] Owfism - My views are not perfect, neither are yours, we are equal.
 * [[File:O'Langism.png]]O'Langism - Nice response.

Lancebarnett - add me