.dotdotdotsam Thought

.dotdotdotsam Thought is a Pan-Hispanic Marxist-Leninist ideology that represents the current views of user .dotdotdotsam. As a Pan-Hispanic, he advocates for a Latin America united under a federation of socialist republics in order to ensure sovereignty against Amerikan imperialism. As a Marxist-Leninist, he advocates for armed struggle in the form of a revolutionary vanguard in order to build that federation of republics. He ultimately wishes for a Latin America that is not only sovereign but progressive, democratic, secular, patriotic, republican, technologically advanced, and up to par with a historic socialist power like the USSR.

Taking inspiration from Chile's Cybersyn, he desires a distributed decision support system to assist in the management of the national economy (cybernetic socialism). He views the USSR's failure to computerize the economy under OGAS as a great mistake that should be avoided in the future, and thus advocates for a computerized planned economy in Latin America.

Additionally, he is culturally revolutionary and believes in surpassing reactionary cultural trends. Although he is not opposed to preserving harmless traditions for cultural reasons, he is opposed to the preservation of harmful traditions such as, for example, bullfighting and homophobia. He is a firm advocate of revolutionary feminism and LGBT rights, as they often bear the brunt of these harmful traditions.

=Philosophy=

Dialectical Materialism and Contradiction
Hegel's Absolute Idea lays the foundation for the narratives of liberalism, fascism, and conservatism.

=Government=

LAU
'''The LAU, or Latin American Union, is an envisioned union of 15 socialist republics that span through all of Latin America. '''


 * [[file:LAUicon.png]] Latin American Union
 * [[file:Bolivarism.png]] Socialist Republic of Gran Colombia (main SR)
 * [[file:SRmexico.png]] Socialist Republic of Mexico
 * [[file:Cball-Brazil.png]] Socialist Republic of Brazil
 * [[file:Cball-Cuba.png]] Republic of Cuba
 * [[file:SRargentina.png]] Socialist Republic of Argentina
 * [[file:SRperu.png]] Socialist Republic of Peru
 * [[file:SRchile.png]] Socialist Republic of Chile
 * [[file:Cball-Bolivia.png]] Socialist Republic of Bolivia
 * [[file:SRuruguay.png]] Socialist Republic of Uruguay
 * [[file:SRpanama.png]] Socialist Republic of Panama
 * [[file:SRguatemala.png]] Socialist Republic of Guatemala
 * [[file:SRhonduras.png]] Socialist Republic of Honduras
 * [[file:SRdominican.png]] Dominican Socialist Republic
 * [[file:SRnicaragua.png]] Socialist Republic of Nicaragua
 * [[file:SRcostarica.png]] Socialist Republic of Costa Rica

General Assembly
The LAU has a general assembly that regularly meets once a year in an assembly hall, but emergency meetings can also be called. The assembly is led by a president who is elected by the member states of the LAU as well as 7 vice presidents who are also elected by the member states. For regular yearly meetings, the general assembly meets to overlook progress in the member states and adherence to intergovernmental law. For emergency meetings, the general assembly could theoretically meet for any reason, but emergency meetings are typically called when there is a grave and direct threat to the existence of the LAU such as a declaration of war or a particularly harsh sanction by an opposing nation.

Socialist Republics
Each socialist republic has a constitution that will lay down the framework that demarcates fundamental political code, structure, procedures, powers, and duties of government institutions. Within every individual republic, a popular referendum will either reject or accept the draft for the new constitution.

Structure
Every SR will have local assemblies within it, and each one will have an election every 2-3 years. Every 4-6 years, there will be an election for the national assembly. Citizens are not required to be members of the Communist Party to vote or to be elected for any position, and the Communist Party will not interfere in the political process by supporting or propping up certain candidates; attempts to do so are illegal as it is a form of lobbying. Anyone over the age of sixteen can vote and be elected for the municipal assembly, and once they are eighteen they can vote and be elected for the national assembly. Money and political parties will not have a place in the nomination process; instead, individuals will directly nominate those who they believe should be candidates. Community assemblies permit anyone over the age of 14 to join, and they will meet a minimum of once every 3 months to plan the running of the community (public health campaigns, keeping the community clean, assisting community members in need etc). The community assemblies will also be a place to discuss nationwide issues and legislation in order to feed back their proposals and thoughts to the national assembly.

Voting
Voting, like in all democratic countries in the world, will be done privately and secretly. Candidates' biographies and reasons for running will be displayed on local notice boards in order to make sure that every candidate gets the same exposure; after all, lobbying and bribing officials is strictly illegal. Delegates are required to meet with their electors around every 4-8 months for face-to-face sessions where they take up issues and problems raised by their constituents and seek solutions. If the constituents feel dissatisfied with the performance of their elected delegates, they can be recalled at any time.

Political Parties
Political parties will be allowed, but they are forbidden by constitutional law to attempt to reform the economy down a capitalist road. They are also forbidden by constitutional law to promote or campaign for certain candidates; this includes the national Communist Party, who is restricted by constitutional law from interfering in electoral process. The role of the non-CP political parties is essentially like a club that forms local political campaigns to address certain issues plaguing the community.

=Economy=

As a Marxist, it is obvious that communism does not come about in one day, it is a gradual process of development through differing material conditions.

Planning
In the construction of socialism, I view planning as the superior method of economic organization as opposed to something like "market socialism". In order to allocate resources practically and democratically, they must be planned. ''How much of X do we need today? How do we produce it? How will we handle either surplus or deficit?'' These are all questions of planning. However, economic planning has a bad reputation of being "bureaucratic", "top-down", and inefficient; however, there are ways around these things.

Healthcare System
Throughout most of Latin America, access to healthcare varies by social class. Private clinics and special medical services are accessible to only the elite families (that are typically the offspring of the Spanish colonizers), public hospitals are underfunded, inaccessible to rural areas, badly equipped, and terribly prone to corruption and preferential treatment. In order give the people quality healthcare service to improve their quality of life, the creation of a new national health system must be a priority. Healthcare is a human necessity, not a business.

Structure
The guidelines for the structure of the healthcare system within a socialist republic of the Latin American Union (mouthful of a sentence lol) are three-tiered, primarily done for the sake of organizing primary, secondary, and tertiary care.

Tier 1 - Municipal
Municipal authorities will oversee a community-based primary care level based on consulting rooms and the classic "family doctor/nurse model". Under this model, every neighborhood is assigned a family doctor who is responsible for keeping track of every patient in the area - they determine who is healthy, who is sick, and who is at risk, as well as make rounds to ensure that everyone receives vaccines, prenatal care and other attention at the proper times. If the people in the neighborhood feel that the assigned doctor is incompetent and/or delivering an unsatisfying performance, they can lodge a formal complaint to a member of the municipal assembly. Since this tier of medical service is intended to treat common illnesses and injuries, it is likely that the majority of cases will be solved here.

Tier 2 - Provincial
If a patient requires a more highly specialized degree of care or medical attention, they are treated at provincially-managed hospitals and centers of specialization. Although patients are free to go directly to these institutions instead of the municipal centers, the system works better when they are referred by the family doctors to work in partnership with specialists. Since cases here are more highly specialized and specific, a lower amount of cases will be treated here than the municipal tier.

Tier 3 - National
This level of healthcare includes nationally-administered and specialized hospitals for the treatment and study of particular diseases. This level is more "curatively-oriented" than the rest, and it will only deal with patients who have complications with very serious illnesses that could pose a serious threat to the well-being of the rest of the population (think: potential epidemics). In comparison to the other levels, a very small amount of cases will be treated here due to the intense level of specialization of the healthcare.

Funding
Healthcare will be financed by the government in order to be provided free of cost. In order to overcome limited access to pharmaceuticals, technology, and other material resources, strength must be leveraged in education in order to produce a higher number of trained doctors to focus on making care more accessible and community-based. Emphasis should be placed on prevention of illness first - if no one is sick in first place, the government doesn't have to spend money it doesn't have on expensive cures.

Prevention and Public Health
For moral reasons (keeping a population healthy is a good thing) and for practical reasons (we can't spend too much money on cures and tools) it is important to make sure the population is healthy. In order to do this, the government must oversee various policies and campaigns geared toward illness prevention.

Hygiene in Schools
An important step towards a healthier population is the promotion of hygiene and exercise, and one way this can be done is in schools. Funding health/nutrition classes and pushing them to better inform students on the dangers of hedonism and self-indulgence can work to create a better and healthier generation of citizens. Also, a healthier variety of school meals can be provided in a socialist planned economy. The reason why schools in capitalist societies like the United States provide such unhealthy, corporate food to their children is because they aren't subsidized enough and need money. Since the profit motive is not the driving force of economic investment, schools are now better subsidized which makes business deals with fatty food corporations less necessary for self-sustainability. Thus, schools can begin providing more hygienic meals to their pupils. Propaganda, to varying extents, can also be a tool to promote better hygiene with posters and art lambasting overconsumption and obesity.

Energy
= Cultural/Social Policy =

=How to Draw=

A few steps: =Short Writings= A common tactic by the modern bourgeoisie is to resort to Malthusianism as a solution to climate change, that is, to place blame on human population growth instead of their own imperialist tactics. Backed by bourgeois scientists and bourgeois politicians, it argues that Thomas Malthus, the 18th century cleric himself, was correct to assume that the inevitable growth of the human species will lead to great ruin. Moreover, they say, we have now reached this level of ruin! Their solution is population control, a mystification of the real problem with its premise being that population growth is an absolute driving consumption and destruction of the planet. Any Marxist, or any human being with intelligence in general, worth their time will dismiss this conclusion as demonstrably false. We must ask ourselves, what has driven this population growth? Have humans suddenly decided to fuck more often without protection? No. This population growth has grown due to the development of the productive forces within capitalism. In short, capitalism has been the reason why this population growth occurred.
 * 1) Draw a ball with a black outline.
 * 2) Draw a line in a slightly dull shade of red diagonally through the ball.
 * 3) Fill the space below with the same color and the space above with a slightly-dark blue.
 * 4) Add the eyes.
 * 5) Place a square hammer and sickle below the eyes.
 * -|Malthusianism is Eco-Fascism=

As capital continually expands at an increased rate, it requires an ever-increasing pool of human labor to exploit, as capitalism necessitates exploitation due to the tendency for the rate of profit to fall, which is caused by the competition between capitalists to expand productive capacity while the productive forces continually expand. The reality that we face today has been enforced through class exploitation, which is evident in the oppressed nations of the world where miniscule wages force families to rely upon the wages of their children (child labor) for survival. The Malthusian notion that population growth drives overconsumption is pure fiction, world-building on a level that only liberals can reproduce. Purchasing power drives excess consumption; in their personal consumption alone, the richest one-percent are responsible for double the emissions of the poorest fifty-percent! By understanding this, we can begin to understand population control as an imperialist weapon that is propagated in discourse that is created by the bourgeoisie through their monopoly on media, as we must remember how in a capitalist society the capitalist class controls the popular media in their favor. The overwhelming majority of growth in the human population is concentrated in the oppressed world, utterly unable to resolve any contradictions which give rise to such growth. Population control theory is nothing but the attempted legitimization of genocide; even if such measures were to somehow be implemented peacefully, the real crisis in population demographics (that we have an increasingly elder population) would ensure the collapse in production as those capable of laboring to the pace of capital’s dictatorship decline in number relative to the rest of the population. Simply put, Malthusianism births eco-fascism.


 * -|A La Guillotine!=

“Like everything else in the world, the revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry has a past and a future. Its past is autocracy, serfdom, monarchy, and privilege....Its future is the struggle against private property, the struggle of the wage-worker against the employer, the struggle for socialism....”

The Monarchy - whether it be British, Spanish, Swedish, or Danish - is a reactionary institution, it can only be understood in the present day as a weapon of capitalism. Most of the monarchies of the world, particularly the European, were swept away following the uprisings that preceded the Industrial Revolution. The emerging power of bankers and merchants (the bourgeoisie) began a struggle for power, deadly in France, with these monarchies. In the French Revolution, the emerging bourgeoisie superseded the decaying French monarchy as it had become a hindrance to their interests. The bourgeois-democratic republic that came after the monarchy emerged as the result of the violent struggle - now, the God-given right to rule had been superseded by the God-given right to capital. Since in capitalism, capital is essentially means to rule, it must be understood that any changes since those bourgeois-democratic revolutions have been mainly marginal. The bourgeoisie decided that it could actually be useful to keep those lovely stuffed animals that decorate Buckingham Palace today; meanwhile, as a token of good will they fill up their royal pets’ pockets with profits robbed from the workers they exploited! The monarchy is by definition uninterested in democracy, peace, and socialism, and by necessity uninterested also in changes to the status quo. For the ruling class, the royals are a most powerful, regal, majestic, and noble friend; for those who wish to change society, it is a vicious, cruel, and wicked adversary whose tendrils corrode the seemingly purest of hearts. The monarchy is used to empower the concept of "national unity", exploited as national heritage. Millions upon millions of pounds are made every year from tourists who wish to glance at the royal gold and ivory that stolen from the African continent - brutal colonialism that has not been undone after centuries.

The liars and hypocrites that comprise the bourgeoisie will continue to hoodwink the dull-witted and blind with talk of "equality" and "freedom", of so-called "peace" that is built off the back of slave labor from India, from Egypt, from Ghana, from Nigeria, from Kenya, and from many more oppressed nations around the world today. Equality between what class and what other class? Freedom from what yoke, or from the yoke of what class? These are the questions that the supporters of monarchy cannot answer, as they would expose themselves for what they truly are - a wolf in the clothing of a sheep who is in service to the interests of aristocracy and capital! Enlightenment, civilization, liberty - these are the pompous phrases that decorate the realities of the grotesquely coarse, filthy laws they pass that crush the power of workers, that treat the woman as an inferior being, that fundamentally work to oppress! Down with this despicable, odious, and revolting fraud! Down with monarchy, forward to socialism on Earth!


 * -|Multipolarism is Imperialism=

When the USSR collapsed at the end of the Cold War, the United States was left as the last hegemon standing. Much of bourgeois academia (cough cough Francis Fukuyama) was eager to declare the "end of history", awaiting the new bourgeois world order of liberal democracy with open-armed embrace - unipolarity of Amerikan capital. But now it appears that something is changing, that there is now talk of a multipolar world. It appears that the United States is slowing down to its competitors Russia and China. There is great confusion on how to relate to these new powers; many (liberals) have thrown themselves to the new Cold War of Amerikan imperialism against Russia and China, while others have thrown themselves to the grace of these opponent powers as a counterweight to US imperialism. Multipolaristas may refer to themselves as anti-imperialist, but in reality they prettify the world imperialist system and deny that competition between two imperialist powers will inevitably lead to war. Multipolaristas assume that imperialism is a uniquely Amerikan phenomenon - it is demonstrably not.

Russia is not anti-imperialist, not one bit. Just because it is militarily and economically lacking compared to the United States does not strip it of its imperialist status; Vladimir Lenin referred to Imperial Russia as imperialist even though it was practically a semi-feudal backward nation of peasants. Its war in Ukraine is not motivated by a desire to "denazify" it, it is to control its land, labor, and raw materials before they are seized by another imperialist power. When Russia invaded Ukraine, the struggle of the Russian imperialists against the Ukrainian masses became the primary contradiction. It is for this reason why the Russian imperialist war on Ukraine must be opposed. However, we must oppose Russia in a way that is not resemblant of the manner in which Amerikan imperialist politicians oppose Russia. They give power to the Ukrainian comprador bourgeoisie to poke Russia with a stick for years so that they can trigger a proxy war between their regional stronghold, Ukraine, and their regional opponent, which is Russia. They do not see a struggle for national defense against imperialism by the Ukranians, they see an opportunity to crush Russia instead - how unsurprising that imperialists will consider power before people. This is not to say that the Ukrainians are simply passive chess pieces in the game of imperialism, but it is without a doubt that the Amerikan imperialists have made great effort to manipulate and exploit the Ukrainian movement for defense in their favor. We must oppose the Russian war in Ukraine and support the right of the Ukrainians, with arms, to defend their land against an occupier; however, we must also oppose the effort of the US imperialists to expand into a major imperialist war.

Multipolarity, in whatever form it takes, will lead to war and violence against proletarians. How naive must one be to believe that permanent peace is possible between various major competing powers? Nonetheless in the age of imperialism? Lenin has expertly established that competition for raw materials and markets by different monopoly capitals must lead to imperialist wars of redistribution, and that periods of peace and even cooperation between the imperialist powers can only be preparations for war - to this day he remains gravely correct. As emerging imperialists enter the territory of old imperialists, war is always on the horizon. As Marxists, as Leninists, and as socialists above all, it is our duty to oppose war. The solution is not to support this or that imperialist power over this or that imperialist power, the solution is the abolition of the imperialist system through world socialist revolution. Only through fighting back against capital will we ever see an end to the brutal wars which plague and haunt the capitalist system. Supporting this or that imperialist power simply because it is opposed to an imperialist power you don't like is a form of vulgar, narrow nationalism that has nothing in common with dialectical materialism; fundamentally, war will be upheld. We must not support imperialist powers or blocs over any other, fundamentally, our position is with the international proletariat. The Ukrainian people are bombed and murdered by Russian imperialists, and the Russian people are sanctioned and put in economic distress from western imperialists - the bourgeoisie of both countries remains untouched. To that we say, down with imperialism! No war but class war! The only conflict we support is the conflict against the bourgeoisie!

=Relationships=
 * -|Self-Inserts=

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

 * - I'm basically you but Hispanic. Pan-nationalism, communism, Leninism, everything perfect. Overall, great stuff plus your art is fantastic plus you're nice.

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

 * [[file:MLL.png]] - Maoist, but honestly not bad. Now that I've leaned away from the futurism, your views seem more and more similar to mine.
 * [[file:MiskaAlt.png]] - Pretty much just the average Yugonostalgia type, the market socialism is problematic though.
 * [[file:Baconicon.png]] - Libertarian Marxist, but I like your cultural progressivism and willingness to relinquish anarchism. Overall pretty good, just drop the "libertarian" nonsense and embrace Leninism please.
 * [[File:Murb.png]] Neo-Murba - I'm really liking the stuff on your page, the only thing holding me back from putting you in 5 stars is the fact you're not an ML and you mentioned Bordiga as an influence [you seem kind of leftcommish to me anyways]. Very well read too, though I must say you should rewrite your "Problem of Transitory Phases" section because it's so atrociously worded it's practically unreadable. Overall really liking your stuff.
 * [[File:Jefsynd.png]] - I used to dislike your ideology back when I was Cyberleninism, but now that I'm reading your full page I must say that your stuff is pretty good. Your criticisms of social democracy and the rise of the left that is pro-prostitution are expertly said. However, I still personally oppose unionism as a revolutionary force in favor of vanguardism due to the fact I see unionism as overly economistic and unreliable. That being said, your stuff is pretty good to me.
 * [[file:CheeseCom.png]] - Overall pretty good, there's not much I disagree with except for the Maoism I suppose.
 * [[File:Neokira2.png]] - Honestly really good stuff, I would put you in 5-star if you weren't so hardline Stalin-adjacent and concerningly brutal . That being said, you're mostly pretty good.

☆ ☆ ☆

 * [[File:O'Langism.png]] - We've had this discussion before but yeah I still don't think anarchism is a solution to the state's inherent oppression. Overall just average anarchosyndicalist.
 * [[File:DragonRed.png]]  - Your page is so damn long and it lacks a brief overview and I don't have any of the time in the world to read this stuff. That being said, you seem too overly bureaucratic, conservative, and xenophobic for my tastes. Your support of Latin American socialists is great and I appreciate it, but seriously cut it out with the reactionary BS.

☆ ☆

 * [[File:Tomjaz.png]] - Vaushite, advocate of "libertarian market socialism" and has a philosophical outlook almost entirely indebted to liberalism. Overall not terrible but could use some work.
 * [[file:Erissky.png]] - I like the fact you're progressive and pro-technology [and a recovering alt-righter], but other than that we don't really see eye to eye. Anarchism and nihilism are just a bunch of edgy teen nonsense, but anti-humanity? You seriously want to get rid of humans? Anyways, other than that you seem okay to me please embrace Marxism-Leninism already.
 * - Liberal, pro-private property, pro-US, pro-NATO, pro-EU, humanist, the list goes on. Too much of an idealist, you fail to see how the interests of capital inherently contradict environmental sustainability and instead seem to push for the typical liberal "human capitalism". Overall average eco-capitalist.
 * [[file:neohumicon.png]] You come to my page to insult me instead of engaging with my ideas lol typical lib.

☆

 * [[File:GanzismIcon2.png]] - "return to hunting and gathering unga bunga" but unironically. Plus you're an ethnonationalist .... ew
 * [[File:NeoGlencoe.png]] - Absolutely filthy gusano-fascist, imperialist garbage. Your ideas on "keeping America pure" sound straight out of a fascist handbook, and you expressly say you want to launch a full-scale invasion of Cuba. Fuck's sake, a lot of these views do not deserve place in civil society. You sound unwell and incredibly angry. Hope you get better because seriously wtf is this.
 * [[File:AryanMonarchBow.png]] - "Aryan Monarchism" 🤓🤓🤓 white supremacist, outright racist, monarchist, hedonist, individualist - honestly, the Bolsheviks should've blasted the Romanovs harder.


 * -|Ideologies=

=Comments=
 * -|New Comments=
 * [[File:Murb.png]] Neo-Murba - Add?
 * - yeppppp add me back ?
 * Add me?
 * [[file:dotdotdotsam-icon.png]] - sure ! Also how do you make a template
 * You can look the code from here
 * [[File:GanzismIcon2.png]] Ganzism Add me? I've already added you
 * - okay
 * [[File:Tomjaz.png]] - Nobody tell him how Aristole is several thousand years older then liberalism.
 * - when I call you a liberal I'm not mentioning Aristotle, I'm mentioning your interest in Noam Chomsky, Vaush, and Bernie Sanders, and market socialism [which is not really socialism].
 * [[File:NeoGlencoe.png]] Neo-Glencoeism- Add me plz?
 * - sure
 * [[File:Jefsynd.png]] Jefbol Thought - add me? (very cool essays by the way)
 * - thank you ! and yes just added you, add me back [also replace Cyberleninism with this ideology bc that's my old one lol]
 * [[File:Jefsynd.png]] Jefbol Thought - alright, by the way i do support the creation of a vanguard-ish workers’ party to educate the working class and to act as the political representative of the industrial unions before and after the revolution
 * [[File:Neokira2.png]] Meowxism - add me?
 * - yes ofc, add me back btw
 * [[File:AryanMonarchBow.png]] Aryan Monarchism - Add me? I will add you back.
 * - got you, get me on yours as well
 * [[File:Brazlib.png]] Brazilian Liberalism - My page is still WIP but you can add me
 * [[File:Yves-nicholas.png]] Yves-Nicholas Thought - add me first then I will add you


 * -|Discussions=


 * [[File:DragonRed.png]] - your ideology looks great. Add me.
 * - sure but user page on the main polcompball wiki? dude just make a self insert on this site instead
 * [[File:DragonRed.png]] - Our economic views are almost the same. I'm not reactionary. Reactionary means monarchy, theocracy, on the capitalist side. Nor am I a classical conservative. I am in favor of the Republic, the Secular, and the Socialism. Anti LGBT. I am pro-Socialist Feminist. The side that I am conservative is the culture of the nation, the protection of the borders of the country, family values...
 * - I mean reactionary not as in you want to bring back monarchies and theocracies, I mean it as in you are not progressive and uphold conservative, reactionary idealism. You are anti-LGBT, narrow nationalist, and want to uphold "family values"; that is reactionary.
 * [[File:DragonRed.png]] - You know this too.restore monarchy and theocracy; Defending monarchy and theocracy is reactionary. Defending the secularism of the republic is progressive. I am truly a cultural nationalist. I am only interested in preserving my national culture in my country. You are more nationalistic than me. You are a pan nationalist. You aim to unite all Spanish-speaking nations under the Red flag. I am in favor of the egalitarian family institution, which I call family values. I am in favor of having a family of parents and children. I'm here for their protection.
 * - The family is anything but 'egalitarian', the father is an authoritative model of the bourgeois, while the mother and child are the oppressed model proletariat, expected to carry out his every whims on the basis of his 'hard work' and status as a 'prime mover'. This structure doesn't 'protect' anyone except men in power.
 * [[File:DragonRed.png]] - Family is important. It determines your personality. Everything depends on the environment. You and the family depend on the environment. I do not support the very oppressive family model. Nor do I support the extremely libertarian family model. I mostly advocate the egalitarian democratic family model. The family is the foundation of the people. If the family is corrupt, the people will also be corrupt.
 * - I agree that family affects your personality and decisions, but that's not a good thing. Regardless of what 'model' there is for a family. There is no 'democratic' family. There is no 'libertarian' family. The family unit arose for the simple purpose of making two more subservient classes to men - women and children.
 * [[File:AryanMonarchBow.png]] Aryan Monarchism - Depending on where you are it might be about making men and children subservient to women. People shouldn't be influenced by your family but it does happen.
 * - expertly stated by, there is no "democratic" family. The bourgeois family is a relationship that has been constructed by property relations that degrade the woman in relation to men. While I believe that the subservience of children to an elder guardian is a legitimate hierarchy, the subservience of a woman to a man is the literal definition of a patriarchal, misogynistic relationship.
 * [[File:DragonRed.png]] - The family unit arose for the simple purpose of making two classes - women and children - more submissive to men." In the oppressive family model, one side is dominant, the person who takes every decision alone. This can be the father. It can also be the mother. There are more fathers in these very backward countries. In my opinion, the father-oppressive family model that prohibits saying hello to a man. The father, who told his daughter to come after 12 at night, adopted the extreme libertarian family model. There are indeed such models. Believe me, neither is good.
 * [[File:AryanMonarchBow.png]] Aryan Monarchism - Regardless of gender both parents should have equal say. Misogynistic and misandristic relationships are for idiots. Kids should have some degree of freedom btw.
 * - Before I type this comment up, can you people take this discussion somewhere else? it's literally a disaster having to manage all of this shit. anyways, I don't have the time to go into a full discussion, I'll just copy and paste a line from Friedrich Engels that is a response to the bullshit you're spewing: "The first class opposition that appears in history coincides with the development of the antagonism between man and woman in monogamous marriage, and the first class oppression coincides with that of the female sex by the male. Monogamous marriage was a great historical step forward; nevertheless, together with slavery and private wealth, it opens the period that has lasted until today in which every step forward is also relatively a step backward, in which prosperity and development for some is won through the misery and frustration of others. It is the cellular form of civilized society, in which the nature of the oppositions and contradictions fully active in that society can be already studied."
 * [[File:DragonRed.png]] - I am not advocating that family members submit to each other. Neither should a woman submit to a man, nor should a man submit to a woman. Everyone should understand and help each other.
 * - for the millionth time, the nuclear family INHERENTLY involves subservience of a woman to a man due to its inherent contradictions. I won't continue repeating myself, please stop blowing up my comment section.f