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)  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)  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)  Mikhail Gorbachev (1931-2022)  Nikolai Kardashev (1932-2019)  Stephen Hawking (1942-2018) Julian Assange (1971-)  Andrew Yang (1975-)  Ivan Bartos (1980-)  Andrewism (?-)  BritMonkey (?-) 

=Politics=

Overview
My economic beliefs are overall left-wing but  pro-market, I believe that the economy should be more  human-driven and not profit-driven, I also believe that  labor is the source of all value and that the unimproved value of land should be  taxed.

[[File:Cybercom.png]] Cybersocialism [[File:Cybercom.png]]
I support the idea of Cybersocialism, that being the idea that computers are to do economic planning and distribution, believing that they are more efficient than humans at planning and implementing policies in regards to economics, as I believe they are by far better than humans at doing such policies. This is similar to Allende's Cybersyn program (9/11/1973 never forget). I believe that there should be a council of 6 economists, and they will vote on what the best plan is according to their own opinions, with them voting on the plans offered by the computers (mostly ranging from good to very good). The voting is done in an e-democratic manner, meaning that the vote is democratic, but done digitally.

[[File:Ricardosoc.png]] Ricardian Socialism [[File:Ricardosoc.png]]
I believe in the labor theory of value as proposed by economist David Ricardo, with the assertion that labor is the source of all value, but also the source of all wealth. Now, I also believe in Ricardo's theory where rent is the difference between the produce obtained by the employment of two equal quantities of capital and labour. In the process of economic development, without there being land value taxation, increased land use and all of that would trickle down to landlords.

[[File:Georgist.png]] Georgism [[File:Georgist.png]]
I believe in the idea of Georgism and the set of policies advocated by economist Henry George. As such, I support the implementation of a land value tax, a tax on the unimproved value of land will have many benefits: It will allow for a more efficient and more eco-friendly use of the land as to not result in more taxes being paid to the government. This will benefit them and the environment. It will also encourage people who just want to profit off of old land that they don't use to just stop having that land. I also believe that from the revenues of a land value tax the citizens (poorer citizens) receive a citizens dividend.

[[File:Yang2020.png]] Economic Scorecard [[File:Yang2020.png]]
I believe that there should be an economic scorecard, this scorecard will be a much representative indicator of  well-being in society that prioritizes human growth rather than the growth of some number, which is exactly what GDP prioritizes. GDP is also flawed because it was made before we landed on the moon, before we understood climate change and before we made internet, thus, This economic scorecard will measure the following things:

- environmental quality

- mental health

- access to education

- quality of infrastructure

- infant mortality rates

- consumer debt

By removing gross domestic product from economic well being, we can stop pursuing the myopic idea of infinite GDP growth and instead build an economy that is focused on human needs, and human well-being, an economy which prioritizes the people over the rich. The economic scorecard also makes economic measurements more accurate to the actual, overall state of society compared to the gross domestic product.

[[File:Minmut.png]] Minarcho-Mutualism [[File:Minmut.png]]
I believe that the government should not have that much of control over the economy, with the means of production being relegated to the  workers and the means of planning and distribution being relegated to  AI planning. This is as such would leave the government only being in charge of taxation when it comes to economic manners.

[[File:Cooperative_Socialism.png]] Worker Co-operatives [[File:Cooperative_Socialism.png]]
I believe that businesses and the means of production within those businesses are to be owned by the workers of that said business, with there being a CEO who only gets a wage 10x bigger than the average worker, no more. Although, he is allowed to earn the same wage as his worker if he wants to. This is what I call a maximum wage. These worker co-operatives will also mostly own small-medium businesses, as such, they can end the big monopolies that have been established thanks to corporatocracy.

[[File:NatProg.png]] Trust Busting [[File:NatProg.png]]
I believe that we need strong anti-trust legislation in order to make sure that the economy is competitive and is not monopolized, like how it is today, in basically most sectors of the economy. As such, I propose an economic constitution which will constitute what is a big business, small business etc. but also what companies are eligible for being trust busted and how much (keep in mind, previous CEOs cannot own shares of stock in the new companies that came out of the old company):

- 30% market share (divided into 10 companies)

- 40% market share (divided into 20 companies)

- 50% market share and above (divided into 25 companies)

This is the model that is followed in Germany and this allows them to have a fair and competitive economy where  small-medium businesses dominate, the true sources of innovation, and they do not engage in price gouging that benefits them only. It is said that small-medium business generate x15 more innovation than big businesses.

[[File:MeritCap.png]] Passive Wealth Accumulation [[File:MeritCap.png]]
I believe that passive wealth accumulation goes against the idea of a meritocracy, and as such, I believe that stuff like inheritance and interest should be completely abolished, however, stuff like debt should be kept to a level as low as possible, this will make it easier to build a  meritocracy (more on it explained in society section).

[[File:Demtrans.png]] Workplace Automation [[File:Demtrans.png]]
I believe that workplaces will eventually have to be automated, thus, the means of production will belong to artificial intelligence, as such, productivity will rise as they are faster and more efficient at doing production and can produce stuff at a larger scale.

[[File:UBI.png]] Universal Basic Income [[File:UBI.png]]
As workers will be laid off because of automation, I believe that eventually we will need a 1,000 $/month Universal Basic Income to be given to people who were laid off from work (as such, this does not apply to the CEOs, although, CEOs who chose to have the same salary as their workers will also earn it). This will not only allow them to earn money in a post-work society, but also allow them to pursue their hobbies and dreams.

Overview
When it comes to taxation, I believe in a Land Value Tax, a tax on the unimproved value of land in order to deal with high land prices and to lower housing prices. I also support a Wealth tax of 30% on wealth over 1bn $, in order to heavily reduce wealth inequality. I also support a church tax of 50% in order to create a secular society. These are the 3 main taxes, although I support other taxes too.

[[File:Socgeo.png]] Land Value Tax [[File:Socgeo.png]]
I support the implementation of a land value tax on the unimproved value of land, over time, land prices have surged to astronomical levels and land prices contribute massively to  housing prices. As such, it must be taxed so prices of land fall thus house prices fall thus more people are able to afford to have a house, an asset. This will also take aim at inequality. global land value is 326 trillion $, and while this tax is progressive going from 0% (lowest value land) to 95% (highest value land) on average it is 37%, so it, in its first year of implementation, would generate 120 trillion $ in revenue.

[[File:EconProg.png]] Wealth Tax [[File:EconProg.png]]
I believe that a wealth tax is paramount to reducing wealth inequality as it has corrupted and eaten away at our innovative capacity and ability to think, corrupting us through  mindless consumerism,  surveillance and  culture war. This is all because we allowed these people who promote such ideas get all the wealth, without taxing it for the benefit of the people. As such, I support a wealth tax of 30% of wealth over 1bn $. This will result in earning 3.8 trillion $ in revenue per year.

[[File:Religion.png]] Church Tax [[File:Religion.png]]
A tax on the biggest churches must be levied, this is to allow the transition to a secular society to be done much easier. Why do I want to do this? We have not been able to prove the existence of god and god has always been used by us to prevent us from making innovations in fields we could easily could've. I support a 50% rate of taxation on churches, they profit of off people having beliefs, earning 378 billion $ a year. This is unacceptable. Revenues from this tax would be 189 billion $ a year.

[[File:Cryptan.png]] Financial Transactions Tax [[File:Cryptan.png]]
I support a 0.1% tax on financial transactions, this will act as some sort of regulation to prevent financial speculation and risk tasking. Per year, this tax would generate 77 billion $.

Overview
On my views of society, I tend to espouse radical beliefs, beliefs which are at their core meant to fundamentally change the way we view society and how society works. My beliefs strive to be as progressive as the classical radicals were in their own time.

[[File:Gay.png]] LGBTQ+ Rights [[File:Gay.png]]
I believe that LGBTQ+ people should have an equal right to marriage and should be treated and should be as culturally accepted as heterosexuals are today, so that the social stigma against them is eroded. I believe that gender should stop being a determining factor in how a person should be treated.

[[File:Acidcomf.png]] Drugs [[File:Acidcomf.png]]
I believe that all drugs should be legalized as a view drugs in of it themselves as a  public health issue, not a security issue, believing that if alcohol and tobacco are fully legal and are a public health issue why can't the same apply to drugs? I believe that soft drugs like marijuana can only be consumed after 18 while hard drugs can only be consumed after 25. This will also massively reduce the incarcerated population, especially in the United States.

[[File:Merit.png]] Meritocracy [[File:Merit.png]]
My main goal in society is to build a meritocracy, that being a society which does job hiring based on a person's capability and experience not factors like race, gender, ideology and so on, believing that to be the main reason of the wage gap between races and genders.

[[File:Space.png]] Space [[File:Space.png]]
I believe we should explore space, there should be an  international space agency (ISA), and it should receive lots of funding to fund space exploration innovations like space tourism, moon and mars colonization and even faster than light travel through  quantum entanglement. Exploring space will allow to know more about our universe and to see new frontiers with our very eyes. The universe has a lot of time, and so shall we.

[[File:FDF-Pirate.png]] Internet [[File:FDF-Pirate.png]]
I believe that we need to put privacy back on the table when it comes to the internet, as tech giants have used information and technology to spy on the people who use their services and products, most importantly through advertisements but also through algorithms and behavioral patterns. These shall be replaced with private advertisements, on the internet, you are also fully anonymous, with you not requiring to have a name, and your IP are not to be known I also support VPNs as a tool of resistance against the tech giants.

[[File:Copyleft.png]] Copyleft not Copyright [[File:Copyleft.png]]
I personally support abolishing patent laws and want to mostly abolish copyright (except for some cases), thus allowing for a mass surge in copyleft, the complete opposite of copyright. It grants freedoms to copies of works that were previously copyrighted and could not be used.

[[File:Civlibert.png]] Stop Watching Us [[File:Civlibert.png]]
The internet is not the only way tech giants and governments use to spy and survey their own citizens, but also through surveillance cameras and the surveillance state. I want to get rid of the PATRIOT Act and also want to curb more pro-surveillance legislations. I believe that Assange should be liberated from prison and not extradited to the US. Whistleblowers should not have to be scared of government intervening and arresting them, their activities should be fully legal in my opinion.

[[File:Laicism.png]] Religion [[File:Laicism.png]]
I, like Karl Marx, believe that religion is the opium of the masses. It prohibits progress in its tracks and innovation to happen by simply saying that god made it. We would had been much more advanced without it, however, that doesn't mean there isn't time to stop religion. I personally believe that a church tax should be levied on all religious churches whether it would be Christian, Islamic or Jewish churches/mosques/synagogues. This would be a big tax and it would disincentivize the continued existence of such institutions, thus making religion a merely personal thing. I believe that there should be no official religion and that government should be secular, thus separated from the state and that education should stop being so pro-religion and instead be  secular and  humanist instead.

[[File:Anti-Corrupt.png]] Prison System [[File:Anti-Corrupt.png]]
On the prison system, I believe that prisons are ought to be nationalized, as I believe jailing people shouldn't be a  for-profit venture, and it is proven that private prisons intentionally keep prisoners for longer periods of time to earn more bucks. I believe that the justice system should be more open and transparent, but also more  humanistic, with me following the  Norwegian model of the justice system. I also believe that victimless crimes should not be crimes.

[[File:Policism.png]] Police [[File:Policism.png]]
I believe that the police and how it works need to be drastically changed. I believe that the police should not investigate themselves, as it is ought to generate results which benefit them. Instead, it is the community which is to investigate and also to hold them to account, and to prevent the police from unnecessarily attacking their  liberties.

[[File:GRights.png]] Gun Rights [[File:GRights.png]]
Yes. We shall have a right to bear arms! Gun regulations should be liberalized, however, there are still gonna be some minor regulations, such as making it so that only people above 19 (obviously, regular people not those who serve in the army) can buy guns and that you need a permit for gun use, however, there will be a high degree of gun freedom overall,  as guns protect people from  tyranny.

[[File:Urbanism.png]] Housing [[File:Urbanism.png]]
Why the hell must homes have a massive cost that is almost x10 their yearly salary when it is considered a human right? How is everyone supposed to have a roof of their heads if an average house costs 200,000 $ while they barely earn 30,000$/year? This is obscene and I believe to be the main cause of homelessness in the world. My solution is to make housing free, having a house is still a wealth asset, however, buying a house won't require that much income. If everyone is given a home, there wouldn't be homelessness.

[[File:Envi.png]] Environment [[File:Envi.png]]
We need desperate and VERY DESPERATE action to solve the environmental and climate crisis we are currently going through. It is real, it is affecting everything. So, what are my solutions? I believe that we should dramatically scale up renewable investment and funding, and to also provide massive tax credits to people who install renewables, electric heating devices and who also travel more frequently on public transit. I also support green hydrogen fuel, cellular meat, green buildings, biotechnology and nanotechnology. I also support carbon capture as a means to make sure we have negative emissions and we bring emissions level (in parts per million) down to pre-industrial levels. I also support a progressive carbon tax.

[[File:Anticar.png]] Anti-Car Action [[File:Anticar.png]]
Cars are the WORST THING TO EVER HAPPEN TO OUR STREETS. The Car industry singlehandedly stole the streets from the people and the community. The problem with urbanism is not many people, building big etc. it's CARS. Cars have literally stolen our streets in the last 100 years. We must take them back. In short travel, aka in the city itself, cars will be replaced with walking, cycling (e-bikes, bikes, scooters) and public transit like trams or buses (in smaller cities). In medium travel, trains. Even regular ones are fine in this instance. For long travel, HIGH SPEED TRAINS. They're faster than most cars (going at speeds over 200km/h and above) and don't pollute as much. All of these are to be run on green hydrogen fuel. For very long travel (country to country) we may still sadly need planes, but we must find ways to make planes greener, if we can't find a way to make them green directly, we can use CDRs (carbon dioxide removals).

Overview
When it comes to matters of diplomacy, I advocate for a world federation, one which follows the ideals of  socialism,  secularism and  democracy. I also support indigenous rights and  international environmentalism.

[[File:World_Federalism2.png]] World Federation [[File:World_Federalism2.png]]
I believe that we should have a world federation, one which will be achieved through the peaceful integration of the  United Nations, through a series of international treaties, done by a majority vote by each nation and not a veto-like vote where 1 security council member can just ruin everything. This will make the UN more powerful, and in a good way. A world federation will allow us to have a more united response when it comes to the most pressing issues facing us right now. Any normal person would wish for this idea, sadly, most are clouded by the notion of the nation state, a notion which has clouded most people, and has ruined our world.

[[File:Native.png]] Indigenous Rights [[File:Native.png]]
In an united world, I believe that indigenous people should have equal land rights to us, and I believe that 5-10% of the world land should be dedicated to them, as not only are they great  environmental protectors, they are also human, and they should be citizens, they should be able to vote, they should be able to participate in politics. They should have a right to have a say. We shouldn't leave anyone behind.

[[File:Pac.png]] International Peace [[File:Pac.png]]
In my opinion, I think the nation state is the sole reason for the existence of war. If there are resources in nation A but there aren't those resources in nation B, nation B will try to get them somehow. But if nation A and B are united, they both have equal access to resources. Thus, a world federation will pave the way for peace. Which is a very good thing as it can allow us to unite and focus on more important issues rather than petty issues like wars.

=Philosophy=

Overview
When it comes to metaphysics, my philosophical beliefs are a synthesis of the ideas of Nominalism,  Existentialism and  Absurdism. When it comes to ontology, I believe in Metaphysical Libertarianism.

[[File:Non-Essence.png]] Nominalism [[File:Non-Essence.png]]
As a nominalist, I believe that universals (or general ideas) in of it themselves are just mere names we give with them not having any corresponding reality, no reality of their own. The only things that are grounded and have a corresponding reality are the particulars themselves. I also believe that everything is made out of matter, as asserted by Hobbes.

[[File:Existentialism.png]] Existentialism [[File:Existentialism.png]]
I believe in existentialism, the idea that there is no inherent meaning of life given to us by a higher authority (a government) or higher being (God). I believe that the way we find meaning to our life is by creating it ourselves. I am both an existentialist and absurdist, as I do agree with Camus on some things but also hold that we have free will, so I am technically both.

[[File:Absurd.png]] Absurdism [[File:Absurd.png]]
I believe in absurdism, and I believe in the  Camusian interpretation of the Myth of Sisyphus, one must imagine him happy doing the same thing for eternity, as that is technically what most people do every time they are at work, yet they are fine. Camus offers 3 solutions to the discovery that we are in an absurd, the first is suicide, the easy way out, the second is a leap of faith, still believing that there is a true meaning to life. The first two solutions are philosophical suicide. The third is embracing the absurd, that our universe is meaningless and its okay.

[[File:DvPermission.png]] Metaphysical Libertarianism [[File:DvPermission.png]]
I believe in libertarianism, no, not Ron Paul and tax cuts. Free will, the idea that our actions are done independently by us and are not determined by something else. Personally, I believe that we do have free will. Like, how are our actions determined? And if so, what determines them? If something determines our actions, wouldn't that determining factor make us be determined not to think about whether our actions are determined?

Overview
When it comes to epistemology, my philosophical beliefs are built up on the ideas of Epistemic Existentialism and  Cartesian Anxiety.

[[File:ExistPhenom.png]] Epistemic Existentialism [[File:ExistPhenom.png]]
I believe in epistemic existentialism, the idea that what is rational and what is irrational is merely down to the individual themselves, the idea that what is rational for us to believe is in part, up to us. We decide what is rational or not, through free will.

[[File:Descartes_2.png]] Cartesian Anxiety [[File:Descartes_2.png]]
I believe that we cannot really know everything, as the knowledge we have of the things around are constantly changing, it is thus essentially impossible to know every single thing about the things we know and to know the things we don't know. This is called Cartesian anxiety. However, you can have a stable foundation of knowledge, and the only alternative is to live in chaos and confusion.

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.

Overview
When it comes to sociology, my ideas are a synthesis of Social Constructivism,  Moral Subjectivism,  Cosmopolitanism,  Individualism and  Metamodernism. These ideas for the basis of my beliefs about society.

[[File:Constructivist.png]] Social Constructivism [[File:Constructivist.png]]
I believe in social constructivism, the idea that sociocultural conditions and forces determine how one lives his life, and the way he builds meaning to his own life is based on what conditions he was born in and just because he had worse chances than others doesn't mean he is inferior to others, he is still human. This is contrary to essentialism, which states that different conditions at birth mark that the person is an inherently distinct (or even inferior by more right-wing people) type of person and cannot become "normal".

[[File:Cosmo.png]] Cosmopolitanism [[File:Cosmo.png]]
I believe in cosmopolitanism when it comes to manners of international theory, the idea that all human beings are a member of a single community and that we are all  world citizens. Cosmopolitan international theory is very influential to my belief in a world federation. We shall be united, as humans, even if we share different beliefs about the world.

[[File:Subj.png]] Moral Subjectivism [[File:Subj.png]]
I believe in moral subjectivism, the idea that morals are merely based on our own perspectives on what is right and wrong and is thus merely subjective, as such, I reject moral universalist arguments and I believe that morals shouldn't universally be equal to all, and that it should be up to the individual to decide what morals and beliefs are good and bad.

[[File:Josiah_Warren.png]] Individualism [[File:Josiah_Warren.png]]
I believe in individualism, I believe that individuals have  free will and thus can have individuality, I believe that through individualism a man (a person) can find his true worth and is free to pursue his true passions. I think that capitalism (the system right now) is a collectivist ideology, as it forces people to work without being able to do what they truly love, and it also oppresses them at said work and doesn't allow their own self-determination. With this, I come to identify with the philosophy of Oscar Wilde.

[[File:Metamodernism.png]] Metamodernism [[File:Metamodernism.png]]
Personally, I believe in Metamodernism, the broad range of developments in culture, art and society in general. A definition of metamodernism is the idea that it is an oscillation between modernism and postmodernism. I believe that metamodernism is the right synthesis between these two ideas, as both make some good points and I believe that it combines the good of both.

Overview
My philosophical beliefs on ethics are based on the ideas of Virtue ethics and  Eudaimonia (which means human flourishing or well-being).

[[File:Virtue_ethics_icon.png]] Virtue Ethics [[File:Virtue_ethics_icon.png]]
My personal moral code begins first with virtue ethics, the notion that a human should have morals based on  golden means (virtue) between two vices, one that is too much and one that is too few. I believe that there are 12 virtues (or golden means), as proposed by Aristotle.

[[File:Eudaimonia.png]] Eudaimonia [[File:Eudaimonia.png]]
I believe that humans should seek well-being and flourishment, and to achieve that I believe that a society must be  individualistic, as said in the previous section. In my opinion, humans can achieve eudaimonia by being virtuous and pursuing friendship. I think these are good moral codes, however, I do not want to universally insert them into all individuals, like some, and I believe that while their morals are not the same as mine, they still can freely pursue them.

=Personality=

MBTI
INTP (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Perceiving)

Enneagram
5w6

=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.

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

Neo-Kiraism (//) - Oh god what is this, this just feels like an SJW Commie in the flesh that right-wingers keep talking about, bruh why do you even sympathize with Juche, they're not even Marxist or progressive. Although, Absurdism and existentialism do bump you up into here though.

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.

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.