Post-logism

Post-logism is the ideology representative of its adherent, Post-logic. It is characterized as a strongly progressive and platformist tendency within anarcho-communism.

Hierarchy
Post-logism believes that the state is essentially a composition of components within a territory to maintain a sovereign unit and interest code. She believes that hierarchy is a foundational component of the state and is what orders the unequal distribution of legal coercive power between classes. Post-logism believes that the highest state class (or more simply the executive class) by definition is holds what can be referred to as the interests of the state, or the purpose of the state, and the lower class within the state describes the role of ordinary civilians in regards to governance. Power structures such as the police force are deemed as enforcers of the state's interests controlled by the executive class and are referred to as "state assets", as they are essentially assets of the state for the purpose of serving itself. Post-logism believes that civilians differ from state assets as they are not enforcers of the state's interests, but are rather only servants of the state interests (which from now on will be referred to as the "interest-group"). This is not to say that state assets to not also servants of the interest-group, but civilians specifically are the lowest class in terms of legal and coercive power. The division of groups within the state is universally a unit of organization, specifically on the basis of the unequal distribution of governmental privileges (i.e. a hierarchy). In a statist society, regardless of the difference of legitimate coercion, the higher the class, the more governmental privilege are obtainable in said class. In other words, the set of governmental privileges in the third sub-executive class is a subset of privileges in the second sub-executive class, which per se is a subset of privileges in the first sub-executive class. This method of organization comes with three universal truths. The executive class maintains a privilege, as mentioned before, that is the interest of the state, one privilege of state assets is to define the privileges of classes below itself, and the governmental privilege of civilians is a cornerstone of humans recognized by the state, or civilian rights, which by definition is also held by state assets and the class of executives.

Coercion (Definitive)
Post-logism believes that the maintenance of the material foundation of the state is coercion or legitimate physical force, and the state is essentially an abstract "tool" without any element of concentration of legal power whether it be absolutist or not. This is derived from the view that there is no aspect in which a hierarchy would have self-sustaining capabilities and maintain a structural formation. She believes, however, that it is more specifically the unequal distribution of legal coercive power that defines the state materially, rather than the presence of coercion. This method of distribution of coercion is what defines the legitimacy of the state. The centralized and concentrated structure of coercion is commonly known as a monopoly on coercion, or monopoly on violence. This monopoly on violence is what maintains the interests of the state and the power structure of the executive class. Post-logism sees coercion, in a mathematical conception, a relative variable rather then an absolute variable, specifically in proportion to the legal power of the civilian class. This means that excess coercive power held by state assets and the class of executives are measured and conceptualized by multiples of the coercion that is legally held by civilians. In addition, Post-logism believes that the monopoly on violence alone does not fully represent the summation of legal coercion within the state, which is observed through the existence of sub-executive power structures, which has been previously classified as state assets. The summation of legal coercion within the state is conceptualized by the excess coercive power held by state assets and the executive class, in other words, the summation of the differences of power between each state body and the civilian class.

Direct vs. Indirect Coercion
Post-logism believes in a distinction between direct and indirect coercion, but, however, still believes that the artificial construction of these coercive forces pave the material conditions which give rise to the formation of a state. Essentially, direct and indirect coercion differ between its origins, or it's where it's exerted. Post-logism believes that coercive power can derive from two main sources: the state and the economy. Coercion that is derived from state assets expresses an exertion of power from one governmental class to another, one that is lower than itself, and this is referred to as direct coercion. Coercion that is derived from economical conditions expresses an exertion of power from a lack/shortage of wages or resources needed to survive that results from a disproportion between the distribution of labor and the distribution of wealth. This is referred to as indirect coercion. The measurement and conceptualization of indirect coercion will complies that the axiom to determine coercion, which is representative is the proportion of the specified class compared to a civilian (which in this context would describe the role of a worker). The measurement of indirect coercion can boil down to two factors: the wage the worker is able to be paid by the capitalist proportionate to how much labor-power the worker is exchanging to the capitalist per given time period or amount of sold labor-power that results in a net increase in the value of a commodity, and amount of labor-power the worker is selling for a wage in order to be paid enough money to buy resourceful needs in order to survive compared to the amount of labor-power the capitalist must put in too survive. The factors are both held by the capitalist class, as the capitalist has control over the worker's wage (until the reach of a threshold where the worker may die) and the amount of labor-power the worker puts in (once again, until the reach of a threshold where the worker may die). Overall, the measurement of indirect coercion is determined by the amount of labor-power the capitalist must put in to survive over the amount of labor-power the worker must put in to survive.

Artificial vs. Natural Coercion
Post-logism also believes in a distinction between artificial and natural coercion. To put it simply, artificial coercion is force generated through the unequal distribution of direct and/or indirect power between two or more difference classes. Natural coercion is a form of indirect force generated through biological needs of organisms that do not result from a hierarchal structure. Natural coercion does not pave the material conditions which give rise to the formation of the state because there are no classes with definitive differences between coercion that is generated by this force. This coercive force is applied to everyone within a territory equally.

State Circulation
Post-logism believes that the state is inherently a self-serving structure, as she believes the state exists to serve itself, or the centralized interest-group, which is by definition the executive class, as the executive class dictates the state through the monopoly on violence that it holds. Post-logism believes that the state maintains a exclusive circular network of deriving the interest-value of the state while also serving itself through state-assets and civilians within the controlled territory. This process is as follows: a higher class exerts power onto a lower class, the lower class serves the interests of the higher class, and power reallocates from the lower class to the higher class. She believes that the repetition of this process will result in a larger and larger concentration of coercion within higher power structures and may eventually dissolve into power corruption, similar to that of Fascism. In addition, Post-logism believes that the proposed liberal system to circumvent this problem, "Checks and Balances", is practically ineffectual, as it merely divides the executive class into two or more power structures, those that share the same amount of legal power, and share the role of the executive, therefore still sharing a mutual interest-group. That being said, the early stages of the Checks and Balances system may delay the threshold of power corruption as contradictions arise, as these are separate classes, albeit they are part of the executives. As the process of state circulation reaches it's later stages before the threshold of power corruption, these separate classes will all have a much greater concentration of legal coercive power than its civilians and can therefore strengthen the mutual interest-group, with can possibly lead to a degenerated, absolutist system of government.

Symbiosis (Definitive)
Post-logism believes that a foundational component that pave the material conditions to the formations of collectives is symbiosis. Symbiosis is defined as the interactions between two or more organisms and can either be mutual, commensal, competitive, parasitic, etc. Post-logism believes symbiosis to be the basis for sociological and cultural development, especially amongst humans. She also thinks that mutual relationships between communities and collectives are by far the most beneficial and effectual, as there is a fitness increase for both or all sides of the equation. This is also the root of her criticism of egocentrism. Namely characterized by its hyper-individualism, Post-logism believes that this train of thought contradicts the impulses and tendencies of organisms, as there exists a material incentive (fitness) for symbiotic, namely mutualistic, relationships between two or more organisms. This then leads her to believe that a post-left anarchist framework would inevitably collapse, as there exists no legitimate rationale to become repulsive to collectivization or communalization. Post-logism also believes that a post-left anarchist framework has no method of coordination regarding the distribution of labor, the distribution of resources, and maintaining the abolition of classes. She therefore believes that this sort of framework would have no way of preventing the formation of a state apparatus, as the material conditions that allow a state to form is not abolished. Post-logism also believes that this biological nature of organisms contradicts with the Objectivist philosophical framework (i.e. the primary aim of an individual is to benefit itself).

Fitness Incentive vs. Material Position
Post-logism believes that symbiosis happens for two reasons: the incentive for an increase in fitness and what she calls an organism's "material position". She makes this distinction because it is important in determining the material conditions that cause a positive symbiotic relationship (fitness incentive) which is contrasted to the material conditions that cause a strictly negative symbiotic relationship (material position). The fitness incentive has already been explained previously so this section will mostly talk about "material position". Material position is very simple. It refers to either a situation or placement of an organism that directly affects another organism without the intervention of the incentive of the increase in fitness. The importance comes with the synthesis of these two motives, which is what breeds parasitism. Post-logism believes to deconstruct parasitism (economically, not biologically) through the abolition of the material position what a capitalist has over a worker, which is done through the abolition of social classes.

Localized Democracy
Post-logism believes that the best form of non-hierarchal government within an anarchist society is a localized democracy, with a few proposed characteristics. Generally, Post-logism believes that there is no legitimate rationale for the state to constitute the direction of politics of a region or country, and it is in the people's best will to formulate society on their premise and ideal world. She believes the key ideal to success with a direct democracy upon its establishment is more forms of civic planning to maintain a reasonable, orderly, non-ochlocratic fashion with a few principles.

What she believes kills a democracy:


 * Coercive Association - Dissenters are not able to secede to form their own communities based on their own interests.
 * Centralized Voting - Votes are casted and discussed on a unitary level with regards to the interests of the nation.
 * Majoritarian Absolutism - The majoritarian popular always wins with no recession or questions.
 * Lack of Repercussions for Minorities - Minorities are not able to defend themselves at an event at which their rights are infringed upon.
 * Populism - People are subjected to propaganda just to benefit corporations and/or existing power structures.

Post-logism believes that key aspect of these problems is that they are the not inherent to the process of casting a vote or letting the people decide their own future without the interference of an authority figure. She believes this can be shown through logical constraints to these apparent impediments without contradicting this key universal aspect of democracy:


 * Freedom of Association - Individuals have the right to join or leave communities voluntarily if disagreements are too severe. (similar to having separate “states” in the U.S., though these communities would be non-hierarchal governments rather than states) Individuals with the same social goals have the right to group together to fulfill those goals as long as it does not propose a transgression on another individual’s rights. For example, let’s say that there are two proposals: A and B. A has a popular vote of 70%, whereas B has a popular vote of 30%. By the standards of rule by majority, A wins the popular vote. However, dissenters, or proponents of B can choose to have a secession.
 * Localized Voting - Votes are casted and discussed in respected communities with regards to the interests of these communities.
 * Council Democracy - Opposing views to the majority should be respected and discussed upon judicially to achieve a synthetic legislator. This is opposed to a majoritarian democracy which is fundamentally against the goals of direct democracy. Post-logism believes that democracy is more than just a “voting process”.
 * Right to Minority Self-Defense - Minority voters should have the unalienable right to retaliate against an unjustified infringement of their rights.
 * Deconstruction of State/Corporate Populism - Individuals should not be subjected to bad-faith constructed information presented by the state or by corporations in order to project followers, usually by the value of community rule.

Utility of Order and Organic Association
Post-logism believes in a code of order that of which she calls the "utility of order". This summation, the utility of order is a code by which order is conducted by utility, similarly to the "utility" described in Mill's "Utilitarianism". Coordination is ordered through the consequential conduct of an action, meaning that if one action were to have a purposefully negative effect in a current set of conditions, the action is therefore opposed, naturally, by the community. This is contrasted to what Post-logism calls the "deontology of order", where actions are judged based on a set of *predetermined* laws. She also believes that the utility of order compliments well with the policy of free association and a localized democracy, as communities will naturally separate from dissenters who produce a net negative value in utility or have contradictions in communal interests. The territory-wide system of free association is not a system of casting votes, and there is no rule by majority, or even the division that constitutes the “majority” or the “minority” merely. The role of the majority mentioned prior is the state of unanimity, the reduction of the division of satisfaction between the majority and the minority. This is contrasted to the maintenance of such groups by coercive association. Free association is effectively a “heterodox” form of democracy in which an interconnecting system within a territory where civilians are free to associate and dissociate with communities with similar or unified communal principles, each communal structure with a different unit of organization agreed upon by its participants, once again naturally through iterations and generations of dissentience and unanimity which develop into organic association.

Occupation
Post-logism believes that the mode of production should be shifted to one that of socialist economies. In an economy with a socialist mode of production, The incentive for production would be the incentive for use-value as opposed to the incentive for exchange value, or profit. Essentially, if there is use-value in the material produced by labor power then there will be an increased demand for this particular job. As for specialized/lower supply occupation, Post-logism believes that a gift economy will most effectively operate under a large scale economy and therefore opposes small-scale localist mode of production. She believes this because it will result in a greater specialization of occupational jobs which will be especially useful for a gift economy as there is no incentive for profit. Essentially, as the the size of the participatory economy increases, the "entropy of occupation" will increase, "entropy" meaning a state of randomness or diversity. "Entropy of occupation" refers to the diversity of occupational interest due to a high sample size participating in the economy. It can sort of be thought of a form of uncertainty principle representative of the occupational interests of the participants depending on the individual. In addition, Post-logism also believes that a lack on occupational specialization can be further circumvented to a large degree with the abolition of the economical class apparatus as job requirements will not be intervened by a "wall of cost". In other words, economical class and money requirements will not be factors in taking classes required for a specialized occupation, which is something that capitalism cannot circumvent as economic classes continue to exist.

Platformism
Post-logism believes platformism to be the most effectual praxis, as she believes that tactical and theoretical unity to be key for a successful revolution to circumvent contradictions between minor ideological differences to work in the late stage revolution, beyond the early term. She believes that platformism is not an authoritarian praxis like some other anarchists believe, since this method of organization has no division of power that constitute different ranks within the organization. Tactical and theoretical unity will be "enforced" in the same way that the principles of horizontal collectives will be "enforced" (see "Utility of Order"). This collective will organize an insurrectionary army to protect the future anarchist territory.

Insurgency
Post-logism believes that an insurgency through an insurrection organized by a platformist organization is required to achieve a relatively large-scale anarchist territory. She believes that reformist and pacifist tendencies uncritically understand the material conditions which uphold the state and capitalism, similarly with the problem in anarcho-syndicalism of the current labor aristocracy within today's popular labor unions. Post-logism does not agree with the illusion of a "strong state" to supposedly properly protecting the revolutionary guard, opting for a more rational and materialist stance that it is firepower multiplied by numbers (quality times quantity) that renders a more useful insurrectionary army. A decentralized and horizontal army is only different from a centralized and vertical army in the sense that it does not follow a deontology of order.

Progressivism
Post-logism generally believes in complete liberation from traditional structures. However, she also believes that localized communities have the complete right to secure traditional culture as long as it is not imperialized to other communities. Consequentially, Post-logism believes that unhealthy behavior that is usually classified as progressive is particularly a result of the profit incentive; take sex work, for example, as Post-logism believes sex work to be exploitative. Post-logism believes that sectarian traditionalism is an emotional response to conditional change and scientific advancement as a result of the formation of one's character by his or her environmental, material conditions. Her cultural stance can best be described as anti-liberal social deconstructionism.

Deconstructionism
Post-logism believes that all qualitative sociological understandings of identity classification, such as gender, sexual orientation, race, etc. are products of identity abstraction. This idea of "abstraction" functions similarly to abstraction within the field of computer science. Abstraction, when applied to identity, is essentially a simplification of physical/biological characteristics into a definitive system of classification. Unlike abstraction in computer science, abstraction in this specific sense is reductionist in nature, as there is no computative translation of abstracted characterization into specialized characterization within a sociological network. This leads her to believe that these abstractions of identity are essentially constructions by societal development. However, Post-logism believes that as the advancement of science and environmental conditions proceeds, these structures will become frameworks of outdated scientific understandings of physical/biological characteristics.

Materialism
Post-logism believes that materialism is the basis for analytical research on the reality of the world. She believes that the dominant factor behind change is the material conditions of a society, most notably conflicts between different interests within different groups (especially socioeconomic classes) generated by a sociological framework. This is contrasted to the beliefs that sociological reform is generated through individual ideas and that the dominant factor behind change are the propositions by individuals of a society. Post-logism believes that there is no rational connection between the idea of an individual and sociological reform without the medium of the conflict of classes, the consideration of the pavement of material conditions that generate the unideal society, or the contradictions between the interests of different groups within a socioeconomic structure, also known as idealism. Therefore, she criticizes idealism for being an ineffectual and utopian philosophical framework and believes it only exists to please the individual or culture without regard for how the world actually functions and changes, and idealism is essentially a coping mechanism to formulate a fictional world that lacks any basis of the sociological framework just for the sake of preserving some abstract "value".

Relation to Anarchism
Post-logism believes anarchism to be a tendency that is able to be derived from a materialist analysis on capitalism and the state. She does not give a prescription of the state, that is, a prescription that anarchism can and should be based on a combination of socialism and an abstract value of "liberty". This is the root of her criticism of "minimal-state" socialist solutions. Rather, Post-logism believes that any state to be an upholder of class society (as explained previously) and therefore should be opposed by socialists. Non-anarchist libertarian socialists do not believe in this claim, rather, therefore, they must simply want to combine socialism and libertarianism, which admittedly is illustrating a prescription of the role of the state in a political economy. Post-logism is opposed to this train of thought because it is a projection of idealism. In addition, Post-logism believes the supposed Marxist criticism, most notably "On Authority" by Engels, to be based on a complete misunderstanding of anarchism, as they repeat the false claim that anarchism is a tendency that prescribes the purpose of the state, and is therefore a form of "bourgeois idealism". Post-logism also disagrees with the notion that revolution is inherently authoritarian because it stems from Engels' misunderstanding of "authority" as conceptualized by anarchists. The authority that is opposed by anarchists is the reactant of imposition from high socioeconomic classes through exploitation/domination of low socioeconomic classes, as this authority is what legitimizes these socioeconomic classes to construct a class-based society.

Absurdism
Post-logism believes that there is an internal contradiction between humanity's epistemology of the universe and the lack of intrinsic metaphysical meaning of the universe in addition with the contention generated between the reality that it cannot be determined what happens over the termination of one's consciousness and the epistemology of the birth of consciousness, known as the Absurd. She believes that the Absurd is generated in correlation to the variability of culture which derives metaphysical epistemology. According to Camus and Kierkegaard, there are three paths an individual could take in regards in confrontation of the absurd state of human existance: suicide, religion, and acceptance. Post-logism believes the first two "solutions" to not be legitimate dialectics, as they are forms of submissions to the Absurd, rather than generating a synthesis to circumvent this contradiction. She agrees with Camus' view that the acceptance of the Absurd is the most beneficial solution, as it derives a synthesis from this contradiction, which is will-constructed essence, a concept derived from the philosophy of existentialism. Post-logism believes that an existential approach to the Absurd would be in the form of the construction and accumulation of essence by one's will, as this essence is the ultimate incentive and motivation to live and to keep living. She believes that the rational approach to a life on a universe without any intrinsic meaning is to simply produce utility based on the interests of one's self and/or association.

On "Basic Science"
Post-logism believes the argument of "basic science" is a tendency birthed from an idealistic and ignorant misrepresentation of science and scientific methodology. She believes that what the cultural right refer to as "basic science" is nothing more than outdated science. This is because one fundamental of science is that empirics derived from observations are not concrete and are certainly subject to change even in the state of proven beyond reasonable doubt, take the history of the atomic model for example. There is nothing really "basic" about science, and science is not meant to be a gnostic field of knowledge. This revised understanding of science can be applied to the understanding of genetic expression, for example. The scientific understanding of genetic expression has evolved from it being interpreted as a snippet of code to being understood as something that is influenced by environmental factors such as photons, temperature, chemistry, etc. combined with the genotypical influence of heredity and spontaneous mutation. This view of Post-logic's is also connected to identity abstraction, as she believes that the abstraction of identity is a product of scientific ignorance. This view is also connected to the previous statement of sectarian traditionalism shaped by the material conditions of a society at a given time, as a society that is shaped by a certain framework of scientific understanding is viewed as an axiomatic understanding of a certain scientific field, despite being outdated science.

On Eugenics
Post-logism think eugenics particularly fails by mainly stemming from a complete misunderstanding and pure ignorance of Darwinism and Darwinian analysis. She believes that eugenicists fail to formulate a distinction between natural selection and artificial selection, the differences in the implications between natural selection and artificial selection, how natural selection even works in the first place, the failure to understand how artificial selection affects the natural course of evolution, and culture. It is, essentially, a dogma with no non-contradictory ideological backing pretending to call itself "Darwinist" to gain a scientific reputation. Post-logism thinks that eugenics fails to understand what makes natural selection natural. It essentially believes that people with any hereditary features which are more "desirable" must be bred together disregarding the hereditary features which are less "desirable" (desirable is in quotes because this sentiment is a complete abstraction). She believes that there are no scientific standards or measurements with uses regarding to Darwin's evolutionary theory that substitute for this need of "desirable" heredity. In other words, the desire expressed by eugenicists is characterized by cultural heredity rather than fitness related heredity, and this is proved more so with the distinction between natural selection and the artificial selection proposed in eugenics. Essentially, natural selection entirely focuses on mutations relating to fitness related heredity, or hereditary features that affect the "fitness" (summed in the ability to survive) of an organism. Post-logism expands on this by stating that this form of selection immediately discredits certain proposals of artificial selection that is characterized by an interference in fitness, as it disrupts the environmental conditions that execute the selection of fit people in favor of selection by the state's best interest. It can best be characterized as an artificial bottleneck in the eyes of a Darwinist. She claims that fitness based selection is superior through natural selection as it realizes the full empirical environment, allowing the most accurate depiction of adaptive species to survive, without any interference of a collection of interests held by a state. As for cultural heredity, this is extremely easy to discredit since cultural heredity does not introduce any overlap with the scientific basis of fitness. "Desired" traits cannot be ruled out by natural selection because it is simply not natural. "Desired" cultural heredity, ultimately, is entirely decided by the culture at hand. In other words, it is subjective; eugenics ultimately comes down to subjectivity. Phenomena just as the "golden ratio" are simply a product of mathematical axioms with the characteristic of relativity and does not translate to an abstract quality of "beauty". the supposed quality of "beauty" in evolution directly contradicts with the scientific basis of Darwinism. Post-logism thus believes that eugenics is a complete infantility and complete joke of a political belief.

On Blanchard's Typology
Although Post-logic believes that autogynephilia has been demonstrated to exist, she entirely disagrees on Blanchard's expansion of this phenomona. Blanchard's theory says that trans women can essentially be divided into two groups: androphilic (or as Blanchard calls "homosexual") and autogynephilic. Androphilic trans women transitioned because of gender dysphoria, are sexually attracted to men, and had early onset gender dysphoria. Autogynephilic trans women transitioned because of a fetish, are sexually attracted to women, and had late onset gender dysphoria.

Post-logic identifies six problems with this hypothesis:


 * 1) It presupposes that trans women can roughly be classified based on observational shared characteristics without a scientific discriminator towards these groups (for example the discriminator for classification in species is being unable to interbreed).
 * 2) It presupposes that transgender fetishism is exclusively autogynephilic without regards to trans men.
 * 3) It presupposes that all sexual activity done by trans people are either androphilic or autogynephilic.
 * 4) It presupposes that all sexual activity done by trans people have a correlation/influence between these two groups without regards to the possibility of being neither.
 * 5) It presupposes that autogynephilia is exclusive to trans people and does not experiment a hypothetical correlation with autogynephilia between trans women and cis women people.
 * 6) It presupposes that femininity and masculinity do not hold inherently fetishistic traits.

These presuppositions demonstrate a leap on logic that was used to formulate this hypothesis that was constructed by Blanchard.

On Punitive Justice
Post-logism believes punitive justice, specially on the subject to crimes with a victim, to be a projection of bourgeois idealism. In other words, it is a tendency that is rooted in bourgeois idealism. She identifies the core fundamental in punitive justice to be the factor of what she describes as the reconciliation of victimization. The reconciliation of victimization essentially describes the rationale behind the execution of retaliation enacted upon by the state. This rationale states that an illicit force or activity performed by a deemed "aggressor" to a deemed "victim" is to be reconciled with a force or activity that is to be enacted upon this deemed aggressor, to one degree or another, and this reconciliation may come in different magnitudes, such as community service, jail time (non-rehabilitative), or even capital punishment. Post-logism believes that this "rationale" is illegitimate because it is entirely derived from an abstraction, that is, the ideals of positive retaliation and negative retaliation which supposedly reconcile each other. It is idealist because it derives a differentiation of value on retaliation based on the source of force or activity, these two sources being the aggressor and the state. The need to reconcile the act on the aggressor on behalf of the state is an ideal that is constructed by the state, rather than a material basis. Thus, acts of punitive justice are merely emotional responses to the aggressor to a large margin, for whatever crime he or her has done. Rehabilitative justice, on the other hand, fixes these issues that uphold punitive justice, as it properly addresses the material (psychological) conditions which in turn shapes the illicit force or activity of the aggressor. Rehabilitation centers may introduce mental therapy and/or electroshock therapy (if it is voluntary), and, in a society principled by free association, inmates may be dissociated with a community as a last resort. In addition, there may also be combined with restorative justice, in which a victim of an aggressor may also have their material needs addressed for restoration.

Friends

 * [[File:Ancom.png]] Anarcho-Communism - good
 * [[File:Platformism.png]] Platformism - good
 * [[File:Prog.png]] Progressivism - i like you when you hate libs.
 * [[File:AnSynd.png]] Anarcho-Syndicalism - decent, although I do not think that worker's unions are too effective at leading a revolution.
 * [[File:Bckchn.png]] Communalism - again, it's pretty okay, but i don't think that municipalism is the best strategy.
 * [[File:Envi.png]] Environmentalism - i care about the environment, though it is not explicit to my ideology.
 * [[File:Awajj.png]] Anarchism w/o adj. - depends on the context.
 * [[File:Ormarxf.png]] Marxism - good economics. not a fan of the the dotp part.
 * [[File:Libmarx.png]] Libertarian Marxism - take the anarcho-pill already.
 * [[File:Councom.png]] Council Communism - leftcom but good.
 * [[File:Anarchristian.png]] Christian Anarchism - christianity but wholesome.
 * [[File:Bundis.png]] Bundism - another wholsum100ism
 * [[File:Insarch.png]] Insurrectionary Anarchism - my praxis
 * [[File:Nacc.png]] N-Word Accelerationism - my other praxis
 * [[File:NatAce.png]] Acenationalism - it me?
 * [[File:Inky-sprite.png]] Inkyism - give me image perms
 * [[File:Potashism.png]] Potashism - h
 * [[File:Neoairisu.png]] Neo-Airisuism - good but why voewsche tho
 * [[File:Dfn.png]] DFN Thought - dfn factor is fake and made up
 * [[File:Minsoctrans.png]] Minarcho-Socialist Transhumanism - why no amnarkism

Frenemies

 * [[File:Orthlen.png]] Leninism - i really liked your take on imperialism, but you embrace the dotp too much.
 * [[File:ML.png]] Marxism-Leninism - some of your modern supporters like [[File:Dengf.png]] him for some reason.
 * [[File:Dsa.png]] Democratic Socialism - peak petit-bourgeois, but you are a socialist so whatever.
 * [[File:Vaush.png]] Vowsche - cringe, but the tactical n word emitted countless amounts of based
 * [[File:Rutabaga.png]] Rutabagism - reformist but smart, also sounds dangerously close to bordigism (which is unbased)
 * [[File:Edwin.png]] Edwinism - you seem decent
 * [[File:Kirakween.png]] Kira Kween Thought - you are scaring me

Enemies

 * [[File:Ancom Furry.png]] Anarkitty - storm you fucking bastard.
 * [[File:Neoliberal-icon.png]] Neoidiotism - i can at least sort of respect [[File:ClassicalLiberal.png]] classlib for not having infantile economics, but jfc this is a disaster
 * [[File:Austrobert.png]] Autistrolibertarianism - lol!!!!
 * [[File:Anin.png]] Utopian Anarchism - [REDACTED]
 * [[File:AnCap.png]] Anarcho-Lolbertarianism - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfB03hv9-Ow
 * [[File:LeftCom.png]] Ultrarightist - how about you go read some bitches.
 * [[File:World.png]] Imperialism - oh wait you're actually globalism. same thing anyways.
 * [[File:Ultranat.png]] Ultraechochamberism - jesus christ go outside.
 * [[File:Hfash.png]] 4chanism - LITERALLY degenerate.
 * [[File:Fash.png]] Kakistocracy - pov you are mentally deficient
 * [[File:Hoppef.png]] Pooppeanism - guys it's voluntary association therefore it's anarchist guys.
 * [[File:Conserv.png]] "Libertarianism" - cons just got trolled.
 * [[File:Marketsoc.png]] Co-op Capitalism - liberal in denial.
 * [[File:Nazbol.png]] Inceldom - virgin gang virgin gang.
 * [[File:Maso.png]] Literal BDSM - sex workerism