HelloThere314ism

HelloThere314ism also known as HelloThere314 Thought is a philosophy and political theory concerned with the disunity between the ideal and the void, the spectacle that is created from that, along with the radical political implications that comes with that.

=Summery= Individualism Metaphysical Nominalism Marxism
 * [[File:Anin.png]]Individualist Anarchism
 * [[File:Anpostleft.png]]Post-Left Anarchism
 * [[File:Antwork.png]]Anti-Work
 * [[File:DialectEgo.png]]Egoism
 * [[File:Ego.png]]Egoistic Anarchism
 * [[File:Egocom.png]]Egoistic Collectivity
 * [[File:EgoUnion.png]]Unions Of Egoists
 * [[File:Ego-Existential.png]]Existentialist Egoism
 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]Existentialism
 * [[File:Absurd.png]]Absurdism
 * [[File:Sartre.png]]Sartrian Phenomonology
 * [[File:Heidegger.png]]Heideggerian Phenomenology
 * [[File:Existentialist Anarchism.png]]Existentialist Anarchism
 * [[File:Self.png]]Creative Nothing
 * [[File:Postmodernicon.png]]Post-Modernism
 * [[File:Poststruct.png]]Post-Structuralism
 * [[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Deleuzoguattarianism
 * [[File:Post-an.png]]Post-Anarchism
 * [[File:Postfem.png]]Post-Feminism
 * [[File:Neomarx.png]]Neo-Marxism
 * [[File:PostMarxism.png]]Post-Marxism
 * [[File:Žižekism.png]]Žižekism
 * [[File:AcidCom.png]]Fisherism
 * [[File:Situ.png]]Situationism
 * [[File:Postsitu.png]]Post-Situationism
 * [[File:Neomarx.png]]Gramscian Totality
 * [[File:HegelMarx.png]]Dialectical Materialism

=Influences=

Theorists

 * [[File:Tao.png]]Lao Tzu (500sBC)
 * [[File:Plato.png]]Plato (300sBC)
 * [[File:Diogenes.png]]Diogenes (300sBC)
 * [[File:Philan.png]]William Godwin (1756-1836)
 * [[File:HegelianPhilosophy.png]]Georg Hegel (1770-1831)
 * [[File:Ricardosoc.png]]David Ricardo (1772-1823)
 * [[File:Fourier.png]]Charles Fourier (1772-1837)
 * [[File:DepressionMale.png]]Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
 * [[File:Ego.png]]Max Stirner (1806-1856)
 * [[File:Mutualist.png]]Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865)
 * [[File:Karl_Marx.png]]Karl Marx (1818-1883)
 * [[File:Georgist.png]]Henry George (1839-1897)
 * [[File:Nietzsche-icon.png]]Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
 * [[File:Indlibsoc.png]]Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
 * [[File:Egomut.png]]Benjamin R. Tucker (1854-1939)
 * [[File:Freud.png]]Sigmund Freud (1856-1939)
 * [[File:Awaj.png]]Voltairine De Cleyre (1866-1912)
 * [[File:Goldman.png]]Emma Goldman (1869-1940)
 * [[File:Heidegger.png]]Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)
 * [[File:Illeg.png]]Renzo Novatore (1890-1922)
 * [[File:Ego-Existential.png]]Herbert Read (1893-1968)
 * [[File:Socan2.png]]Aldous Huxley (1894-1963)
 * [[File:Lacan.png]]Jacques Lacan (1901-1981)
 * [[File:Sartre.png]]Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
 * [[File:ExistFem.png]]Simone De Beauvoir (1908-1986)
 * [[File:Camus.png]]Albert Camus (1913-1960)
 * [[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Gilles Deleuze (1925-1995)
 * [[File:Poststruct.png]]Michel Foucault (1926-1984)
 * [[File:PostMarxism.png]]Jean Baudrillard (1929-2007)
 * [[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Félix Guattari (1930-1992)
 * [[File:Debord.png]]Guy Debord (1931-1994)
 * [[File:Situ.png]]Raoul Vaneigem (1934-???)
 * [[File:Postsitu.png]]Jean-Pierre Voyer (1938-???)
 * [[File:AnOnto.png]]Hakim Bey (1945-2022)
 * [[File:Žižekism.png]]Slavoj Žižek (1949-???)
 * [[File:Anpostleft.png]]Bob Black (1951-???)
 * [[File:Post-an.png]]Todd May (1955-???)
 * [[File:Postfem.png]]Judith Butler (1956-???)
 * [[File:Acidcomf.png]]Mark Fisher (1968-2017)
 * [[File:Post-an.png]]Saul Newman (1972-???)
 * [[File:Egocom.png]]For Ourselves: Council for Generalized Self-Management (1974)
 * [[File:Gender_Accelerationism.png]]Vikky Storm (???-???)

Groups/Movements

 * [[File:YngHeg.png]]Young Hegelians (1835-1846)
 * [[File:Frankfurt.png]]Frankfurt School (1923-)
 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]French Existentialists (1930-1980)
 * [[File:Situationalistinternationalism-icon.png]]Situationist International (1957-1972)
 * [[File:Antwork.png]]Youth International Party (1967)
 * [[File:Egocom.png]]For Ourselves: Council for Generalized Self-Management (1974)

=Beliefs=

[[File:Skepticism2.png]]The Circular Reasoning Of All Things
There is circular reasoning to all principles, all structures of truth or unity. Take science for example, science offers observations about the representation and seeks to understand it and dissect it in a pragmatic way. Scientists commonly make the claim that science offers explanations, yet sciences explanations is based on itself. If the explanations for observations are based on on past observations, that does not constitute an explanation unless the referenced observation has an explanation not based on another observation. In the case of science it does not. Sciences explanations to its observations are based only on observations. An infinite justification happens were no initial proof is found. This is the same for all things. Any principle of morality, for example, is self referential in its justification. Let's say I take it as a principle to never lie. Why do this? Well beside some arguments of practicality in social relations it can be chalked up to "because it's good". This is how it goes for all principles, all systems. All are based on circular reasoning and self-referentiality.

[[File:Self.png]]The Unique And Its Labels[[File:Skepticism2.png]]
All in the world is defined by two assets, the unique and labels applied on to the unique. The unique is not a state, it is a non object; its fundamental nature is the lack of nature. We apply labels to the unique, making it our property in the sense. Neither the unique or the labels applied to the unique can be seen alone, they are codependent. The unique without labels is fundamentally indescribable. We place labels on it to create a frame of reference, a model against metaphysical chaos. The labels too cannot be seen without the unique being labeled. Take mathematics, it is the theory of the pure idea of categorization; it takes placeholders in its symbols and operators as uniques to be described. Pure idea can only be viewed through placeholders, distorting the nature of said ideas. Unlike what Plato says, these pure ideas are not any more "real" then the world wich we perceive; however, it is the subject of philosophy. Take me as I write this, analyzing the unique and its labels, do I deal with any pure idea of this system or do I use placeholders? Obviously, I use placeholders as representations of said idea. Only a representation of the pure idea can be seen, subject to biases and subjective bases. This creates a metaphysical void, nothing can be described, there is no pure essence, etc. Only with a subject to place labels to the unique is there any sense of order. This supposed order cannot describe the unique at all, as that would be against the nature, or rather non-nature, of the unique. As puts it - What Stirner says is a word, a thought, a concept; what he means is no word, no thought, no concept. What he says is not what is meant, and what he means is unsayable."

[[File:Skepticism2.png]]The Incompleteness Of Objects[[File:AnOnto.png]]
What defines an object? There is no essense of an object, we place that essense on it ourselves. Well objects are made with other objects. The computer from which I write this is comprised of many diffrent types of circuits. These circuits are considered just as much an object as the computer they comprise. This is commonly accepted in everyday life, these are just parts of a wider hole. What then of something like a bikini which comprises other objects, the top and bottom yet they are not physically touching. This can also easily be accepted. What then of the catree, a new object I just thought up comprising a cat and a tree. Most would dismiss this as nonsense however it is the same as the bikini. Is there anything fundamentally diffrent about the bikini? Nothing but the fact that humans gave the bikini objecthood by recognition. Nothing is an object till we recognize it as such. Just, as will be seen later, they view humanity's imbued purposes as useful to the context of everyday life, however they offer nothing when it comes to trying to analyze reality. This means that the whole concept of objects are abstractions created by humanity. What does this imply? As discussed in the previous section there is an alienating separation between one and all. This one also can be observed but is simply an illusion. What can be concluded from this is a state of chaotic uniqueness, of complete difference. Objects are illusions.

[[File:Absurd.png]]Metaphysical Disunity And The Absurd[[File:Skepticism2.png]]
From this metaphysical void of uniqueness, there is sharp contrast to the ones imagined by individuals - meaning, structure, etc. This creates disunity, a disunity between the abstractions conjured up by humanity, the ideals we hold, and the metaphysical void of uniqueness. There of course is conflict present in this disunity, this forms the Absurd. There are other forms of disunity, all relating to Absurd and Kafkaesque. Disunity in these forms are between the unique individual and structures so above the individual in its power. Take, as will be discussed in later sections, the current spectacle and the associated Baudrillardian system of objects and other related modes of spectacle. The individual has reactions to spectacle, creating things such as situations and insurrection. There is a disunity between the personal and political ideals of individuals and consumerist hegemony. This example of disunity, as well as all other modes of disunity are tied back to the main disunity, that being the one between the metaphysical void and ideals; the consumerist hegemony is the amalgamation of spectacle, a concept that will be defined and explored in the subsequent sections, all that must be known for now is that it is fundamentally related to the main disunity, from this this consumerist hegemony we can see it is fundamentally connected to the main disunity. Thus these sub-disunites can be understood as a meta-disunity as it is one level above the main disunity. This ties the concept of disunity all together.

[[File:Postsitu.png]]Spectacle[[File:PostMarxism.png]]
Spectacle is the reaction to disunity, to the absurd. It seeks to place some order on the world, to dilute the reality of pure uniqueness. It places things such as metanarratives and structures to reality just as a form of escape. These spectacles inherently have the effect of transforming being to appearing. , while falsely placing spectacle wholly at the hand of, shows correctly that spectacle transforms from being to appearing. Take the conception of meaning,  himself saying that life is like a melody. We construct stories and live for the appearance of the story While spectacle appears individually, much of spectacle is determined by facticity. The ideals of our current age forms other spectacle. consumerism is tied to the Baudrillardian system of objects, resistance in the form of heaven storming is inherently tied to it, etc. These form the modes of spectacle. Spectacle could be compared to conception of ideology as ideology is a state of distraction from the logic of the dialectic, yet unlike what  suggests it does not arrive from the mode of production; some like  share a similar thought - "The Only Illusion in Capitalist Society is the Apparent Freedom of the Slaves. The Only Spectacle is That of the Freedom of the Slaves", on the contrary, the mode of production arises from spectacle. provides a great analysis of spectacle, not falling into the essentialism of, yet he fails to consider its source. While spectacle might be constituted around the current mode of production, the mode of production and the structure around it is spectacle in itself. They are self constituting, as spectacle arises from the mode of production, yet regarding a mode of production at all is inherently spectacular. While I have been focusing on the mode of production, it is not the basis of all historical modes of spectacle. Previously in feudal times, religion was the justifier of the spectacle of feudalism, the mode of production is constituted by exterior forces. It is similar to how it is today, as economic forces are revered as the new god. What of the reactions to the mode of spectacle, are they themselves spectacular? Yes. It could be considered a meta-spectacular predicament as it is a layer down from the original basis of spectacle, yet placing itself in relation to the mode of spectacle creates a situation where the antithesis of the mode of spectacle is pursued, falling into contorted visions. Some reactions, such as situations, give realization of spectacle yet can never replace it. All in all spectacle is everywhere, and you can never escape it.

[[File:Žižekism.png]]Ambiguity, Frameworks, Ideology, And Meaning[[File:ExistFem.png]]
To fill the void of existence and uniqueness one throws on spectacle. But how is this spectacle expressed in means of understanding the world, on a personal, Phenomenological, Existential perspective. It is expressed through frameworks, ways of understanding the world and ones place in it. These frameworks can be taken directly from the current mode of spectacle, or can be something new, adding on to previous frameworks. These frameworks are inescapable, as Žižek points out resisting frameworks, or in his terminology: ideology, is a framework in itself. herself points this out, critiquing the Nihilist for critiquing personal meaning while any action inherently has subjective meaning, including their critique. herself holds the concept of ambiguity, ambiguity between diffrent frameworks, diffrent was of defining oneself. insight towards this is that one does not have to choose, rather one can define oneself based on ambiguity, fulfilling multiple roles, or better yet define oneself flexibly. Frameworks, meaning, ideology, etc cannot be escaped, so define oneself as one pleases, not falling into any consistent role or view of oneself. Embrace ambiguity.

[[File:AntiEconomy.png]]Anti-Economics[[File:Postsitu.png]]
The economy is a pure idea. Economics is the ideology of the idea. Economics is the dominant theory of the world in a Marxist sense. Other social sciences are viewed as the conflict between diffrent theories while economics is viewed as a material science, getting progressively closer to truth. Just as sociology comprises theories about social activity, economics comprises theories about economic activity. Just like material sciences, and other social sciences, economics should never be put on a pedestal or it becomes a devolved religion. The economy is just like class or society, an economy is just a grouping of economic activity. Thus a theory grouping these into a science is an attack on ownness similar to class reductionism. What does this imply towards economic activity? Economic activity should thus be spontaneous, with those participating in economic action seeking it out of mutual self benefit, forming a instantanius. This could take the form of, , bartering, etc. This economy constitutes a pseudo-unity to material conditions and provides an incite to , that being that the dialectic is on a stage of void.

[[File:PostHegel.png]]Analysis Of The Dialectic[[File:ExistMarx.png]]
The dialectic deals with ideas, the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis of these ideas. It is important to note that this is not a two into one scenario but a one into two scenario. When the dialectic commits a synthesis it does not combine ideas but move beyond the ideas, the individual has an identity, is presented with other ideas and then considers that idea, committing dialectical synthesis. As discussed previously these ideas are labels, not able to fully describe the unique. Along with that, the dialectic is placed on the foundation of spectacle, an explicitly anti-dialectical concept. As individuals are explicitly labeled, the individual participates in the dialectical process. This is the conception of the dialectic. Pure idea cannot be viewed without the unique to be labeled. Labels are constituted by the exterior, as will be discussed in a further section. As the dialectic is actively participated in, it is not a metaphysical framework; however, as ideas are constituted by the exterior, the all (just scroll down to the one and all section to understand the terminology), it makes it a thing to be actively participated in. This brings in the conception of dialectical materialism. These political dialectics are to participate in political struggle. The contents of this political struggle will be discussed in further sections.

[[File:PostMarxism.png]]Marxism And The Problem Of Class Reductionism[[File:Post-an.png]]
Marx and those who succeeded him had the idea of class struggle. This analysis of class struggle and the following theory of dialectical materialism has had impact on much of history. Class, as Marx describes it is the relation to the means of production. In Capitalism there are two main classes in the relations of production - the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Marx argues that these classes define oppression, the main oppression being economic oppression. It is important to note that Marx does not view economic oppression as the most important form of oppression, just the basis of oppression. From this Marx argues that class should be rejected, giving way to communism. This argument, while certainly having many good points is quite essentialist. The first problem is class reductionism. Marx makes it quite clear, unlike others claims, that there is great difference inside classes. This is not the problem, merely that the grouping itself is essentialist. If some grouping, some identity, in this case class, defines history then this is quite dogmatic. Dialectical materialism is the main problem of Marxism. Its collectivism is also a central problem. Marx argues that communism will lead to the true freedom of the individual; this is a fine view which they hold much respect for; however, the collectivist view of history and political struggle is extremely problematic. Along with this, the principle "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is very bad. It shows contradiction to his proclamation of individualist communism. The main basis of Marxism is the economy. The problems of economy can be seen in a previous section. This focus of the economy and economic activity found in Marxism is its own undoing. Marx is a hugely influential philosophy with many of its principles aligning with my own, yet it is fundamentally essentialist and dogmatic as well as being alienating to the individual in its political struggle.

[[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Machines And The Body Without Organs
All things can be understood in terms of production. Not necessarily economic production, but rather production in all semblances of the word. What is the source of production? Machines, not necessarily technological machines, but machines in the Deleuzian sense, that being a set thing that produces another thing. It should be cleared up that while I reject labeling structures of "things" as it is inherently essentiallist; however it constitutes dialectical process and can be seen inside ones psyche so it is relevant to label in this case. These machines constitute things such as and all forms of dialectic. What is most important is how they relate to oneself, that being pleasure machines. These pleasure machines are comparable to the Schopenhauerian conception of will, that being that everything has will and wills things into being. This is similar to machines in general, specifically pleasure machines. Pleasure machines are not driven by Lacanian lack, as it is only in the urge of creation, as is the nature of machines. Deleuze and Guattari critiqued Lacan for his conception of lack and his Freudian conception of desire and its opponents as simply limiting the pursuit of pleasure machines. These machines put limits on the individual, set paths for one to follow. This places extreme authority over ones actions, if the exterior authorities can limit the individual, internal wills can do so ten fold. Thus the body without organs is advocated, a psyche for oneself and with pure creativity. One achieves this through schizoanallysis wich is discussed in a later section.

[[File:ExistPhenom.png]]Phenomenological Perspective And Radical Subjectivity[[File:Self.png]]
We are individuals, engaged in individual experience. Wider truths and meanings, if they even exist are so beyond us, we could never find it. Thus, philosophy should be focused on individual experiance. There is no apt way to describe the self. All labels we place on ourselves is fundamentally a describing act, made to place any sort of unity over the fundamental state of disorder known as the self. The self is unique, the creative nothing. This applies to all other things as all descriptions of any object are merely labels placed on it, only to put any sort of unity to the world. These labels are in a symbiotic relationship with the unique, for the unique cannot be recognized without these labels and the labels cannot exist without a unique to describe. While the unique is fundamentally without nature it can certainly be observed. Unlike what Husserl says one is not always conscious of consciousness. As Sartre rightly points out you can easily be conscious, even when perceiving details pertaining to oneself. For example as one talks about themself are they conscious of oneself. Or as I write am I conscious of myself, my existence? No, I may reference myself and my ideas but I am not actively perceiving myself. Or just as one goes about everyday activities are they conscious of themself? They are clearly conscious of the exterior world yet not conscious of themself. One is conscious without the consciousness of consciousness. This leads to the ego being generated merely out of conscious of it. Its being is simply constituted by itself. When one is not conscious of it it simply does not exist, the one disappears and becomes one. On other matters of the self, the self is not unified, instead it has a mere pseudo-unity. It merely holds the appearance of unity. The ego is a bundle of abstractions made by the interior desires and inherited human nature and the molding of the exterior world. Thus the ego itself is just a line created just to be able to function that separates the interior and exterior. When one references themself they are referencing the interior and exterior influences that constitute the ego. They are not unified but held together to function. They are only held together, only unified by consciousness of the self. This disorder of even the consciousness of this unique shows the pure disorder of the self.

[[File:Egocom.png]]One And All[[File:ExistFem.png]]
There is one and there is all. They are both expressed in the form of the other, all is merely a collective of exterior ones and one defines oneself only in terms of the all. The all is the labeler of uniques yet one can only label in terms of the all. This applies to oneself, take exposition of his ugliness, saying that he would never have known his ugliness unless he had seen his moms reaction. This label on himself is only in terms of others, the exterior, the all. This applies to all things as the one cannot be understood without the all. This is not to say that the all's labels define the one, as that would contradict metaphysical uniqueness; rather, we can only understand ourselves in the terms of others. The one is our framework, as it is the position one occupies. The takes this as a rational argument of self interest, as why would one act for a cause outside ones own. The labels the cause of the all as a foreign cause that individuals take as sacred. Instead they follow their own cause, creating a radical assertion of ownness. This is all well and good, except that ownness can never truly come in the presence of an all, because the all defines the one the one can never assert itself as ones own. This has taken many like Novatore to suggest going towards the creative nothing, the unique, to assert oneself without labels. This just leads to the one becoming all, as with pure uniqueness there can be no others, this leads to a lack of distinction. Ignoring the feasibility of that goal, it too lacks ownness as with the one becoming all the individual is stratified as it now has no means to define itself besides merely itself. The common view is far less extreme, seeing that one can take external labels as their own, the unique and its property and all that. This has problems as these labels are still tied to exterior causes and ideals, alienating the individual from itself. This creates a narrow, considering only the individual side of the dichotomy. The collectivist views the collective as the goal seeing the individual ruled by diffrent ideals that are external and thus seeking those ideals over all else. This is far more irrational then narrow, as it places sacred causes, as well, sacred. What then is the suggested goal? Simply the synthesis of one and all. One might wonder the possibility of this, as the one and the all are dialectically opposed. To consider their synthesis one must first come to the realization that the one and the all are codependent, both defining each other. The rightly realizes that exterior causes are sacred, yet, as discussed before, it is narrow. realizes that the liberation of the individual, the pursuit of ownness, cannot come without the liberation of others; as if both constitute each other then if one remains strained then the other is strained. If one pursues ownness yet lives in a feudal society they will be eternally limited. This leads to the conception of the ethics of ambiguity, that being that one cannot be liberated without liberating others, that one should first start with those around them. I would not agree with the labeling of this conception as an "ethics" as it is only in the pursuit of ownness. The synthesis of one and all is the one taking the all as its property liberating all things. This is also my reasoning towards certain political projects such as, rejecting Egoistic Political Nihilism and Ego-Centrists as engaging in the all is necessary for the liberation of the individual. A firm critique of collectivity from Individualists and Egoists is that collectivity puts some cause of the community above the individual, thus creating a sacred cause and authority. This in many cases can be true and it is a legitimate concern in many collective environments. A sustained collective environment can easily devolve into something no sustaining the owness of people. This means that this collective must be greedy, must be a Union Of Egoist. Collectives if spontaneous and with common interests can separate the inherent alienation of humanity and allow for social individuality. If one always holds themself to be greedy collectivity can function with ownness.

[[File:Goldman.png]]Minority Vs Majority[[File:Indlibsoc.png]]
Capitalism, unlike what says, is inherently non-individualistic and plays toward collective consciousness. The first thing to note is wage labour, wich is just one selling ones labour to, inherently alienating oneself in a sense. This may be out of the individual interest of the, however this is out of the of the pursuit of capital, a foreign cause. All classes in are depraved by external interests. Along with this culture itself is anti individualistic, creating a common culture of sacrificing oneself for external interests, and creating a social hive mind. Take when/if one rides trends, one is following eternal causes by foreign influence. It is important to note that this is not to one persons cause, but to collective culture; same as when one participates in wage labour, one does not do that in loyalty to ones boss but general conditioning to do as ones told, to sell ones labour and work for a wage. The culture is inherently collectivist, enslaving individuals to external causes.

[[File:Absurd.png]]Self Affirmation And Life Just For Life[[File:Ego.png]]
=Relations= I will be redoing this section, if I forget to re-add you please comment.
 * -| Ideologies/Philosophies=

[[File:Mega_Yes.png]]Based

 * [[File:Absurd.png]]Absurdism - Your theories of the conflict in the need for meaning and the lack of meaning present is extremely based. You're a core tenet of my philosophy.
 * [[File:Existentialist_Anarchism.png]] - While I don't agree with the existentialist theory of meaning, its theory of choice is amazing; this combined with anarchism makes a very based ideology.
 * [[File:Situ.png]] - Based analysis of the spectacle, and many of your subsequent theorists are very based. Can be too marxist though.
 * [[File:Ego.png]] - BASED!!! Ownness is the main principle of my individual philosophy.
 * [[File:Egocom.png]] - While I don't agree with communism your theories of egoistic sociability only improves Stirner's conception of egoism.
 * [[File:Poststruct.png]] - Structure is a cancer! You greatly influenced me.
 * [[File:Postmodernicon.png]] - I agree on the lack of metanarratives. History is pure chaos.
 * [[File:Post-an.png]] - The structural cancer found within classical anarchism has been extremely detrimental. Your ideas of freedom seem to be a restating of stirnerite ownness and sartrian radical freedom, based!
 * [[File:PostMarxism.png]]Post-Marxism - Marx has some good ideas but we must remove its dogma.
 * [[File:Žižekism.png]]Žižekianism - Your theory of ideology works quite well with my theory of fundamental disunity.
 * [[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Meta-Anarchism - Schizo-Politics are based! Having any one framework just limits possibilities.

[[File:Yes.png]]Good

 * [[File:Soul.png]] - Your conception of oneness contradicts ownness. Other then that, you're pretty based.
 * [[File:Acidcomf.png]] - Different goals but based way to achieve them. Capitalist realism is an amazing theory.

[[File:Mega_No.png]]Cringe

 * -| Self-Inserts=

[[File:Mega_Yes.png]]Based

 * [[File:Councilguy2.png]]Post-Councilism - I like that you've drifted away from pessimism, and you've gotten me to look into people like Voyer and Newman, overall pretty based.
 * [[File:AshleyHere.png]]AshleyHere Thought - Very similar to me, don't know why you left egoism though.
 * [[File:PostChronic.png]]Post-ChronicFemcelism - Based post-anarchist and post-marxist, and from your icon you seem to be a situationist, based!

[[File:Yes.png]]Good

 * [[File:NeoAlphadonialism.png]]Neo Alphadonialism - Kinda inconsistent but your good, also a nice person.
 * [[File:Liblovsprite.png]]Liberty-Loverism - I agree on a lot of stuff, but your quite dogmatic and likes private property.
 * [[File:TipuiSmall2.png]]Tipism - From your influences you look based. Your page is very bare though.
 * [[File:Anbun.png]]Anarcho-Buniism - I like your meta-ethics though I don't like syndicalism even in praxis and futurism is very dogmatic.

[[File:Kinda_Yes.png]]Fine

 * [[File:Anarcho-Immortalism.png]]Anti-Deathism - Alright anarcho-communism but bad views on death.
 * [[File:NguyenreichismIcon.png]]Bruhman Thought - Best orthodox marxist I've ever seen.

[[File:Kinda_No.png]]Meh

 * [[File:Duckism-icon.png]]Duckism - Based machiavellianism and anarchism, but capitalism is a cancer and you misunderstand a lot.
 * [[File:Ultro.png]]Ultroneism - Very smart, and got me to a consistent view of egoism, and I'm quite saddened that you're leaving the wiki, but HOLY SHIT dude, I DID NOT STEAL IDEAS FROM YOU!!! WE MAY BOTH COME FROM STIRNER, BUT WE TAKE IT IN WIDELY DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS!!!
 * [[File:TonyNew.png]]South Floridan Socialism - Quirky progressive lefty, could be worse but not the best.

[[File:No.png]]Bad

 * [[File:Panth.png]]Pantheonism - Monarchist and cultrally center lefty, bad but could be far worse.

[[File:Mega_No.png]]Cringe

 * [[File:Atacc_icon.png]]Ataccism - I like anti-humanism but everything else is a cancer.
 * [[File:Vermaatism_smol.png]]Vermaatism - I like individualism, but the authoritarianism and capitalism is a big no. Also your individualism of "improving" the individual through involuntary means just contradicts individualism. Also I'm not collectivist.


 * -| Figures=

[[File:Mega_Yes.png]]Based

 * [[File:Ego.png]] - Unequivocally based. Your ideas of egoism and ownness have been a big influence.
 * [[File:Egocom.png]] - While not being a communist myself, social egoism is a great concept, along with the narrow socialism and egoism dynamics.
 * [[File:Egocom.png]] - Your ideas have great influence on me. Your individualist communism is really good.
 * [[File:Egomut.png]]Benjamin Tucker - While I haven't read much of you, your ideas on egoism and mutualism are cool, even if I reject economics.
 * [[File:Situ.png]] - Your situationism and analysis of the spectacle is far better then Debord's. Best member of the Situationist International by far.
 * [[File:Postsitu.png]] - Your anti-economics is based as well as your analysis of Marx and the Situationism International.
 * [[File:Postfem.png]]Judith Butler - Gender is indeed preformative. Finally a feminist without all the identity politics.
 * [[File:Post-an.png]] - Postanarchism is very based. The morality and essentialism found in anarchism has harmed it substantially. I need to read more of you.

[[File:Yes.png]]Good

 * [[File:Camus.png]] - Your absurdism is extremely based, way to humanistic though.
 * [[File:Sartre.png]] - Great philosophy of existentialism. Became way to marxist and was quite hypocritical. Need to read more from your marxist period and you in general.
 * [[File:ExistFem.png]] - Your ideas of othering is amazing, and while I don't agree with your existentialist ethics, it's still pretty based.
 * [[File:Anpostleft.png]] - Great critiques of classical anarchism, kind of a prick though.
 * [[File:Post-an.png]] - Based postanarchism, though I don't like your views on death.
 * [[File:Debord.png]] - The one who got me into situationism, but your analysis of the spectacle is the most lacking, plus your marxism led you astray.
 * [[File:Žižekism.png]]Slavoj Žižek - Your critique of ideology is AMAZING! Huge part of my analysis of general spectacle. The rest of your opinions seem to be just general ideological chaos, where one is so awakened to the reality of ideology and yet must live with it. Pure ideological noise.
 * [[File:Socan2.png]] - Based anti-economics and your analysis of bullshit jobs is amazing. Don't align on social anarchism though.
 * [[File:Gender_Accelerationism.png]] - You claim to be a stirnerite however with your essays I have read you seem quite essentialist. Still very good, your gender accelerationism is too marxist though.
 * [[File:Gender_Accelerationism.png]] - Same as Storm, I don't know much about you besides your gender accelerationism.

[[File:Kinda_Yes.png]]Fine

 * [[File:ChristExist.png]] - Based existentialist, but you fall into the pits of spectacle through your religion and conservatism.
 * [[File:Ancom.png]] - Anarcho-Communism is alright, your quite outdated though.
 * [[File:BakuninHeg.png]] - Based critique of Marx, but I don't like collectivism or your currency.

[[File:Kinda_No.png]]Meh

 * [[File:Marx.png]] - Has some very based opinions, but quite dogmatic and essentialist. Also kinda a prick. Glad you got more libertarian as you got older.
 * [[File:Marx.png]] - Same with Marx, but On Authority is a cancer.
 * [[File:Chomsky.png]]Noam Chomsky - Thanks for getting me into anarchism, but your really dogmatic and structuralist.
 * [[File:Mutualist.png]] - I like mutualism, but you're really racist and sexist, an Stirner destroyed you.
 * [[File:Georgist.png]] - Land is indeed the biggest factor in production and you're slightly libertarian, but everything else ranges from meh to awful.
 * [[File:Heidegger.png]] - Your critique of the enlightenment view of being is based. I don't agree with your conservatism and have some problems with your framework of dasein. Your philosophy is quite good, but we don't talk about THAT period.

[[File:No.png]]Bad

 * [[File:Rawls.png]] - Your theory of justice is insanely essentialist. Better than a regular liberal though.

[[File:Mega_No.png]]Cringe
=Theory=

Theory I Have written

 * [[File:Post-Genderism.png]]Gender Abolition: Praxis And Analysis

[[File:Existentialist_Anarchism.png]]Franz Kafka

 * [[File:Existentialist_Anarchism.png]]The Trial

[[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Gilles Deleuze And Félix Guattari[[File:PostMarxism.png]]

 * [[File:Meta-Anarchism.png]]Anti-Oedipus

[[File:Camus.png]]Albert Camus[[File:Absurd.png]]

 * [[File:Absurd.png]]The Stranger
 * [[File:Absurd.png]]The Myth of Sisyphus: And Other Essays
 * [[File:Existentialist_Anarchism.png]]The Rebel
 * [[File:Humanismpix.png]]Resistance, Rebellion, And Death

[[File:Lib.png]]Thomas Nagel[[File:Absurd.png]]

 * [[File:Absurd.png]]The Absurd

[[File:Sartre.png]]John Paul Sartre

 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]Existentialism Is A Humanism
 * [[File:ExistPhenom.png]]The Transcendence Of The Ego: An Existentialist Theory Of Consciousness
 * [[File:ExistMarx.png]]Search For A Method

[[File:ExistFem.png]]Simone De Beauvoir

 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]The Ethics Of Ambiguity

[[File:Nietzsche-icon.png]]Friedrich Nietzsche

 * [[File:Nietzsche-icon.png]]Thus Spoke Zarathustra
 * [[File:Nietzsche-icon.png]]Beyond Good And Evil

[[File:Socan2.png]]David Graeber[[File:Globnat.png]]

 * [[File:AntiEconomy.png]]Against Economics

[[File:Debord.png]]Guy Debord[[File:Councom.png]]

 * [[File:Situ.png]]Society Of The Spectacle

[[File:Situ.png]]Raoul Vaneigem[[File:Ego.png]]

 * [[File:Situ.png]]The Revolution Of Everyday Life

[[File:Postsitu.png]]Jean-Pierre Voyer[[File:AntiEconomy.png]]

 * [[File:AntiEconomy.png]]The Economy is Only an Ideology in Marx’s Sense

[[File:Indlibsoc.png]]Oscar Wilde[[File:Anqueer.png]]

 * [[File:Indlibsoc.png]]The Soul Of Man Under Socialism

[[File:Ego.png]]Max Stirner

 * [[File:Ego.png]]The Ego And Its Own

[[File:Ego-Existential.png]]Herbert Read

 * [[File:Ego-Existential.png]]Existentialism, Marxism and Anarchism

[[File:AnOnto.png]]Hakim Bey[[File:Ego-Existential.png]]

 * [[File:AnOnto.png]]Ontological Anarchy in a Nutshell

[[File:Post-an.png]]Saul Newman

 * [[File:Post-an.png]]The Politics of Postanarchism

[[File:Egocom.png]]Emma Goldman[[File:Anfem.png]]

 * [[File:Egocom.png]]Anarchism And Other Essays

[[File:Egocom.png]]Matty Thomas

 * [[File:Egocom.png]]The Relevance Of Max Stirner To Anarcho-Communists

[[File:Egocom.png]]For Ourselves![[File:Postsitu.png]]

 * [[File:Egocom.png]]The Right To Be Greedy

[[File:Egomut.png]]Benjamin R. Tucker[[File:Anin.png]]

 * [[File:Ricardosoc.png]]Henry George And Interest

[[File:Anpostleft.png]]Bob Black[[File:Antwork.png]]

 * [[File:Antwork.png]]The Abolition Of Work
 * [[File:Postsitu.png]]Imputationism
 * [[File:Postfem.png]]My Preferred Gender Pronoun Is Negation

[[File:Postciv.png]]Strangers In a Tangled Wilderness

 * [[File:Postciv.png]]Post-Civ! A Brief Philosophical and Political Introduction to the Concept of Post-civilization
 * [[File:Postciv.png]]Post-Civ! A Deeper Exploration

[[File:Cball-British_India.png]]George Orwell

 * [[File:Cball-British_India.png]]1984
 * [[File:Cball-British_India.png]]Animal Farm

[[File:Socan2.png]]Aldous Huxley[[File:Post-an.png]]

 * [[File:Ford.png]]Brave New World
 * [[File:Socan2.png]]Island

[[File:Republicanismpix.png]]Jean-Jacques Rousseau[[File:Radlib.png]]

 * [[File:Republicanismpix.png]]The Social Contract

[[File:GeoSynd.png]]William Schmack

 * [[File:GeoSynd.png]]Geo-syndicalism

[[File:Bckchn.png]]Murray Bookchin

 * [[File:Bckchn.png]]Post-Scarcity Anarchism
 * [[File:Postsitu.png]]From Spectacle To Empowerment

[[File:Demcon.png]]Abdullah Öcalan

 * [[File:Demcon.png]]Democratic Confederalism

[[File:Ectrans.png]]J.D. Moyer

 * [[File:Ectrans.png]]A Solarpunk Manifesto

[[File:Chom.png]]Noam Chomsky[[File:AnSynd.png]]

 * [[File:AnSynd.png]]On Anarchism

[[File:Einstein.png]]Albert Einstein[[File:Soc-h.png]]

 * [[File:Soc-h.png]]Why Socialism?

[[File:Karl_Marx.png]]Karl Marx And Friedrich Engels[[File:Marx.png]]

 * [[File:Marx.png]]The Communist Manifesto

[[File:Gender_Accelerationism.png]]Vikky Storm and Eme Flores[[File:Xenofeminism.png]]

 * [[File:Gender_Accelerationism.png]]Gender Accelerationist Manifesto
 * [[File:Awaj.png]]It’s Time For “Mad Anarchism”

[[File:Anqueer.png]]Alyson Escalante[[File:Postfem.png]]

 * [[File:GenderNihil.png]]Gender Nihilism: An Anti-Manifesto

[[File:Steinval.png]]Peter Vallentyne

 * [[File:Steinval.png]]Left-Libertarianism: A Primer
 * [[File:Steinval.png]]Left-Libertarianism as a Promising Form of Liberal Egalitarianism

=Recommendations=

Writings

 * [[File:Absurd.png]]The Myth Of Sisyphus
 * [[File:Existentialist Anarchism.png]]The Rebel
 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]Existentialism Is A Humanism
 * [[File:ExistMarx.png]]Search For A Method
 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]The Ethics Of Ambiguity
 * [[File:AnSynd.png]]On Anarchism
 * [[File:Post-an.png]]The Politics Of Post-Anarchism
 * [[File:Egocom.png]]Anarchism And Other Essays
 * [[File:Ego.png]]The Ego And Its Own
 * [[File:AnOnto.png]]Ontological Anarchy in a Nutshell
 * [[File:Egocom.png]]The Right To Be Greedy
 * [[File:Indlibsoc.png]]The Soul Of Man Under Socialism
 * [[File:Marx.png]]The Communist Manifesto
 * [[File:GenderNihil.png]]Gender Nihilism: An Anti-Manifesto
 * [[File:Situ.png]]Society Of The Spectacle
 * [[File:Situ.png]]The Revolution Of Everyday Life
 * [[File:AntiEconomy.png]]The Economy Is Only An Ideology In Marx's Sense

Youtube Channels

 * [[File:Neomarx.png]]Tom Nicholas
 * [[File:Absurd.png]]Sisyphus 55
 * [[File:Mutualist.png]]Then & Now
 * [[File:GeoSoc.png]]Unlearning Economics
 * [[File:BrtiMonkey.png]]BritMonkey
 * [[File:Awaj.png]]Great Anarchists
 * [[File:Libsoc.png]]YourBoiMason
 * [[File:Existentialism.png]]Eternalised
 * [[File:Ego.png]]Kane B
 * [[File:Ancom.png]]Radical Reviewer
 * [[File:PostMarxism.png]]Jonas Čeika - CCK Philosophy
 * [[File:Anqueer.png]]Zoe Baker
 * [[File:PostMarxism.png]]Plastic Pills
 * [[File:ExistMarx.png]]Epoch Philosophy

Comments
HelloThere314 - Comment if you want to discuss or if you want to be added. I will be deleting old comments.