Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 4,746 articles on Polcompball Anarchy Wiki. Type your article name above or create one of the articles listed here!

    Polcompball Anarchy Wiki

    BERNHEflash.gif BERNHEism BERNHEism.png is an ideology. I'm not summarizing it here, so you'll actually have to read my page Troll.png.

    Cap.png Economics (Troll-small.png)

    BERNHEism supports a complicated economic model that fuses State Capitalism, Regulationism and a medium-sized, yet flexible Welfare State. It seeks to privatize most of the market with high regulations in order to keep a sense of competition around, maintain a decent standard of living for workers, and to prevent private interference in the government. However, BERNHEism also believes that a few industries should be deemed too important or too volatile to be entrusted to the whims of an autonomous market.

    Regulationism.png Free Markets Do Not Exist

    Title. Laissez-Faire economics are based on a contradiction. Think about it; if a government has to intervene in a market to protect consumers, the market is considered to be controlled, to an extent, but what if, in a "free" market, where there is no government intervention whatsoever, corporations become big enough to absolutely dominate entire sectors of the economy and perhaps even extend their control across some territory? Isn't the concept of "lobbying" also a form of regulation as well, since corporations are actively influencing the laws of the state? Could the people challenging these corporations be considered tyranny of the majority? And even if you were to prevent this through government regulation, haven't you just gone full circle and began to regulate the markets again? My point is that a truly "free" market cannot exist, since if the government won't regulate, corporations (or the people themselves) will begin to institute their own forms of regulation. Mind you, the concepts of some theories based on the concept of a free market (but not necessarily Laissez-Faire) like Liberalism are still very good economic models, but I believe that with some more regulation, we could go further. And with regulation being a defining trait of a market, why not?

    Lib.png Regulationism Done Right

    I believe in a system that employs regulation and Keynesianism (in its privatized section of the economy) and State Capitalism in its public sector. However, regulation is still very much a double-edged sword, and I acknowledge this. Complete and utter regulation will make us no better than Command Economies, which are catastrophic in all aspects. In contrast, no regulation whatsoever wouldn't be as bad as a complete command economy, but it would still be quite bad regardless. There is a golden ratio.

    Dirigisme.png How Much is Too Much?

    I may be a fan of limited state capitalism to an extent, but this is contained within a select few industries out of necessity. Having too much regulation is worse than not having enough regulation.

    Statecap.png Nationalized Core Industry

    I believe in a core of industries, run entirely by the state in a state capitalist manner, that are deemed too important for a private market to handle. And I want to make this very clear; I am not one of those state capitalists; limited/necessary price control to prevent things like price gouging is fine, while price setting by the state is a very, very bad idea.

    Authcap.png Which Industry is "Core" Industry?

    The Big Seven:

    • Sun.png Power
      • For reasons that should be obvious. Private industry in this field has proven to be lackluster in terms of innovation and preparing for long-term scenarios. If we are at least going to weather the coming environmental storm with any hope, we need to begin researching and implementing EFFICIENT green power (nuclear, liquid thorium, fusion, etc.) ASAP. The time of natural gas and oil are over, although admittedly, it will take awhile to wean society off of them since it's interconnected with so many industries and communities already. Merely banning fossil fuels like I've seen some people unironically advocate for would result in a complete economic nightmare.
    • Scientocracy Small.png Pharma (includes the manufacture of vapes and cigarettes).
      • OK, now this one is simply because y'all can't behave. I know this one, in particular, is beaten to death, but Insulin, damn it. There's no reason why Insulin costs should be this fucking high, especially when the manufacturing costs are so low (although not as low as people point them out to be, mind you), nor is there any reason whatsoever why the room & board costs for American hospitals (and even using the damn ambulance) makes people more scared of seeking healthcare than getting injured. However, the overall high cost of over-the-counter and prescription pharmaceuticals is the way it is for a reason. Manufacturing medicine is a very complex industry, and the testing phases for new medicines are very, very rigorous. Years of research could potentially be wasted on a new drug that may or may not work. Pharma companies have to account for all sorts of government regulations (even more so than your average industry). And if the drug doesn't work or has an averse side effect, the legal consequences for the company could be astronomical. And that's probably just scraping the surface. Conforming to all of this and avoiding all of these traps makes conceptualizing and producing most medicines a lot more expensive than people realize, and while some prices are indeed overblown for the sake of profit, medicine overall is costly for very good reasons.
    • Bankocracy.png Banking
      • The average person is financially illiterate when it comes to personal finance. The state must step in and nationalize all of the banks. This would allow the state to help its people make sound financial decisions, make it harder for them to fall into economic death traps (credit card debt, etc.), and grant the state even more control over the greater economy.
    • Merc.png Travel
      • As the recent Southwest Airlines logistical crisis proved, the entire travel industry, from Uber to Delta Airlines, needs to be implemented within the state. The state is the only entity capable of handling the logistics of travel, and thus, well, NATIONALIZE IT!
    • Krit.png Legal
      • The ability of richer people to afford better lawyers is absurd. Nobody should be able to weasel their way out of punishment just because they can afford better damage controls. Take the OJ Simpson case, for example. He spent a ton of money, more than many people will probably ever make in their entire lives, towards assembling one of the best teams of lawyers that the world has ever seen to combat the allegations that he killed his wife. The sad part is that he got off, despite monumental forensic evidence against him. Every person should enter the justice system equally represented by public defenders, and the state should make it so.
    • Ingsocf.png Information Technology
      • This one is more of a way to implement greater control over the content on things like computers and smartphones (essentially granting it control over the internet, with time), a way for the state to essentially take and install whatever it wants on your device, as well as a means of tracking people via GPS in case the person using it becomes wanted by the state.
    • MegaCorp.png Asset Management
      • WIP

    Corp.png Megacorporations

    State-owned businesses are not known for their efficiency, so I still want to privatize them as much as possible. However, I wish to run the state-owned industry that exists in a manner that allows for as much autonomy as possible on the methods of production and other aspects of a business. I wish to fill the highest echelons of power in state-owned industries with vetted officials (so we don't have complete retards running the show) and, above all, have the leadership report directly to government committees, replacing what would normally be a board of investors. The format these state-owned industries would take would be massive megacorporations grown from modern-day giants like BlackRock, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. These megacorporations would be like the ones found in China today, except mine would be allowed to have more autonomy than their Chinese counterparts.

    Cap.png Private Industry

    Markets.png Privatize what can be Privatized

    Title. Completely state-owned industry tends to be less efficient, less adaptable, and less technocratic than an autonomous market. That being said, I am no Misestard, and I support limited state intervention for the sake of protecting the interests of the citizenry, as well as intervening directly in a sector in case of an absolute emergency. However, for the most part, I believe these markets should be left alone and the invisible hand should be allowed to do its own thing, but if the state needs to, it should be able to intervene in this sector.

    Georgist.png The Question of Land

    Land and ownership thereof should be left to the autonomous market. Landlordism is not inherently bad and is just another market, although landlords themselves should be monitored for obvious reasons.

    Synd.png The Individual Worker

    Being a capitalist, I am not afraid to admit that I do, in fact, value the greater economy over the rights of individual workers. However, despite this sentiment, I would still grant workers greater rights than what they have in the current American system, since I also believe that the success of the economy, until fully automated, is intrinsically linked to the happiness and prosperity of those who make it run. Therefore, I believe it's worth it to give workers a few benefits for the sake of their happiness, so they may be more productive at work, become more nationalist, and actively see the state as its friend, not an enemy (think of what happened with r/antiwork rising (and eventually getting CIA'd) due to material conditions of the modern American economy).

    AnSynd.png The Question of Unions

    Unions are probably the biggest obstacle to economic efficiency that exists in the current system, yet, due to the nature of modern American capitalism, they are actually somewhat needed. I hope to not only supplant unions with state alternatives, but to render unions obsolete as a whole. Supplanting unions is a good thing because, more often than not, the union often does not truly represent workers as a whole (and the ones that do tend to become collectives of utter kooks (think of the IWW)) and instead represents the interests of those who run them, and these people often have agendas that differ from what the union is supposed to be about. This is not only a direct threat to economic efficiency, but also to state control and, sometimes, the social tranquility of the nation. Thus, I believe in abolishing unions by making them completely unnecessary, although there will be a state mechanism in place in case of loophole exploitation or unfair treatment.

    Marketsoc.png Why Co-Ops Fail

    Cooperatives are not good in my opinion because they put the worker ahead of economic production. I believe in the exact opposite mentality, although I believe in treating workers well for pragmatic reasons, as aforementioned. Thus, Cooperatives tend to be notoriously inefficient and unstable compared to a basic, hierarchal workplace's inherently technocratic and efficient nature.

    3way.png The ESOP: The Best Compromise

    However, even though the current system is great for production, it can be better if the workers were given more leeway and were offered a chance at a good life through their labor. One of the measures I would like to implement is the mass implementation of Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs). In essence, these work by having a legal entity (in this case, the state) hold shares of stock on behalf of the employees of a business. It's entirely funded by the company and operates on many of the same rules as a 401k retirement plan. Then, by either receiving money from the company or taking a loan from a bank or 3rd party and using that money to purchase most or all of a company's shares from the owner. Instead of an independent party determining the price of these shares, the state would determine the price in this case. This not only gives the workers technical ownership of the company without any risk of cash overlay or compromising the hierarchal structure of a company, but it also, by extension, directly ties things like benefits, welfare, etc. to the success of the company, thus giving the incentive to work harder while guaranteeing decent amenities.

    Welf.png Welfare

    I support a large welfare state in order to brace ourselves for the coming advent of mass automation and to keep the proles appeased and out of the damn way, essentially.

    Handling the Automation Crisis

    One of the biggest issues that get in the way of the inevitable ascension toward mass automation is the fact that it will leave a ton of workers completely jobless. I believe that the benefits of mass automation very much outweight both the short-term and long-term costs. However, I still support the gradual automation of the market, so the transition toward a post-industrial society and economy is as smooth as possible. Ideally, the workers left behind because of this will either be sent to a state college or trade school or, if they simply aren't smart enough for higher education, become indentured laborers to the state, for there will be work that machines simply cannot do.

    The Necessity of Useless Eaters

    And then, there are those who are so unfathomably pathetic (to be frank) that they are better off leeching off of society because it keeps them out of the way. These "people" will be covered for by the state, and they will probably be hooked up to something like VR for the rest of their lives, but it isn't in the best interests of the state to keep these eaters alive for as long as possible. They will subsist on fixed quantities of sustenance (probably very close to the bare minimum), and of course, they will always have the option to escape Dreamland. Still, the point is to keep them out of the way and to create a sort of "endpoint" or "garbage dump" for economic stimulation, not to have them live long and waste even MORE taxpayer money. They also would not be able to participate in controlled elections and would effectively be second-class citizens. Ideally, the mere existence of this entire class of "people" (if you can even call them that) would remain a secret so people don't willingly follow their example.

    Why the Automatophilia?

    Because robots aren't human. Simple as that. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain from complete, mass automation at this stage of the game. We must forsake the myth of "human value" once and for all and embrace the cold efficiency of the factory once more.

    Sec.png Civics

    BERNHEism is a very authoritarian ideology which seeks to expand the size and reach of the state, while drastically reducing civil liberties for the sake of order, progress and making civilian life less complicated and less political overall.

    TotUltranat.png The Necessity of the State

    The state is needed to ensure order and peace between its citizens by providing a coherent rule of law that works for everyone within the nation. The presence of a strong state is also needed to coordinate and execute many of my goals in an efficient manner, such as mass surveillance, state control over the media, mass automation, mass eugenics, and, eventually Post-Humanism and Algocratic Cyberocracy.

    Technocracy.png Who Is Fit To Rule?

    I believe that the state should select the most qualified (not necessarily the "best", per-se) people to make or help make decisions regarding policy, economics and law. "Qualified" in this context means the best person for the job, not necessarily the person with the most credentials or years of experience within a field. BERNHEism recognizes that the world is a variable place, and the state must be prepared for anything if it is to survive in the long run. Thus, he supports term limits for all positions within his government, emergency replacements if the need arises, and federalism to be able to adapt to any situation that may end up facing us. BERNHEism is a very big fan of technocracy, with power being concentrated in small councils of the most capable people of their kind in the nation, with this power being dispersed within a highly bureaucratic, yet efficient system.

    Totdem.png Very Controlled Democracy

    BERNHEism is federalist, as he believes that policy can be executed better if done through local executive structures that possess limited autonomy so they may make decisions that are made for and apply only to the states they serve. However, the states will be given far fewer rights than they do in the modern American system, as they will not be able to override federal policy without first challenging it through a pre-determined system. The states themselves will make up a far smaller portion of the government (with the house abolished and the senate reduced to a minor law-making apparatus within the state. However, both the governor and senators of a state will still be elected through democratic means, but the state will select candidates for the people to choose from, instead of candidates running independently. This will ensure at least some form of competence and loyalty and will prevent to rise of any more Kak-Dunce.png John Fetterman-s.

    Mediastocracy flair.png The Media

    Independent news media is a mistake and yet another tool for retarded celebrities and shady businessmen to impose their will upon the state and the population. People could consider the media to be an "industry," but in my opinion, the media shouldn't even be monetized in the first place. The purpose of the media is to serve news. The state shall control all news media on a few channels, and all alternative sources of news (except for things like personal blogs) will be banned.

    PolState.png Police Reform

    The police SHOULD be the primary enforcers of the state, but there is a lot of work that needs to be done with the entire department. I believe in giving the police more power than they have right now, as well as upgrading their equipment and facilities substantially (although not militarizing them). Still, they should also be given far more stringent training, especially in weapons handling, handling tense situations, and use of lethal force. In essence, I want to make the police FAR more disciplined. Uvalde could have ended a lot sooner if we had more disciplined cops.

    Blacknat.png Repairing Race Relations...

    A large part of the catastrophic race relations in America, toxic idpol aside, is the fact that police tend to sometime be a little overzealous when dealing with everyone, to be honest. Still, non-whites tend to get the shaft the most, especially with things such as the school-to-prison pipeline in place. Disproportionate media coverage and crime rates aside, most of the incidents you see in the news should not have ended the way they did. If someone has a weapon in hand or is attempting to brandish one, the cop should have every right to drop them where they stand, but merely resisting arrest is nothing to kill someone over. Mind you, certain communities of people in every race tend to be particularly belligerent towards law enforcement, and it is this behavior that contributes to why some of these officers are so finnicky. None of this is even purely racial, either. This simply goes in general.

    ...While Crushing Antifa.png Antifa

    Alright, it's gaming time. Antifa is a domestic terrorist conglomerate operating on American soil, and all of them need to be annihilated with maximum prejudice. Antifa is a direct threat to the integrity and sometimes even the very authority of the state, and everyone affiliated with their little social media cells or anyone daring to wear black bloc on the streets should be either arrested or, knowing these types, uh, silenced. These people don't want to be Americans by their own admittance, and therefore, we shouldn't even give them the courtesy.

    Altr-fat.png Right-Wing Militias

    See above, except there will probably be a lesser mortality rate in this group because they appear to actually be able to follow orders sometimes.

    Globalism.png Diplomacy

    CivUltranat.png Ultranationalism in a Country

    Ethnonat.png Why Ethnonationalism is Stupid

    Globetard.png The Problem with Globalism

    Ultranat.png The Necessity of Strong Borders

    GlobeMask.png Intervention

    An idea I'm not a really big fan of overall, but I'm willing to do if it means furthering or protecting my nation. Despite being a literal ultranationalist who will happily bully the Eurosphere with our economic and military influence (hehe), actual economic or military intervention almost never ends well for the countries intervened in, with only short-term gains (or even loss) for us.

    Banana Republicanism.png Outsourcing Labor

    I'm not a fan of this idea at all, although I recognize by this point, it may be a necessity for the USA to remain a dominant power in the world. Nevertheless, if I have to do it at all, I will do this as little as possible. Ideally, mass automation will remove the human cost of outsourcing labor, and by that point, we'd be merely paying room and board (and taxes).

    Necon.png National Security

    Let me make this absolutely clear: I AM NOT A HAWK (the neocon ball is only there because it's a joke). However, I will intervene in other countries if our national security is threatened by foreign entities. However, if possible, I would attempt to opt for a peaceful or cooperative solution to our problems instead of simply Lockheed Martin-ing everywhere we go.

    Commie.png Tolerating Commies?

    Ideological difference is no excuse for belligerence, unless that ideology is actually, directly threatening America or one of our allies (think of the Khomeinist regime in Iran, or the debacle in North Korea, or even Russia sometimes). I'll leave commies and fascists alone if they leave us alone and know their place.

    ApolGamer.png Social Views

    Literally Hitler

    SJW.png Identity Politics

    Discusting >:(

    Homo.png The LGBT Question

    I will admit that I am very skeptical of the LGBT+ community in particular. I don't mind these people existing, but I am not a fan of some of the community's more, uh, degenerate practices like pride marches and their weird infatuation with having drag queens read to children for no apparent reason. I'll give them their civil unions (as giving them full marriage rights may antagonize the churches needlessly, a civil union would be functionally the same thing without religious undertones), but I'll be watching that community in particular for any sus things.

    White Guilt.png Race Blm.png

    The modern concept of race is an arbitrary construct. Melanin content and physical differences between the races are merely an adaptation to their environments, and the median IQ in places like Africa tend to be so low because there isn't access to decent education and other things (you will find similar rates in some parts of white Appalachia as well, which speaks volumes about the current state of America as a whole). My point is that all differences between the races can be explained with either basic biology and anatomy, or merely looking at environments.

    Needless to say, I believe most racial conflict in America is unnecessary. I also recognize that certain policies like the school-to-prison pipeline, unfair gerrymandering and overt police violence (although that last one is seriously overblown, it's still there) exist, and I will do my best to counter those as well. I will also work to improve low-income communities everywhere, from Appalachia to Harlem, regardless of race. Another thing I despise is modern white guilt, which sometimes insinuates, at its absolute worst, that all white people are responsible for what their ancestors did in the past, or what a select few are doing right now. We may have just a small amount of privilege (not as much as most libtard ideologues would like you to think), but we as individuals are not responsible for either colonialism or what shady politicians are pulling right now.

    Fem.png Gender Male-icon.png

    Uh, equal. Biological gender roles, although admittedly based in actual science, can be overridden by just how advanced human society is nowadays. Both 3rd/4th-wave feminism and the Manosphere are EQUALLY (ba-dum tss) retarded. That's all I have to say. However, I deviate slightly from this because I can't support abortion because it often (but not always) results from "casual" sex. Rape is one thing and QoL-lowering genetic defects are another, but willingly choosing to screw someone, fully knowing what it entails, and then deciding to clean up the mess like THAT is not right. Therefore, I am a fan of using birth control as an alternative.

    Laicism.png Religion

    The church should have no influence in the state and all religious institutions should be subject to tax like any other establishment. However, other than that, I'm fine with people worshipping whatever they want, so long as it doesn't have anti-state undertones. Eventually, if God does not reveal Himself, religion shall go away on its own. It's just unwise to merely rip people away from it.

    Cybercr.png Technology


    Indust.png Mass Automation

    I support an economic policy that seeks to attain full automation in as many fields of the economy as humanly possible. Robots are more precise, quicker, more consistent, easier to coordinate and, above all, don't come with the downsides of human laborers. Robots can't unionize, don't require petty things such as benefits, wages, time off, sick leave, raises, etc., and don't stop working, provided they're powered, fueled and in good working order Troll.png. Most industry can be mass-automated right now, since we have the technology, and what we can't automate right now, we should work on so ASAP. This is the way to turn the American economy into a complete powerhouse, but there's a teeny tiny problem with that; where do you put the workers displaced by automation?

    Post-Industrialism.png Dealing with the Fallout

    Dealing with the millions of displaced workers that will be the result of this whole mess will be very hard, and it's actually one of the biggest deterrents for abolishing human labor, other than some moralistic "hUmAn-MaDe 🤓" BS. To fix this, I would offer workers a way to attend free, state-owned universities. These universities would be four-year endeavors that would either springboard into higher forms of trade (jobs that can't be or can only be partially automated [yet], such as construction, software engineering, high-level electrician work, etc.) or a field in science, the humanities, etc. Alternatively, they would be able to accept a position as a State Sub-Indentured Laborer," doing odd or unusual jobs whenever the state needs them, in exchange for being hooked onto a UBI program. This would allow us to test a UBI system in a real-world scenario, as well as fill in the niche for odd jobs that can't be done by robots yet. However, all of this would cost A LOT of money, so automation would either be a gradual process (preferred), or we would have to spend time stocking precious things like gold up (think of what we have in Fort Knox, plus a little extra) so we could accelerate automation a little faster in the future, but not too fast, where we inundate the global economy with gold (which would cause a crisis).

    Eugen.png Perfecting Our Genes

    I am a massive supporter of CRISPR-based eugenics as a means to improve the next few generations of Americans by removing genetic defects within the population and giving people what are more or less biological cheat codes by manipulating certain genes to make the population more intelligent, making them stronger, give them better senses, etc. None of my eugenics is inspired by race at all, although an interesting idea worth entertaining is racially optimizing the next generations of Americans for the American environment since race is linked to the environmental impact on the human body.

    Posth.png Transcending Biology

    Eventually, when the technology is sufficient enough, I wish to transcend mere biology for the superior forms of the machine. Since this milestone is likely a century or more away, I can't say for certain what will happen, but it's bound to be good.

    Artifism2.png This Planet Is Ours

    I have a unique view when it comes to the environment. In the short term, I can be considered a bright-green environmentalist who wants to use nuclear power, a tried, proven, and unfathomably based method, to supplant fossil fuels. Since the technology has already been highly developed, it will be easier to build nuclear power plants compared to wind farms and solar panel fields. I wouldn't say I like using solar power in particular because the technology is experimental and inefficient, while other methods are available (although solar is still very much worth researching). I'm also a proponent of hydropower, as long as the impact on local environments is marginal enough. I'm not going to refuse to build a dam that could provide critical power for a region for the sake of one subspecies of unimportant, non-impactful fish. I also want to start the mass culling of invasive/out-of-control species like wild boars, coyotes, and, unfortunately, feral cats and dogs (although I would like to re-home as many of the latter as possible).

    When we have the technology to, however, I embrace the Artifist view on environmentalism, which states that nature is imperfect and should be supplanted by human constructs. While I agree with it 100% in the long run, for good reasons, nature is the way it is. It also has an annoying tendency to be interconnected to itself, so the implementation of Artifist technologies will be highly regulated and VERY gradual.


    Chadf.png The Post-Labor State

    Hopefully, automation and machine rule will become so influential in all facets of the state that the concept of "blue" and "white"-collar labor (among with a few other collars) will become defunct since it would reach a point in which machines automate the gathering/synthesizing, processing and manufacturing of goods, as well as power generation, agriculture and other important fields. This state, however, will probably take around a century of work to realistically attain, so there's that. We were simply born too soon.

    Antwork.png Post-Labor ≠ Anti-Work

    Now, being in the post-labor state does not mean the cessation of work. People will still be involved somewhat in politics, research and the humanities, as well as high-end machine maintenance and more technological fields. There will still be plenty of stuff to do. I never said this was post-SCARCITY, which will take even longer to achieve, probably.

    Noocracy.png What Will We Do?

    Ideally, we'll drop the pursuit of manual and paper-based labor for the sake of becoming smarter. By this point, hopefully, CRISPR-based eugenics and body modification will lead to a drastic increase in IQ (although a better system will probably be formulated by that time) among the population, which would allow us to ascend past labor itself and instead begin to think about things like philosophy, advanced science, literature, art, and even politics.


    Zio.png Israel Hamas.png

    Frankly, I believe both the Israeli side and Palestine are both equally retarded. I can't justify Israel's existence outside of the effort they already put into building Israel up in the past 80-ish years. Still, other than that, I can't say I support Israel in any meaningful way outside of pure pragmatism, given the way they treat the local Palestinians, making themselves (and us, by extension) look even more terrible on the world stage. Palestinians aren't helping themselves either by electing Hamas terrorists to lead them, antagonizing Israel and its allies even further. Ideally, if possible, I would desire a two-state solution since it would be unfair to boot the Israelis outright since they already sacrificed a lot to build Israel up, but if I had to pick a side, I'm going with the Israelis for purely practical reasons. Israel would make a far worse enemy than most of the Middle East combined for one reason; their military might and the fact that they may be a nuclear power. It's better to remain allies with Israel and perhaps force them to treat the Palestinians better by withholding aid or exerting bureaucratic/diplomatic pressure, but that's all of the good that can come from that entire quagmire. Finally, and I cannot say this enough, there is no reason why we should be sending those people BILLIONS OF DOLLARS PER YEAR in aid, while they can handle themselves just fine and we have domestic problems to take care of.

    Libertarian.png Guns, Guns, Guns!

    I believe that people should be allowed to own weapons if they wish, and pistol training (after a mental evaluation) should be included in the state school curriculum. However, he does not want a free-for-all open-carry utopia in the states, but he does not want to limit a time-honored American tradition, either; SHOOTING BIG FUCKING GUNS. Therefore, he wants a compromise. Citizens should not be allowed to own any sort of automatic weapon, sniper rifles or guns with specific modifications and/or are over a specific caliber, as well as banning makeshift ammunition and barring specific other kinds of ammunition (like AP rounds) from sale. This would still leave the American population with a wide array of rifles, shotguns and pistols to choose from for hunting or self-defense purposes. However, he also wants to put some of the aforementioned bigger guns in ranges for people to be able to shoot anyways with supervision. He is also fine with most bladed or blunt weapons and non-lethals like pellet/airsoft/BB guns, tasers, and pepper spray.

    Of course, and this should go without saying, people can't purchase a weapon if they don't have a license/FOID card. There should also be annual health evaluations as a requisite for being allowed to own weapons legally.

    DepressionMale.png Euthanasia

    I don't see anything wrong with allowing the euthanasia of the terminally ill or extremely old if they desire it. Of course, I don't want to be like Canada and actively present it as a cure-all. Assisted suicide would only be legal with the approval of at least three medical doctors. The decision would ultimately be left up to the individual.

    How To Draw


    Yes.png Good

    Meh.png OK

    No.png Terrible

    Mega Yes.png Vanguard of the Future

    • VEnlight.png Philosophical Post-Humanism (Post-Kantianism.png/Accel.png/Neorational.png/Neolib.png/Regulationism.png): Looks extremely based. Although I am not really a fan of implementing philosophy into my own political beliefs, we appear to align on most things, save for authority and civil liberties. Well, I can definitely make concessions for that. Perhaps interventionism will come later, but with the current state of the world right now, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm definitely not held back for moral reasons, though. Your capitalism, disregard for tradition, post-humanism and philosophy, on the other hand, I can synchronize with. This can definitely work! (89/100)

    Yes.png Partners

    • SiamNeocon.png Non-Pronouncable Neoconservatism (Necon.png/Post-Bert.png/Nrx.png/Arist.png/Reactmod.png): We agree with each other quite a lot, but there are a few differences. You're a little too moderate when it comes to technological development and free markets, and you're a little TOO interventionist (even though this can be forgiven because Asia is...less than stable for the moment due to China fucking everything up over there). Your social views are also very good and you're a fellow technocrat as well, but we'll never agree on authority and the like. As for eugenics, I can't see why anyone WOULDN'T want them the way I do, if it's genuinely to improve the capacities and capability of humanity. Accelerationism is a funny little idea as well (just don't tell Buni). (78/100)
    • DoesntExist.png Left-BERNHEism (Antrans.png/KimIlSung.png/Protect.png/Fut2.png/Confucianism.png): Literally me, but leftist. Surely, you must see that the inherent nature of markets embodies the technocratic ideal we strive so hard for, and that chasing state-mandated altruism for the sake of a misguided quest for equality is bound to end poorly? Also, I'm glad you make concessions for my interventionism, since I do it for pragmatic reasons and not 'Muricanism icon.png for the preservation of Lockheed Martin, not-so-hallowed be thy name. Either way, I am more than willing to work with this. (62/100)

    Meh.png Mischungen

    • Pixil-frame-0(27).png BERNHE's Fascist Friend (React.png/Islamfash.png/Ultranat.png/Totalitarian.png/Troll.png) : It's a shame you don't like where I'm going ideologically, and I can basically say the exact same things that you said about my ideology, but flip-flopped. Leftism is based on the frivolous pursuit of equality, which will never come to any meaningful fruition. Inequality is human nature, so why not embrace that? However, I freely admit that Fascism is easily 1,000x better than Communism ever will be in terms of actually having a workable system (that is, until they get a bit too greedy with the land grabs), so just don't get any more leftist! Also, I do not necessarily follow the "hurr durr le experts are never wrong" stereotype. I believe primarily in qualification, not experience, although the two usually correlate. Finally, I'm not really a fan of your right-idpol social views and theocratic tendencies, but I can make concessions for that. It's not the worst, per-se, but it's definitely not the best. I'd still be more than happy to trade with him, though. if his rates are competent, and Fascist allies tend to be good enforcers. (43/100)

    No.png Stagnation Pits

    • Panth.png Most Sane Distributist (Monarch.png/SocDist.png/World Federalism2.png/Antrans.png/Civlibert.png): I'm not a fan of this ideology. First off, you resort to the filthy mockery of transhumanism that is Archeofuturism. Secondly, your form of authoritarianism (monarchism) is not good, with or without an inheritance system, as concentrating power in the hands of one person is almost always a shit idea. ESPECIALLY nowadays. Thirdly, you probably already know what I'm going to say about World Federalism, so I'll say this; why cooperate when you can have HEGEMONY? Although your space imperialism is indeed mega-based (we need to get the Helium-3 on the moon before China does). Fourthly, civil liberties are populoid copium and only get in the state's way. Let the state do its job! Freedom can come later, maybe. Finally, you probably know what I'm going to say about unions and your weird form of socialism-not-socialism. Workerphilia and its consequences... But other than that, it's not nearly as bad as it could be, and even though Archeofuturism is a stagnation pit all by itself, it's better than modern passivity. You just barely saved yourself from the Eugenics Section™. (22/100)

    Mega No.png Proof That Eugenics Is Needed

    • Yoda8soup.png Eco Super-Sandersism (Green Party (US).png/LeftSocdem-Alt.png/Demsocstar.png/Prog-u.png/Globnat.png): I'm not fond of this ideology at all. First off, it's workerphiliac to a high degree, to the point where even a market mechanism won't mitigate the sheer inefficiency of the system because it values the individual over the economy. Coops and socialist markets are only feasible (not even good) in smaller countries (think of Tito's Yugoslavia). Widespread implementation of these structures in a country with such a large economy and population as America would ruin the entire thing. Secondly, he has the right idea about environmentalism, but damn, it's the soft kind! Become a based Artifist! Thirdly, anti-interventionism is highly unworkable in this scenario anyways since the USA would lose all of its global influence and power, creating a cast-down, beaten America whose only friends are worthless third/second-world shitholes at best and a nasty power vacuum between some of the worst nations on the planet (i.e. Russia, China, etc.) at worst. Not to mention that it would naturally exclude labor outsourcing, which is a necessary evil at this stage of the game. Fourthly, there's the difference in authority, but we'll never see eye-to-eye. I've given up trying to convince people why unfettered democracy is garbage for some time now. It never sinks in because it's become a matter of morals and wanting to continue believing the illusion that your voice matters and not actual practicality or reality. My final analysis of this ideology is this; you're essentially Bernie Sanders on literal black tar heroin. Whether or not that's a good thing, I leave that to the reader. (14/100)
    • O'Langism.png Most Anarchist "Anarchist" (AnSynd.png/GE.png/Indlibsoc.png/Native.png/Synthesisanarchy.png): Essentially my opposite in almost every way. It will probably collapse in a week when it is inevitably land grabbed by their hypothetical neighbors. The economics are terrible and contradictory as hell, even if it uses markets (or at least this...version of them), and is incompatible with the global market mechanism (since it would be nigh-impossible to build a meaningful, strong economy with his restrictive, decentralized, obtrusive and workerphiliac policies). Your civics are highly unstable due to your weird desire for pseudo-anarchy, and your social views will only get in the way of true progress with your apparent idpol fetishism. There is no redeeming anything in this ideology. I drew that conclusion as soon as I saw the biggest economic abomination on the planet; the Gift Economy. The only thing that prevents you from getting 0/100 on the final score is your acceptance of the concept of markets and regulation, to a point. Still, even then, with your system, I have no idea how they'd be implemented on any reasonable scale. (2/100)

    AAA.png Unclassifiable

    • Ultro.png A Philosophy In A Political Wiki (Ego.png/Postmodernicon.png/EgoUnion.png/Indiv.png/Ins.png): I don't exactly know what to say about this one. I feel like critiquing it, but there is a problem; I don't know what a lot of it is saying. So, it'll probably stay here for now while I mull this over. However, moving on to your analysis of my ideology, I would say that you've hit it spot-on, for the most part. As an ideology, the entire point of this page is to envision what I consider the perfect society. There's no denying that. But I've made my peace with that fact. There is still, evidently, plenty to learn. (???/100)
    • Neokira2.png KKT (Gooder Version) (: The only reason you're in unclassifiable is that your ideology isn't complete yet (as there are only two paragraphs for me to go off of, as well as your infobox). Not going to lie, as soon as I saw the cursed ideology known as Ergatocracy, I was compelled to send you right to the bottom, but you appear to be sympathetic towards a pseudo-technocratic economic system and you are also a fellow transhumanist (but not on my level). Either way, going from what your infobox says, you bridge the gap between being a Stagnation Pit and being living proof for the veracity of Eugenics. Anyways, I'd need more text to give you a genuine placement.


    The only condition to be added to my self-insert is that you need to add mine first (and I will be checking). Also, if you got to this point already, please use BERNHEism.png instead of BERNHEflash.gif when writing your review.

    NatPolPotSmallerEye.png National Pol Potism - Kinda based. Add me?
    O'Langism.png O'Langism - Add me?

    - You know what to do, I asked this 4 times already (including this time)
    • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: Jawohl, it's a shame this damn wiki keeps crashing so we have to repeat this over and over again.

    Panth.png Pantheonism - So, how exactly is this not Totalitarianism

    • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: Oh, it is. I just want better optics.
      • Panth.png Pantheonism - Gotta keep good PR, eh?
        • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: Finally, someone understands.
          • Panth.png Pantheonism - Anyways, would you mind to add me? I already added you.

    Pixil-frame-0(27).png New Model Of Cheesenism - add me

    O'Langism.png O'Langism - Would you self identify as a fascist? Just asking out of curiosity.

    • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: No. Not only does the term have seriously bad optics, I don't agree with a large portion of what Fascism has to say, especially regarding social stuff and traditionalism and autocracy. The ultranationalism and authority is based, though.

    Ultro.png LordCompost86 - Please add me - (Ego.png/Postmodernicon.png/EgoUnion.png/Indiv.png/Ins.png)

    Neokira2.png Neo-Kiraism - why didnt i read the above im big dumb. anyawys, add me, i alr added u back lmao

    • Neokira2.png Neo-Kiraism - btw i edited ur icon from a gif to a png for my relations w/ u or whatever why didnt i read that either im so dumb istg lmfao
      • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: Hey, I remember you from the old wiki. It appears you've gotten slightly more sane from your, uh, other self-insert.
        • Neokira2.png Neo-Kiraism - lmfao thanks. but yeah, could u add me back? i alr added u

    O'Langism.png O'Langism - Seeing as you support welfare would that make you BERNHE Sanders? (I apologize for this terrible joke but I had to.)

    • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: Hell no. Bernie relies too much on workerphilia and populoid sentiment. He's actually worst-case scenario IMO, because he can't do economics for shit.

    O'Langism.png O'Langism - would you rather ally with an authoritarian hardline Stalinist (full collectivization, fully planned economy, all the classic ML stuff), or an Anarcho-Capitalist?

    • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: AuthUnity all the fuckin' way!

    MATTball.png Matteel - can you add me lmao

    • BERNHEflash.gif BERNHE: Eh, are you still updating your self-insert? If so, add me first, but if not, tell me (the reason I am asking is because even though your userwiki says you're inactive, I see you editing stuff sometimes, so I am confused).
      • MATTball.png Matteel - Well I'm not really editing anything outside of making the occasional correction on something I felt like need to be corrected (I've left PCB entirely for this reason), and I'm not longer officially editing my self-insert and have it locked to prevent vandalism.
    SiamNeocon.png - Can you add me? My ideology is Neo-Phibunsongkhram Thought. (Necon.png/Post-Bert.png/Nrx.png/Arist.png/Reactmod.png)

    O'Langism.png O'Langism - My ideology kinda changed. Update relations?
    Neokira2.png Neo-Kiraism - i added a bit more detail to my page, especially with the civic part. update relations for now?

    • Taq-hat.png Taqat - Merit is key, and I appreciate that you see that. You should read on Fut2.png Marinetti you seem like you would agree with him on a lot.


    Add yourself if you want: [Ball] [Ideology], ([5 balls that represent your ideology the best])

    Theory & Shit

    Stuff I've Read

    • The Communist Manifesto (Karl Marx)
    • The Turner Diaries (William L. Pierce)
    • Hunter (William L. Pierce)
    • The Political and Social Doctrine of Fascism (Benito Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile)
    • The Great Replacement (Brenton Tarrant)
    • Gorgias (Plato)
    • Aristotle's Politics (Aristotle)
    • Leviathan (Thomas Hobbes)
    • On Liberty (John Stuart Mill)

    Stuff I've Partially Read

    • Imperium (Francis P. Yockey)
    • The Decline of the West (Oswald A. Spengler)
    • Summa Theologica (St. Thomas Aquinas)
    • The Prince (Niccolo Machiavelli)

    Stuff I Plan To Read

    • Economics In One Lesson (Henry Hazlitt)
    • The Armchair Economist (Steven Landsburg)
    • 1984 (George Orwell)
    • The Wealth of Nations (Adam Smith)

    Literature That Isn't Economic/Political Theory or Philosophy

    • Animal Farm (George Orwell)

    Theory Suggestions [User, Theory, Author]


    Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.

    Recent changes

  • Lukko • 1 minute ago
  • Rocksmanylobsters • 2 minutes ago
  • Rocksmanylobsters • 2 minutes ago
  • FtosorciM • 7 minutes ago
  • Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.