×
Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 5,891 articles on Polcompball Anarchy Wiki. Type your article name above or create one of the articles listed here!



    Polcompball Anarchy Wiki


    Beryism is the self-insert ideology of BeryAb. He is liberal to libertarian, democratic, economically centre-right to right-wing, culturally liberal, pacifistic and patriotic.

    On economic terms, he is firmly economically liberal, supporting ease of doing business, free trade, cautious spending, with the addition of a tax and land reform. On diplomatic terms, he is a staunch supporter of civic nationalism, interculturalism, cultural tolerance and the promotion of a peaceful, non-interventionist foreign policy.

    Overview

    Expansion of Democracy and Federalism

    Beryism desires a democratic government structure, more so, a reform of liberal democracy, but with tweaks to make the people have greater say in policy. Also known as semi-direct democracy, directly inspired by the Swiss model.

    The system would, on one hand, be representative, as the more "objective" decisions, particularly those pertaining to fiscal and foreign policy, would be in the hands of politicans elected by representatives, whereas many social policies would be in the direct hands of the people to vote on. As this system is currently only availabe on German communal level, Beryism would want to expand it to the national/federal level. Furthermore, people will be able to propose local and new laws via popular initiatives, which will be passed over and approved from municipial governments to communal level to state level or alternatively all the way to federal level, depending on which stage the law is designated for. At each regional level, it is first determined whether the law is feasible and in line with the constitution. At the end of the line, after the approval of the local governor, a last consultation vote is held for final confirmation. If this succeeds, the law is passed.

    Furthermore, he supports federalism over unitarism. He thinks the states should be largely responsible for themselves, except, of course, for national security decisions and the likes, and many social policies should be left to the states to decide via mentioned referendums, or alternatively just by the local government, such as local education, with funding from the main government to develop adequate regional programs, in an approach similar to the subsidiarity principle. Another reason for his support of federalism is to prevent separatism. It is seen in highly unitarist states such as France, Spain and the UK (with Bretagne, Catalonia, Basque Country, Scotland, etc., respectively) that the central government shows little to no respect to regional cultural identities and, in some cases, even tries to undermine and/or assimilate them. On the other hand, you aren't having much of that mentioned separatism in Germany, Switzerland or the United States. (Try finding an unironic Bavarian separatist.) Therefore, he sees federalism as the peaceful solution.

    He supports building more language-specific schools, multilingual street signs and spreading overall awareness for regional minorities such as the Sorbs and the Frisian peoples in an attempt to protect their dying cultural and linguistic identities at every cost.

    Although he wants to largely leave it to the states up to decide, he, ideally, would like to see the voting age at state and communal levels lowered to 16, but keep the national voting age at 18. He thinks that a teenager of said age is still within the process of maturing at that point and might make unconscious or severely misguided decisions.

    Economy

    Beryism prefers a free-market economy. He believes true economic democracy is manifested in a market-based system. Markets, in nature, take both current material conditions and the people's desires into respect. Thus, he thinks it is the superior way of allocating goods, with no feudal lord or central planner making consequential long-term decisions that might end up firing backwards. A market system will be quicker to adapt to change. Fair and actual competition ensures that the populace gets the best possible prices.
    For the planned economy, he believes it will either find its way back to a market-based system, like in China, or collapse in itself, like many other places. He thinks autarchic economies such as those of Eritrea or North Korea are not something to strive for, as they create the most backward of pits. He also has strong objections towards production quotas as seen in the USSR, as production that exceeds quotas would often be subject to stockpiling and subsequent expiry and rot, as well as being unable to be sold on the public market in general despite overall demand for said product, effectively preventing what would have been a win-win scenario.

    He shares skeptical attitude towards market socialism, because he believes having a society centered entirely around worker co-operatives, while it will be infinitely better than planned socialism, will lead to high levels of unemployment and overall reduced productivity, growth and prosperity.
    Nevertheless, worker co-ops should be devoid of bureaucracy and freely allowed to compete with private enterprise. They can perhaps even be encouraged on a small scale, but they can not be the backbone of a strong economy.

    Fiscal Policy

    Beryism thinks it has been shown in countries like Venezuela that fiscal responsibility is a must for every government. A country in such abundance of natural resources, once wealthy, went downhill due to severe resource mismanagement and failure to diversify the economy. Norway, a more fiscally responsible government, manages to be wealthier than even its neighbors due to careful spending of oil revenue, and Botswana rose from a once impoverished nation to the wealthiest country in continental Sub-Saharan Africa, due to not having spent all its diamonds at once.

    He is fiscally pragmatic, but leaning conservative. He sees loads of benefits in privatization, as competition drives down prices and leaves people with greater freedom of choice, whereas some industries are, in nature, better off in public hands (roads, healthcare, education...). He prefers a more balanced budget, attempting to focus more on services that ensure equal opportunity (education, healthcare) but leaving other, non-essential services to free commerce. He also dislikes high spending (in particular ad hoc policy) as he fears it will increase our national debt.

    • He believes that the current welfare state, that is mostly referring to Germany's "Hartz IV" system, is broken, inflated and has too many people living off of it, even when given the opportunity to work. This is a burden on the government's budget and creates an unhealthy culture of dependence. In essence, he proposes a new, less cost-heavy social security, for those who truly need it, such as disabled people, or those that were recently fired. If the situation is out of your own control, then you enjoy benefits. Then, a negative income tax (below a certain threshold) would secure one can at least get their monthly groceries but not much more. Immigrants enjoy initial financial support, but are quickly incentivized to work. Too much immigration and a strong welfare state are no good couple.
      • Problem with UBI: While unbureaucratic and non-messy, he thinks UBI remains inferior to NIT, for one key reason: it is too unconditional. Top earners get paid the same amount of money as bottom earners, which seems pointless to him especially considering this money is partly taken from taxing those at the economic bottom. It is also more cost-heavy than a negative income tax, the latter of which only being meant as a headstart for those less fortunate people to be able to prove themselves. Why tax someone only to repay them a part of that same money later? It's too many extra steps.
    • He believes that the German public broadcasting system (ÖRR) is obviously a mess and needs reform. First of all, he thinks the taxpayer is paying way too much money in financing this stuff. Many of these taxes, he says, are being spent on entertainment programs instead of anything meaningful. He believes this should be in the hands of private suppliers. That being said, most public broadcasters would be privatized, to curb spending, and to relieve the taxpayer's wallet. However, basic news broadcasting would remain in the hands of the state and free of charge as right now, as everyone should be informed on what is out there. And for le World Cup.
    • He supports slowly privatizing internet supply, as he believes government-owned shares to currently hold a monopoly over independent providers. He wants different businesses to compete and find the best deals.
    • He wants increased spending in public education, this can not continue. The digitilization program is motivated by wanting to make schools more modern, as shown in countries like Finland and the Netherlands. We shall make things like overhead projectors obsolete and replace them with proper screens. Having only private schools will lead to greater (unjust) inequality, as people born with potential, but into poor families, aren't offered enough opportunities to later pursue their own destiny. As mentioned before, this would be executed not by simply pumping more money into the national education system, but instead by issuing money to states, in order for them to spend more on equipment. He also supports the elimination of mandatory religious education.
    • He favours a universal healthcare system. Although he recognizes that the American healthcare system is not very free market either, but rather is a consequence of too much government involvement. Under a free market healthcare system, there would be different, independent suppliers competing to find the best possible prices for their customers, so he thinks that is important to consider. Despite this annoyance with the American healthcare system being called "free market", he sees it as smarter to sustain a universal healthcare system, as the world's most prosperous nations all feature proper public medicare. Take the example of a person suffering a severe injury in the streets. Then five healthcare providers arrive. They may start haggling the prices down... but all of that happens while the person is bleeding out.
      The baseline program would be available for every citizen, and ensures basic treatment (or insulin, if you have diabetes, etc.) but if an individual desires to opt out and access higher standards of medical care, and/or has to do so (as in, cannot afford to wait in lines, due to a very serious injury, for example) then he thinks it is their very good right to do so.
    • He especially supports ending the CDU's endless corporate subsidies to the coal industry, in order not to make the taxpayers unwillingly pay for the planet's eventual demise. Similarly to the French government, he supports more investment in nuclear energy, thus having to roll back on the nuclear power exit initiated in 2011, as well as initiating subsidies for renewable energies such as solar and wind, and ecological subsidies for sustainable agriculture. This would, of course, be a gradual operation, not an immediate one, which could be harmful to the economy. (For more, see also the section regarding environmental policy.)
    • He aims to reduce subsidies for the car industry, but does not seek their full abolishment. The car industry makes enough profits on its own as he believes, and doesn't need tens of millions of Euros pumped into it each year. However, he is cautious of the immediate halt of subsidization as this could cause some distortions.

    Taxation

    With more cautious spending, taxation would be more lenient that it is at the moment. Simply put, Beryism believes that extraordinarily high taxes will reduce people's incentive to work, as most of their income would be taxed away regardless. With less money among the populace, that can result in a weaker economy. These are some potential tax proposals:

    • Repeal the coffee tax, for he thinks it is a useless tax that will be made obsolete with less spending.
    • Repeal the beer tax, for similar reasons as above, as it is a niche tax on an everyday product.
    • Potentially cut even more consumption-related taxes, depending on whether the government can afford it or not.
    • Repeal the inheritance tax for average persons, because he thinks the person who gives the money probably worked hard for it, or his ancestors did, and he thinks it should be their conscious decision to let their heirs inherit it or not. Boiling it down, he sees it like any other transfer of money. However, corporate dynasties passing over huge sums of capital will continue to be taxed.
    • Flatten income tax to a low flat rate. You should and will be allowed to keep most of your rightful income.
    • Introduce a land value tax, to help tackle the housing crisis. This is one of the less coercive taxes for the individual and can take the place of the progressive income tax. Not only is this a good and sustainable source of government revenue, it will also encourage individuals and especially corporations to use their land more efficiently, as hoarding land would prove a greater financial threat. Looking at you, Silicon Valley. (Not that restrictive zoning laws don't pose a problem in there as well.)
    • Introduce a slightly heftier carbon tax for large CO2-emitting corporations, something that will be explained later on. (This would not affect corporate tax, as he does not want to drive away investment.)
    • Lower the general value-added tax for all respective goods, and instead raise taxes on plastic and other waste products.
    • Lower corporate taxes and turnover taxes for worker co-operatives with roots within the country.

    Regulation

    In the vast majority of cases, Beryism thinks price control regulations are a short-term, unsustainable solution to deeply rooted problems. Politicians, especially populists, like making lots of promises that they're going to cap the prices of a service or a product. Rising prices are not always a sign of a corporation's "greed", but rather of changes in supply and demand.
    And when politicians want to lower the "costs" of certain services or programs in order to make it "more accessible", what they really mean is that they are going to lower the prices. The supplier's costs (material, workers/employees, time) remain the same, and only make it so that the overregulation effectively ends up in the employees getting underpaid. This is not to mention the severe cases of resource misallocation and price distortions in the long run, essentially creating a sort of imbalance.

    Despite all of that, he believes it is incredibly important that there are regulations to keep the competition fair, most notably in regards to worker's rights; workplace safety, a sufficient amount of annual leave/vacation for employees, and a suitable minimum wage (though one that is not too high, as to cope with inflation). It must also be made sure that suppliers of goods don't just put in their products whatever they want, they ought to make sure their orange juice makes no one die of dysentery. The problem with having food mislabels run free is that although the argument can be made that customers will refuse to purchase known faulty goods, there will always be someone who, unwillingly, has to take one for the team first. Then we get to food labels regarding people with conditions such as lactose intolerance, fructose malabsorption, etc.. That would indeed be a catastrophe.

    Free Trade

    Economic globalization, at this point, is basically inevitable according to Beryism. However, instead of seeing it as a bad thing, he sees it like a giant wave. A wave that we must best together and grasp the benefits of instead of letting it flush us away. When looking at a place like Iceland - in the case of a closed or highly protectionist economy, he asks, who will grow the Icelander's bananas and who will manufacture their smart devices? Another example. Here in Germany, it would be rather... difficult to grow bananas or pineapples. But hey, at least the German climate allows for potatoes to be grown! Meanwhile, Costa Rica already has a lot of tropical fruit that is waiting to be sold on the global market, yet they are in dire need of some of those German potatoes. One can likely figure out where this is headed at.
    An isolated economy is one that must make sure it can provide its people with anything in potential demand, which is nearly impossible unless your country can grow any fruit and manufacture any smart device within its borders. He thinks free trade paves the way for more exotic products to find their way into our markets, and, on the other hand, helps with industrializing impoverished agrarian societies, if done right, and provide sustainable jobs.

    He believes that protectionism in many cases is a trade policy motivated only by xenophobia with no economic benefits in the long run. Often, it brings nothing other than distortion of price relations and misallocation of scarce resources. It narrows down national supply of goods, supplies the nation with more expensive, inefficient goods and rewards those who would normally lose, while punishing those who would allocate goods properly. As such, he believes that protectionism, in the long term, would drive humanity into atomization and utter poverty.

    When It Goes Wrong

    Economic globalization hasn't only done good. If one remembers the wave example, a good example of a nation flushed away by said wave is Ghana. You have the agricultural sector, food and fishing being completely swept over by foreign competitors. This is, more often than not, a bad thing. However, this is simply what happens when there is no initiative, that is, no bottom-up development, coming from the government of the country in question. A country needs good and sustainable economic policies in order to not get flushed away by the wave, and actually benefit from free trade. Botswana and, in recent years, Rwanda have been examples of great bottom-up development. Good policies for developing a nation are:

    • Cutting red tape for business and reducing bureaucracy
    • Lifting excessive price controls, though not TOO FAST.
    • Encouraging investment and reducing corporate taxation
    • A good, well-funded public education system (especially in early stages of development)
    • Nationalization of natural resources and pragmatic fiscal policy (first is important in early stages, after a certain point it's more important to diversify the economy and move away from natural resources only)
    • Privatization of certain state-owned assets to prevent budget drain

    So, what if your country is at existential threat from foreign competitors? - May the invisible hand of the free market forgive him for saying this, but he believes tariffs and import quotas are needed to foster local production, before being truly able to compete with global markets and enjoy the fruits of free trade.

    Environmental Policy

    Beryism recognizes man-made climate change as a real thing (dun-dun-dunnn!). However, he believes that a strong economy is not to be damaged, because giving heavy, sudden blows to the economy for "environmental purposes" will make many people's lives terrible, as they will have less to eat, earn less in general, et cetera. Nevertheless, economic crises are very much able to be reversed, this isn't necessarily the case with environmental damage.
    That being said, Beryism rejects a purely restriction-oriented environmental policy (do we REALLY need to regulate the shape of our cucumbers?), he believes it's better to make use of market instruments to combat climate change, such as emissions trading and introducing aforementioned carbon taxes. He thinks the small revenue generated from those carbon taxes can also help us invest in research for technology, which can serve as a tool for combatting climate change. Furthermore, he wants to keep the German recycling culture intact.

    In terms of actual policy, as mentioned in his fiscal policies, with the gradual removal of coal and gas subsidies, reintroduction of nuclear energy and promotion of renewable energy in the long run, he also wants to promote decentralized energy generation. That is, encouraging private households, villages and town communities to adopt primarily PV systems with financial assistance from regional governments, and keep hoarded energy in local reserves for longer periods of time, or during winter. This would make people more self-sufficient in their energy production and already reduce reliance and demand on coal and gas.

    Freedom of Speech

    When it comes to freedom of speech - in spite of everything that he thinks about actual racists and bigots, Beryism finds the notion that the government should be able to restrict speech in (almost) any way ridiculous. Free speech is not a "right" to be granted and certified by a paternalistic state, it is something natural that the state shouldn't censor in the first place. He despises how Germany has become a global laughing stock for its hate speech laws, even in non-Nazi-related fields. He is mostly opposed to hate speech laws, both online and in real life. This only ends where the physical or mental well-being of another person begins. He wishes for:

    • Protection of online privacy (the government shouldn't be able to punish you, unless you're basically part of an armed militia trying to organize on Telegram, or advocate violence beyond empty words in general)
    • Repealment of most online hate speech laws, particularly German YouTube's hate speech laws
    • Repealment of laws prohibiting insulting/mocking other religions (blasphemy)
    • Decriminalization of German Imperial flags and the recently criminalized German Imperial Navy flag, with flying/carrying the swastika flag in public remaining illegal for reasons that should hopefully be obvious
    • Repealment of § 131 prohibiting representation of violence, which includes decriminalizing all horror movies and games that were prohibited with the introduction of this paragraph
    • Repealment of § 185 prohibiting insults and mockery of individuals
    • Adjustment of laws prohibiting harassment of ethnic/racial groups to legalize any defamation and insults, even in public, and to only penalize public calls to violence (incitement) against these groups
    • Public Holocaust denial remaining a punishable offense

    Other issues related to governance

    • Beryism isn't opposed to pornography, nor to sex work. Under regulation, registration and monitoring, he sees no reason to prohibit the latter.
    • Beryism wishes to repeal most if not all government surveillance, particularly that imposed by the CDU.

    Feminism

    Beryism is a strong supporter of feminism. He believes individuals of both genders have the same inherent worth and should not be treated differently under the law. As part of common sense and in line with established norms, he believes that women should be able to vote, participate in government and have access to all of the same benefits that men do.

    He is very much pro-choice on matters of abortion. He sees it as a woman's right to choose whether to get a baby or not, and thus, any abortion in the first half of pregnancy would be fully legal on demand. Anything further than that, and it would be legal only in case of rape, incest, or, of course, when the mother's life is in danger. To prevent abusive usage of abortions, he would regulate healthcare so that if a woman has had more than two abortions in her lifetime, it would become permitted only in cases of rape and life endangerment for all three trimesters. Most importantly, to prevent such a thing from happening though, schools require comprehensive sex education in order to educate young people on this topic.
    Furthermore, he wants to revoke Germany's ban on advertisements for abortions, under the condition that they are subject to clear scientific reviews and inform women best on their choices.

    Finally, when it comes to affirmative action, this is where his libertarian side comes more into play again. He tends to view it as a counterproductive, anti-meritocratic measure that undermines the true capabilities of women, and that at the expense of qualified men. Diversity quotas in the workplace don't help at all, when the underlying issue is far greater, such as a severe shortage of economic opportunities.

    LGBT

    WIP...

    Justice

    Beryism is strongly opposed to the death penalty and any form of corporal punishment. He supports rehabilitative justice for most offenses, especially considering it will be easier to release a falsely convicted criminal than to... resurrect him. All things considered, he thinks some crimes are pretty much unforgivable, and warrant life imprisonment or perhaps life in labor that makes them, at least, contribute to society by building infrastructure, buildings, bridges, et cetera.

    Nationalism

    Beryism is supportive of civic nationalism as an alternative to xenophobia and eternal self-segregation. He thinks a good nation is one where the people involved share common values, language and optionally also culture. He thinks any such nation has a right to self-determination. He subscribes to the concept of the Willensnation (voluntary nation), which is a nation not defined by ethnicity, not by race, not (necessarily) by culture and not by religion. It is a nation made up of individuals with a desire to a common goal, a constitutional patriotism, united by a shared language, set of values and banner. It is a nation that is built from the bottom-up, free from assimilationism and coerciveness, not directed by the state but rather facilitated by it. This is what he considers nationhood worth preserving.

    He views ethnonationalism as a stupid ideology based on hatred, arbitrary differences and wanting to keep humanity divided for eternity. In Ethiopia, this is evident in the current "ethno-federalist" system emphasising more on differences than similarities, causing divide and polarisation. Even under the previous, otherwise horrific regimes , there was a shared Ethiopian civic and cultural identity. Only after the 90's civil war did people start caring about ethnicity again. In such a case, he supports reverting back to the historical provinces and booting the ethnicity-based system. In countries like the DRC, he supports neither maintaining the current hot mess of a system, nor balkanisation into ethnicity-based microstates. He proposes "building blocks", where the country is divided into smaller intercultural federations of various nearby cultures that can engage in cross-culture dialogue and work together towards a brighter future, uniting more and more peoples. This ensures that the ethnicities aren't fighting like they are right now, nor the atomisation of peoples. (This doesn't warrant intervention, as this is merely a proposal.)

    He is a non-interventionist, because he believes other countries' affairs are mostly none of our business. He thinks we shouldn't be making the situation in other countries even worse. Operation Condor in Latin America was a massively anti-democratic operation that replaced democratically elected leaders with autocrats that oppressed their own people, no matter some of the undeniable economic development that occurred in some nations. This is both financially and ethically unsustainable.
    If democracy is the superior system, he thinks it won't need the use of force to be spread, most of these operations have resulted in nothing but civil wars and rise in anti-Western sentiment. His ideas should instead prove themselves in the marketplace of ideas.

    When it comes to immigration, he doesn't mind some liberalised immigration laws, but favours strict integration programmes that make sure newcomers know to respect the country. On the path to citizenship, one must attain knowledge in the national language, the government structure and its routine, along with a clean criminal record, however, he won't force silly, unneeded traditions on anyone. On the topic of borders, he is not necessarily pro-open borders. He supports the Schengen agreement and free movement between EU citizens. In times of crisis, he supports closing the borders, to defuse the situation, additionally to make sure who enters the country and who does not. This, sadly, was not what he saw Merkel do in 15/16, instead opening up all borders, which led to crime and violence skyrocketing, with the addition of the AfD's rise. We shall be good, but not stupid.

    Anti-Militarism

    He is strongly opposed to wars and conflict. He supports a moderately funded, healthy military, which only serves for defending the nation in case of an imminent war or threat, or to prevent a genocide from happening, thus, the American intervention during WW2 was justified (duh). He opposes any kind of peacetime draft along with supporting a prohibition on selling weapons to regimes of terror (e.g. Turkey, Saudi Arabia), no matter if that is by the state or by private arms producers. Weapon trade with nations under threat from imperialism, such as Ukraine, will however still be allowed. He is also in favor of working with other nations to collectively dismantle all nuclear weapon arsenals.

    It goes hand-in-hand with his support for free trade and free exchange of goods, as it increases mutual reliance and cooperation, and reduces the profitability of war. After all, he sees that nations have historically fought wars against each other for the primary motive of material gain, or in other words, because the grass looks greener on the other side.

    Transnational Alliances

    Beryism doesn't view the EU as a fundamentally bad idea. He is in favor of the Eurozone, the Schengen agreement as well as a common market. Nevertheless, he is a soft Eurosceptic, opposing further integration and Eurofederalism in particular. He finds it unfeasible for similar reasons as World Federalism, he states that you can't represent the desires of all nations, let alone individuals, on such a large scale, without an ungodly amount of centralization. To him, the logical conclusion of such a thing is either a centralist bureaucracy that uses violence and coercion to stay in power, or a truly weak union that falls apart in a matter of years or even months. If it should ever happen any time in the future then it should, at most, be a loose confederation and membership in it fully voluntary, not with the European Parliament unconsensually centralizing power.

    Ideally, Beryism wants the EU to back away from national affairs, such as immigration, healthcare, social policy and employment. In particular, he finds the idea that the EU can just redistribute immigrants among member states how they please ridiculous. Immigration should remain a national affair, though it is acceptable and good to him if the countries engage in voluntary discourse on how to handle major crises. If this decentralization is done, then, the EU can better focus on technological development and security.

    Beryism opposes NATO, as he thinks the alliance is far beyond its days. Now, the alliance doesn't serve much purpose besides terrorizing the Third World. So, since NATO is rotten to the core to him, he sees the logical conclusion for Germany as leaving it. But he would not mind a new alliance focused on true self defense, not playing the global cop. If the alliance is to survive in the modern day, he believes it needs to undergo serious self-reflection on what it means to be "democratic", and revise its own constitution, in order not to engage in undemocratic activities in the future.

    Flag

    Flag of Beryism

    The left side represents Ethiopian/Amhara ancestry, whereas the right side represents German nationality and love for Germany. The symbol in the middle represents the invisible hand of the market, a symbol used commonly among liberal ideologies on Polcompball.

    Color Name HEX RGB
    Green #018A2C 1, 138, 44
    Yellow #FCDD09 252, 221, 9
    Red #DA121A 218, 18, 26
    Black #000000 0, 0, 0
    Red #FF0000 255, 0, 0
    Gold #FFCC00 255, 204, 0
    Beige #EFE9AB 239, 233, 171


    Relations

    (WIP)

    Friends

    • Classical Liberalism - The main foundation for my beliefs. It is sad that this label has been hijacked by conservative zealots who do not know what it means truly.
    • Liberalism - Individual liberty, equality before the law, market economy - I agree with basically everything you spew. However, you tend to be too compliant with corporate welfare, offensive warfare and infringements on free speech nowadays, and fully representative democracy is dated and needs reform in order not to cause polarisation.
    • Progressivism - It's important to look forward, not backward. In a free society, I don't see why people should be treated differently because of ethnicity, gender, sexual identity or religion.
    • Anti-Communism - This might come as a surprise to some of you guys reading this, but indeed, I do oppose communism.
    • Patriotism - You are an important tool for national cohesion. I do love my country dearly, but I also support progressivism, as a nation must march forward.
    • Civic Nationalism - The healthy balance - cohesion and tolerance. You are the best form of nationalism to date.
    • Interculturalism - *chef's kiss*
    • National Liberalism - Now this is what I am talking about! However, I disavow the cultural conservatism some of you folks support, and I am not a full Eurosceptic. Brexit has had a terrible effect on the British economy, see the exploding gas prices.
    • Libertarianism - I agree with you more than I disagree, though some of you guys have different solutions and end goals from me. Also, your American followers can be absolute nutcases. Overall, I see you as an ally.
    • Civil Libertarianism - The harm principle is based.
    • Georgism - Land value tax is the best, most useful tax. A tax reform would have many positive impacts on society.
    • Pirate Politics - I do support a copyright reform in my country. If you want to see how patents are being actively abused and hinder innovation, I suggest you to look at the American healthcare system.
    • Ordo-Liberalism & Social Capitalism - The reason why Germany is so prosperous today. Thank you very much, very pog.

    Frenemies

    • Green Liberalism - Awesome ideas, but would you please stop being so anti-nuclear?
    • Cultural Nationalism - We should make sure immigrants integrate, but we should leave native minorities alone. You and unitarism make for a vicious combo, forced assimilation is just brutality. At least you aren't that racist, I guess.
    • Isolationism - You have good approaches to conflict, but you're too often motivated by xenophobia rather than anything else. Also, it would be best if you opened yourself to the global market.
    • Neoliberalism - You've provided some good economic theories, and free trade is based, but open borders shouldn't necessarily be an ideological imperative. And please boot them.
    • Libertarian Conservatism - I find myself agreeing with a lot of things you say, but again, too much focus on non-issues like "wokeness".
    • Anarcho-Capitalism - I understand the concern that individuals should only be paying for the services that they actually want to use, but it's absolutely more pragmatic to keep a few sectors, such as roads, public.
    • Market Socialism - What if a society centered around co-ops cannot sustain itself? I feel like you are simply trying to project what you think is right onto others without their consent. However, you have some tolerable-ish variants I can talk policy with.
    • Multiculturalism - You might not be intended as self-segregation, but you will often result in such. You give reasons for them to rise. Different cultures can exist in a free nation, yes, but we must want to pursue a common goal, yes?
    • SJW - Is your presence greatly exaggerated? Yes. Would I support this, though? Probably not.
    • State Capitalism - You've been a force for good in the third world, but you stagnate real quick, also you usually suck at diversifying economies.
    • Austrolibertarianism - Meh, I like some of the things you spew, but I still think a society without compulsory taxation wouldn't work, and also, I like common land ownership and monetary unions. Because I hate going to the bank.

    Enemies

    • Fascism - Thanks for contributing to humanity's bloodiest conflict, screwing over both your own country and East Africa, as well as creating an insufferable modern fanbase. You deserve nothing but shame.
    • Propertarianism - Reducing ethics to nothing but property rights is a ridiculous concept.
    • Marxism-Leninism - Power corrupts. The cultural and economic scars you've left on this world are visible to this day.
    • Neoconservatism - Wanting to increase your sphere of influence will incentivise other powers to do the same, eventually leading to a global cataclysm.
    • Right-Wing Populism - You are an absolute menace to our society.
    • Ethnic Nationalism - If this is your ideology, look at the DRC or Yugoslavia during the 1990's. Stop ruining more nations.
    • Protectionism - I don't want my country to turn into a backwater autarky. You make very little sense from a first world perspective and often just piggyback off of cheap populist and/or xenophobic rhetoric.
    • Pinochetism - No matter how backward I believe socialism to be, this kind of military dictatorship is and remains unjustified and vicious. I would take a socialist who is a true democrat over a despot like you.
    • Stratocracy - Just what purpose do you serve? Autocrats and elites send their people to kill each other and destroy heritage for profit or even just to appease their fat arses.
    • World Federalism - A world without borders is a world with nowhere to escape.
    • Honeckerism - Wer schleicht so spät durch Kraut und Rüben, es ist der Erich, der will nach drüben! Er hält das Westgeld wohl im Arm, er hält es sicher, er hält es warm. Er erreicht die Grenze mit Mühe und Not, tritt auf 'ne Mine und - bumms - war er tot!

    (Obviously, this is NOT based on personal relations, just ideology for the most part)

    Based

    • Icedism (9.5/10) - My Indian counterpart, sweet! Your ideals seem quite good to me, I'll have to watch your page development for a while though.
    • Polfax Thought (9/10) - Very based! Nationalism and libertarianism are a nice combo, but I am not certain if a society without compulsory taxation could hold strong.
    • M4RKAruism (9/10) - Good all around. Free markets and mixing patriotism with international co-operation is very nice. There is some stuff here and there that makes me think a bit, but you are deserving of being up here.
    • Aaronism (8.5/10) - Best socialist to be honest. Now, while I agree that the individual should be free to pursue his own destiny, separate from any sort of cultural or "moral" agenda pushed by the government, I'm not so sure on ideologising hedonism. Enough said; we agree on most things, and that's nice. (private property is valid...)
    • Lexsiek (8/10) - Quite based, indeed. But a little radical. Your basic principles are right for sure, though.
    • Individual Voluntaryism (8/10) - Similar to above. We share similar principles and you are open to different viewpoints. I will be curious to hear your take on Georgism.
    • TDRHism (8/10) - Based and non-nutjob-pilled. I disagree with some individual policies, particularly those pertaining to LGBT issues, with the addition of you being too heavy on taxation (unhealthy food tax and school supply taxes? Sheesh...). But our basic principles are the same, and your vision for America is honorable, when looking at the status-quo.
    • Owfism (8/10) - More based than not, but I'd rather support the reintroduction of the death penalty than world federalism, even in the long run. I also oppose socialism and I have doubts about strong trust-busting, as well as e-democracy, which is a highly corruptible system. But all in all, you're fairly cool. LVT and bright-green environmentalism ftw!
    • Neo-Arctoism (9/10) - When did I even remove you from my relations? Strange. Anyway, I might just be one of the few people to generally get along with you ideologically speaking. Your economic policies are almost identical to mine, as we both seek to maximise personal and economic liberty within the bonds of the social market economy, we both support a liberal democracy, and we both share an affinity for our home countries without being a-holes about it. If only you didn't talk about them so much...
    • ChronicLiberalism - (8.5/10) - You haven't really laid out any of your beliefs yet, but from the current looks of it, you seem to have become really based. I'm just not as keen on "gun rights" as you are.

    Pretty Based

    • Syncretic Tridemism (7.5) - Close contender for being in "Based", but there are some things I don't like. You're too authoritarian and too economically left-wing. There's also too much traditionalism, I personally disagree with your stances on drugs and LGBT, I don't see their decriminalization or legalization as a slippery slope for our society. Also, you stan too many dictators for my liking. Then finally, I think you'd do well if you embraced semi-direct democracy instead of just merely liberal representative democracy. All in all though, more good than bad here.
    • Tomjazzism (6.5/10) - Surprisingly awesome for a socialist. Markets, environmentalism, progress, direct democracy, nicerinoes! We share many principles but come to some different conclusions.
    • Evolutionary Socialism (7/10) - We have many common beliefs, such as cultural liberalism, a foreign policy mirroring a healthy mix of internationalism and patriotism, and a Swiss-style semi-direct democracy. Your proposed form of welfare state is not something I would support though, although since you liveg in the US, you have some valid concerns even if I don't necessarily approve of your solutions. Phasing out private enterprise is also something I'm doubtful of for the time being. But frankly, you're one of the better socialists, and our conversations have been really civil.
    • SomeCrusaderism (7.5/10) - You're quite alright. I agree with your fiscal policy, and your stances regarding racial issues. Now... that drug policy, nah, man. Furthermore, I think it's interesting that you want to leave weed and same-sex marriage to be left to the states to decide; that shows the lack of federalism we have here in Germany. And federalism + civnat is another sweet combo! Just that I also disagree with your stance on abortion.
    •  Neo-Afunhumaninterism (6/10) - JoeyFloppaism, but a little less scary, it seems. You're a bit too laissez-faire; there's too much Austrian economics leaking from your economic policy, and you're unnecessarily harsh on LGBT folks. However, you are an anti-communist, anti-authoritarian, against censorship, and you sometimes speak German for no particular reason, which is based.
    • Yoda8soup Thought (6/10) - Not horrible, not fantastic. I don't like syndicalism, socialism or decentralised planning, but I like markets, land value tax, libertarianism and direct democracy. And you're socially progressive, which is definitely a plus.
    • Uzarashvilism (6/10) - Very similar to above, but more centralised. Perhaps this one is too conservative for me though, and too anti-libertarian. At least we support markets, have the same democratic model and see all men as our equals.
    • BERNHEism (6.5/10) - Bernheboy is back, and this time, he's picked up some actually decent politics! The aspect in which you have, without any doubt whatsoever, improved in the most is that of your social views, which are a lot less "spicy" than they were just about a year ago. As for second place, I'd have to go with either your civic views or your economics, both of which have seen considerable improvements from the last time I had to add you here, specifically your support for a mixed market economy as opposed to a planned one. Lastly, however, I must also point out some of your ideology's less appetising features, namely your gun fetishism (well, "fetishism" relative to what I advocate for), support for the death penalty and, most notably, your lingering authoritarian and ultranationalistic tendencies. Oh, and I don't get the union hate. Unions are cool, and it is, unequivocally, thanks to them that our workers enjoy many of the rights and priviliges that they currently do. So yeah, that sums up my brief review of your ideology.

    Mixed

    • Celfloskism (5.5/10) - Mostly fine. Too far left economically, too statist, and supports the alter-globalisation sham, which is sad. Military interventionism is a no-no, if you're gonna tax the hell out of your citizens, spend it on anything but that! But good for being a democrat and a cultural liberal, among some other things.
    • Mikolayism (4.5/10) - Yeah, way too authoritarian. But the more I saw your page develop, the less horrible it became. Maybe too conservative as well, but I can somewhat look past that. As for your agrarian socialist policies, I'll have to massively disagree with those, as those would lead to tremendous economic regression. And fuck East Germany (idk why you'd even support it, to be honest). However, we do agree on democracy (even if your model is strange), markets, and nationalism.
    •  Metbolism (4.5/10) - You have good approaches to both fiscal and foreign policy, so it is a shame that your cultural and social stances are so horrendous. And you barely cling to anything resembling liberalism. Better than communists, though.
    • TypicalFan1 Thought (5.5/10) - A Mexican AfD supporter. Never thought I'd ever say that. Your economics seem good (although they are ill-defined), your social views could be a lot better, and isolationism is not beneficial either. Well, at least you don't support bombing Iraqi orphanages. Overall, a typical alt-liter; bad, but not making me want to commit alt-die.
    • ThisIsMyUsernameAAAism (4/10) - An ancom and a socialist. But despite that, not only do we get along, you also have many cool cultural takes, you hate authoritarian socialism, you support rehabilitative justice, the main problem is the gift economy taking the place of the market economy.
    • File:Councilguy2.png Post-Councilism (4/10) - Yes, morality is subjective. No, we should not fully reject it. Good for being an anti-authoritarian individualist, but taken to a frankly horrifying extreme. Many based takes, but philosophically, we are miles apart.
    • Novoscarletism (5.5/10) - Eh... I'm really not getting the whole guild shtick. I like subsidiarity, but the fact you want to decentralise so many essential services to the municipal level with no competition allowed, with the bonus of protectionism for consumer goods, would easily make your country lose its status as an economic superpower. High corporate tax and wealth cap seem like fair proposals at first, but I also think those would hurt the economy in the long run, especially the latter. I also oppose your staunch anti-individualism, anti-drug stance and opposition to abortion, but what I do generally support are your market economy, your anti-racism, federalism, gun rights, opposition to offensive warfare and recycling programs. Overall, your ideology has decent proposals, and not so decent ones.
    • Darknight Yuusha Model (5/10) - Once again, extremely similar to above, but has slightly more unsettling rhetoric. Opposition to sex work and pornography, disagree here as well. Otherwise, mostly what I said about Scarlet. There are agreements in policy here and there, but rhetoric strongly separates us.
    • Pantheonism (5.5/10) - I've seen far worse socialists. Nonetheless, there are several objections I have to your beliefs, namely the world federalism thingy and your rather scrambled economic system. You also support too many dictators for my liking.

    Pretty Cringe

    • File:NeoLukko.png Neo-Lukkoism (3.5/10) - Well... how and where do I begin? I think I'll start with your economics, which is the subject we have, without a doubt, the most disagreements on. Now... what you propose is a little, let's say, idealistic. The idea that you can simply abolish everything we currently have and have it not be succeeded by massive amounts of poverty and technological regression or people forming new, smaller economies (and subsequently expanding their spheres of influnece to forge more large-scale economic systems) seems rather silly to me. You keep bringing up "mutual aid" as a potential alternative to the things we have right now, yet refuse or just don't feel the need to go into detail about it. Also, you claim to support automation in some areas, even though your new economic system renders any further technological advancements impossible, as you seek to tear down everything that had led to us enjoying the (relative) prosperity that we do today. Work abolition, especially when not properly elaborated upon, is also something I can't help but chuckle at as a serious proposal. Overall, your system, if I may even call it that, is not one I could see sustain itself as intended for any longer than a handful of days, and that's just on a small scale. As for your social views, I don't think there's much that I fundamentally disagree with; it's just that you go several steps further than I do.

      Verdict: Goober.

    Cringe

    • General Shrekretary Thought (1/10) - Basically my polar opposite on every issue, besides race. Unironically looks up to Stalin, favours a command economy (why), is populistic and disdains free trade. Goes here for obvious reasons.
    • Neo-Immorxism (1.5/10) - Overall a very unpleasant ideology; syndicalism is like putting the bus driver in charge of managing his firm. You say you are democratic, but you have a tendency towards being very undemocratic to those you oppose ideologically. But, in all fairness, I'll have to see how your page will develop for your part regarding democracy. However, I will give you credit for being a fellow LVT enjoyer.
    • Neo-Bannnedism (1/10) - Glad you're back, but your ideology is as horrifying as ever. You seem to have given up republicanism and replaced it with whatever that system is supposed to be now. On the bright side, you are slightly less anti-semitic now. What's more, you aren't racist, or... at least you claim not to be. Otherwise, your policy isn't my cup of tea, to say the least.
    • Cheesenism (0/10) - An authoritarian theocrat with no respect for the individual's dignity. Don't know, but it feels like you tried to take almost everything wrong with this world and cram it into one. But hey... you hate commies, that's cool. Not like common enemies have to mean anything, though.

    Test results

    Art

    Navigation

    Comments

    Implianium - Add me

    XarTario - Can you add me onto your self-insert relations?

    BeryAb - Ayo

    • - Moin.
      • BeryAb - Moin :), falls du dich wunderst, so fühlt es sich als einziger Deutschsprachler hier an, welcher kein Linker ist. ;(
    - You'll have to change your relation for me bezzy man. Although mostly the same - but the focus is now on the impossibility of political achievement (in the long run) and the inevitability of change of values, morals, leaders, customs, morals, etc. As opposed to just a modern expression of Stirner's Ideas.
    

    BERNHE0504 - Beryist Society is BASED. The actual ideology, not so much. Add me please.

    • BeryAb - Later!
      • BERNHE0504 - I’ve updated my ideology a little bit and became less of a LARPlord (and less racist), so it may be worth taking a look at again. No pressure, though.
    - Add me? - Thank you :D

    Uzarashvilism - Ay there! Add me?

    Owfedcdl Can you add me?

    Owfism << Ideology

    - You should update what you said about me in your relations to fit my current ideological development.
    
    DarknightYuusha - Update my relations and add pls.
    • Applethesky2021 - I see that you've added me, I'll add back when I get the chance.
    - Beryist Society - Add me.

    Ronwelltarianism - Can you please add me?

    New Model Of Cheesenism- pld add md

    NeoArctoismIcon.png Neo-Arctoism - Could you perhaps add me please?

    Nesanel Thought - Your ideology seems interesting. Add me perhaps?

    Neo-Kiraism - add me

    You know- very good page you got here. I like a lot

    BERNHE0504: Hello there Lord Bery, ruler of the Kraut Liberal clan and Vanquisher of Commies & Italians. I humbly request that you add my inferior ideology to your far superior one. Thanks in advance.

    Pantheonism - Hallo Bery! Könntest du mich wieder zu deinen Beziehungen hinzufügen?

    Wraizer Though Sorry btw, i accidentaly edited your page (i already reversed)

    Calculustism - May you add me pls?[OUTDATED SELF INSERT]

    National Fracturism - Moin Bery, kannst du mich hinzufügen?

    ChronicLiberalism - Can you update relations?

    Neo-Calculustism - Add? thanks

    BeryAb - All of you will be added sooner or later, despite how lazy I feel about this page at the moment.

    - Hi Bery, could you add me? c:

    Brazilian Liberalism - Add me?

    Serbian Socialism Also me?

    Add me (Accursed Biological Anarchism)

    Great British New Left Add me, you absolutely amazing human being

    - Probably not happening, but can you add me, I guess?

    Danielism - add me please

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

    Recent changes

  • GeneraleArmando • 7 minutes ago
  • GeneraleArmando • 10 minutes ago
  • Dee3fgf • 23 minutes ago
  • Dee3fgf • 26 minutes ago
  • Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.