Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 5,618 articles on Polcompball Anarchy Wiki. Type your article name above or create one of the articles listed here!

    Polcompball Anarchy Wiki

    Davilandism is just the thought of the user Davilanda (me, the person who is editing this thing). It's an catholic, ancap, reactionary and aristotelian ideology

    Political Beliefs

    Cap.png Economy Lfree.png

    I believe that the only system that can make society prosper in the long term is laissez faire capitalism. This is because it is the only system that is consistent with the right to property (a fundamental pillar for coexistence in society), in addition to being the system that has allowed countries to develop in a better way (people who allege that protectionism is what develops nations do not coherently analyze the historical situations of the countries that allege that they developed with protectionism).

    Regulations and other obstacles to the free market economy are only arbitrary barriers to the free interaction of economic agents (making it difficult for businessmen to calculate economically and generating crises and misery). In addition to this, the regulations do not help the consumer at all, since they are intended to help him and only cause prices to rise, companies to go bankrupt and the consumer to not be able to decide his life for himself.

    Property.png Property and Business EconAn.png

    Property is the only thing that allows us to settle our conflicts, which makes it what keeps our society on its feet. Private and personal property have arbitrary distinctions, since they start from the same source (the exclusion that someone exercises to other people of an object (even if it is shared at will by the owner)) generating that the Marxist distinction of personal property and private is arbitrary as he had already said. Property must be defended as inviolable, since this is the foundation of society as we know it, and without it we could not resolve conflicts peacefully. Of course, the property (over the objects) in the same way must attend to the common good, but this does not imply that an institution that violates the property right itself must take charge of that work.

    Austrobert.pngEconomic ThoughtAustrobert.png


    Awaj.png Anarchism Feud.png

    The State is an institution that has a monopoly on violence and uses this power to coerce the people under its interests. The only thing that keeps it alive is our blindness to the belief that it is necessary to maintain society as we know it. If we were to rebel among all of us against this institution that has harmed the human race for thousands of years, it would not have a chance, since we are the only ones who allow its existence by paying taxes.


    Hoppe.pngLandlords and Original appropiationAncapf.png



    Personally I am not a nationalist or an internationalist, I just think that no one should be subject to state coercion. I think that the concept of "nation" is too ambiguous and tends to lead to statism, although it can be used in favor of the fight against statism.

    Internationalism tends towards globalism insofar as it seeks cooperation between nations, which means that it can lead directly to the idea of a world government (an idea that is inherent to the existence of the State itself).

    Isolationist.png Isolation Antiimp.png

    I don't think we should intervene in any community unless it is absolutely necessary (it is strictly necessary if the community falls under the clutches of communism or statism). Problems between regions don't really worry us because they are just fights between states (talking about the current situation of course).

    React.png Society Trad.png

    Western society must preserve the knowledge and moral norms that have been given to us by our ancestors. Well, this does not mean that there is no progress of any kind, but that social progress is restricted due to the damage that new ideas can generate in society (for example, feminism and the LGBT community). Social morality must be properly based on natural law and virtue ethics, since these are the ones that best support social values (in addition to the fact that, in the case of natural law, it is the only one that can satisfactorily support the law and morals).


    Christy.png Autonomy Conserv.png

    I believe that the mere existence of free will allows us to do what we want (although often that is not convenient for us). The point of our freedom is to be able to act correctly at will, even if that also implies being able not to. I do not want to say that I do not care what others do, because apathy towards others is the path to the destruction of society. While it is true that many acts should not be punishable (such as the sale of psychoactive drugs), that does not mean that they should be approved by society, since many of these things harm the individual who commits them and the environment that surrounds them.


    Gay.png About homosexuality

    Homosexuality, like disordered tendencies, per se is not a sin, since it is not as such an immoral action that is carried out voluntarily. What is a sin is committing homosexual acts (such as having a romantic relationship or having sex with other men), since you are knowingly committing immoral acts (committing disorderly acts).

    I don't think homosexuality should be considered a crime, since homosexuality (understood as homosexual acts), like other sins, does not make society cease to exist (not like actions such as stealing or killing). But one must be clear about the immorality of committing such acts.

    Trans.png About transexuals

    Transsexuals are people with a completely altered perception of reality who believe that by identifying as the opposite gender, they are already that gender. Supporting them to identify as people of the opposite gender to the one they are born with is being uncaring and is hating that person with that problem. These people should be given the appropriate psychological treatment and be taken to therapy to stop having such ideas that are harmful to them.


    I personally am a Roman Catholic, and I am in favor of the Church's teachings being expanded to the whole world (Acts 13:47). However, I do not believe that this work should be imposed by the State, since it is not the State's concern.

    In any case, I think that when coercion is used against the Catholic faith, the people must defend it, whether peacefully or violently. WIP

    Ancapf.png Transition to the Ancap system Ancapf.png

    Well guys, this is the tutorial on how to make an Ancapf.pnganarcho-capitalist and Libertarian.pnglibertarian society that is moral and functional in a few steps, ideal to go along with Catheo.pngChristian morals and Trad.pngtraditional values (or if you are not Paleolib.pngpaleolibertarian, you can go along with Kant.pngcategorical imperative).

    The ingredients are:

    1. People who can attract ordinary people to libertarian ideas (speakers).
    2. Defenders (like, the security of the cause).
    3. People who prevent the speakers from falling into anti-libertarian ideas ("intellectuals", so to speak).

    Now, the steps you must follow are:

    1. Through the speakers, make society understand the importance of property rights and how the State violates these rights.
    2. Get the defenders to act in case the state tries to suppress the cause.
    3. Mix intellectuals with speakers to prevent speakers from falling into legitimizing anti-libertarian methods (such as reformism).
    4. Get everyone to stop paying taxes, and thus destroy the state without resorting to unnecessary violence.
    5. Wait 3 to 10 years for this to take effect.
    6. You can give agrarian and anti-urban ideas to taste.

    Now, enjoy your prosperous and (mostly) happy anarcho-capitalist libertarian society!



    Rural.png Technological Beliefs Techcap.png Farm.png


    Philosophical Beliefs

    NatLaw.png Justice and rights Hoppe.png


    Thomism.png Ethics

    I follow the Virtue ethics icon.png virtue ethics So, what are the sources of morality? Catheo.png (Cathechism of the church 1750-1754):

    The morality of human acts depends on: - the object chosen; - the end in view or the intention; - the circumstances of the action. The object, the intention, and the circumstances make up the "sources," or constitutive elements, of the morality of human acts.

    The object chosen is a good toward which the will deliberately directs itself. It is the matter of a human act. the object chosen morally specifies the act of the will, insofar as reason recognizes and judges it to be or not to be in conformity with the true good. Objective norms of morality express the rational order of good and evil, attested to by conscience. In contrast to the object, the intention resides in the acting subject. Because it lies at the voluntary source of an action and determines it by its end, intention is an element essential to the moral evaluation of an action. the end is the first goal of the intention and indicates the purpose pursued in the action. the intention is a movement of the will toward the end: it is concerned with the goal of the activity. It aims at the good anticipated from the action undertaken. Intention is not limited to directing individual actions, but can guide several actions toward one and the same purpose; it can orient one's whole life toward its ultimate end. For example, a service done with the end of helping one's neighbor can at the same time be inspired by the love of God as the ultimate end of all our actions. One and the same action can also be inspired by several intentions, such as performing a service in order to obtain a favor or to boast about it. A good intention (for example, that of helping one's neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. the end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).

    Theocrat.png Existence of God Catheo.png




    Egoism or altruism?


    Emotivism and rationality






    Davilanda crush.pngMy crush UwU


    Conviction for the beliefs


    About the being


    Philosophical periods: An opinion


    Aristotle.png Movement (or charge) Thomism.png


    Free will


    Natural science



    Origins of universe


    Heliocentrist.png Heliocentrism or Geocentrist.png Geocentrism


    Earth flat or a sphere?




    Virus are live beings?

    No WIP

    About random things


    Ideological information

    WIP I'm literally Anakin Skywalker








    Socal Media


    Davilanda I de Corinto (davilandaidecorinto)





    • Davilanda - Guys, I'm mad because I spent a whole day editing this thing and ended up ruining everything because of a little mistake
    • Tony.png Retroliberalism- add me please
    • Yoda8soup.png - Add me?
      • Icecream6969.png Davilanda13 - wait more time, please
    • METBOL.png Metbolism - You're like me but Ancap
      • Icecream6969.png Davilanda13 - true, but also you're volcel, that makes you better than me XD
    • - Add me?
    • Atacczoombol.pngTechnocapital Cultist - You ever heard of NRx? I think you'll like it
      • Icecream6969.png Davilanda13 - men, NRx are just hoppeanos with state, so they're gays
    • SCT.pngSílas Carrasco - Can you add me pls?
      • Icecream6969.png Davilanda13 - and you're who?
      • Icecream6969.png Davilanda13 - shit, based culturally, but you're prottie, and authoritarianism Is gay
    • Ronwelltarianism icon.png Ronwelltarianism - Can you please add me?
    • Xirlan-alt.png - Add me reactionary chad.
    • OwfBall.png Owfism - Add me to relations
    • Noelism-icon.png Noelism - Good news, Chilean leftoid constitution got BTFO'd. Also add me?
    • OwfBall.png Owfism - It seems you have mentioned some arguments (2 of you are made by yourself so I am not gonna really touch on them). The first being the Thomism.png theological argument, now, this uses an argument by analogy. More specifically, it was used by Paley through the watchmaker analogy. It would thus be asked what would we think if we found a watch on the ground, did it appear spontaneously Is it a dream Rene Descartes .png or is it thought through its complexity, how it was made in order to be a watch. Then the watch must have been made by someone on purpose right? Through this, Paley argued that the teleology of the watch would come to the conclusion that there was an intelligent creator, that being God, that created it. So through this argument, if there is a watch maker, there must be also be a world maker. Right? And that is obviously, in this case, God. However, Paley also compared a watch to a human, but I am not talking about that.

    Now, personally, I don't believe in the conclusion that god exists, nor this argument, so, I shall come up with a disanalogy of sorts. Situation A and B are thus too different to be able to work. Yes, we can take a look at a watch and look at the gear, how it was assembled onto the watch yada yada yada, but, there is something wrong here: If god, the interpretation of god, the main one at least, an all-good, all-powerful being would give our eyes a blind spot? Like, what's the point of a blind spot? If the omni-god, one which is omnipotent, omnibenevolent, a.k.a all-powerful and all-good, would give us something bad and useless? Like, if he does something bad, then that means he is not all-good, thus he is not omnibenevolent. I could go on about how the omni-god doesn't make sense, but I am just gonna stick to the Thomism.png theological argument. Paley would response to this by saying that just because we don't know there is a purpose doesn't mean there is one, however, this is contradictory, because his whole argument for god is that you should look at the world and see purpose. So if we see things that are working great, and others that are not working so great, now that's flawed. Let's take a look at Liberalsoc.png Bertrand Russell's analogy: Why would god give a bunny a white tail? So hunters can shoot at it? Now, yet again, that debunks the fact that god is omnibenevolent, since he gave bunnies a bad purpose, which well, is not an all-good thing. The point: If we invent purposes rather than recognizing ones that are inherently there, then we create purpose, not God, then if you believe that god made eyes so can we see then God must have also made fingers to be picked by noses and rabbit tails as bullseyes and blind spots as a way for us to be in a car accident. So, the counter-argument is (since this is too long and I am not touching the other arguments and other ways of debunking this) We don't get to just pick and choose and say God designed the stuff we want him to have designed and not the other stuff. (Ik its pretty weird to just make a really long comment debunking your beliefs in god, but, I was bored.

      • Icecream6969.png Davilanda13 - I will respond you later
    • SerbSoc.png Serbian Socialism Are you planning to add me? I hope not.
    • NeoOptimGlasses.png Neo-Optimateism Pretty interesting. Your thoughts about pink and red markets?
      • New Davilanda..png Davilanda13 - I really didn't heard about that markets :'v
        • NeoOptimGlasses.png Neo-Optimateism - Pink market creates violent and legal goods((mostly government regulated))(prisons, wars, torture, compulsory education) and Red market is violent and illegal goods(slavery, assasinations, theft). Also, do you have discord?
          • New Davilanda..png Davilanda13 - davilandaidecorinto, and thanks, I think that the pink market should be provided by the (unregulated) market, but some things can be avoided for keeping the human dignity (torture). About the Red, I think it's very immoral and it should be still illegal (idk if I explained my point correctly).
    • 2x2Master.png 2x2Master - Literally me, but like, anarchist and even more traditionalist.
    • Rigby.png - Can you add me?
    • Herball.png HeredyBall - My man got stuck in the laissez-faire rabbit hole and is hyper-christian. How would you make sure your "morales" works without a higher power ? How do you deal with monopoles ?
      • New Davilanda..png Davilanda13 - no sé jaja salu2.
    Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.

    Recent changes

  • Owf • 2 minutes ago
  • EinnafLausn • 8 minutes ago
  • EinnafLausn • 9 minutes ago
  • FHR Anti Winx • 14 minutes ago
  • Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.