×
Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 3,996 articles on Polcompball Anarchy Wiki. Type your article name above or create one of the articles listed here!



    Polcompball Anarchy Wiki


    Ego-Progressivism is the current of thought followed and created by Io, it essentially seeks to combine traditional Ego-Communism with Ultraprogressivism, viewing that the struggle for gender, race and sexual liberation should come hand in hand with individual sovereignty and egoism.

    Ideological Influences

    • Socrates.png Socrates (470-399 BCE)
    • ThomHobbes.png Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
    • Rousseau.png Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
    • HegelianPhilosophy.png Georg Wilhelm Friederich Hegel (1770-1831)
    • Stirner.png Johann Kaspar Schmidt (1806-1856)
    • Ormarxf.png Karl Marx (1818-1883)
    • Nietzsche.png Friederich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
    • Goldman.png Emma Goldman (1869-1940)
    • Sartre.png Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
    • Vaush.png Ian Kochinski (1994- )

    Beliefs

    The Basis

    Skeptic.png Nothing is Anything Absurd.png

    We know things, we certainly do, with enough confidence to assert their realness absolutely, but how do we get to know this? by learning of course! *we* learn, learning is an individual process by which we get to absorb knowledge and understand the world better, but there's something interesting about this is it not? the dependence on the individual for this absolute understanding, in this, existence itself for the individual is fully dependent on the individual themselves, but each individual is different, with different experiences and perspectives, thus we don't really get to "know" the world, we create it for ourselves and then we compromise what is real with others.

    The exterior world, that which is outside of us as individuals does "exist" but actually knowing it from a objective stance is absurd, as we only have our subjective senses to rely on, we don't really see an absolute reality and realize its truthfullness, we take it in with our senses and use that to create our own reality in our heads, but with reality thus being something so varied and transient whats the point to pinning some sort of universal reason? that doesn't really exist or can be proven to exist, because any "universal truth" is only as universal as people chose to see it their way from their view, god is universal for the christians yes, but what is he for the atheist? we ever only exist as absurdities in an absurd world, and any created reality is as legitimate as the actual reality, that is, not at all, whats to care if an apple is red to the view of god and another human if i live and die seeing it blue? what gives their view more weight? my life is my whole reality and if that is what is set for my life than it follows that that is my reality, but if their view can't hold weight mine as well can anymore beyond my own senses, so nothing really has any weight, nothing really can be proven and knowledge isn't really attainable.

    What we do to attain some sort of "concrete" reality is to agree, for our own benefit we may hold our views as absolute but as long as we interact with the outside world we set things from an "outside" view, but we can't really reach that view, so what do we do? as individuals we reach out to one another and compromise and agree, we may not agree whether the wind is cool or warm, but we reach out and say "well the wind is blowing" and thus we set it as a "truth" which is only the compromise of reality and we take whatever benefit we can from it.

    Nihil.png Phantasms, Morality and Authority Self.png

    So what are we? a bunch of nothings really, in a nothing place called to do nothing, which is everything, by other nothings, which are to be our everythings, where do we see this? well in society, humanity, religion and so on, things in existence manifest themselves as something we are to sacrifice ourselves to "serve their cause", but these things are nothing, reality has no care for whether i "serve god" or "serve humanity", and does it care if i "serve myself"? no it doesn't, yet in our social structures we are called to do something that is above ourselves and are deemed as immoral or sinners if we fail to do so, but sinning can bring as much joy as being holy, so for the man of joy the difference isn't there.

    Yet we are to follow a cause, and make it sacred, we don't rely on ourselves we must place a fixed idea above us, as sacred, so we too can become ideal, close to sacred, but what is this? nothing, its immaterial, it exists only as phantasm and in practice works only to shackle us, prevent us from realizing ourselves and being an "owner", because we are "being owned", this is why the conscious egoist is one that has throwing off these fixed ideas, one that has realized its "ownness".

    We are taught to be seen as evil, as "born devils", our unique nature is seen as something that is far from good, this comes from religion of course, that teachs you that you as a man are a sinner, and must become a "man of god" to be "Holy", only then you will be a "better person", and that carries on to the thought of today, "human nature" -not as the nature of humanity but as nature of a human person- is seen as perverse and thus we must sacrifice ourselves and put sacred causes above ourselves so we too can escape from being this "born devils" and become holy people, this is the call to morality, to which all causes call back to, whether it be the patriot or the globalist, the communist or capitalist, all base their causes on doing what is the moral thing, their cause has the legitimacy because it is moral, and to be a better person you must be moral and help realize their cause, but "what good? what bad?" as all things are nothing i see no thing as more legitimate call to morality, as morality is all things entirely subjective, whatever is moral is what we think is moral, so morality lives purely in the head, in the ideal, immaterial world, but i am a material being so it has no effect on me, in fact, i could live my whole life being immoral and all the consequences would come from the material followers of morality and not of morality itself, and they could usually throw off morality, as they do for gain, so really, it has no real strength, it is only a vehicle, an excuse, that we use to justify our own self-interest.

    So as we throw off morality in what pillar does authority stand on? i can't stand authority when it goes against my self-interest as does everyone, thats why individuals try to mold authority to however they want it to be so they can be better adjusted in their existence, so as with morality authority is to be molded based on individual ideals how does it really "exist"? of course authority still has its effect on the material, when a cop disciplines someone they are exerting their authority over them, but that authority only exists as long as the person is disciplined, if, for example, the person is to fight back and prevent that discipline, the authority lives only on the ideal, so it isn't a material force, just an ideal, a fixed idea, one that can be thrown off, and throwing it off leads to liberation, to be free from authority, allowing yourself to better realize your ownness, to be yourself.

    Conservative.png Conservatism is present in most relations Progress.png

    It is conservatism and conservative thought that tries to chain the individual to whatever society expects of them rather then allowing them to be liberated and fight for their own cause, believing that each individual should dedicate itself to the cause of society, or order, or tradition rather than themselves and seeks to destroy all that stands by itself, conservatives believe in something sacred, and that said sacred must be fought for, defended and kept, social conservatives, love the traditions and social constructs of our society, so they fight long and hard to keep them sacred, thats the obvious example, but if we wish to live just for ourselves then there happens to be a lot in the way no? and so people who don't believe in this egoism think we should "conserve", conserve the everything else, putting it as sacred, since it is above the individual.

    Ultraprogressivism.png Identity and Tribalism Tribal.png

    A consequence of conservative thinking is tribalism, the belief that the individual should exist for its identity and serve it, thus being part of a tribe and dedicating itself to that "tribe", this chains the individual and prevents it from fighting for its own cause, this behaviour is often seen in so called "progressives" this putting your identity above everything else, but i believe its inherently conservative in the way it sees the individual as a tool of its identity (which is sacred). Furthermore, identity itself is something alienating to the individual, as acknowledging someone by their identity does not acknowledge them by their uniques, only the sameness of the label its applied towards them, of course, there can be uses for identity and ways one can pick up their identity and use them for their benefit, but this "identity" is a label applied to the outside towards the individual, usually by authority figures, in this way identity as its applied is something that is against the individual as it negates its uniqueness, and this labeling does come with duties and rights, the same way as one being part of a literal tribe places them in a hierarchy and puts them to be dedicated towards that tribe and rejected by other tribes, so is the case with identity, you're placed as the "same" as something else, then that sameness is used as justification to treat you a certain way thats inconsiderate of your uniqueness, and along side it you're expected to follow your duty towards your tribe, you're a woman so you must be a feminist, you're a proletarian so you must be a communist, but rejecting this will only make you ostracized by inside the tribe, but from outside you're still treated as part of it, being queer but anti-LGBT will not make you be treated as not-queer by people that are not-queer for example, so from that there are two opposing forces in relation to the tribe that oppress you and reject your uniqueness, thats why simply doing as most progressives do and fighting for the tribe against the oppression of the tribe isn't enough for the realization of owness, as even if you get rid of that oppression you're still oppressed by being part of the tribe.

    Illeg.png State of Insurrection Insan2.png

    So, let's say we wish to realize ourselves, be our own, if that is the case than why let this phantasms tell you what to do? this things such as laws, the state, religion, all try to dominate you, to chain you to their cause and make yourself their property, but that doesn't happen only in the world of spirit where in your mind you decide to take up such sacred causes and thus you humiliate yourself and bow down to it as your superior, but also in the world of senses, where the police offer will arrest you if you try to live without the law and even beat you if you dare resist his authority, but whats the solution in the case of the mind? well simply don't believe in it, its unreal, a phantasm, so live without it as it is nothing, and the same goes for the physical, if law isn't real why respect it? well if force is the consequence surely you can try to avoid it can you not? its not a simple thing to escape the chains of the state, but fighting against it, living in insurrection[1] and not letting yourself be governed, the law is just a phantasm, so an egoist would live above it, and you can only be above the law by not respecting it, not believing it, and so on, this too goes for all other phantasms, such as state, nation, religion, etc.

    The Specifics

    Awaj.png Civic Egoism Self.png

    Liberation is, of course, closely tied with liberty, the cause of the individual, for its realization necessitates liberty, "social progress" as it is opposed to conservatism holds it as ideal that all must be free to do as they desire, unchained from the conservative and collectivist ideals that prevent them from doing so, in that way most conflicts, such as the ideal of economics, social problems and such have to do with the struggle between liberty and authoritarianism, to fight against progressivism in that sense is inherently authoritarian.

    Commie.png Economics Antwork.png

    As mentioned in the above section the question of economics is too tied to liberty, as different economic systems greatly impact how an individual can forward its cause, All economic systems remove freedom from the individual in some way, capitalism, feudalism and state-capitalism prevent the individual from being free and true to itself by making it bow down to someone or something else, be it the will of lords, of the free market, or of bureaucrats, So for a "freer" system there could be a non-coercive economy, a sort of mutualism without markets where individuals freely choose what they want or not to work on and thus what they want or not to obtain, however even engaging in said social contract will steal from the individual some of its freedom, so if they wish to be freer they must too take what it wants for itself without regarding whatever system is put in place.

    Envi.png Environment Indust.png

    The environment is precious to the individual in the sense that its good health is physically necessary for the individual to continue its existence, as such protecting the environment is in the self-interest of everyone, but, if this is to somehow change, and it is no longer in the individuals self-interest to protect the environment then its up to the individual to decide what it wishes to do with it, as for an egoist it is property of the individual and not the other way around.

    Nation.png The Trap of Nations Anat.png

    Nations are a classic example of a spook, a fixed idea that serves nothing more than its own cause and seeks to subjugate the individual to said cause, it is a net-negative for the individual in every way, nationalism prevents us from helping eachother, for standing by eachother and claiming all the benefits that that would entail, and thus Ego-Progressivism is anationalist, believing in the abolishing of nations all together, and that the individual can operate as if there were no nations.

    Antthe.png The Religion Question Theocrat.png

    Religion is something that alienates the individual, makes it work not for itself but for a holy cause, to reach for and create a heaven that is external and the "good" all the while the individual itself is reduced to something unsacred, uncreative, and merely a subject of an external ideal, the individual must free itself from religion to find itself free, but to force others to abandon it is no less authoritarian than forcing others to be religious, as such although Ego-Progressivism believes that in the decision making processes of a government religion being excluded always would lead to more freedom, the individual belief in religion shouldn't be fought against with force, instead it is up to each individual to free itself from it.

    Antr.png Morphological Freedom

    Liberty is not something that is born from or maintained by only ideals, our material conditions affects greatly how free we can be from whatever binds us, and while that may be obvious for things such as material goods or needs, one way that our material conditions makes us less free is our own body, the individual is trapped by natural laws and forced labour under a set standard, the natural standard, that is not absolute however, and with the development of technology we can break free from this, take glasses for example, someone with problem seeing is in a way less free then one who can see well, as the one with problems seeing has less access to many things around life, with glasses or contact lenses however, one can see better, interact with the world better, not only is this beneficial in the sense of survival, it also enables greater freedom as it removes many impediments one might have, so if we can use technology to better our freedom and our quality of life then why only stop at making as as good as we "should", at the grand scheme of things there is no "should", this is biological conservatism that claims we "should" be what is "natural" or "right", there is no "right" however, so what to prevent the individual from bettering itself in such a way if it so does wishes? it is an expression of freedom to chase further freedom, and technological enhancements can deliver the individual greater freedom of the material world around it and its own body.

    Anqueer.png On Gender

    Gender is many things all at once, and at the same time, nothing at all, it is in its essence an abstraction, a phantom or spook that is performed by the individual, its an idea that is imitated though it lacks original form, at the same time it organises itself through a class structure, with males being the dominating class, females the dominated and queers those who don't conform and break the structure, all those things combined lead to an idea such as gender having enormous impact on the life of the individuals, since we are born we are forced into either male and female, and since then we are pressured to fit into the mold of our given gender identity and ostracized as queer if we ever choose not to follow said mold, as such gender in all its forms is an authoritative structure, one that rules over the individual, no wonder that system lead to so many oppressive structures across our history, but even when gender is at its least important it still continues being an oppressive and conservative structure, as gender, as long as it exists will force on us an arbritary set of rules we are meant to follow not for our own sake but simply because we must, because it is tradition and so we should, gender is an authoritative structure through and through and as long as it exists it will be, thats why feminism and men's liberation fail, because they do not wish to free us from gender, but free gender, making gender, a thing that oppresses us, free, no, it is not enough to simply liberate gender, but liberating yourself from gender is what would lead to greater freedoms, that is not to say gender as an identity should be completely abolished, its coercive forces should but to take gender as one's property, picking it up as conscious choice and using it for its own cause is also liberation.

    Personality and Behaviour

    Ego-Progressivism acts exactly like its founder, Io

    Relations

    Friends

    Neutral

    • Ancom.png Anarcho-Communism - Of course, a stateless and classless society based on mutual aid is incredible, but why are so many of your followers so spooked?
    • Agorismf.png Agorism - Black markets sound cool but why have markets at all?
    • AnAg.png Agrarian Anarchism - Ok lets say we're free, then why limit ourselves to agrarianism? i don't see the point, i love cities
    • Agsoc.png Agrarian Socialism - Socialism? ok, Agrarianism? Why???
    • Globnat.png Alter-Globalization - If we are going to globalize its good we do it in a better, less harmful way
    • Annil.png Anarcho-Nihilism - We are similar of course, but why despair at this meaningless universe? i prefer to laugh, laugh for it is that meaninglessness that allows me to be my own
    • Anpacf.png Anarcho-Pacifism - You won't accomplish anything with that "warm heartedness"
    • AnSynd.png Anarcho-Syndicalism - Yeeaah i like social anarchism and all but im more than just a worker and don't want a state that allows me to be free *as long as* im a worker
    • Antifa.png Anti-Fascism - Bash the Fash! some of your followers are too religious tho
    • Antcomp.png Anti-Realism - Weed.
    • Apolit.png Apoliticism - Fine
    • Auton.png Autononism - A little bit based, too religious tho
    • Avar.png Avaritionism - I don't think a world where everyone does what they want would end up like this ideology is often portrayed

    Enemies

    Me

    Like

    • HelloThere314Icon.png HelloThere314ism - We agree on pretty much most things
    • Ashley.png AshleyHereism - We are pretty similar politically but she's a little more moderate, great ideology though
    • Touseyism ball.png Neo-Touseyism - I very much agree with the idea of Meta Anarchy
    • Ultro.png Ultroneism - I suppose orthodox stirnerism and ego-communism aren't as compatible as i previously thought, that said even if he says im a pious progressive i very much agree with most of his ideas and i do admit he has been an influence for my ideology

    Kinda Like

    • Duckf.png Individual Voluntaryism - You make a good point on the nature of political structures and coercion, but your solution to it is not to advocate for the individual to freed from said structures but for individual to be free to choose which structure they wish to be oppressed by
    • Yoda8soup.png Yoda8soup Thought - While the society this ideology would lead to is preferable to and would be an improvement of the current one in many ways, it still fails to fundamentally solve the many problems inherent with this system, with democracy, production and states
    • Council.png Post-Councilism - For the communist state i am not me, im the proletarian, as such i am granted the rights of the proletariat as long as i fulfill my duty of acting like a proletarian, i don't wish to bow down to these concepts, i am me, not this abstraction.
    • Vamp.png Braun Spencer Thought - Well i guess in a way our philosphies are similar enough but i have to disagree with your ethical system, you understand things are subjective but when claiming pleasure is the highest good you go on to cite minimalism as the correct way to live, aren't you then upholding an objective standard that others must follow? i quite enjoy a busy life and thats true for many of us, if i seek pleasure in that am i not being good then for not maximizing it in your eyes? not to mention how hedonism itself places body and pleasure above the the self, thus being another fixed idea that possesses us, as for the politics, yeah its just "good" capitalism with too much of a focus on ruralism, which i don't like as someone who quite enjoys city life and the good it brings us.

    Neutral

    • OwfBall.png Owfism - Typical american demsoc, proposes solutions to problems but doesn't go as far as it is necessary to really solve them
    • Glencoe.png Glencoeism - Surely, the problems with the current system is that its not "optimal" enough, we should organize it differently so it would be better, no, i say it will never be good enough and we should just throw the whole thing away
    • BasedMan.png BasedManism - What objectivity? what truth? why should i care about that? surrender myself and my being to the whims of logic and "higher truth"? life is an absurd, and its an absurd to find some true and objective system, other than that you're ok i guess

    Dislike

    • Syntridem2.png Syncretic Tridemism - Attaturk failed, so did Sun Yat-Sen, nationalism will always lead to suffering and the oppression of the individual, no matter how much welfare you try to shove at my face
    • Panth.png Pantheonism - Pan-Humanist Social Monarchism, to say this ideology is haunted by phantasms (spooked) would be an understatement, and also, why monarchy? if you believe a leader should be competent surely you would defend meritocracy or technocracy
    • MLL.png Libra Thought - Humane liberalism, one that gives you a "more" humane work (not that Marxist-Leninist countries have a better record with working conditions), a "more" humane economy (Where the needs and wants of the human are dictated by the polis and not itself), a more humane "democracy" (where you can criticize the government as long as the government doesn't consider it a "threat", very humane indeed), a more humane ruling class (it would surely only educate the people, how much can a revolutionary institution that brought about a new order manufacture consent anyways?), but the thing is, its not enough for this things to be humane, i want them gone, all of it, only then i would be free, tolerable foreign relations takes aside from the Donetsk and Luhansk support, which is the equivalent of supporting vichy france
    • Postean.png New Maria's Ideology - You say you put yourself first but it really does seem like pessimism dominates you

    Enemies

    Comments

    • Ashley.png AshleyHere - New ball 😮
      • Ioist.png Io - Yeah, i've had three different balls 😎

    MATTball.pngMatteel - Ayo add me please.

    • Postean.png Pessimism is political, social and metaphysical, not in everyday life.

    Navboxes

    1. the Stirnerite meaning is being used here
    Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.

    Recent changes

  • JacksonTheBear • 1 minute ago
  • JacksonTheBear • 4 minutes ago
  • Hokton • 4 minutes ago
  • JacksonTheBear • 10 minutes ago
  • Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.