Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 6,303 articles on Polcompball Anarchy Wiki. Type your article name above or create one of the articles listed here!

    Polcompball Anarchy Wiki

    Rutabagism is a reformist left-unity culturally-left ideology, but this is an oversimplification and if it weren't it'd describe most left-unity ideologies. It's extremely globalist and is an ideology primarily concerned with solving the immediate problems of the 21st century, this ideology doesn't concern itself with the best end-state for humanity, as it sees that as the job of a society without the existential threats that plague the current one. The ideology believes that the current leaders of society are selfish and incompetent (at what leaders should do, they seem pretty good at robbing people) and that a socialist society would result in more people in power who know and care to fix society for reasons I'll explain below, don't hold your breath though, I wrote this part after a lot of what's underneath and specified all this after much of what's written and don't care to move it all around. Also, hi Jreg!

    Further Explanation for those that have the Time to Read it

    Rutabagism is reformist not because of a moral rejection of violence, but because the other proposed options for the destruction of capitalism aren't possible in this ideology's view. Firstly, revolution seems extraordinarily impractical in the modern day as the corrupt institutions that control society would be able to crush any rebellion. Secondly, Marxian Accelerationism (accelerating capitalism until its inherent contradictions cause its collapse), while a perfectly reasonable idea when it was created (even if I'm generally against accelerationism because it seems like you're just hurting people for a utopian future that may never come), is no longer applicable as capitalism is growing to the point where it can become self-sufficient and continue at least a century after climate change ends most life on Earth, eventually stopped by the entropy that ends all things in the universe. Rutabagism thinks that left-wing policy, because it improves the material conditions of the people and reduces the power of its most ardent opponents will be able to perpetuate itself at increasing speed. This ideology advocates for increasing levels of federalization, eventually culminating in one worldwide government, though there will be several checks and balances in place to make sure this is not abused. This is believed to be necessary because it would allow third-world countries to be protected from international imperialism while also protecting minority groups in those countries through the progressivism that comes naturally from the societal growth granted by not being bombed and robbed every four minutes, and by the worldwide laws emphasizing human rights. The wings of this government would not be separated by structure or geography, but by purpose. The three major wings would be the scientific, economic, and social wings, with several departments beneath, some would be joint departments with agreed-upon heads. The economic wing would be charged with providing basic needs, modernizing and diversifying local economies to maximize output, and automating all manual labor to allow humans to follow more academic fields that cannot be automated. The social wing would seek to end meaningless divides between people to allow humans to band together for the collective good, cooperate and negotiate with non-governmental institutions (primarily academic institutions, celebrities, news media, local leaders, etc.), deal with crime (most crime will have disappeared by this point due to the reduction of poverty, but the criminal justice system will primarily be preventative and rehabilitative), and ensure this society doesn't become too authoritarian and that people have and express their individual freedom. The scientific branch would primarily be responsible for combatting climate change and developing the necessary technology for the other two branches to function, though upon the successful abatement of climate change would divert some of the resources in that field towards interplanetary colonization, so as to ensure the (foreseeable) immortality of the human species. The leaders of the three groups would be elected by the populace, though only people with a background and renown in that field would be allowed to run, academic institutions would put forth candidates rather than parties, the leaders of the branches would select heads of each department (though this would not be their only function), who would select their staff. Examples of these departments include Agriculture (joint economic and scientific), Cultural Manipulation (social, and not as grim as it sounds, it would just seek to reform cultures through social osmosis to value individual identity, cooperation, and achievement, this way authoritarian measures wouldn't need to be taken to keep people peaceful and utile), Energy (joint scientific and economic), Industrial-Academic Transition (joint social and economic), Medical Care (joint economic and scientific), Education (all three, separate from the academic institutions as this would just be the basic education all students would need to receive, and the academic institutions would be separate from the state and simply seek to discover and share knowledge, often to solve a particular issue or just improve the quality-of-life of the average citizen), and housing (joint social and economic). Here's where we get to the explanation of why I think a socialist state would be more meritocratic, a socialist state, or at least some hypothesized socialist states, are more likely to a) educate their populace (real socialists, not tankies) b) try to appoint the best and brightest as their leaders c) define the "best and brightest" as the people who can most help the average citizen and d) lack another force to draw the most intelligent (not that capitalists are the most intelligent, usually they're meh to a little above average, and that's just counting the ones who didn't get their money in inheritance, but many of the people under them are geniuses who's talents are wasted on the acquisition of just enough money not to die). This is purely a transitory state, after the primary issues have been solved (imperialism, capitalism, climate change) than the state may transition wherever the society deems fit, while I'd advocate for an altered form of Democratic Confederalism, I don't know what's in the future, it's quite possible that new kinds of societies that we can't achieve nor predict will be possible.


    No, I just explained to you my ideology, that was the point of the last section.



    • Progressive Neo-Corporatism - Most of this ideology is based, but corporatism is questionable, due to the amount of trust that is placed in the infallibility of the state.
    • - - - The definition of utopian, and we disagree on religion, but other than that, quite based.
    • Neo-Bsaheedism - Based reformist market socialist, and I'm glad you've recognized the necessity of the state. Also, thank you for making my Polcompball good.
    • Anti-Deathism - Alright, yeah, eventually we should develop the technology to escape death, even if you are far too libertarian for my tastes, I appreciate the concept.
    • Tomassciism - Very based, nearly identical except for disagreement on religious issues.
    • Ozymandiasism - Similarly very based, while I disagree with the distributism, I can see where you're coming from and the rest of your ideology makes up for it, in accordance with your rating system I grant thee a 9/10.
    • NeoSajism - Techno-democratic Laicist global federalism is extraordinarily based, I disagree with the ordo-liberalism, but the rest of your ideology definitely makes up for it.
    • Liberal Technocracy - Quite similar to the last one, and similarly based as well, again, my main problem with this is the liberalism, but at least you both have welfare, and the rest is excellent.
    • Meritocracy - Meritocracy is best achieved through socialism, and the best argument for meritocracy is that it benefits all.
    • Yori Model - A fellow reformist, we agree on nearly everything and everywhere we don't agree I think we're still trying to reach the same goal.
    • Pan-Left Anarchism - Uber-based, please though, a state can be beneficial.
    • Ricardian Socialism - Obviously, you're a bit outdated, at the same time, you're still brilliant and one of the most influential concepts for my ideology. There are efficiencies that come with a market, and markets are not necessarily exploitative. I also appreciate the classical liberal influence and the nuanced economic perspective. That said, there are some issues present now that couldn't have been predicted in your day, so strict adherence is foolish, and eventually I hope to phase out the markets, just because over time alternate systems will probably outclass you.
    • Multiculturalism There are good aspects to every culture, we should adopt the best parts of all of them and discard the rest.
    • Technocracy - You're excellent, especially in your original form, but you could stand to be more democratic.
    • SajZeal Model - A more moderate version of me in some respects.
    • Techno-Socialism - The closest I come to coherence.
    • Democratic Socialism - The necessary component in this ideology to keep it from falling into kleptocracy.
    • Market Socialism - An excellent way to make sure you aren't bombed out of existence before your time.
    • Eco-Socialism - One of the main reasons for abolishing capitalism is climate change, at least in my view.
    • Guild Socialism - The general swing is based, but you're a little outdated and you need something to keep your guilds in check and serving the people, not the other way around. If you were elected, modernized, and had more of a task-force structure, you'd be extraordinarily based.
    • Marxism - You're quite based, that being said, your modern followers need to stop basing your entire ideology around people who lived over a hundred years ago and have a completely different world and framework upon which they set their ideology, especially when doing so would literally go against the ideology of that person.
    • Kaypakkayaism - In my opinion a defense of Mao is far more acceptable when you were alive, as his work and purported goals were quite noble, and his worse policies were not yet widely known outside of China. You also died for a noble cause, and pushed anti-imperialist goals in Turkey.
    • Eco-Authoritarianism I really, really hate to say this, authoritarianism is extremely cringe, but, some extreme action needs to be taken and it needs to be taken quickly, at the beginning of this state you'll be present, but I'm definitely gonna phase you out over time as more and more people accept the reality of climate change. Plus, thankfully, I'm given the in where everyone in power will be well-educated and knowledgeable, meaning that this action is likely going to be taken by elected officials and is therefore still democratic.
    • Democratic Confederalism - While I think a stronger, more centralized state is necessary for the time-being, the Rojava are extremely based, they do a lot of good work, and a modified version of this is probably my candidate for when Rutabagism ends.
    • Neo-YugoslavPartisanism - Excellent, the state is a necessary tool, at least in the short-term, and I'm glad you've realized that.
    • Hibernocracy - Whatever's necessary to end the Bri'ish is based, no matter the cost.
    • Bull-Moose Progressivism - Very based, the environmentalism and economic reform is enough for me to turn a blind eye to Panama, but, you know, in the future please don't do a Panama.
    • Globalism - Global issues require global action, we cannot allow petty international conflicts to get in the way of progress and solutions.
    • Gravelism - I wish you were like a decade or two younger and that the DNC hadn't ratfucked you, you could make an excellent candidate and hopefully subsequently an excellent president.
    • Laicism - Exactly, we need to phase out religion, not outright persecute it.
    • Progressivism - Social and technological advancement strengthens a society, it's one of the best features of humanity.
    • Reformism - Oftentimes pretty utopian, but I do believe you to be the most viable route to socialism in much of the world.
    • Moonlitism - A little bit too libertarian, but I'd prefer something too libertarian to the inverse, and otherwise you're quite based.
    • Bernstienism - Exactly, reform as a means to an end, used not because violence is wrong, but because it is impractical.
    • Sandersism - Bernard, you've shifted the American Overton Window leftwards and genuinely help the people, I think you're the best viable candidate at the moment, provided you don't die.
    • Corbynism - Popular britbonger socialist, if you can win, it'll be a sign of good things to come.
    • World Federalism - Like I said, global problems require global solutions. I wish you'd drop the local nations, but you're still extremely based regardless.
    • Syndicalism - I think you're a little too decentralized but you're based nonetheless.
    • Orwellism - Fellow democratic socialist and excellent author!
    • File:Lagon.png Lagonism - I think your ideology may be a little more influenced by cachet (not exactly what I mean, sort of internal cachet, if anyone has a word for that, please tell me) than you realize, but you're still based, and I think with a little time you'll be able to define your ideology better and along purer lines.
    • Anti-Theism - So long as no one gets killed or jailed, you're based, religion is an overall detractor from society, even if it has brought some good.
    • Mutual Libertarianism - Please return to the economic left! That said, techno-democracy is extraordinarily based, as is applying your libertarianism is a consistent way, even if I disagree with it. I'm not going to address the alter-globalism right now, as I don't feel like writing several pages on the subject.
    • File:Slavreichismsmallnew!.png New Slavreichism - You're more anarchistic than I'd like, but other than that, you're quite based.
    • File:MinnAestIcon.png Minnesotan Aestheticism - Other than Medieval Europe, I quite like your aesthetic choices (always been preferred North American aesthetics to European ones myself, both in early colonization, and before the Eurocucks arrived).
    • Environmentalism - Humanity is dependent on nature for our survival, the Earth, so far, is the only place that can support us, and even if that changes, we'll still be reliant on Earth's life, just cultivated on a different planet.
    • Logavism - Please regulate your economy and strengthen your state, but other than that, you're quite based.
    • Social Distributism - I've always been fond of distributism, I consider it a decent alternative to socialism, and this is even better.
    • File:Lumi.png LumiNyteism - Socialist Kemalism sounds excellent! The only problem I have is your anti-democracy, I understand the reasoning behind it, but conversely, someone in power without meaningful popular checks on said power doesn't end well, even when there's some form of bureaucratic check. This is actually part of an argument I have in favor of reform, is that as the country goes to the economic left, more and more people will be better educated, that said, with someone like Erdogan in power I can 100% understand a distrust of democracy.


    • Alter-Globalism - I see where you're coming from, the exploitation of foreign labor by predatory multinational corporations is despicable, however I don't necessarily think economic isolationism will solve that, as I'd argue it would mostly result in economic stagnation. Instead, I'd argue global cooperation is a better way to solve this issue, so that what's currently the third-world and what's currently the developed world would be on the same bargaining level, the third-world would be prioritized due to its need, rather than the first-world being prioritized due to its power and resources.
    • Conseilism - Way too culturally right-wing and a little too authoritarian, but other than that, you seem pretty based!
    • Social Capitalism - Better than ordinary capitalism, but social democracy is preferable, and socialism is preferable to that. I'm also going to use this as a place to put my opinions on Singapore. Your growth was unimaginable, and truly, I think you're far better than most alternatives I see. You jail people for spitting and are a little too economically unregulated, but I still believe you're an overall good.
    • Corporatism - Interesting ideas, but too authoritarian, plus, your close relationship with fascism isn't great.
    • Queer Anarchism - Absolute abolition of gender, while desirable, is difficult and unnecessary. So long as people aren't being murdered or robbed for being gay (whether by the populace, by corporations, by religious institutions, or by governments), it's not an issue that should have this level of attention specifically paid to it when there are so many other problems that require immediate action.
    • Neo-Metbolism - I am quite fond of syndicalism, but anarchism is incompatible with cultural rightism, and I dislike both.
    • Bsaheedism - Pretty based, but you need to actively encourage research into solutions for climate change, you can't just keep people from making things worse, plus the class-collaborationism is a little cringe.
    • Jorgensenism - I'll always prefer a Nolanist libertarian to some madman who thinks "libertarianism is when wealth inequality," and nothing else, but you are still a capitalist, and you do still promote the argument that all of capitalism's flaws come from regulation.
    • Irish Republicanism - I love your initial incarnation, but you're a little too nationalistic, and you're kind of a terrorist organization, remedy those two things and you'll be excellent.
    • RutaReactionarism - I like the economics and everything, and I guess that's one way to reach unity, but stop with the genocide threats.
    • Hoffmanism -We had the opportunity for genuine change in this country, we had a lot of anti-establishment energy which we could have done something with, but instead you channeled that energy to smoking weed in a field, and now for the rest of time you and slightly altered versions of yourself are the libertarian-leftist stereotype. That being said, there's an argument for cultivating a popular movement and subculture to support your goals, plus your movement created a lot of good music, but ultimately you failed where other leftist movements succeeded because they took the movement seriously, even if right-wingers still try to slander the left with the imagery of more serious leftist movements like the Black Panthers, it's never been as effective as the lazy, promiscuous, immature hippie.
    • IOF0PLPMAIAADEEEINA - Based in almost every respect, but as an egoist you do have an automatic point reduction, I'm afraid.
    • https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/polcompball_anarchy/images/c/cc/Anarcho-antinatalism.gif/revision/latest?cb=20210520230805 Anarcho-Antinatalism - Eh... okay, I'm lenient due to the communism, but I dislike antinatalism, humanity so far of the life we've seen shows the most potential, I don't want us to willingly die out, I want us to get our shit together, and advance and expand (peacefully) as a united species. Besides, we fucked the environment up badly, it's our responsibility to fix it.
    • Blartism - Eh... I'm sort of filling up quotas here with placement (one of the several reasons my relationships section makes no sense, the other being that my beliefs have changed a bit and this whole page is sort of outdated), but while anarchism could work, we need immediacy with the changes that'll be instated, something difficult to achieve with anarchy. Other than that, you're quite based.
    • Anationalism - I love this idea so much, why must you be an anarchist though?
    • Conservative Socialist Nationalism - A little bit too conservative, but I like your economic system, and will always back a fellow terrorist.
    • Mutualism - I've always thought you've got a lot of interesting ideas, obviously I disagree with the anarchism (though you're not necessarily anarchist), but you seem like one of the most thought-out anarchist systems.
    • Potashism - Based in several respects, but the state, at least for now, is necessary.
    • Labour Zionism - The socialism and environmentalism are obviously pretty based, but historically, while progressive on fronts like gender equality, you were pretty racist. Your modern incarnation is no longer racist, which is good, but you've grown weak, you no longer really advocate economic change, I hope one day the New Economic Party grows, they seem pretty based.
    • Left-Wing Nationalism - Historically, oftentimes when you're present, it leads to positive radicalization but in turn has also leads to terrorism (terrorism meaning the intentional targeting of civilians), whether it be the American Revolution (leftist for the time), the IRA, Puerto Rican separatists, etc.
    • Bismarckism - Outdated, but for the time you were extraordinarily based... other than the anti-democracy and moderate cultural conservatism.
    • Progressive Imperialism - With a second term and less congressional stupidity, LBJ could have done a lot of good, but Vietnam still knocks you down to frenemies.
    • w:c;Polcompball:Castroism - He had a lot of good ideas, he had one of the best healthcare systems in the world, but his human rights track record is appalling.
    • Ego-Communism - Emma, you're beyond utopian (that comes from a reformist, mind you), and egoism is pretty cringe, but you still do have some good ideas.
    • Christian Socialism - I like the socialism, I like the democracy, I like the manipulation of culture to serve the greater good, but religion? I don't know man...
    • Catholic Workerism - I like the socialism of course, but the religion is cringe and I think it leads to the anarchism, if you believe serving a magic man in the sky will solve all your problems it makes sense that you wouldn't try to work on them yourselves. Short version: based socialism, cringe religion, and half-based half-cringe anarchism.
    • Anarcho-Pacifism - Big fan of the pacifism, not sure how you plan on solving the issues with the day with anarchism, but anarchism's definitely a candidate for when the time of the transitory state comes to an end.
    • Council Communism - You or Democratic Confederalism would probably be the basis of my ideology if not for climate change, but we need a centralized, organized effort against climate change, and unfortunately I don't think that's something you can provide. Plus, unlike Democratic Confederalism, you don't have as much going for you for the modern world (maybe why you died out, I don't know), and as such I'd consider you a corpse to be scavenged from rather than an ideology to be wholly considered.
    • Gaddafism - I too like to take simple democratic socialism and complicate it to the point where it's illegible, the difference is I actually want to keep it as democratic socialism.
    • Keynesianism - I really like Keynes, and Post-Keynesian theory seems interesting from the cursory research I've done into it, but unfortunately you are still a capitalist.
    • Anarcho-Communism - I really like your ideas, especially on paper, but when we've got a thousand catastrophes around the bend don't you think the people in power should be the people who know how to solve them?
    • Pan-Nationalism - Pan-Nationalism is a good way to unify states, but it does still validate the idea that people should be defined by a single, unchanging, unimportant identity.
    • Airisuism - Pretty based in many respects, but there are issues that need to be solved by a state. I do appreciate your endorsement of AOC and Bernie, left-wing policy is self-perpetuating and we need folks like them to get the ball rolling.
    • Social Democracy - Welfare saves lives and proves the viability of leftist policy in a capitalist society, but you're not a permanent solution, and you still allow capitalist damage to the environment and exploitation of foreign nations.
    • Left-Communism - Your theory is kind of based (other than the revolution, but if I had to mark down every lefty ideology for their advocacy of revolution I'd have no friends), I'd rather put you in friends, but your followers are elitist dicks who, if they have an effect at all, is the deterrence of potential allies. Even if you believe a revolution is possible, you still need to convince a significant portion of the population, potentially more people than with reform (because over time reform will reduce the power of our enemies).
    • Maoism - I really hate not putting you in enemies, but your writings were based, even if the leadership (past the first three years) was emphatically not based.
    • Eco-Fascism - I hate all fascists, including you, but you both care about the environment and have a semipermeable membrane through which cultural osmosis may take hold.
    • Green Minarchism - Environmentalism is based, but we should go one step further and incentivize people to work for the collective benefit (such as reversing the tide of climate change) as opposed to just keeping people from actively making things worse.
    • Transhumanism - I like the development of technology and the emphasis on science, but there are things that need to be done before we have some sort of cybernetic utopia. That's not to say we can't innovate in areas that enhance the experience of the individual, but our primary focus should be on the good of humanity.
    • Ho Chi Minh Thought - One of the few authoritarian leftists I'd consider a potential leftist, one who didn't really sell out their values, but you still did some exploitative state-capitalist things.
    • Obamaism - Best president in my lifetime, but too moderate. I understand you were fucked by a conservative congress, still, things like your immigration and military policy were your fault.
    • Ethnic Welfarism - Please lose the ethnic elements, it's a surefire road to stagnation and even worse. That said, in other respects, quite based.
    • Spadist Libertarian Noocracy - You're a pretty interesting ideology, and I really like your Polcompball, though please abandon capitalism.
    • Ego Post-Humanism - Agh, I'm conflicted, I think your ideas about the ascendance of humanity to something better are really cool, but egoism is a system that encourages personal ambition over cooperation, which is cringe.
    • SJW - Okay, first thing's first, a few annoying teenager like half a decade ago does not constitute a threat, that said, I was one of you and we were annoying as hell. Also, depending on whether or not you'd consider this "SJW," I tend to think this is an excuse for establishment Democrats to sabatoge people they don't like, even when these people are to the social and economic left, though though I'd argue that's more of a problem with the general media corruption where basically every new network is pushing the same agenda with different aesthetics (that's not as cynical as it sounds though, CNN is still an objectively better news outlet than Fox, but they're still both trying to get the same ultimate result).
    • Northzrnism - "What you do is none of my business if you keep it to yourself" is an ideology I can respect, even if it's one I can't get behind, that said, I don't think capitalism's how you achieve that vision, but this ideology is okay regardless.
    • Daveism - The user behind this ideology seems pretty good, but the ideology itself is, uh, complicated. I like the guild socialism a lot, but regressivism is atrocious.


    • Black Islamism - Just because you're Black doesn't mean you aren't still a Clerical Fascist, it boggles the mind that some leftists unironically defend Farrakhan.
    • Reaganism - You're basically just a folksy Nixon, I'm glad you're dead.
    • Christian Conservatism - A plague of children that have stopped the tide of progress for centuries, please be quiet you irritating, whiny hypocrites. When did "the magic man in the sky told me they're bad" become a valid excuse for policy anyway?
    • Acid Communism - "I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees," now please shut the fuck up you depressing prick, maybe these issues can be solved, maybe they can't, I'd rather the world goes down in defiance rather than collective suicidality.
    • Neo-Yoriism - I'm glad this road of capitalism and anti-environmentalism has been abandoned.
    • Gabrialduffeyism - From what I've seen he seems like a good guy, but his political takes are still pretty right-wing.
    • Neoliberalism - Murderer both domestic and foreign, precursor to the following.
    • Corporatocracy - An upsettingly plausible future is one where a form of neofeudalism descends and corporations completely replace the state.
    • Objectivism - One of the worst ideologies, cooperation and progress go hand-in-hand, plus, you died in public housing, hypocrite.
    • Reactionary Liberalism - You realize liberalism is what brought us to the present, yes? Liberalism was born from the enlightenment, it's created from the values of liberty and egalitarianism, the basis for modern socialism and progressivism, your ideology has adopted the precursor to everything you despise.
    • Reactionarism - What the hell is wrong with you? Society today has its flaws, sure, far too isolated, people are detached from their trade, if they have one, but the solution isn't literally just trying to go backwards in time, there are ways socito bring back the few good parts of the past without losing all the progress we've made.
    • File:Mises Instituteism.png Mises Instituteism - Honestly, the satire page seems pretty accurate, not even a problem with your economics, I respect Friedman even if I hate him, you on the other hand are just a moron beyond reproach.
    • Ba'athism - How any purported leftist supports you I can't fathom, stop nerve-gassing your own people asshole!
    • Ethnopluralism - People with different backgrounds and different cultures allows society to evolve, collecting the best concepts from all cultures and discarding what's unnecessary, you'd just form a cultural feedback loop where everyone just believes in more and more radical versions of whatever ideology they began with until the worst part of that ideology destroys them all.
    • Esoteric Fascism - Please stop making Paganism fascist, Pagan symbology is cool, why must you ruin it?
    • Social Darwinism - (Not the joke, off-compass ideology, but the real idea people sometimes push), you don't understand what Darwinism means, helping eachother is beneficial for survival, dipshit.
    • Austrolibertarian - See, there's a certain respect I have for Friedman, I believe the man was quite intelligent and skilled in his field, and while I do absolutely reject his economics, I'll defend him as a worthwhile figure. There is nothing and no one belonging to the Austrian School of Economics who I'd consider defending.
    • Voluntary Human Extinction - I- I... Where do I start with this? First of all, we've caused a lot of shit, we need to fix it, otherwise there will be horrific consequences down the road. Also, why, why do you exist? Humans, for all of their faults, can still do good, we're still the only species on Earth who has shown significant societal progression, plus, we invented bagels, what more do you need to realize humans aren't that bad after all?
    • Juche - Socialism is about collective ownership and collective profit, it's about shared benefit and unity for societal progress, you isolationist, monarchist, murderers.
    • Heinrich-Cheungism - You're superior to the average National Capitalist for your technocracy, but you're still a NazCap.
    • National Socialism - Genocidal maniacs, why does anyone support you guys in the 21st Century?
    • Mesoconservatism - So, you've adopted the discriminatory and barbaric social policy of paleoconservatism and the cruel and expensive foreign policy of neoconservatism, you had a Sophie's Choice, and you chose to kill both your children.
    • Nationalism - Nationalism is at least the most honest modern incarnation of our tribalistic tendencies, but it still delays and destroys, and for what, some arbitrary lines drawn on a piece of paper to appease two parties that do not care at all about you? That's the thing though, you don't even really love your nation, so much so you make up elaborate lies about how evil it is, you're basically just fabricated nostalgia that kills people.
    • Mercantilism - Historically speaking, the deadliest ideology, the East India Company is basically the fucking villain of history between the 17th and 19th centuries, you killed approximately 10 million people in Bangladesh alone, a third of their population at the time (in a span of three years, I might add), it's a little impressive to be as evil as you are.
    • Egoism - Anarchism is a little utopian at the moment, but I understand the basic concepts, maybe eventually it'll be a good idea. Egoism, on the other hand, by its very definition has no infrastructure or safeguards in place to keep warlords from rising, to aid any issues, to do anything as a collective, it's an unstable society doomed to failure.
    • Nullism - Authoritarianism is cringe but sometimes necessary, but there is no justification, ever, for totalitarianism. I'd argue even if you're just looking for strict efficiency, if we all think the same then no new ideas occur and we're permanently stuck at the level of society we were at when we started.
    • Capitalism - A defunct system, while unlike many socialists I think you were a good idea 400 years ago (see footnote in comments), you've ceased to be a tool for humanity and have instead made humanity your tool, and as such you must end.
    • Dengism - Transitory state? What in the hell are you transitioning to? It doesn't look to me like your getting any less capitalist.
    • Marxism-Leninism - You gave him the idea to call himself a transitory state! You were the one who gave the phrase connotations, but the idea itself is a good one, and is only destined to lead to corruption when all of the resources are consolidated in one place under one man. Yes, I do realize that their are differing definitions of Marxism-Leninism, I'm using the definition of all the imperialist states that called themselves Marxist-Leninist or Communist despite being state-capitalism.
    • Hoppeanism - We'll skip past the culturally right libertarian as I've addressed that elsewhere, "individual freedom" was in no way more common in the days of monarchy! In those days, where you were born meant what you would do and how you would die, no deviation possible. Liberalism has its flaws, but it's certainly a freer and better society than that.
    • Clerical Fascism - I hate you so much, you're the worst fascist, and, I mean, that's kind of an impressive title. I'd also argue you're the most historically powerful, whether you call yourself Klansman or Kharijite.
    • Anarcho-Fascism - Oh, well will you look at that, a variation of fascism with even less of a basis in the real world. I'm so glad you make no sense, otherwise you might gain power someplace, the thought alone gives me shudders.
    • State Atheism - State Atheism in practice almost always leads to state worship, instead of outright persecuting the religious, allow and encourage religion to die out with societal progress.
    • Imperialism - You know before when I said climate change was one of the main reasons for socialism? Dealing with your shit was the other one.
    • Accelerationism - Stop it, the future is mass extinction and societal collapse, we can delay, and hopefully prevent that, but each of you are wrong in some way. Right Accelerationism, yeah, I mean, I don't think I have to explain this one. Left-Accelerationism, capitalism is killing people faster and faster already, and now we have a deadline before we're all dead, instead of speeding up the collapse of capitalism and hoping its demise comes before the end of humanity, why not just, I don't know, try to solve both? Gender Accelerationism... never mind, you're based, carry on. Unconditional Accelerationism, no, what the hell's wrong with you?
    • National Capitalism - See, I'm generally against violence because it hurts our optics and I think it's a long-term anchor for our cause, but you know, I think I'll make an exception for you.
    • Anarcho-Capitalism - I'm going to have to agree with my anarchist brethren and say this is just feudalism wrapped up in a bow, plus, capitalism without a state that purportedly serves the people to hold it back is going to end the planet even sooner.
    • Reactionary Socialism - This isn't real socialism, hell, the Dengists might even call you a fake socialist, like the last one, you're just feudalism wrapped up in a bow.
    • Feudalism - Just feudalism wrapped up in a, wait, no, just feudalism.
    • Pol Potism - Where to begin? You execute those seen as intellectual, which will do nothing but keep our society in the dark age, you took arms from Kissinger to sabotage Ho Chi Minh, oh, and typically I'm not a fan of enslaving, torturing, and executing children.
    • Zionism - Way too expansionist, but my opinions on you have softened. You do a lot of wrong, especially when it comes to foreign policy, you have the resources to meaningfully reform the Middle East and instead kill and rob your neighbors, but I no longer think you're uniquely terrible, like I used to.
    • Neo-Ottomanism - You are uniquely terrible, Erdogan's a Clerical Fascist and a murderer, and he's destroying the Rojava, I see very little that redeems you.
    • Neo-Afunhumaninterism - I hope you mature beyond this as you age, the obvious and fundamental hypocrisy of a libertarian who thinks people who've got nothing to do with him should be forced to follow his arbitrary cultural mores is something you're either going to have to rationalize or justify as you age.
    • Lpyapersonism - I don't mind the user too much, they seem nice (even if they are infuriating to debate, just because there's no fundamental reality we can agree on, thankfully, we do agree on some moral things which makes debate possible, even if quite difficult), but I really dislike religious conservatism, just because it seems like a way to avoid confronting basic and outdated human instincts that lead to negative behavior by justifying it as "just following orders."
    • Pinochetism - Imagine toppling a democracy and installing a dictator in the name of freedom...
    • Neoconservatism - Since there's no Kissingerism page and I'm too lazy to make one at the moment, I'll use you as a substitute. Fuck you Henry, you're my mortal enemy for now until the glorious day your miserable existence ends. You're probably the most globally damaging individual person of the 20th century, you ruined lives, ended democracies, and just generally did your best to break everything. All that said, I will give you one point, the reformation of German culture post-WW2 you influenced was actually pretty ingenious, and is a big influence on my ideology.
    • Jed-Pilled Thought - Advancement is the great gift bestowed upon humanity and you would squander it by binding us the the apelike tribalism we're supposed to have evolved past.
    • Shining Path - Boiling children isn't great

    Deeply, unforgivably cringe

    Template:Rutabagists Template:Environmentalists


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

    Recent changes

  • GeneralStudios • 1 minute ago
  • GeneralStudios • 8 minutes ago
  • Shigeruguy • 50 minutes ago
  • Shigeruguy • 51 minutes ago
  • Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.