Icons: (
/
/
/
/
)
“Regarding the need to pray, the anarch is again no different from anyone else. But he does not like to attach himself. He does not squander his best energies. He accepts no substitute for his gold. He knows his freedom, and also what it is worth its weight in. The equation balances when he is offered something credible. The result is ONE.
There can be no doubt that gods have appeared, not only in ancient times but even late in history; they feasted with us and fought at our sides. But what good is the splendor of bygone banquets to a starving man? What good is the clinking of gold that a poor man hears through the wall of time? The gods must be called.
The anarch lets all this be; he can bide his time. He has his ethos, but not morals. He recognizes lawfulness, but not the law; he despises rules. Whenever ethos goes into shalts and shalt-nots, it is already corrupted. Still, it can harmonize with them, depending on location and circumstances, briefly or at length, just as I harmonize here with the tyrant for as long as I like.
One error of the anarchists is their belief that human nature is intrinsically good. They thereby castrate society, just as the theologians ("God is goodness") castrate the Good Lord.”
Economics 
Entrepreneurship and Creativity
The problem with homo economicus: Its suppositions
An addition to Gonzo Capitalism, listening to your (loyal) customers 
Success within the use of free markets 
How most of the free market economies have had thriving economies throughout history. Will work on in the future.
How are we going to incorporate Georgism and Propertarianism?
Might have to put some more effort into your property buddy 
Fittest propertarians and landlords through LVT
(Social) Darwinism in economics 
Social Darwinism by definition is the application of the "survival of the fittest" in societies, coined by Emile Gautier and defined by Herbert Spencer. I will explain the application of social darwinism to economics and possibly society.
Don Vultaggio, the president and co-founder of AriZona tea 
I was drinking some AriZona tea I bought from a gas-station one day and it got me thinking: "How much profit its company has capitalized off of a mere 99 cents?" I dug deeper researching how and I have created a hypothesis. People, or consumers, will most likely consistently seek and want products for cheaper prices. You might think: How may businesses profit off of such cheap products, especially for 99 cents? Don Vultaggio, the president/co-founder of AriZona tea, one who has built a multi-billion dollar empire is our prime example here. He has accumulated billions of dollars due to that same empire, AriZona, because of the cheap, affordable, and quality products produced by the company. (WIP)
Market forces are everywhere, even drug cartels 
WIP
Our way to decentralization 
Commodity-backed currency or crypto-currency?
Bias against the (libertarian) left sucks, honestly
The strong bias many (libertarian) right-wing individuals have against leftist viewpoints is very idiotic. It's an oversimplification that ignores the similarity within the leftifts, and a bit of some leftist ideologies aren't inherently incompatible with rightist perspectives. For instance, the principles of Mutualism and Agorism (certain types)[3], advocating for voluntary association and free markets within a decentralized framework, are just some examples of leftist thought that can compatibilize even with some of the most extreme rightists. These approaches highlight the potential for common ground and shared values, demonstrating that the political landscape is far more complex than a simple left-right dichotomy often suggests. If you look at it from another perspective, you'd find many of these ideologies share common beliefs with rightists.
I do not care if you are rich or poor 
Deregulate zoning laws to end housing crises
How Corporatism destroyed the USA during the Great Depression
The US tax system is such a fucking dystopia
Capital cope
Capitalism, as a nearly dominant global economic system, (and most likely dominant in the coming years) possesses an almost inescapable momentum. Its intricate web of financial institutions, technological advancements, and ingrained societal norms makes it difficult to abolish entirely. There isn't an available formed alternative system poised to replace it. This isn't to say that alternative economic models haven't been proposed or experimented with, but none have achieved the widespread global adoption and influence of capitalism. Mark Fisher continues my thoughts in his influential book "Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?" The book primarily discusses that capitalism has become so deeply embedded in our consciousness, our political systems, and our everyday lives that it's practically impossible to imagine a world without it. In more detail, Fisher particularly covers neoliberalism and its rise, which in my words, is a horrible example. I'll discuss this later. This acceptance of capitalism as the only viable system and the inability to even conceive of a serious alternative is what Fisher termed "Capitalist Realism." It's not simply the economic reality of capitalism's dominance, but a deeper, more backhanded ideological force. It shapes our expectations, limits our imagination, and subtly discourages any serious challenge to the status quo, as argued by Mark Fisher. The idea is that even if one wanted to resist or overthrow capitalism, the systemic forces are so powerful that any attempt would be futile. This leads to a sense of resignation and acceptance, where individuals believe there's no point in fighting against an insurmountable force, thus passively contributing to its continued dominance. The statement suggests that resistance is not merely difficult, but inherently pointless under the weight of Capitalist Realism. The individual is left with only one choice: participation within the existing capitalist framework.
Mark Fisher portrays Capitalist Realism like as a cruel, twisted dark-hearted dystopia. Fisher is incorrect in many particular areas critiquing Capitalist Realism, ranging from using neoliberalism, stating that Capitalist Realism limits imagination, etc. To say that this "Capitalist Realism" limits our imagination is quite frankly absurd. In fact, it's quite the opposite. (WIP)
Is capitalism over?
Unironic Perestroika 2.0
Economic Globalization
The only type of imperialism that I accept (kinda)
Global brand/company/corporate dominations
Best managers in management 
Intellectual property is not legitemate
Art is an exception 
...And an exception for that too 
Counter AI-slop with contract agreements
Physical property is superior
Right to strike 
Many, and when I say many, I mean MANY leftists claim that libertarianism infringes on the exploitation of workers rests on a biased delusion that misunderstanding of both libertarian principles and the nature of exploitation itself. Leftists often argue that free markets lead to the exploitation of workers through low wages, unsafe working conditions, and the suppression of worker power. However, this critique mixes the absence of government intervention with the deliberate suppression of worker rights. Libertarianism advocates for individual liberty and limited government. This means minimizing state interference in economic activity, allowing individuals to freely enter into contracts and pursue their own economic interests. In this system, fostering competition and individual responsibility, ultimately benefits everyone, including workers. The "liberty of the people" extends to all individuals, regardless of their role in the economy. You can see where this is going. Workers, therefore, are free to negotiate wages, seek better working conditions, all without government intervention. The dogmatic assumption that this freedom inherently leads to exploitation ignores several crucial points. Firstly, a truly free market relies on informed consent. Exploitation, by definition, involves coercion or deception. If workers are freely entering into employment contracts, accepting wages and conditions they deem acceptable, then the claim of exploitation is weakened. Individuals need to ensure that they are getting themselves into what they think benefits all parties. Secondly, a competitive market incentivizes businesses to treat their workers fairly. Companies that offer poor wages or working conditions will struggle to attract and maintain relativity, putting them at a major competitive disadvantage against businesses that offer better conditions. Thirdly, robust worker protections don't necessarily require government intervention. Independent unions, worker cooperatives, and ethical consumerism can all play a significant role in ensuring fair treatment of workers. So, how does this contribute to workers being able to strike? I'd assume you'd already know, but if it isn't obvious enough already, (WIP)
Hypocritical libertarian capitalists 
The economy is a cruel, cruel place (and why I sympethize with SOME leftists) 
Stop denying climate change and destroying the environment you fuckers
Real-time evidence that low taxes and free economies are a win 
FUCKING 90.2 ON THE ECONOMIC FREEDOM INDEX
HONG KONG, SWITZERLAND, AND SINGAPORE ARE MY PRAXIS.
The State 
Covering Patchwork
Will write later. It elaborates about the success of microstates and why patchwork is a good example of a favorable system, and many more about it.
NRx and Minarchism go hand in hand
Title is self-explanatory, will write later
Minarchist paradoxes and Hoppe and Nozick's critiques 
I discuss the paradoxes behind Minarchism and its contradictions and how I theorize to fix, or manage in this case.
There will always be imperialists 
Defense within microstates.
Incorporating Panarchy, Minarchy, and Patchwork
I explain how to merge these systems together.
Meritocratic and Aristocracy 
Govcorps?
Government competition and innovation
How are we incorporating knowledge and technology through liberty, individualism, free market, and decentralization? 
The Failed
Hans-Hermann Hoppe
WIP
Democratic Insurrection 
Democracy is the cause of insurrection (January 6th Riot) 
Democracy is a lie 
Kierkegaard's concept of "The Mob" quite literally is democracy
Anarcho-Capitalism isn't real anarchy; and that's a good thing
You can't escape chaos from both the state, government, or anarchy
Hereditary processes absolutely stink
The obvious instability and potential for disastrous leadership within a monarchy are apparent. You wouldn't trust a mechanic who had never touched a wrench, nor your health to an unqualified, untrustable doctor. Similarly, trusting the governance of a nation to an individual solely based on heredity is a gamble with catastrophic consequences. A monarch's legitimacy rests not on merit or capability, but on lineage, a system contrary to the principles of competence and effective governance. This problem has brought distraught to many monarchies throughout history, and the United Kingdom, with its long, complex history, provides evidence. While steeped in tradition, the process offers no guarantee of selecting a ruler possessing the necessary skills, knowledge, and temperament to lead effectively. We've seen instances where monarchs have lacked the intellectual capacity, the wisdom, the traits to govern effectively. The idea that a nation's fate should hinge on the chance of a competent heir is unacceptable. Would you trust your life, your livelihood, your future to someone solely because of their birthright, regardless of their qualifications? No! Why would you? You wouldn't take medical advice from a doctor who has not taken medical school. Why, then, should we accept political leadership from someone dumbfounded? This foolish incompetent tomfoolery is why I embrace meritocratic ideals. I prioritize meritocracy, selecting leaders based on demonstrable expertise and proven capabilities, rather than factors like birth. A meritocratic, or technocratic system strives to identify and power the most skilled and intelligent individuals, ensuring that governance is informed by hardcore decision-making and understanding of complex issues. By focusing on competence and expertise, we can create a more stable, prosperous, and equitable future, one farther more superior than the unpredictable and often arbitrary outcomes of hereditary rule. However, you wouldn't want a singular leader, that failing system is prone to corruption. This leads me to federalism.
If not patchwork, then federalism
I also support an alternative system to patchwork.
Fuck the UN and fuck nationalism 
What the fuck is Trump's problem?
Trump's Neo-Cult of Personality 
Trump has failed his cult. What are we going to do about it?
The Democrats are as worse
Make Vivek president IMMEDIATELY. (kind of)
Summary: I explain how Vivek is going to bring America to its peak. Not a fan of democracy but he is the best option in American democracy. Shame the population didn't vote for him.
Why are schools and their programs becoming the cathedral? 
Both the (political) left and right are retarded 
Right to internet access
Soma...
If I Founded A Nation
microstate
Societal and Cultural Views
Progressive and conservative friendly fire 
At first glance, you may assume that progressives and conservatives are completely opposite. Wrong. I will disprove this in this section of my page.
You must be absolutely brainfucked to think we should return to the medieval era
You can't make everything "all-inclusive" 
Limitations on gender and body modification surgeries 
Ideas/Concepts
Post-Minarchism
A new concept I have created that I will further elaborate in the future. It is similar to 
Post-Libertarianism in a way.
Post-Nilssonianism 
Digitalization
Kraterocapitalism/Kraterocorporatocracy 
Question
Who was in Paris? 
Postpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostpostmodernism 
Philosophical Thoughts/Beliefs 
I will not speak much about philosophy since this is a political website, although take this with a grain of salt because I might change my mind later.
Metamodernism and Hypermodernity [4]
I explain my beliefs and critiques on metamodernism and hypermodernism.
Deep appreciation for Post-Irony
Should grand narratives make a return or dissapearance? 
My love-hate relationship with Egoism
The title is self-explanatory
The differences between misanthropes and anti-humanists 
You can tell already.
Active Misanthropy and Passive Misanthropy
A brief look at humanity 
Humanity and how it failed.
Will to Power and Passive Nihilism
What did the Solar Economy get right? 
A cold anarchy and a potential synthesis with a hot anarchy
Nick Land and his followers are mere utopianists
Landian Accelerationism is NOT feasible
Ontological Anarchy?
File:Recursivism.png Philosophical Recursion
Why I take Ernst Jünger's word
Yep. You know what I'm going to say. To start off, Jünger was an individual who genuinely faced the actual experience and was a first-hand witness to something that constructed, supported, and stabilized his philosophy, a war veteran. (WIP)
Katkov was ahead of his time
Acceleration is inevitable
The Metamodernism of the Accelerationists
How we interpret the Bible 
The church always tells us how we're supposed to interpret the Bible
Christian Amorality
Next step in evolution
I'm open to technological advancements and modifications to humans using bio-technology, but I'm a bit skeptical to some extreme measures regarding it. (WIP)
Lyotard's warnings are probably right
Existential Despair and Infinite Qualitative Distinction
Heidegger, why must you deny that you're an Existentialist?
Fuck correlationism, embrace realism 
Žižek and the eerie similarities with Radical Orthodoxy 
Urphänomen
Goethe's emphasis on development and transformation
Dugin CAN POSSIBLY make sense in a way
Fourth Theory is just the leftist extension of NRx
Humans WERE social animals
Lipovetsky's concept of individual authenticity
Kierkegaard's concept of individual authenticity
Procesist theology
A dynamic reality, a dynamic economy (and society)
Don't know if I should put this in the economic section or philosophy section.
Emphasis on creativity
Untold Heaven
Unironic Insularism to dodge dogmatic views 
Post-Post-Marxism (not here for my beliefs but discussing it)
Brent Cooper's Meta-Marxism 
The fact that I should shut the fuck up is an artificial concept
The fact that I should shut the fuck up is an artificial concept 
Bullshit.
Misc.
Neoreactionary sterotypes [5]
WTF HAPPENED TO MOLDBUG??? 
George Washington is the only true American
Piracy is justified
Do us Filipinos secretly love Slavics? 
Is PCBA just a phase? 
Damn, that is pretty good!
Bruh stop fucking changing the alphabet song
Games
Yakuza
Team Fortress 2 
- (WIP)
Random tech shit
Next plans as of currently
- Convert my Chromebook into a Nixbook
Install LineageOS on one of my phones (or Graphene)- Install Gentoo on my switch
- Get a new pc/laptop
- Install
Tails, 
Qubes, 
Steam, 
Artix Linux or 
Debian operating systems on it - Download all my previous private software (
Tor, 
Mullvad, 
Matrix, etc.) - Also download my epic gaming shit!!! Also use Flatpak, Lutris, and WineHQ to run games
- Create my own mail servers or servers in general
- That's fucking it
I just want some fucking privacy
Recipes
Breakfast
Lunch
Dinner
Conlangs
Old
Haxellian
Troixogasque
Troixogasque is an abugida developed in 2023 that has not been finished.
Baulino
Hazonetics
Hazonetics is a semi-jokelang with chaotic phonology. (Kind of)
Éxilian
Myitu/Mwitu
Iktaw̃ian
Jurgzvæltes
New
Political Journey
Non-Political Stuff
Don't let politics in the way of a good friendship
I've met people from all over; progressives, to conservatives, communists, to capitalists, anarchists, to statists, you get the point. I don't mind your political ideology (as long as you're not an asshole about it) and we can still become great allies or acquaintances.
Relations
Compatible Collaborators
Dingusbingusism - My previous ideology was full of shit, and I would like to debate with you another time. Sad to see that i've lost contact with you.
Celestial Libertarianism - This page and your ideological stances and most philosophical beliefs are spectacular. It's beautifully written and it has high potential on being influential to people and possibly even me. I have no crutiques. I don't think I need to say further, I support your ideology.
Crysalism 
- What I said above but I disagree with your democracy, even if voluntary.- Neo-Nietzscheanism
- PEAK CINEMA
Potential Cooperation
Andrionism - I can't say much because there's very little. I'd say I agree with you a lot, but you need to elaborate more. If you noticed, I've removed the Post-Libertarian part of my influences because your critique of Killer Kitty's alt reminded me of why I don't align with Post-Libertarianism anymore. Just like XK said, read some Neoreactionary theory. 
Neo-TIIKKETMASTER Thought - I'm going to be direct. While I generally find your beliefs to be compatible with mine, I have concerns about the inconsistency between your self-identification as a libertarian. Libertarianism as a philosophy posits individual and intellectual freedom. Shunning those who disagree with your beliefs is dogmatic, biased, and suppressive. This contrasts greatly with the principles of open discourse and tolerance often associated with libertarian thought. This feels hypocritical, given your stated beliefs. While you are agreeable in many other ways, (just cut out the Rationalism) this inconsistency is significant and calls for attention. I would appreciate it if you could address this.
Asneeism - You're 
Noteism
done right. I concur with your overall ideology, particularly your economic and (most) philosophical views, neoreactionary leanings, and views on eugenics and Hoppean concepts, which aligns with my assessment. But there is always a critique. Historically, monarchies have often had high levels of expenditure on courts, armies, and the personal enrichment of the ruling class. While decentralization might slightly reduce the size of the central government, the total amount of taxation and government spending may not decrease significantly. Additionally, the reliance on regional nobles creates an unequal power structure. It risks the development of inherited privelage, rather than fostering a meritocratic society. The claim that the social organism benefits from suppressing individual self-interest overlooks the crucial role individual initiative plays in innovation, progress, and societal advancement. As far as communitarianism, I disagree. A system prioritizing the collective often hinders creativity and dissent, leading to stagnation. Many discoveries in science, art, and technology often form from individuals pursuing unorthodox paths, defying the status quo, and challenging existing norms. Forcing individuals into a pre-defined mold that serves the "collective" leads to a loss of unique talents and perspectives. The concept of a "greater good" is subjective and often used to justify authoritarian measures. Who defines this "greater good," and how are dissenting opinions accounted for? History is rife with examples where the supposed benefit of the collective has been used to justify oppression, injustice, and the suppression of individual rights. The lack of a clear, universally accepted definition of the "greater good" renders this argument inherently problematic. The argument suggests that individualism leads to meaninglessness. This is a false dichotomy. Meaning and purpose can come from many' sources – personal achievement, creative expression, relationships, contributing to a cause one believes in – not solely from identification with a collective. A truly thriving society allows individuals to find purpose in many ways, without forcing conformity.
Hendersonism - Never thought I'd have you comment here, but I'm aware of your distaste for libertarianism and "wacky NRx stuff", but aside from that I still have some critiques for some of your views, concerning your views on religion. Honestly, I could not care less if you're agnostic or not but my concern lies in your proposed religious regulations. Even if maintaining a degree of religious freedom, these regulations would most likely be so restrictive to the point it would force a mass exodus within the country of traditionalist/conservative families which is a signifcant factor of the US population, but since religion in the US is on the decline and unaffiliated religious individuals are on the rise, it might aid your aim to restrict religion, but large chunks of the US population believe that the US should be a Christian nation. (take a look at this article) Adding on to that, the motto of the US is "In God we trust". Converting the US into a more secular nation is going to be tough work, and it would most likely take 10+ years if you do it in a subtle way. You're only pleasing the seculars, which is contradictory to your utilitarianism. Setting aside this major point of contention, I generally find myself in agreement with your other views. (Might add more critiques, please note that)
-
I doubt that a "mass exodus" will truly happen with the policies I would want to pursue, as I doubt things would ever get "restrictive" enough to warrant taking one, one's family and one's entire livelihood with them to a country with different people, different culture and a different political philosophy overall (although to be fair, I do rock the boat regarding "political philosophy"). I don't want to enforce my narratives absolutely everywhere, either. Take, for example, religion in the household and on the family level. At those levels, not only is suppressing religion completely impractical, but even if it was, it wouldn't be worth either the expenditure or the blow to social cohesion it would deal. I do not want to police what people think; hell, I'm even fine with Mormons and the Amish doing their own thing as long as they're not endangering the public health or spreading subversion, but I don't want religion to pollute the greater narrative of things and ESPECIALLY how policy is made overall, either. Secularism would lead to a society that I believe would be better off than one dominated or even substantially influenced by religion, so I disagree with the notion that my policies aren't utilitarian since I'm planning in the long run, not exclusively in the short-term. Moreover, I think that invoking "In God We Trust" is pretty dubious, especially since it's a symbolic phrase, but that's a minor nitpick. In retrospect, though, perhaps my anti-religious tax policies and stripping every religious institution of their ability to receive 501(c) benefits is a bit too harsh indeed; maybe having them pay a flat rate like everywhere else would be good enough while actively dealing with megachurches and other subversive sects on a case-by-case basis. I still retain my opinions on Total Islam Death in any scenario, though, since it would be a net positive if those types packed up and left in the long run.
Ah, I see. Well in that case, I'd agree with you more then, but HOWEVER, "Total Islam Death" could potentially cause another World War considering that Islam is the second most followed religion, it'd be like a Tenth Crusade and a Holy War against seculars.
- Well, I did specify that I want to keep Total Islam Death internal to the country and maybe even Europe or ASEAN. I've admitted that I won't be able to purge it from MENA ,even though if I could, I certainly would.
- MENA can still declare war even if you keep it internally and encourage terrorist attacks worse than 9/11.
- I welcome the
opportunitychallenge.
-
- Whatever game we were playing, you just won.
two retards fighting:
Bayanihanismo - Holy shit, Kardashev Pact reunion!!!! But besides that, I'd gained the impression you'd place me inside the "Dubious" section in your relations, but it's time for some of my critiques. (WIP)
Aceism - WIP
Neighborly
Carangejoism - A bit too nationalist for my tastes, although you are highly agreeable. I especially agree with your argument against leftists, and it also applies to progressives. However, conservatives also act this way in a certain manner. (will add more later)
Zankism - We are very similar in mostly everything and we come to mostly the same conclusion. I'm only a bit hesitant about your progressivism.
Neutral
Aploism 
- (i will add more later trust) I'd say your philosophy is pretty good (although I'm skeptical about the materialism) although your politics and economics leave a lot to be desired. Let's start with economics. The positive part within your economic views are your pragmatic views on taxes and modernization. I can't say much about it since it's still a work in progress (much like my page) although welfare, corporatist, and socialist policies is unnecessary. I'd say your cameralist variant is way better. (WIP, will elaborate on why I disagree later.)
Brazilian Liberalism - Some aspects of your economic beliefs are acceptable, but I'm a bit hesitant about your protectionist measures and regulationism. Throughout history, many free-market and free trade nations have evidently been successful and showed exceptional economic growth. (still can be seen now in microstates) Look at Singapore – a nation that has one of the most free markets in the world, is one of the most thriving nations with a high GDP per capita. This can be seen in other microstates similar to Singapore, such as Luxembourg, Monaco, etc. which have fostered robust economic environments through deregulation and a focus on attracting foreign investment. Additionally, you should ditch the democracy. Democracy is a flawed system. It is prone to corruption. The voters may be misinformed and how their votes will affect the future of their nation. Many of these arguments are old and many are tired of hearing it but it is true. Moreover, another system is more favorable, especially ones that include merit. Moving on to the positive side, I'm glad you don't dickride Neoliberalism and the USA anymore. What's also good is that I find the "National Security" (besides the protection of national businesses part, although I don't know if you're talking about other national businesses or domestic businesses) and "Israel" sections on your page agreeable, as well as environmentalism. This commitment to environmentalism is a one in a thousand chance among capitalists, and YOU have managed to beat those odds. Since I have taken a break off this website for a while, you have made a lot of progress my friend. YOU'RE A FEMALE????????
Nitrism - Why do you embrace Corporatism? There's many instances in of which nations embraced a corporatist economy and failed horribly... (WIP)
Clean-Up Centrism - I can't really say much about you other than that I admire your technoliberal and pragmatic views. I can get behind welfare (even though I don't support it) and I agree with the concept of "opportunistic neutrality", along with anti-racism, and global profit. My problem lies in the section of a "clean" democracy and your proposed system of a "radicalism meter". Even if the democracy is "cleaned", merit or skill is the prime option over democracy and the populace may still be uninformed and still be dogmatic, or not even participate in the voting, rendering it useless. Furthermore, forcing apoliticals or everybody to despise extremism is oppression and a violation of civil liberties, even if a threat. Individuals should still be able to express their political views, extreme or not. Action should only be taken if violence is acted upon and is not in accordance with lawful order and if it is a violation of individual liberty. This "cleaning stage", in essence, is an authoritarian ideology that enforces radical centrism on its citizens.
Oștism - WIP
Meritocratic Technocracy - WIP
Chained
Ordolibertarianism - Your page is interesting... You've changed a bit and I see that you've accepted the right a bit more ever since the last time I've read your pages. You're still left leaning on everything besides the economics. However, I did not put you in this tier just because you are a leftie; you're here because of your philosophy. (WIP)
Yatagarasism
- WIP
Neoradical Liberalism - WIP
Blinded
Abelism 
- You are very similar to what I used to believe in and think. Despite this, I disagree with many of your proposals within your systems. Why would one be selected as a leader based on bias? Race, sexual orientation, and gender should not matter; merit and the capability of handling governance is only what matters. This is fundamentally flawed. In addition, the nation does not have to rely on foreign imports. Every nation has corporations that does foreign imports. (unless restricted by the government) What doesn't make sense to me is why you choose an economic system that has not worked in the past, and why you pick welfarism. Welfarism is also something that should not be implemented as it breeds unhealthy reliance. This is just a few out of the many. Although, there is something I think highly of.I'm glad that you recognize global warming/climate change as a legitimate concern. Finally someone recognizes it! It will ruin our planet and get in the way of everything and eventually destroy humanity. (I will add more once you complete the significant segments in your page. Please notify if you do.)
AnonymousAmericanus - ...are you larping?- Communism of the Real - WIP + Response
Neo-Katipunanism 
- WIP- Itapism - WIP
.png){kind=small}
Misguided
Floral Republicanism - You aren't as bad as people say but holy shit I can't fathom how much I can disagree with your views. Elitism and democracy do NOT mix whatsoever. This is the pathway to corruption. What's also dogshit is interventionism. The only redeemable qualities are your free gun rights and economical beliefs and some of it's not even that good. Reconsider your school of economic thought.
- Response 2 (WIP)
- I assume you are referring to a natural monopoly. Let's say a monopoly emerges within the market. With this situation, it is most likely that it would generate significant concern within individuals and the media. Many will address their concerns about the monopoly. Word gets out about it in a negative way. Consumers generally respond negatively to monopolies and would most likely reduce interaction with said monopoly, possibly leading to a decrease in an overall demand for it. Even so if this hypothesis is wrong, the dynamism of the free market will always come into play. The free market, always constantly evolving, and adapting to changes and market forces. Overtime, it will heal from the wounds and keep on going. In this economy, where innovation is encouraged, many self interested individuals will possibly pursue in economics as a reaction to the monopoly and compete. They will disrupt the monopoly. With the pressure from the competition, it will weaken the market share, fading it into obscurity. And do not forget the minarchy. Minarchies (especially ones with right-libertarian policies) provide breach of laws to individuals to protect them. This breach of laws can also apply to monopolies. You might think this is contradictory. Breach of contract isn't market regulation; in which it is the foundation of the free market. It ensures agreements are honored. Suing a monopoly is to uphold the agreement. You should also remember minarchies are not the absence of the state. It is a minimal state. Enforcements of contracts protect individual liberties, property rights, and so on. It is an essential function. But what about bubbles and inflation?
- I don't deny bubbles nor inflation, but in a free market it's way less severe than a regulated economy. Inflation happens everywhere in every economy. In a free market, it tends to correct imbalances within the economy due to mechanisms built into it. For instance, when prices rise excessively high from increased demand, it incentivizes increased production and/or development of substitute goods eventually and gradually surpress the inflation. Aditionally, in a free market, businesses within it are prompted to attract customers through low prices, when meanwhile monopolies and oligopolies face the inflation. As for bubbles, its resolution can be traced to early ones within history. (WIP)
- Democracy and Elitism DO NOT MIX (WIP) Just because a mixed government exists does not mean it mix well.
- Patchwork (WIP)
- Welfare (WIP)
- Response 2 (WIP)
Coco0330 - My complete fucking polar opposite.
Bolshebitchism - Do I need to explain?
Gallery
Comments
Ask here to be added. I'm open to criticism but fuck you if you resort to insults.
Reiism - Add Rei, me like when add, me happy :D
- Coco0330 - Add me.
- Aploism - add me?
- Dark Minarchism - i'll do it tomorrow, it's very late right now where i am and i need sleep.
- Dark Minarchism - sorry for the delay. this time i will ensure you get added soon.
- Aploism - sorry for bothering but when will you add me?
- Dark Minarchism - i'm working on it, although my vacation is hindering my progress.
- Carangejoism - Welcome to the Wiki! + Add me
- Dark Minarchism - thank you for the welcome but i'm not new to this wiki i'm on a new account. also i will add you
- Brazilian Liberalism - Add me
- Dark Minarchism - we meet again
- Abelism - Add me
- Dark Minarchism - you're added. note that i will possibly add more
- AnonymousAmericanus - add me?
- Dark Minarchism - soon
- Ordolibertarianism - add me
- Dark Minarchism - what i said above
- Floral Republicanism - You should like, totally add me.
- Dark Minarchism - okay but add me after
- Neo-TIIKKETMASTER Thought - add me darkie.... see what i did there? ;)
- Dark Minarchism - yeah
- Crysalism - Made the Post-Minarchism icon for you.
- Dark Minarchism - thanks! i highly appreciate it
- Aploism - can you give me an alias?
- Dark Minarchism - sure + i will add you tomorrow morning, mountain standard time
- Celestial Libertarianism - Add? Also, maybe join the
The METAMODERNISTS
- Dark Minarchism - i will most definitely add you and i'll accept the invite
- Asneeism - add me?
- Dark Minarchism - in progress
- Bolshebitchism - add me
- Dark Minarchism - done
- Hendersonism - Add me?
- Dark Minarchism - i'll add you later
- Dingusbingusism - My friend, I am flattered that you consider me an influence. Glad I could guide you.
- Dark Minarchism - thank you for that, you've created a major turning point in my political journey
- Nitrism - Could you add me? I promise to add you later
- Dark Minarchism - ok
- Yatagarasism - add pls?
- Dark Minarchism - soon
- camel Add me back when you get the chance.
- Dark Minarchism - i'll add you with the other guy
- Add Neo-Katipunanism add him not me
- Dark Minarchism - soon
- Do you have a Matrix account mine is Squandrilky:matrix.org, also I’m the masteracc guy
- Dark Minarchism - no but i can make one
- Would love it mate, your a real one for that
- Dark Minarchism - said it doesn't exist so here https://matrix.to/#/@triestineeconomiczone:matrix.org
- Would love it mate, your a real one for that
- Clean-Up Centrism - Nice page layout you've got here, mate! Can you add me? I promise to add you back.
- Dark Minarchism - done
- - Nice! I added you back, btw.
- Dark Minarchism - yeah i saw
- Nitrism - I think you've already noticed, but just to be sure, you know I added my economic perspective, right? When you can update our relationships pls?
- Dark Minarchism - i take a long time, i'll update it after i do my schoolwork
- Oștism - U should add me 😊😉
- Dark Minarchism - i will..
- Could you add me back please
- Dark Minarchism - will do
- Meritocratic Technocracy Could you add me, please?
- Dark Minarchism - ok but add me after
- Meritocratic Technocracy Sure.
- Neoradical Liberalism - Add me? I added you earlier
- Dark Minarchism - i will add you, also i was expecting higher on the relations
- Aceism-Add me?
- Dark Minarchism - let me lock in and add the rest
- Neo-Nietzscheanism - Add me? My page is complete enough now id say, since the will to profit entrepreneurmensch thing is the main part of my ideology, without it my ideology (apart from some social darwinist, biorealist and technological views I have) isnt really meaningfully different to hoppeanism or neoreactionaryism.
- Dark Minarchism - what i said for ace
Midskism - Add me?
- Dark Minarchism - soon let me lock in
- Andrionism - Add me and I add back?
- Dark Minarchism - ok
- Zankism - Add me.
- Dark Minarchism - sorry for the short response but added
- Andrionism - Hey man, I noticed that you didn't add me in your relations even though you responded. I've been waiting for days, whats the hold up?
- Dark Minarchism - i did it + forgot about it + didn't know you wanted it that bad
- Andrionism - Okay, thank you for adding me, I added you back btw.
Notes
- ↑ Might seem a bit contradictory, but I take some ideas.
- ↑ Search up Billy Ray Waldon.
- ↑ Some may consider Agorism as a left-libertarian ideology.
- ↑ Will refer to this article later. https://adfontesjournal.com/member-exclusive/after-metamodernism/
- ↑ https://greyenlightenment.com/2017/05/16/accelerationism/ I will refer to this article in the very future.
 Self Inserts - Literal Fanfiction 
|
 Philippine Ideologies - Pearl of the Orient Seas 
|
 Capitalists - For the profit incentive 
|
.png){kind=small}
 Libertarian Right - Welcome to Ancapistan 
|
 Minarchists - Protecting freedom through the state 
|
 Georgists - Land, rent and taxes.
|
Culturally Right - Conserving the national culture 
|
.png){kind=small}
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
 Environmentalists - Green hills and blue sky 
|
.png){kind=small}
 Transhumanists - ROBOT ARMS ROBOT ARMS 
|
    8Dreams - Going Off-Compass    
|
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
