This thread is permanently archived
What's your ideology?
| I'm centrist around Economical and Social Liberal, sometimes a bit more towards the conservative side. Very much into the most normal in terms of political ideology. Not a fan of Neoliberal ideas simply due to how chaotic they make things become. Don't hate Communism particularly but I see no way to apply it in real life. Social Democracy can work but even that has its limits. Anyway, I'm rambling on!
| My only ideology is to reject all ideology.
| Probably post-left, just a nihilist who wants lawlessness.
| White nationalist
| Zizekian Edgelordism
| zizekian communist
| I dont care about idiotic ideas as ideology.I live for myself i die by myself i have done a lot of things for money and i will keep doing them whatever the situation the world is.I want to know if there is an ideology dedicated to human individuals like me except of egoistic dipfucks.
| Imo we ought to have more diversity than just a few dominant ideologies in the world. Different cultures are suited to different systems, & experimentation & diversity would keep folks from becoming so overdependent on one model. Global ideological struggle brought us the cold war & the current mess in the Middle East.
But as for myself, integralist. Not necessarily Catholic or even Christian, but religion seems to me a promising candidate to get us out of this capitalist rut.
| >>288070
In brief, Falangism, since Franco, is about social reactionarism (first & foremost), a maximally centralized state, & often the cultural superiority of Christian peoples & values.
Integralism, at least since WWI, is foremost about the conflict between spiritualism & materialism, is conservative but not reactionary, advocates significant decentralization, &, while some of its leaders have been antisemitic for religious reasons, advocates broad racial tolerance.
| >>288070
To be more clear re; decentralization, integralism advocates leaving considerable power to local union-based governments, at the expense of everything except national leaders. It doesn't mean something like the federalism we see in the US & UK.
| >>288146 thanks for answering. Even though I am leaning more to communism, fascist thought is really fascinating for me. I see you are quite informed on the topic, so can you please give me some info how national syndicalism is related to both falangism and integralism, and what's it about?
| >>288161
Gladly. National Syndicalism can seem hard to pin down, but that's because it refers to two slightly different things. Both are fundamentally the formulation of syndicalist economics into a corporatist system, designed as a meeting of the minds between the syndicalism of Georges Sorel & the fervent nationalism of Charles Maurras, its founders. Maurras, in turn was a major source of inspiration for Franco, Degrelle (of Belgian Rexism) & Mussolini.
| Anarcho Communist
| >>288161
>>288161
In Italy, its legacy is Mussolini's "fascist syndicalism," essentially the forms of syndicalism with direct state control, which of course was used to the benefit of bourgeouisie. In Portugal & Spain, it was given more attention because syndicalism within a nation allowed one to reject both capitalism & communism, & yet held some appeal for the many anarcho-syndicalists of the time. Franco eventually abandoned it, but the Integralists carried it forward.
| Commie soical leftist
| Improve yourself.
Strive for perfection.
Don't hurt others.
Understand one another.
| My ideology is pragmatism and centrism:
It allows me to believe or at least make people believe that I don't have an ideology and am always right with no alternative while I can blame others for beeing impractical (slightly, far or extreme) right or rather left ideologues. Pragmatism is world wide Number 1 ideology.
| >>d6e8f3 that is what you are irrelevant of how you try to mask it as, thus you and all the dumbass who would agree with your statement have an ideology.
| >>0354b1 my problem with pragmatism (as an ideology) is that the pessimists and those in who would be dethroned from power if the status quo changed use it as a screen to justify changing nothing, when change is desperately needed.
| >>289091
You could say the same for any ideology. Maduro totals the Venezuelan state, & yet those trying to unseat him are attempting "to destroy the Bolivarian Revolution." Ideology is irrelevant when it's reduced to an excuse anyway.
| Dżucze
| >>289462 But my key problem with (pure) pragmatism is that one can twist it to maintain whatever the status quo you want (unjust or not) way easier than anything else, as the ideology doesn't have to aspire for a better world it just asks for what works and one could then say what is currently happening works so why change.
The problem with this that nothing ever changes and the society stagnates.
Not saying it happens every time just that it can happen easier than anything else.
| >>289086 I gain nothing from committing to and ideology other than to be locked in a fixed mind set, blinded by my own justifications.
By renouncing ideology of all kinds, you are open to experiencing anything and able to live harmoniously with all others.
| >>290293 how is that any different from your own statement? An ideology simply gives meaning to an otherwise meaningless world and what you're saying is also a meaning.
| >>290317 it isn't a system of ideas. It is self rejecting and understands that no methodology, including itself, should be followed in its entirety.
| Christian. Just Christian. Nothing else.
| >>290513 I bet he is one of these fundamental protrstant American Christians who identify themselves just by "religious values". Fucking disgusting
| >>290293
I think you've got it backwards. You can map an ideology to your ideas without mapping your ideas to a certain ideology. To me, anyway, saying "I'm a fascist" is just a concise way of expressing approximately what I believe, it doesn't mean my ideas are fixed or that I have border controls on my beliefs.
| Liberal in this thread. No commies and nazis allowed.
| >>76faec liberals will always turn to right if the left gains power : https://www.google.com/url?q=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DATFyBRhCQvw&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwid__DW_ZfbAhXmw1kKHTZ8Dh4QtwIICzAA&usg=AOvVaw2cbJzQ-0bQiBrSGSZV66hV
With the exception of WW2 I can't say that the reverse is true.
| Ideology has poisoned the last thousand years
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7ghslwtrJc
| Ideology is love, Ideology is life.
| Centrist.
| Moderate. I just want everyone to get along and compromise.
| >>291233
unfortunately also the left turns right when liberals do. You just can't stop murdering hordes driven by stupid hate with pacifism and ethical correctness. I mean, speaking of WW2: how "left" was the soviet union? And how long did it take for the west to realize the ideologic madness about the nazists ideology? Before the Hitler-Stalin pact conservative powers in the west were pretty pro-hitler, while the left allready was desillusionated and weak, facing stalinism.
| >>291611
1) yes, but that is self defense, not turning rightward.
2) now, the problem of this question is two-fold as you are asking an Anarchist to vouch for the SU and where the Soviet's went wrong is a question that plagues Marxists to this day.
3) The Left was rendered weak by successive failed revolution in Germany, Hungary, Italy, Finland, and Ukraine (caused by the Soviets) with later in Spain and Manchuria (also somewhat caused by the Soviets).
1/2
| >>291671
To say that what happened after 1917 was the moving rightward is means you analysing both history and the video I linked wrong.
As Peter isn't talking about ideologies moving rightward but discussions and discourse, specifically centrist discussions and discourse.
| >>291671
1) Well, the right also wins masses by proclaiming "self defense" The german nazists armys name was litterally "defense-power" (Wehrmacht)
2) agreed
3) mostly agreed. Not to forget that "communists" majorly suceed in technological/economical backwarded countries, which just really a few revolutionaries recognized and even less of them dealt with it reasonable.
| >>291671
Again to 1)
This is a dangerous terrain: Fighting fire with fire, becoming the devil itself while fighting him. "Self defense" can be stretched pretty far. I know the counterrevolutionary threat was a real thing and there unfortunately were and are people which can't convinced by words, no matter how reasonable they seem to you. It doesn't change the fact that forcing or killing people is a bad thing.
Currently the rise of the right can still be stopped civilized.
| Liberalism.
| >>291684
1a) I don't like not to be one of those people but Wehrmacht in this context meant "Armed Force", however addressing your argument I would say the right's rhetoric around their "self-defense" can be easily broken by any real deeper analysis of it, the trick is to get most people analyze it deeper than the surface level.
1/2
3) not only that but compared to regimes the revolutionaries want to overthrow, the revolutionaries were emancipators, though Stalin put an end to that
| >>291699
1b) True, it is easy to lose oneself in the revolution, though that is why I would demand heavy transparency, recallable representatives (if they are necessary), and an elected, recallable officer corps who's constituency are the soldiers they lead, and for those who can't be convinced with words as it all theoretical to them maybe they will come around when it is put into practice, tho reactionaries and fascists will likely need to be fought,...
| >>291813 ...and finally while I'm skeptical of reformism that DemSoc believe in maybe it will be the way to communism, also anarcho-pacifism may also merit a look if you feel that way and if so then I guess search for it on https://theanarchistlibrary.org/special/index and crack open an ebook on pacifist theory and praxis.
| >>291813
1b) In extreme situations, transparency, elections and a constitution are a heavy burdens if you're facing an enemy who give a fuck about these things if you seriously question their right to rule. These things are a luxury, only those can provide, or even just make appear it exists, who are in power.
>>291863
Well isn't it ironically, that capitalist world managed to reform capitalism for a while facing the communist threat, while communist world failed reforming?
| >>291813
Sorry, but with elected officers you're just setting yourself up to fail the transition ot war footing. During wartime it's understandable, although it still begs for competent soldiers to be dismissed for a single failure, but during a protracted time of peace it'll become a corps of politicians.
| war communism is the only answer
| >>291884 not really as if a revolution is happening against such a government, that means the mask slipped and everyone saw that the people don't control shit, also no as most revolutionary theory demands mass organization before revolution, so rev.orgs. would also provide transparent local elections.
Also, those reforms were meant to reduce class consciousnes and now that the revolutionary threat is over the capitalist class want as much as possible meaning those reforms must go
| >>292076 ...and with the end of those reforms class consciousnes will rise.
Also, the Warsaw pact was not the place for reforming theory in any meaningful way as Moscow dictated orthodoxy, and communism was (outside the Warsaw pact) and is constantly reforming itself.
| Right wing anarchist
| >>292122
I honestly believe the "Prague Spring" was one of most important and historical chances for communism failed by a communist administration. It was destroyed by the unbroken paranoid, imperialist, conservative and reactionist spirit which survived the russian revolution under stalin, currently beeing one of the few re-cultivated aspects of the soviet-era in modern russia.
Gorbatchevs perestroika and glasnost were too late, but resigning to the west was a huge mistake.
| >>292122 I don't disagree, it could have worked but, the Soviets wanted an empire (well more like a giant buffer but whatever).
| >>292031
But those were wartime armies. Even in the 17th century pirates were electing their captains, but these are all forces in which every troop knew that his life or death would be decided by his vote. As I said, during times of protracted peace there would be countless green recruits who had never experienced that. Is their judgement to be trusted in the same way? I certainly wouldn't put stock in them to choose an able commander over a politician.
| I miss being racist when nobody took it seriously, and saying all kinds of horrible shit that would get me banned from websites and beat up in real life. Now in real life you have people being racist expecting you to take them seriously, and people who beat you up beacuse of some horrible shit someone else said on the internet. So my ideology is - hide everything and don't let people know what you do for fun. Society falls apart when you let the stupid in.
| >>292031
I'm also strongly discouraged by the history of more successful armies. During the US civil war, the most popular Union general was MacClellan, who opposed Lincoln for the 1864 election. He also had no respect for Lincoln, & it was his incompetence & devotion to minimizing casualties which drug the war on for 3 years. Contrarily, Grant & Sherman were a drunk & a mental patient who attempted suicide during the war. Which of these would win an election?
| >>292360 not exactly, yes, at its peak the black army was made up red army defectors and peasants and those red army defectors likely defected from the previous Russian army as time passed they were replaced by local peasants as well with no previous military experience though they still an effective fighting force, so it wasn't necessarily a wartime army.
Though the catalans had no previous fighting experience what so ever as most of the Spanish who fought in Rif war sided with..
| >>292398 Franco.
The way I would avoid an Anarchist army losing its edge is (assuming communes and people would opt-in) is a basic training program in which people would learn how function as a militia until and mount a defense until mobilization could be finished, though with that said as technology advances mounting a defense gets easier.
| >>292364 Everyone signing up to protect the revolution and their homes knows that they will likely die, the point of electing the officer corps is establish a meritocracy meaning those who can complete their objectives effectively with low causalities will rise through the ranks while those who are incompetent won't, so I believe that Sherman would be chosen over MacClellan as everyone knows a short bloody war is better than a long drawn out one, also by electing officers one can..
| >>292416 ..draw from a large pool of experience and knowledge as I would assume that people would still be trained in what being an military/militia officer would entail, and having a constituency being the infantry could arguably provide moral as who would second guess themselves, especially when everyone knows that their lives are on the line, so everyone would be sure not to choose a screw-up.
| >>292416
You're assuming people whose lives are on the line are going to be avoid the hypocrisy of valuing their own lives over the good of the commune even if morale is low, & that they'll be able to distinguish the better commanders from the worse. Nobody during the Civil War anticipated the war could be ended any sooner, they very nearly voted McClellan into the presidency. I cannot fathom how one could have faith in the common private to choose the best general.
| >>292630 If they are putting their lives on the line to begin with, they already value the commune's protection over their lives, as in the past Anarchist armies have been 100% voluntary, they don't conscript, thus those who don't wish to fight don't fight.
| >>292726 also the problem with comparing Anarchist governance with capital-driven governance is kind of sketchy, as anarchism is entirely a meritocracy meaning certain problems like careerism/nepotism wouldn't be a problem.
| >>292739
Nepotism will always be a problem, in every society/system. Even if in your anarchist utopia the bloodbounded family is no estate sponsored unit anymore, most people will stay at their place with the people they know, they are "familiar" with. It's not made up and abstract nationalism or racism, but more like natural tribalism. Even if they all are 100% tolerant, openminded and rational, peoples decisions will be affected by the loyality to the members of their "tribe".
| I'm living my own life. My identity isn't bound to some ideology like some cool club.
| >>292739
I'm afraid you've missed my point about valuing their lives. There will doubtless be many who thought they were prepared to sacrifice themselves when that was merely a notion & nobody was actually shooting at them, & yet find themselves quite hesitant when the time actually comes. There will be some who suffer shellshock. There will, depending on the war situation, be those who never seriously expected to have to sacrifice themselves. There will be those serving because...
| it was expected of them by their family or community rather than because they wanted to. And even soldiers who might have gone into battle with that resolve are liable to let it waver when the strategic situation looks grim or casualties mount rapidly. I mean, unless this is a rendition of the Black Army instilled with the fanaticism of Imperial Japan.
| >>293358
At least soldiers fight for their income. That's were the name comes from. In Germany the soldiers income is called "sold", and the word for soldier is "soldat". It's also realted to the german word for mercenary: "Söldner"
Materialism has always the last word, not ideologies. They are just build on top of and determined by it. I can't eat ideals, they don't protect me from bad weather and clima and at least I can't have sex with ideals. And I give a fuck about ideology.
| > tfw no comfy anarcho-communism commune to live in
| >>293350 if their families and community what people to contribute they wouldn't push people into the army, as people could always work in a munitions factory, plow the fields maintain infrastructure, there, are millions of things wars need that aren't fighting, so those few who did fight would be volunteering to do so.
There would be a bit of fanaticism, but not like say imperial Japan where it was nationalism and religiosity demanding people to kill themselves for the nation.
| >>293223 also the nepotism that arises in capitalism comes from have a small board room of capitalists setting company policy and if not them then people hired by them with no worker input as well as political oligarchy.
So having workplace democracy, democratic consensus for decisions, and mandatory rotational elected positions that are recallable at anytime kind of destroys any openings for nepotism.
| >>293710
So start a company will all those things baked into the corporate charter and outcompete your competitors with your superior way of doing things.
Or just whine about it online I guess.
| >>293831 do you actually have have a real criticism or are you just going to use more phoned-in bad faith stock criticisms, as to start a business you need start up capital a many proletarians within don't and the whole "beat then at their game" shit just turns you into the monster you are fighting, as you have steal the workers labor value or you are out of the competition as that is what capitalists do.
So in answer to your question fuck off and KYS.
| >>293710
That depends on what you mean by nepotism. In virtually every environment short of a Platonic republic there will be people who will connive & conspire to arrange a bright future for their progeny. For example, a prominent & popular general speaks well of his son, & others, because it would damage their image & relationship with him, hesitate to speak ill of him. Even if it is unintentional, even if he doesn't realize it, the general has effectively indulged in nepotism.
| Perhaps that falls outside your definition, but your point was that the election would reliably be free of familial influence, & I believe that example demonstrates the contrary. There was a reason Plato expounded the need to totally reconstruct the family. >>02efab here again btw.
| >>293387
You say that materialism trumps all, but I must say I don't believe that's quite right. Who here would put material goods before their lives? Even on top of that there are many instances like Muslim extremists & the Japanese kamikaze pilots who throw away their lives for an ideal.
| People are guided by emotions, & while there are certainly fanatics whose zeal or patriotism overcome the fear of death, if soldiers' morale should fall then given the choice many will bow to the fear of death. That was what I was trying to convey, & why election of officers is an especially dangerous prospect in times of low morale.
| >>293917 I think that would kind of irrelevant to his election as any type of leadership position as the endorsement would be taken into account, but would be most important would be how they performed in a training/battlefield scenarios, if poorly they're not likely to be elected, if proficiently the obverse would be true.
This kind of why I place an emphasis on merit as opposed to say familial ties to greatness or an appearance of higher competence, in short act or don't boast.
| >>293917 I think that would kind of irrelevant to his election as any type of leadership position as the endorsement would be taken into account, but would be most important would be how they performed in a training/battlefield scenarios, if poorly they're not likely to be elected, if proficiently the obverse would be true.
This kind of why I place an emphasis on merit as opposed to say familial ties to greatness or an appearance of higher competence, in short act or don't boast.
| >>294139 now, I'm going to make an interesting argument, in that in an Anarchist or Marxist society why would want to do what your parents did you truly can contribute to society or your Union of Egoists (not an Egoist just wanted to be inculsive) however you wished, your progeny will always be safe and successful within said society, so I believe one focus would change to protecting and providing for one's progeny to one's society, I believe that nepotism stems from the lack of...
| >>294162..Safety and failure as well as the possible exploitation and death that comes with failure, that capitalism brings.
Thus us being socialized under capitalism will believe that nepotism and careerism will always occur irrelevant of the system, that is why breaking from capitalism will be both the greatest economic and social revolution since breaking from feudalism.
That is why I believe that there would within Anarchist army there would only be a competent officer corps.
| >>294173
Well the only difference between capitalism and feudalism is industrialization which increased productivity and shifted power from feudal ground owners to capitalist machine owners. It is still a class society, a fucking pyramid.
| >>294193 the shift from feudalism to capitalism was still a major societial, social, and economic shift.
| >>293924
Lmao
Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.
It's not about consumerism dawg.
| >>294198 tru
And there were many tried revolutions and riots by farmers and petite bourgeois, throughout Europe for hundreds of years. And people died and nothing changed for a long time.
| >>294139
Also I don't assume that people are rational beings which would elect the best commander, especially in times of peace. In times of peace you want a chill guy who gives you the better food, is nice to you, etc.
In war times you want the one who can win fights. But even then there will be charismatic leaders who will get elected before some intelligent lowlife creeps.
--commie g/u/rl over--
ps: that's a rly nice discussion in here <3
| >>293924
Islamist terrorists and kamikaze pilots are just dumb drones who can't see behind the ideologies they are fooled with. This ideologies just exists for the materialistic goals of their leaders, it is no driving power itself. Also those who recognize this and refuse to die for this purposes are punished in several ways, including beeing killed. In the end ppl do anything to survive longer or to protect their families and friends, but they don't see the real threat above 'em.
| >>294349
It is not about electing "the best commander". It is about having a choice and taking the consequences -the good and the bad. It's called freedom. This is what capitalists always pray but which their system fails to provide, as capitalists take away the freedom of choice from people since there is a ruling upper-class. Democracy stands in contradiction to capitalism and will always fall to it on the long term.
| >>294395
Read some testimonies from survivors of klamikaze missions & would-be terrorists. They're not trying to survive, if anything they're looking to die for something, because in that their life will have meaning. Compare Viktor Frankl's "Will to Meaning."
>>294399
Aha, I see now that there's a difference of premise. I'm of the opinion that in a state the foremost duty of the military is the preservation of the state, & I had translated that to anarcho-communism as that the...
| duty of the military would be to preserve the freedom, the void left by the state, that most folks enjoy. Imo, building the military's capability & will to do that for the common people takes precedent over the freedom of soldiers themselves, for they have already signed away their freedom in making that commitment. The military is better able to serve as a bulwark by tainting itself, just as is the case in espionage.
| >>294343
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/materialism
The defition of materialism I've used above is the 2nd, more colloquial of the above; "a preoccupation with or stress upon material rather than intellectual or spiritual things."
| >>294139
Then you believe that if Makhno had a son who served in the Black Army, he wouldn't receive special treatment from those around him because he was the son a popular hero? I don't mean currying favor, but simply because they'd naturally make the association?
Even if Makhno just spoke favorably, reminiscently about his son as many fathers are prone to, I believe that would disproportionately influence the opinions of those around him just because it were Makhno saying it.
| >>294173
I believe it's human nature that familial love will usually override cares about society, at least with the everyday lives of common folk (allow me to invoke Plato again here). If it isn't economic security than wisdom, education & social skills, if it isn't those then connections to those with them & consequently with influence. No brand of socialism will in & of itself produce a society in which there's nothing more a parent feels they can/should do for their children.
| >>294349
It really is, thanks to everyone pitching their opinions in. I apologize for posting so damn much, but there're so many things worth replying to.
| >>295146 the best way I can explain it would be be that people wouldn't think, Makhno was a good general, he had a child, meaning that child would be a good general, as while yes, he was an important figure, it is also kind of important in anarchism/marxism to not over value or to put great stock into "great (wo)men of history" as Makhno's offspring aren't Makhno they are they're own individual and would be viewed as such, could they gain the skills to lead by being near Makhno for
| ...most of their life sure but so can someone who has had training and specifically learned to be a military leader, that is what I believe, yes ( I'm >>5b1344 )
| >>295150
I get what you're saying, but I disagree, as it isn't that a parent can't do more for their child, it's that doing more for your child and society become one in the same (under communism) as opposed to being first being primary and the second optional (under capitalism), and that has to do with how the individual acts within both systems, meaning cooperation vs competition.
How I view at it is that everyone in society becomes close friends or distant relatives.
| >>295289
P.S. sorry if these are coming in infrequent or weird times I'm kind of dealing with some stuff.
| Be an ocean. Leave your ideologies on the shore and let the Tao into your heart.
| Libertarian socialist, my g/u/rls
| I'm a socialist
| I am libertarian but not socialist.
This thread is permanently archived
| Like last year everyone was a Commie and some people where were Anarcho kiddies (<3).
But it seems like in the meantime we got more diverse.
-commie g/u/rl over-