×
Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 2,513 articles on Polcompball Wiki. Type your article name above or click on one of the titles below and start writing!



Polcompball Wiki
Polcompball Wiki
2,513Articles
  Recent changes
in:
Pages using Tabber parser tag, Pages with broken file links, Self-Insert,
and 21 more
Revision as of 05:55, 31 October 2024 by Nebeler (talk | contribs) (replaced PCBA links for pages where possible; minor spelling/grammar fixes)


Self Insert
"People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism

This page is meant to represent Borkerface2007's political views. Please do not make any major edits without their permission.

Work in Progress
"I'll be done any day now!" - Still-Being-Drawnism

This page is not done yet and may still contain inaccurate information or miss important details.


SMALL ROUND BATTERIES and catholics ARE STILL BANNED UNDER (NEO-)BORKER THOUGHT


Hi Jreg, I still hate your content😈!!!!


If you have any questions about my ideology, reach me at my discord

Alstūdism, or Neo-Borkerism, is the political ideology of Borker, after he stopped being an anarchist. He is now a Fascist, deeply influenced by Ramiro Ledesma and the Italian system of fascism. It is a very nationalistic ideology, as are all fascists, for Norway, and deeply religious as well, believing in Ásatrú. He believes in a totalitarian Norwegian state, modeled technocratically and as a corporate state, as was espoused by Mussolini. However, it has not left its economically leftist roots, and still belives in a form of Socialism, although this time a rather statist kind.


-Table of Contents-

5 Principles of Alstūdism

  • To recognize that the state and people must work as one to protect the nation and maximize happiness.
  • The collective welfare of the nation.
  • To stand against reactionary barbarians and revolting against the current world order.
  • To renew the Norwegian nation through revolution and break away from the west and the east.
  • Upholding the values of nationalism and religion as important cultural aspects that strengthen communities.

Political Journey

  1. 2007-2018 Was raised relatively progressive as my parents were.
  2. 2018-2019 I was the standard Bernie supporter who idolized the Nordic System of Social Democracy.
  3. 2019-2020 Had started to drift more radical as the pandemic set in, specifically got into Trotskyism from reading Mandel, and I considered myself a Mandelist.
  4. 2020-2020 My short lived bout as a council communist started as I read into the Spartacists.
  5. 2020-2022 I started to get less radical as the pandemic calmed down, I was the standard DSA supporter (still am a card-carrying member of the organization), I was kind of an American Nationalist and Isolationist as well. I eventually started to tread more and more libertarian as I was exposed to them, and eventually started considering myself an anarchist without adjectives.
  6. 2022-2023 What I was from Late 2022 to Late Summer of 2023. I was a very nationalistic anarchist, and a staunch communist as well.
  7. 2023- After months of being rather disillusioned with anarchism, and entering a period of stagnation in which I didn’t feel like writing about anything to do with anarchism or what I believed in, I started reading Mosley and Gentile while on vacation, on a whim. After spending a whole night reading and researching, I realized this was the political position for me, as an alternative to anarchism, without forsaking my left wing beliefs and nationalist beliefs.

Government

Alstūdism upholds the principles of republican government, while considering monarchy as nothing more than a reactionary institution that offers little to the people apart from draining resources for so-called "National unity" centered around a figurehead king. It advocates for efficient government operations, depicted in technocratic ideals, eliminating burdens on the public like the royal family. Additionally, Alstūdism supports various reforms within the Norwegian parliament, aimed at restructuring the Norwegian state into a new corporate state.

Storting Reforms

In the pursuit of realizing the ideal of the corporate state, a comprehensive reform of the Norwegian Parliament (The Storting) is imperative. Among the reforms advocated by Alstūdism is the division of the parliament into two distinct chambers, thereby establishing a bicameral structure. These two chambers comprise the National Chamber of Corporations (Nasjonal Kammer av Korporasjonar) as the lower house, composed of representatives elected by the members of each respective corporation, and the upper house known as National State's Council (Nasjonalt Riksråd). Members of the upper house are carefully selected from the lower house and the party to serve as policy advisors to the lower house and to the Kansler. The Great Council for National Interests (Storrådet for Nasjonale Interesser) will serve as a cabinet to the Kansler, heads of ministries selected from the party will comprise the council, its responsibilities being to work with the Kansler to select succession and work out policy.

Succession and Promotion

Alstūdism believes in a streamlined system of promotion and succession within the government, the state, and the party, where in you are selected due to your own skill and not solely to public opinion, allowing for more skilled individuals to be in government. To be elected to the lower house of the Storting, the National Chamber of Corporations, in which representatives push forward the interests of their respective syndicate, you'd have to gain expertise in your field, making sure you're well immersed in the needs and wants of your field. After this, you will have to submit yourself to the state office of approval to pass ideological and competency exams, ensuring that you're versed in the state ideology and in your field. After you are approved, your name and qualifications will appear during the next syndical election, in which your fellow syndicate members will vote to elect a representative. If you are selected by your peers, then you are set to work in the lower house until your syndical term is up.

The succession of the Kansler will be ensured to be smooth and clean, without party infighting. A head of ministry, whom are selected from the lower house of the Storting by the Kansler to serve on the Great Council of National Interests, will be groomed into leadership and selected to succeed by the Kansler and approved by his peers on the Great Council. The succession process will come when the Kansler dies or retires, as he usually serves for life.

Sterkemannisme

WIP.

Economics

Alstūdism asserts that the economy should embrace significant nationalization and adopt syndicate-based organization, drawing inspiration from National Syndicalism and Corporatist principles. It diverges from the latter by rejecting the socialization of the bourgeoisie, a tenet often embraced by fascists. Alstūdism contends that the profit-driven nature of the bourgeoisie inherently conflicts with national interests, necessitating their separation from the nation. State-run syndicates, representing every industry and worker, would be given a limited amount of autonomy from the state, though still held tightly to prevent inefficiency or dissent. Within the syndicates, the means of production would be stripped from private hands, and given to the syndicates, who on loan from the government own and manage these, nearly a form of workers' self management.

Moreover, Alstūdism advocates for substantial expansion in Norway's vital industries, particularly those currently reliant on foreign imports—mainly Machinery and Equipment and Food Stuffs. Over time, the goal is to gradually reduce foreign imports, incrementally boosting domestic industries until achieving complete autarky.

Regarding farming and agriculture, Alstūdism closely aligns with Jorian Jenks's concept of the Land Army. This entails forming a voluntary force responsible for reclaiming and preparing land for cultivation. Members of the Land Army will then be granted the land for farming, having acquired cultivation skills during reclamation service. The ultimate aspiration is to achieve complete self-sufficiency in food production.

Social Views

In its social views, Alstūdism self-identifies as a blend of Progressive Conservatism, though the characterization isn't entirely accurate, as it retains certain elements of and traditionalist beliefs. The ideology embraces Feminism, asserting that both men and women should enjoy equal standing within society. Alstūdism advocates for the full inclusion of women in the military and all governmental positions. However, it rejects affirmative action, as the governance of Alstūdism strongly adheres to a meritocratic approach

Alstūdism extends nearly equal rights [10] to homosexuals as compared to heterosexuals. However, certain limitations apply, notably that discussions on homosexual-related matters are not permitted in public domains, with potential sanctions including imprisonment. Any form of Pride celebrations are prohibited, and organizing such events may lead to legal consequences. Homosexual marriage is legally permissible, yet adoption rights are contingent upon a government-issued certificate affirming the couple's suitability as parents. It's noteworthy that heterosexual couples are given preference in adoption proceedings.

Alstūdism's stance on transgender individuals is largely opposed to gender transitioning, seeing transgenderism as a mental illness, largely stemming from modern society and consumerism. Individuals who believe themselves to be transgender will be given state-mandated psychiatric meetings to hopefully cure their mental illness.

As for heterosexuals, Alstūdism emphasizes the promotion of traditional marriage[11] and encourages couples to have more children. Social benefits are provided to alleviate the financial responsibilities associated with raising a family. Alstūdism supports legal abortion in cases of nonconsensual pregnancy, although without celebration. The ultimate objective of these policies is to augment native birth rates, fortify the nation, and ensure its enduring survival.

Finally, Alstūdism firmly opposes the dissemination of pornography or sexually explicit materials for entertainment purposes in society. This is rooted in the belief that such content degrades the sanctity of the intimate act, reducing it to mere pleasure-seeking and stripping away the emotional dimension, which consequently adversely impacts society as a whole.

Education

Alstūdism believes that for the youth to be raised right they must be instilled with religious values and nationalist views. Asatru would be shaped into national curriculum, emphasising its role in shaping the Norwegian nation, and promoting its values of honour and collective. The Poetic Edda and various other religious texts would be mandated reading in vidaregåande, and it would also be worked into lower grades as well if applicable.

Historical achievements would be highlighted, especially the struggle for independence, to promote a sense of national exceptionalism. The new national anthem (Høgt Mot Nord) would be mandated at the beginning of the school day, as well as having national flags in every classroom. Textbooks and learning materials would be 'revised' to teach a more prominent Norwegian history. Starting in ungdomsskole, ideological education would begin, teaching students about the civics of the nation and foreign systems that the state has taken influence from, but painting the state ideology itself as a uniquely Norwegian system. Nynorsk would also be taught in schools instead of Bokmål, as a more authentic expression of the Norwegian language than the Danish-inspired Bokmål.

Holmgang

Alstūdism, in supporting the militarisation of society, also uniquely supports the resurrection of the practice of Holmgang, which was a practice of legal dueling in early medieval Scandinavia, used to settle disputes or grievances. Participants in said duels would fight with swords, axes, or other weapons until one surrendered, was incapacitated, or killed, and said duels were heavily legally regulated, overseen by arbiters and witnesses, to ensure fairness and adherence to the rules of the fight. Alstūdism supports this practice being brought back, though under the same amount of legal regulation as it previously was, if not more, to ensure the duels are not lethal, unless both participants consent to it being so before the duel. Holmgang would be determined between the two fighters, deciding on where it was fought, what would be won and what would be lost, and finally whether it'd be fought to first blood, submission, or death even.

To ensure the fairness of the competition, there would be no way to have someone substitute for you in the duel, though the duel could be pushed back if a participant falls sick or under similar circumstances. Though there would be no legal repercussion for not showing up to the duel, there would be a societal pressure to do so, the act of avoiding a duel after it has been decided being painted as dishonourable and cravenly in the new national culture. The overall intention of resurrecting this practice is to encourage the people of the new Norwegian nation to pursue martial activities such as historical sword fighting, as would be provided as an option in schools, to promote camaraderie between the duelers, and to encourage virtues of honour, courage, and bravery. Finally, the state would fund and create dueling clubs amongst colleges and similar institutions to support the spreading of this practice.

Cultural Views

Alstūdism believes strongly in national rebirth, like its last iteration. Norwegian culture is being killed by western influence and Neoliberalism, being forced into accepting foreign values and systems. For this to be remedied, Norway has to isolate itself, to let its culture resurge, and the state as well has to take charge in rejuvenating the nation. One of the foremost matters Alstūdism believes in is reviving Norse Paganism as it is a more authentic Norwegian religion than Abrahamic Faiths, which were and are being imposed on the nation today. Now, this wouldn't involve heavily suppressing Christians or the church per se, but rather removing any government influence they have, offering incentives to the public to convert and centering more social activities around Norse Paganism, and finally, introducing religious doctrine into schools, to make sure the new generation is more inclined to the faith. Along with this, Bokmål must be replaced with Nynorsk. The reasoning behind this is similar to the opposition to Christianity, that it is a foreign element, Bokmål being adapted from Danish, while Nynorsk is a more authentic form of Norwegian.

Foreign Policy

The new Norwegian state must remain neutral in most all conflicts as to maintain the nation's sovereignty from both the West and the East, as both are imperialistic blocs. However, in the case that similar-minded states arise, Alstūdism would be very willing to show solidarity with them against the two imperialistic blocs, and engage in equal dealings with these states.

Military and Defense

Alsūdism holds that the military should be one of the first and foremost focuses of the state, in order to ensure the defense of the nation. It espouses the same four military lines policy put forth by Kim Il Sung in 1962, that the state must "arm the entire population, fortify the state, educate every soldier to become a party cadre, and modernize the military".

Along with this, Alsūdism believes that the military should be heavily politicized in order to ensure ideological loyalty and fervor among each soldier and officer. Political commissars should make up a large portion of the officer corps. This ensures the centralization of military within the state's control, and cuts down on disloyalty within the military.

To defend the nation from external threats via deterrence, the state must develop nuclear weapons as quickly as possible.

Technological Views

Alstūdism holds that for the nation to advance and maintain sovereignty, technological progression must take place, and must be heavily developed by the state. However, it does not want to advance automation enough to cause mass unemployment. Most of the technological advancement should be in terms of military, medicine, and power, to keep the nation on the same playing ground as other nations.

Green Power

Alstūdism believes that Norway should transition fully away from fossil fuel as quickly as possible, and towards more green and productive. Nuclear power, run on thorium, should be the mass source of energy until geothermal and hydropower is perfected. Wind and solar have proven to be inefficient in comparison to these methods, and Nuclear has been unfairly slandered in the media, mainly by those elements who would wish to keep fossil fuels in use.

The Nation

A lot of this I share with and drew from Fargoth

Alstūdism defines the Norwegian nation as the following:

  1. The Native Faith, being Ásatrú, rather than any religion imposed on us hundreds of year ago by foreign powers, that being Christianity.
  2. The Blood, being ethnic Norwegians.
  3. The Soil, that being Norway, and our land currently held by

Just like National Wodenism, Alstūdism regards New World settler colonial countries to be unable to form a nation, as they are not connected to the land they reside on. Instead, the Native Americans and such are, and deserve the land, though that is not too feasible.

A New Era of Romantic Nationalism

Norway didn't really get to experience an era of Romantic Nationalism like the rest of Europe did, as it was a colony to Denmark and later Sweden. Because of this, Norway didn’t get to fully experience it and the cultural development the period brought to other countries. For example, many Norwegian-born philosophers and artists were educated in Copenhagen and then assimilated into Denmark, thus robbing Norway of many talented individuals. To remedy this, a new Norwegian state must invoke another romantic nationalist era.

National Essence and Immigration

Alstūdism follows the idea of "National Essence," as proposed by Giovanni Gentile. This concept suggests that you can have a profound connection to the cultural identity of a nation, like the Italian nation or Norwegian nation, even if you weren't born there. Alstūdism advocates for the repatriation of individuals who strongly identify with a specific nationality, as exemplified by Borker who, despite being born outside of Norway, identifies as Norwegian.

However, individuals would need to fulfill certain criteria, including demonstrating Norwegian heritage and meeting specific qualifications, in order to be eligible for repatriation.

Revanche!

Alstūdism holds the beliefs that to work towards a renewed Norwegian nation the coming state must take Revanche against Sweden, and reform the nation partly through conflict. The specific territories that Alstūdism wishes to return to Norway are Bohuslen, Jemtland, Idre and Särna, and Herjedalen. These territories were all once part of the Norway, and until rather recently, linguistically and culturally Norwegian, distinct from the Swedes in the area. These Norwegians were assimilated into the Swedish population, in a form of cultural genocide. As this is clearly a result of the imperialism of the Swedish Empire, it must be cast off of Norway, as with every other form on imperialism and colonialism. This also works to expand the Norwegian population through the reincorporation of old lands into the State.

The Delusion of Racialism

Alstūdism holds that Racial Nationalism and by extension race, are meritless categorizations that are based on outdated theories, with ethnicity being a far more accurate categorization, as race is often very fluid and ambiguous in its interpretation, and also lacks a biological basis. Ethnicity, on the other hand, is more accurate because it is based on cultural, historical, social factors, and a small amount of biological factors, rather than being fully based in biological ones. Along with this, Alstūdism views Racial Nationalism as a form of Pan-Nationalism, and near internationalism, as it often posits that all people of a certain race should be under one state, which blocks individual nations from having their own self-determination, a principle Alstūdism strongly believes in.

"Race Mixing"

While Alstūdism doesn't believe in race, it is still against "race mixing", or more accurately "ethnic mixing". It believes that for each nation to remain, they must retain their own ethnicity, believing that diversity inherently requires separation.

Religion

Alstūdism strongly holds that a revival of ethnic faith, specifically Ásatrú for the Norwegian nation, and that internationalist and universalist religions, such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism must be eradicated from the nation, as they pose a threat to the nation through their globalist tendencies, and Christianity being the root of liberal principles in Europe and the west at large.

Alstūdism states that the best way to lead the nation into a revival of Ásatrú would be to grant incentives to those to convert, introduce the religion as the state religion, and then introduce the religion into public schooling, with the goal of bringing the new generation fully into the faith. It also believes that with the decline of Christianity in Europe, people would openly adopt the faith to fill the whole that Christianity would leave, holding the belief that people inherently seek to be spiritual.

In terms of religion as well, Alstūdism considers that all European (and some related) native faiths stem from the same gods of the Indo-European beliefs, and thus are all related. While it believes all the gods are the same, it does not believe that each country should adopt the same pantheon, as in keeping with its views of a faith for every nation, it believes that each nation should keep to its own traditions of worshipping the true faith, calling them by their own names and praying in their own ways.

The Revolution

For Alstūdism to be achieved, this plan must be followed. In the first phase, the focus should be on forming a political party that aligns with our desired objectives. Assemble a group of like-minded individuals who share the party's vision and establish a clear party platform. This platform should combine left-leaning economic policies with right-wing nationalism while highlighting issues like immigration and wealth inequality to capture the attention of potential supporters.

The next phase of this plan is to gain populist support for our party's ideology. This will involve addressing the fears and concerns of the target audience, ours being the working class. It will be essential to build grassroots support through local campaigns and community engagement. Additionally, the party should closely monitor economic conditions, and as economic instability surfaces, position itself as the solution to people's economic hardships.

Now, when we believe the party has gathered sufficient support and the conditions for a potential revolution are favorable, the next phase involves planning a mass march from Bergen to Oslo. This march will serve as a way to demand a change in the nation's political leadership. Once we arrive in Oslo, we will demand the institution of our chosen leader into the office of Prime Minister by the king, dismissing the current government. From here there are two plans:

Plan A: Constitutional Transition

Under Plan A, if the king responds positively to the demands, the party can work within the existing government to transform key institutions gradually. This would involve holding a constitutional congress to enact the desired changes.

Plan B: Armed Revolt

If the Oslo march is repressed and violence breaks out, Plan B will be a shift to an armed revolt strategy. The party would utilize its paramilitary wing and the support of the masses to establish a provisional government in the areas under its control.

The Abolition of the Monarchy

Under Plan A on the aforementioned plan, a crisis would be created by staging an event where the King appears to abuse his power to dismiss the Prime Minister. In response, the King would be placed under house arrest, leading to a biased referendum to abolish the monarchy, and subsequent trials for abuse of power and treason, ultimately resulting in exile.

Under Plan B, the monarchy will simply be abolished upon our success in the revolution.

Smaller Unsorted Sections

This will be a section in which I do various topics that I have opinions on which don't fit into other categories/do not merit larger sections

Gun Control

WIP.

Random Opinions I Have

  • Alstūdism believes that the Svalbardian Ptarmigan should be introduced to the rest of Norway widely, and be the national bird. The reasons for this are:
  1. The Svalbardian Ptarmigan has adapted to survive in one of the harshest environments on Earth. Its ability to thrive in the extreme conditions of the Arctic symbolizes the resilience of the Norwegian people.
  2. The Svalbardian Ptarmigan is uniquely tied to Norway's Arctic heritage. It reflects the nation's historical and cultural connections to the Arctic region.
  3. It's objectively cuter than the White-throated Dipper.
  • Alstūdism despises small round hearing aid batteries and wants them replaced.
  • Alstūdism hates Japan
  • Alstūdism generally opposes drug legalisation, but supports the legalisation of LSD and similar psychedelics, for religious reasons, and under strict regulation of course.

How to Draw

Flag of Alstūdism
  1. Draw a ball with a black outline.
  2. Fill with dark red.
  3. Draw a white gear in the top left, half cropped out.
  4. Draw a white Ásatrú eagle within the gear
  5. Add eyes.
  6. (Optional) Add a beret, with a golden sword badge.
  7. Done!

Literature

Have Read

Ones I've read since making this page
  • - Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered
  • - Fascism for the Million
  • - The Doctrine of Fascism
  • - The Land and the People
  • - The Futurist Manifesto
  • - The 26 Point Program of the Falange
  • - On Authority
  • - The National Bolshevist Manifesto
  • - D Landa Manifesto
  • - 88 Precepts
Ones I read last time
  • File:Kropotkin beard.png - The Conquest of Bread
  • - Kurdistan, Woman's Revolution and Democratic Confederalism
  • - God and the State
  • File:Kropotkin beard.png - Mutual Aid
  • - Statism and Anarchy
  • - Atlas Shrugged
  • - The Communist Manifesto
  • - The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
  • - The German Ideology
  • - The National Anarchist Manifesto
  • - Anarchy
  • - Leninism Or Marxism

Reading

  • - The Weight of the Nation
  • - The Anthology of Ramiro Ledesma
  • - The Origins and Doctrines of Fascism
  • - For My Legionaries
  • - What is to be Done?

Plan to Read

Suggestions

  • Feel free to add whatever book you'd like me to read here!
  • - Communization and its Disconects ( A wee oddo)
  • - Fundamental Principles of Communist Production and Distribution ( Nurisk)
  • - Fourth Political Theory ( Nurisk)
  • - National Socialism a Left Wing Movement ( Philosophical Nuggets)
  • - Settlers the mythology of the white proletariat ( Philosophical Nuggets)
  • - Fanged Noumena ( Gualguainism)
  • - Metamodernism and the Return of Transcendence ( Sundog)
  • - Finite and Infinite Games ( Sundog)

Finished Suggestions

User Test

Pick only one from each category :]

  • Civic Axis
    • Chaoist (-50)
    • Anarchist (-10)
    • Minarchist (-5)
    • Libertarian (-5)
    • Civically Moderate (+0)
    • Statist (+15)
    • Dictablanda (+10)
    • Authoritarian (+25)
    • Totalitarian (+50)
    • Orwellian (-50)
  • Type of Rule Axis
    • (Anarchist) Anti-Democracy (-10)
    • Direct Democracy (-20)
    • Semi-Direct Democracy (-10)
    • Representative Democracy (-10)
    • Authoritarian Democracy (+25)
    • Totalitarian Democracy (+50)
    • (Authoritarian) Anti-Democracy (-5)
  • If none above apply...
    • Organic Centralism (+5)
    • Kultokratic System (+20)
  • Economic Axis
    • Marxist Communist (-10)
    • Socialist (+20)
    • Welfarist/Gift Economy (+5)
    • Mixed (-10)
    • Liberal Economics (-50)
    • Capitalist (-50)
    • Darwinist (-100)
  • If none above apply...
    • Third Positionism (+50)
    • Anti-Economy (-25)
    • Non-Marxist Communist (+20)
    • Fiscal Federalism (-5)
  • Economic Freedom
    • Anti-Economy (-20)
    • Dirigisme (+25)
    • Regulationism (+10)
    • Mixed (-5)
    • Liberal Economics (-25)
    • Free Market (-50)
    • Laissez-Faire (-100)
  • If none above apply...
    • Central Planned (+50)
    • Decentral Planned (+5)
  • Diplomatic Axis
    • Autarchy (-25)
    • Autarky (+50)
    • (Alter-) Globalist (+0)
    • World Federalist (-25)
    • Cosmopolitan (-10)
    • Internationalist (-25)
    • Moderate (-5)
    • Patriotic (+5)
    • Nationalist (+25)
    • Chauvinist (+25)
    • Racial Nationalist (or similar broad category) (-10)
    • Ethno-Nationalist (or similar narrow category) (+50)
  • Geopolitics
    • Western (-100)
    • Western Adjacent (-10)
    • Non-Aligned (+50)
    • East Adjacent (+25)
    • Eastern (+10)
  • If none above apply...
    • Anarchistic Unaligned (+5)
  • Cultural Axis
    • Revolutionary (-50)
    • Progressive (-25)
    • Reformist (-5)
    • Syncretic (+50)
    • Conservative (+25)
    • Traditionalist (+10)
    • Reactionary (-50)
  • Technological Axis
    • Primal (-100)
    • Primitivist (-50)
    • Pre-Industrial (-25)
    • Deceleration (+10)
    • Moderate (+25)
    • Acceleration (+50)
    • Automated (+25)
    • Transhumanist (-50)
    • Posthumanist (-100)
  • If none of the above apply...
    • Post-Civ (-25) [and/or] Archeofuturism (+25)
  • Environmental Axis
    • Human Extinction (-100)
    • Radical Environmentalism (+25)
    • Eco-Fascism (+50)
    • Ecocentrism (+10)
    • Environmentalist (+10)
    • Moderate (+0)
    • Post-Industrialism (+0)
    • Industrialist (-25)
    • Anthropocentric (-25)
    • Anti-Environmentalism (-100)
  • Neurological Axis
    • Anti-Praxis (+0)
    • Utopian (+25)
    • Dogmatic (+25)
    • Idealist (+50)
    • In Between (+0)
    • Realist (-5)
    • Pragmatic (-10)
    • Rational (-20)
    • Dystopian (-25)
    • Anti-Theory (-5)
  • War Axis
    • Pacifism (+5)
    • Non-engagement (+50)
    • De-escalation (+20)
    • Intervention (-50)
    • Irredentism (+25)
    • Revachism (+50)
    • Jingoism (+10)
  • If none above apply...
    • Class Warfare (+5)
  • Praxis
    • Insurrectionism (+25)
    • Revolutionism (+50)
    • Moderatism (-5)
    • Reformism (-25)
    • Stagnationism (-50)
  • Ethnic Axis Optional
    • Chinese (-5)
    • Indian (-5)
    • Other Asian (+0)
    • Other Southeast Asian(+5)
    • Western European (+5)
    • Northen European (+25)
    • Celtic (+10)
    • Eastern European (+10)
    • Southern European (+5)
    • American (-5)
    • South American (+5)
    • African (-5)
    • Arabian (-5)
    • Jewish (-50)
    • Indonesian (+10)
    • Korean (+10)
  • Religious Axis Optional
    • Original Paganism (+25)
    • Zoroastrianism (+10)
    • Buddhism (-5)
    • Hinduism (-5)
    • Orthodoxy (-5)
    • Catholicism (-5)
    • Islam (-5)
    • Judaism (-25)
    • Protestantism (-5)
    • Neo-Paganism (+0)
    • Wicca (-50)
    • Irreligion (-5)
    • Satanism (either atheistic or theistic) (+0)
    • Shinto (+5)
    • Syncretic (-50)

Post your results here, with the correct format:

Best and Worst Parts Of My Ideology?

Put down below what you think is the worst aspect of my beliefs, and what the best part is according to you


Example

Borker - Best Part: Blank, Worst Part: Blank

Goober- Best Part:Syndicalism, Worst Part: Authoritarianism

Schumacherianism - Best Part: Paganism/ Heathenry, Worst Part: statesoc

Relations

If you are the type who adds balls in relations to show your perception of their beliefs or a short summary, then use the following: (Code Stolen from Quark) 

[[File:Alstudism1.png]] [[Alstūdism]] ([[File:Sansepolcrismo.png|link=Fascism]]/[[File:Natsynd.png|link=National Syndicalism]]/[[File:OrgDem.png|link=Authoritarian Democracy]]/[[File:NorseTheo.png|link=[[Norse Theocracy]]]]/[[File:Republicanismpix.pnglink=Republicanism]])

Which will look like this: Alstūdism (////)

Everything here is solely based on political opinions, not personal


Innerst (8-10)

  • National Wodenism (////Norse Theocracy) One of the biggest influences on me becoming a fascist, you are probably the most similar person to me ideologically on this site now. We believe in nearly the same thing, the biggest difference I can think of is that of me being a Revanchist, though that isn't really even a big disagreement. (10/10)
  • Inexistism (////) Really sad to see you move away from the economic left, though at the least you did stay governmentally the same. Foreign-policy wise, you kinda improved actually, but other than this I don't have much to say, as your page is rather empty. (8/10)
  • Improved Citizenism (////Agrarianism) Over the time I've known you, you've gotten way better politically, as if my memory serves me well, you used to a right libertarian. You seem to have went the same route that I did, though not as extreme, which is understandable. I agree with most of what I see here. (8/10)
  • Ziółkowskiizm (////) While I think you are too moderate in some regards (economics), your social policy and governmental views are incredibly based. I think socially and in terms of nationalism is where we agree the most, and though I don't like your econ, at the very least you're not too capitalist, nor communist. I quite like your foreign policy as well, universal nationalism being something I like greatly. The Catholicism isn't ideal, but at least it's not Judaism or Islam, and speaking of Judaism, we are both haters of international finance . (8/10)
  • Agricoetism (////) The lowest of this tier, but still good. We differ quite a bit, but you're still generally alright, the main issues I take with your ideology is the moderatism, especially in religious and governmental positions. To have a revival of paganism, a very strong state will be needed, with harsh measures, against the church. And as for our disagreements about ethnic nationalism mutt cope , that is rather minor but cannot be overlooked. Ethnicity is inherently tied to the definition of a nation. (8/10)
  • Hyperfascism(////) Alright, gonna start this one out with the few critiques I have, that being the Duginism, I'm not exactly the most well-read when it comes to Duginism, but you state that his Fourth Theory is supposed to be a synthesis of Marxism-Leninism and Fascism, though from what I know, he claimed it is supposed to be past those ideologies, though again, I am not well read on Dugin. Lastly, the supposed pan-nationalism is foul, though not elaborated on so far, and the "Eternal, Dialectical War" is a bit concerning, fascism as Mosley wrote, "alone can preserve the Peace, because alone it removes the causes of war.", so I would like to see you elaborate on what you mean by that. Now onto the positive elements I find, that being mostly the economics and the cultural views, the vocal minority of fascists online, that being mostly comprised of children who do not read, do not understand that fascism is revolutionary and modernist, not reactionary and traditionalist, so it's quite nice to see another fascist who recognises that, along with your support feminism and the homosexuals, although the latter might be a bit too far in your case, though it's not the worst. The economics and civics are just about the best part here, being in near complete agreement, except the aristocracy part. Overall, really good ideology, a bit short in the foreign policy beliefs however. (8/10)

Assosiert (6-7)

  • Iberian Directorialism (////) fellow 2007 gang Really good, though my problem with most in this tier applies here, that being moderatism, though in some cases in your ideology, that isn't something I'm going to count against you. Your social views are subject to the thing I just mentioned, one of the better people on this site when it comes to LGBT stuff, though I'm not a fan of the last part of that acronym and you seem to be, but that's not something I too much care about. Other than that, your economics and civics are alright but yet again too moderate, this time in a bad way, I would recommend you 'La Conquista del Estado' by Ramiro Ledmesa, if you're already familiar with Ledesma than don't bother reading the next part, but he was the more radically socialist and fascist founder of the Falange, much better than Jose Antonio's democratic and traditionalist nonsense. Last things last, something I wanted to talk about was your support of the republicans in the Spanish Civil War, which not to be mean here, but that is a rather silly take, I get that you say because of your opposition to Franco, but it's always possible to say you support an internal faction within a larger group (FE-JONS within the Nationalists). (7/10)
  • Leerderism (////) Pretty good overall, you're just too moderate when it comes to important issues, like reformism vs revolution (which is a really big one, as international finance will always work against nationalist movements), and too internationalist really (international finance again). Although I love the agrarianism and communitarianism, we probably agree quite a bit when it comes to that, and maybe nationalism, minus your internationalist tendencies. Overall (somehow ) more moderate version of Jonah. (6/10)
  • Meowxism (////) You will probably not place me as high as I regard your ideology, and that is because you are not fully honest, or at least don't realize, how close Marxism-Leninism is to fascism. The anti-capitalism, the socialism in one country, the totalitarianism, the modernism, you even claim futurist influence, a movement heavily tied to early Italian Fascism. In economics and civics, you are especially good, I quite like centrally planned economics, and Marx had good ideas on that front, rarely. Definitely the worst aspect of your ideology is the cultural and social policy, and transhumanism is purely evil, though the internationalism I don't count against you, I believe it's feigned as you're a Marxist-Leninist. (6/10)

Midtst (5)

  • Conorism (////) You don't really have any beliefs so I can't rate you mate. (?/10)
  • Gualguaiapathy (////) I don't understand any of this. (?/10)
  • Baxism (////) Highest of this tier, you are overall pretty more alright, definitely moreso in economics, I quite like the councilist approach you take, along with the unique spin on it, really interesting, I don't quite like decentralism but you pull it off pretty well so I won't count it against you, the mob rule is also pretty based, I quite like Jacobinism, but where you start to fall short is in regards to philosophy and social views, direct democracy isn't a very good idea, and the rampant progressivism as well is rather foul. Still though, rather good overall, just with really unfortunate drawbacks, if you adopted ethnic faith and national revival, you'd definitely shoot up a couple tiers. (5/10)
  • DrasThe Thought (////) Not a whole lot here, but from your infobox you seem a lot like the guy above, so the same stuff applies, pretty decent, with some real foul parts. (5/10)
  • Cosmic Legionarism (////) Highest of this tier, I respect the revolutionary aspect of National Socialism, however I still of course reject racialism and imperialism. Your economics and civics are the best part of your ideology, however a bit too moderate on the former, but still alright. I'm also glad that you rejected spiritual Bolshevism, and embraced ethnic faith, even if I don't fully like the path you took into esotericism. Also now that I'm a statist myself, I can fully respect your societal and civic views, if a bit tough on the gays I know what you are though, and your technological views as well. Overall, our biggest differences stem from your support of National Socialism, but that's it really. (5/10)
  • Philosophical Nuggets thought (////) Incredibly foul and silly Third-Worldism right off the bat, socialism and revolution cannot take place in the mostly rural and unindustrialised portions of the world, as the proletariat is not widely present. The national socialism is rather silly too, especially claiming that it is a left-wing movement (it's clearly third positionist mate). Also you claim to be a cultural nationalist, but against civic nationalism, a rather silly stance judging that the two aren't all that different, and that you don't see to mind ethnic mixing and multicultural societies. And judging from your writing on my beliefs, I don't believe you know what corporatism means, nor that you actually fully read my page, so I'm not going to return the favour. (5/10)
  • Alstūdoncrack Thought (////) My retarded son, very disappointed in how you turned out, but alas you're still somewhat alright. (5/10)
  • Kimno Thought (////) Not too bad as Marxists, because you're not too culturally left-wing, though I of course still dislike the internationalism inherent in Marxism. Although your cultural views are rather vague currently, I find myself agreeing with 2/3 of it, and we both do believe in "Cultural Rebirth" though I suppose you have a different meaning than I do. Your philosophy is again rather vague, though again I find myself agreeing with a lot of it. The majority of our disagreements I would think lie in government and economics. (5/10)
  • Pantheonism (////) One of the better ones in this tier, mostly because you aren't as bad in your bad aspects as the other people here. World Federalism is obviously evil and impossible to achieve, and along with that you cling onto neutered reactionary institutes for some reason, that being monarchism. Your economics are your strong suit though, and are quite decent, if not based. (5/10)
  • Vistulism (////) Rather alright ideology, though with some downsides, mostly coming from your direct democratic processes, though it seems less worse than other systems in this case. The economics also seems rather socialist and corporatistic, so I quite like that, guild socialism remaining rather similar to syndicalism, so I have no problem with your economics other than them being overall too moderate. Republicanism is also quite an important issue to me, and we're both staunch republicans so that's nice. Will update this with my opinion on your cultural and social views when you get around to that. (5/10)

Trell (2-4)

  • Romantic Egoism (////) Best of this tier, and that's due to minor philosophical agreements such as a shared support of Existentialism and Paganism, though the latter's support is entirely contingent on if you support a Folkish or Universalist stance on faith. Other than this, my standard gripes with anarchists apply, that being nationalism is incompliate with anarchy and individualism, for the former is an entirely collectivist and tribalist belief. (4/10)
  • Neosyndicalism (////) Your economics are the least worst of your ideology, still however falling short in terms of being a collaborationist, along with the upholding of markets, one of the most core principles to capitalism, the anarchy of production. Your misunderstanding of imperialism is particularly foul, as well as implying I am one. I do not condone imperialism, and the Russo-Ukrainian War is not an imperialist's war; it is the Russian Federation moving in to secure the independence of regions that literally wanted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation, that were blocked from doing so by the Ukrainians. I believe as well that you have a fundamentally flawed view of imperialism. Imperialism is not just when you invade land, it is the invading of land to generate wealth, without care for the people of your nation. Second highest of this tier, still really bad overall (4/10)
  • Great British New Left (////) Your page is very nicely structured, I'd say that, though that is just about the only nice thing I'll have to say about the content of it. My biggest problems lie with the economics and just overall moderatism, the reformism is deplorable, and especially resting your hopes in the rotten carcass that is the UK Labour Party, a party so rotten they've pretty much acquiesced completely to their rival party, I get that you place your hopes in the outskirts of the party, but they're just that; outskirts. This party will not be anyway to reach the change you're looking for, though I see you are sympathetic to some revolutionary notions, though I'd think it's overshadowed by your reformism, so no points for that. Next part is economics, I don't really get what you mean by "until the markets can be done away with", the period of development that capitalism is needed for has passed, the capitalist mode of production can be done away with and markets abolished; planning is needed to fully purge society of economic exploitation, as well as the chaos of the market. Finally, your 'nationalism' is the worst part to me, on top of this moderate ideology is its moderate take on nationalism, a purely civic seeming one, the English people are an ethnic nation, all nations are really, and to deny ethnicity is to deny one of the most important cornerstones of the nation, simply unbelievable to me that you'd call yourself a nationalist and deny ethnicity, it's clear from that you take a civic position on it, something I deeply hate. That is about all though despite minor things, and I've spent too many words on this maybe. (4/10)
  • Lankajori Thought (////) I have a lot of thoughts on this ideology, but first we shall go over the 'socialism' and reformism. You call yourself a revolutionary nationalist, so where is the revolution of that? If you wish for a revolution and claim to be against authoritarianism at all costs, then you don't want a revolution, the most authoritarian thing there is, to quote one of the foremost writers of the ideology you claim to hold to "A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois?". And now, if you don't believe in socialism by revolutionary means, then I am assuming you prefer reformism, the most silly of positions. Do you think the bourgeois classes will sit idle and not use their iron grip over the election system to hold out any party that even mildly threatens their status quo? (not that you even doe, mind). Going off of that last part, your ideology isn't very socialist to begin with, you simply wish to change the current means of things to have red flags and be organised more "democratically" and "socialist", without realising what either of those even mean or how they can really be applied. The "Marxists" you claim be to inspired by are nothing more than renegades and revisionists, very well encapsulated in the fact that you yourself have not even read Marx nor Engels , so of course you hold to figures and theories that are only related to Marxism in name. In your economics you list "Marxism", though I'd really like to see you try and explain what the Marxian labour theory of value is, or really any economic theory. And finally, the cultural nationalism is near insulting, you yourself have 2% Irish ancestry and claim to be part of the nation through your occasional 'immursement' in 'Irish culture' (Music and food, of course). Cultural nationalism in general is civic nationalism with extra steps, who is to say that because you can adopt a culture given enough time, that we should not take in even more immigrants, as long as they convert to the culture? Surely you see how contradictory that is. (3/10)
  • Neocarlism (////) Not a whole lot of meat on this page, so what I do know of your beliefs, I've picked from our Discord interactions and your influences. Still painful that even if you don't technically call yourself a fascist, you still consider yourself to be influenced by "fascist" ideologies (ideologies that are not fascist, just have the misconception of being fascist), so I'm still going to hold it against you. You cannot call yourself a fascist and a monarchist, they're mutually exclusive labels, and your support for "moderate free markets" is extremely silly to combine with your otherwise totalitarian politics, if the state is supposed to have influence in all aspects of society, how is it supposed to let the markets remain otherwise free and uncontrolled? And calling yourself a socialist, even if a market socialist, is way too silly combined with this, socialism isn't simply when you have welfare and universal education and some workplace regulations, the market is an inherent part of capitalism that must be struck down. Reaction is obviously another thing I'm against, and very insulting again that you consider yourself influenced by "fascism" and call yourself a reactionary. Not much positive I can find about this, as any good is cancelled out by rather contradicting opinions you also hold. (3/10)
  • Golden Iron Doctrine Thoughtism (////) Rather standard liberal democratic policies, though the regulation and patriotism is a nice bonus, though way too moderate for me to consider it all that good, this applying to most agreeable parts of your ideology. Will update when you've written more here. (3/10)
  • Necro-Anarchism (////) An ideology nearly completely opposed to mine. The most foul part of this ideology is something I would usually not be against, that being nationalism, but in this case it’s a horrid individualist pervasion of the nation, twisted by racialism into an abomination of a ‘nation’. American has never, and will never be a real nation, and no amount of palingenetic ultranationalism will ever change that. The individualism as well here is awful, I can’t imagine a more short, brutish, and wasteful life than that of the degree individualism has been taken in this ideology. But death is not a awful thing per say, it can be virtuous and beautiful if in the service of your nation. But death under your system would have no beauty nor meaning, for there is no meaningful cause to die for. The thing stopping this ideology from being in the lowest depths is that it’s not evil, it’s not believed in for any evil reasons, it’s just dumb, and not completely dumb at that. Just about the one thing I could agree with you about is panarchism is alright, or rather just not completely horrid. Also neat aesthetics 👍🏻 (3/10).
  • Polianism (////) Not too fond of NRx people, and NRx socialism sounds very silly and contradictory, other than that your page is mostly philosophy which I don't understand or dislike. (3/10)
  • Distributist Reactionarism (////) Ideologically pretty bad, you don't hold much in common with me. Christian, Reactionary, and Anti-Socialist, all aspects of this ideology are opposed to my beliefs, except maybe corporatism, but you're the lame kind of corporatist. (3/10)
  • Schumacherianism (////) Pretty disagreeable in most all aspects, not gonna write a whole huge critique as you did though (I am pretty lazy). The support of ruralism and agrarianism as a capitalist is rather contradictory, as I say below, capitalism is an inherently progressive system, and progressed beyond the "rural man" into the urban man, as history tends to do. The constant revolution you detail doesn't seem at all to stop revolt, only make it an inevitability, no matter if it is inefficient or costly, that rarely stops war, and especially civil war, the way to ensure peace is to remove their cause, "as the main cause of war is the struggle for markets" as Mosley said, and that "by building a self-contained or autarchic system we withdraw from the struggle for markets and so withdraw from the risks of war", fascism is the route to civil peace. Objectivism is by far the most retarded philosophy frankly, and I'm not even going to get into criticising it, and the Buddhism is silly but meh. Overall, the only good I can find is the technological beliefs, and that's it. (2/10)
  • Mishism (////) We’re friends and all, but you and I have fundamentally opposed base beliefs and values, so I do not agree with you on most anything, except for maybe environmentalism and social views. (2/10)
  • Ultroneism (////) Way more philosophy-oriented than me, with this page as your political beliefs rather undefined in its current state, from what I can tell, it's gonna be stuff I'm rather fundamentally opposed to. Will update when there's more on your page, and when I have more to say (2/10)
  • Second Anidiotoncrack Thought (////) Very contradictory and rather incoherent at times. Firstly, your capitalistic views do not mix with your supposed nationalism. Your views on wealth redistribution and socialism in general are very silly, you seem to be for consensual government and authoritarianism at the same time, as you state that "socialism is like taxation, theft, if you do not consent to having your money taken from you, you are being robbed". Other than that, your Islamist views on women are vile and reactionary, to say the least, totally unproductive. I think most of your views are just very anti-fascist and just make you some weirdly incoherent corporatocrat. (2/10)
  • Neo-Glencoeism (////) Vile globalist and liberal, I don't believe we share much of anything in common other than authoritarianism. The neoconservatism and cuck nationalism really blow, as well as the economics. (2/10)
  • Fitocracy (////) Rather awful beliefs, as a fascist I of course oppose reaction and feudalism, and by extension the monarchy. Not a whole lot to say here, other than it's pretty bad. (2/10)
  • Venatrixism (////) Not a single good thing that I can find in this ideology, near the complete antithesis to my beliefs, in the opposite way that Liberalism is. Still, I will say one thing in that, unlike your past beliefs, you seem to have more uniquely your own beliefs, which is nice to see, even if it's still cut and dry postie slop. (2/10)

Nederst (0-1)

  • Neo-Afunhumaninterism (////) Standard liberal with not many diverging thoughts, like the guy below, you don't even need a self-insert, you don't really have enough interesting nor unique ideas, so I can't say much other than Boring Liberaltarianian #14. Small side note at the end here, looking at your page on the old wiki, geez, how much can one man suck off a website lmao, childish behaviour. (1/10)
  • Brazilian Liberalism (////) There's not a single thing good with your ideology, you're the very anthesis of what I believe in. (1/10)
  • Comrade Phil Thought (////) Edgy child who knows nothing of the ideology and doctrines of fascism, nor communism. See below (0/10)
  • Neo-Jewgism (////) The most foul of reactionary brimstone. Literally just the standard 14 year old radicalized by seeing gay people in public, you have no real positions beyond being the right-wing version of an SJW. You are not a fascist, you are not a communist, you are not any label you apply to yourself. You are a petulant child with no opinions further or deeper than “Hur Dur I hate [blank group]”. My advice to you is very simple, grow up and actually read literature from the ideologues that represent the ideals you claim to ascribe to, you shallow miserable child. (-10/10)

Brilliant

  • The Doctrine of Fascism A perfect doctrine, one that is loose enough to be adapted to each nation's needs and circumstances, and concrete enough to be identified easily, so as to not conflate it with other ideologies and beliefs. A revolutionary ideology, one that revolts against the liberal world order and the Bolshevik ideology that seeks to destroy nations, while balancing modernism and tradition perfectly.

    • Good

    • Juche Wonderful ideology, arguably the last third positionist country left today. I have very few qualms with this ideology, and I especially love how it broke completely with historical materialism, thus fully severing itself from Marxism. The only critique I could give is the succession of Kim Il Sung, with his horribly incompetent and corrupt son taking charge, and his grandson after him, who admittingly is better than Kim Jung-Il. 조선민주주의인민공화국 만세!
    • National Communism Really good ideology, mostly because t's not Marxist, even if it claims to be. Nationalism is totally at odds with Marxist internationalism, and the statism as well is opposed to the 'communism' in its name. It's a good ideology because it's not what it claims to be. The economics are really good, usually leaning towards economic plannification, and usually authoritarian-totalitarian in civics. Were I advocating for a stateless end (in theory), I would be a national communist.
    • Nazi-Maoism Really schizo ideology, but still great in terms of civics and economics. I don't know enough about it, so I can't say much here on Freda, but from what I know it's rather good.

    Alright

    • British Fascism Decent ideology, but it's way too moderate on economics, and Mosley's stance on the monarchy and World War 2 is rather foul. I do take a lot from its civics however, and Mosley has been very influential on the development of my own thought. More modern iterations of it have been a lot better, especially him and him.
    • Folk Socialism Extremely good for a non-fascist, I obviously love the economics and traditionalism, though the support for reactionarism is rather bad, though not as bad in your case.
    • Paetelist National Bolshevism I like this ideology quite a bit, however it is inherently anti-fascist, being for Marxism, and opposing fascism due to its "Non-Germanic attitude". For that reason I cannot fully support this ideology, but however I do love the pagan revivalism, far-left economics, and revolutionary attitude. The best Marxism has to offer, and full of banger quotes: "And if German nationalism has a deep spiritual and religious sense, then it is that of an insurrection of the Germanic way of life".
    • Non-Marxian Communism The best form of communism, your economics are admirable, and much more community focused than Marxism even. The civics are still less than desirable, but you would be a useful ally to have, as I am willingly to work with non-Marxian anti-capitalist anarchists. While the term is rather vague and can applied all the way from third-positionists to Bakuninites, it's still a decent ideology.

    Middling

    • Corporatism Rather inadequate economic, favouring bourgeois control, something that inherently works against the interests of the nation, something Mussolini came to realize in the end days of Italian Fascism. As a system of societal organization however, I quite like it. Organizing society into interest groups is something I take great inspiration from, in my support of syndicalism. Technocracy and economic planification are also central to my ideology, and the corporate state is quite a good way of implementing that, and reaching an organic society.
    • Strasserism Not the best, and technically two different ideologies, but I'll do my best to cover them both here. Starting with the worse of the two Strasser Brothers, we have Otto. I say he's worse then Gregor because of his increasingly anti-fascist and pan-Europeanist attitude Post-World War 2, and especially his adoption of pacifist and democratic politics, as well as being a devout Christian. Gregor is a good bit better than Otto, but still not the best. He is better because he never renounced fascism, nor militarism, and always strongly held to socialism, not adopting a more distributist kind like Otto did. However, something you both did right was oppose imperialism, and reject the favoring of big businesses, large industrial corporations, and the leftover aristocracy from the empire that the mainline NSDAP did.
    • Falangism Rather decent ideology when it comes to economics and civics, but Primo de Rivera explicitly rejected fascism and many concepts of fascism, such as the Hegelian conception of the state, and rejected modernity in favour heavily of tradition. Ledesma is much better in this case, as he openly embraced fascism, the Hegelian conception of the state over the Catholic conception of the state, and favoured a totalitarian government, one that disregards the idea of the individual, unlike Primo de Rivera. The whole "Cosmic race" thing is also very foul.
    • Italian Left Communism I hold a lot of respect for the Italian Left Communists, and I always enjoy talking with them. I respect most in this ideology the centralism and the anti-anti-fascism , and we agree on a ton of little things, like defining Marxist-Leninists as fascistic. While I still oppose this overall due to Marxism and the internationalism that stems from it, it's still a pretty alright ideology regardless.
    • Mutualism As a fascist and syndicalist, Proudhon did have somewhat of an influence on me, especially when it comes to property, but this ideology is still anarchist at its roots and therefore rather foul. The love of markets is also very foul, but some of Proudhon's individual opinions were rather good .
    • Sorelianism You have a lot of good opinions, and you influenced fascism quite a bit with your rejection of pacifism and mystification of violence, though your libertarian and Marxist positions can't not be brought up. You still are really good in terms on economics, but you really shine when it comes to philosophy, I mean there's a reason everyone thinks Sorel is a fascist, and that'd be his huge influence on the philosophical development of Gentile and Fascism in Italy. Overall, rather bad politics, but a great philosophy.

    Inadequate

    • Distributism Mostly foul ideology, this is just capitalism but with more widespread ownership of property. Some variants of this are more tolerable, and some aspects of Catholic Social Teaching are nice, even if too moderate on collectivism. Still way too moderate and capitalist for my liking, but not as bad as other forms.
    • Maoism Pretty foul ideology, I do like revolutionary aspect of Maoism however. I also refrain from placing you as a socialist, since the Chinese Constitution of 1954 explicitly protects private property, and the right of capitalists to have control over the means of production, if they work for the interests of the nation. So, for this reason I hold that you are not a socialist nor communist, but rather a nationalist bourgeois revolutionary, as was common in anti-colonial revolutions in the era following World War 2 in Asia and South East Asia. I can't even say that Deng is worse than you for bringing back capitalism, because Mao never abolished it.
    • Dengism Not a fan of capitalist roaders in the slightest, but you underdid economic reforms that were necessary to position China ahead of the USA and western influence, though again, you are a capitalist roader. I of course oppose imperialism, and you love neocolonialism and imperialism in Africa and Oceania. Your successors in your name also horribly increased economic inequality, and dismantled the few good things Mao left behind.
    • Dutch-German Left Communism I do look rather favourably on the Dutch-German Left Communists sometimes, but they're still Marxists at the end of the day. They have great analysis on reformism, and I do view worker's soviets as a great form of grassroots organization during the revolution. However, no matter how much I agree with you on the small things, we're still fundamentally opposed.
    • Fourth Theory Hopefully Nermal will better explain Dugin and Fourth Theory to me one day, but this lazy critique will stick until then. A reactionary ideology that opposes fascism, already not off to a good start, and your imperialist foreign policy is just horrendous. I don't understand Dasein, but moving past that the only good part of your ideology is the opposition to liberalism.

    Bad

    • National Socialism I respect the revolutionary aspect of National Socialism, but alas it ended up starting one of the most deadly conflicts in human history through its imperialistic ambitions, and invaded and subjugated my people. The racialism and economic moderatism are also not good, but a lesser evil of it.
    • Marxian Communism Foul internationalistic and godless ideology, the only aspect of this ideology I can respect is the economic part, and even then it dwell's too much into statelessness and anarchy.

    Disastrous

    • Capitalism Very foul ideology, while once you were a progressive force in the world, you are a rotten system to the core. You trample nations and traditions of the world beneath you, and bring the world evermore into a bland and mixed globalist 'utopia'.
    • Liberalism One of the most foul ideologies to ever exist, you work to destroy nation and tradition alike in the name of progress and liberty. You support a façade of representative democracy to appease the people and give them a false sense of freedom of choice at the ballot, while you deny them true democracy, that being economic. Pure evil, and totally reprehensible.
    • Anarcho-Capitalism Unfathomably foul ideology, you aren't even really an anarchist ideology, just a stateless one. At least the communists actually believe in anarchism for honourable goals, you're just a degenerate who wants corporations to own every inch of society and drive the world into hell, hell at least the Neoreactionaries are honest about it.
    • Feudalism Horrid brimstone ideology, anyone who advocates for this in the modern age has zero idea how retarded they are. First off, the vast decentralization of the realm made it easy for uprisings to spring up and tear apart the nation, as well as making administrative tasks very difficult. Secondly, it's literally a caste system dawg, with the privileged (most of whom not even being competent enough to rule) ruling until their death, and if they're really incompetent, civil war time, yay more dead peasants for the lord's games. A required step in the march of progress in history, and a step to be left behind completely.
    • Neoluddism Another reactionary ideology, and even less relevant. While your goals are more honourable than normal reactionaries, they are completely misplaced. Social alienation has not stemmed from the industrial revolution, but rather capitalism and the separation of man from his labour, the answer isn't more individualism, it's more collectivism.
    • Reactionarism Completely antithetical to the revolutionary spirit of fascism, anyone who thinks to label fascism as anything other than a progressive system is moronic, and anyone who seeks to call themselves a fascist and a reactionary is a moronic illiterate.
    • Monarchism Yet another foul reactionary ideology, I don't care about whatever "Monarchal Tradition" you claim a nation has, you are an antiquated drain on the nation that will always seek to preserve itself and its interests before the nation, as noted in Fascist Italy.
    • Neoreactionaryism Probably the ideology most opposed to fascism, you are fanatically capitalist and reactionary, totally against all that fascism is for, and your ideology seeks to make any attempt at fascism impossible, with its aims for society. I don't believe there's much at all I can say in favour of the dark enlightenment as a fascist, maybe that you people at least know how to define fascism better than a liberal can.
    • Limonovite National Bolshevism I despise you so unfathomably much, you've spawned a wave of larpers who don't understand fascism nor Marxism, and are incredibly stubborn and unwillingly to learn how wrong they are. You are nothing more than a degenerate who used the name of a great German ideology to slap on your barely even distinguishable variant of Marxism-Leninism, and I hope you are burning in the deepest boiler room of hell for that.

    Brilliant

    Good

    • Edmondo Rossoni (////) Pretty much the ideal version of Mussolini, really good.

    Alright

    • Benito Mussolini (////) Had a lot of influence on me, especially in civics and economics, though you were too willingly to collaborate with the Nazis and Germans, and made compromises with the Monarchy.
    • Oswald Mosley (////) Much like the above, though you were nearly a defeatist with your support for the Nazis. Still though, you were a great writer and pushed me finally into embracing fascism.
    • Antanas Smetona (////) Really good figure that I hold a lot in common with, namely the nationalism, corporatism, and agrarianism. Sadly too moderate on some fronts, but you were incredibly good for Lithuania, and led it wonderfully in a time were great leadership was needed.
    • Karl Otto Paetel (////) Really admirable figure when it comes to your revolutionary nationalism, socialism, and pagan revivalism, though your denunciation of fascism as a foreign ideology to Germany and your Marxism stops me from fully liking you, Marxism cannot be reconciled with nationalism nor religion.

    Middling

    • Joseph Stalin (////) It was correct of Mussolini to state that Stalin had in effect turned Soviet Bolshevism into Slavic Fascism, though what keeps you from any higher tiers is the invasions and "spreading of the revolution" that was done in your neighbouring countries, as well as personal family stuff. Still, overall decent figure.
    • Georges Sorel (////) Rather alright in inspiring fascism and national syndicalism through your alliance with the integral monarchists, though you were still a libertarian and a Marxist. The myth and the violence of your works are inspiring, though just about the only good aspects of it.

    Inadequate

    • Bernie Sanders (////) Rather boring and standard social democrat, economics are middling but not the worse thing ever, though you really fall flat in social and civic views. Funny that this is considered the radical left in America.

    Bad

    • Leon Trotsky (////) Rather foul Jewish communist, actually a Russian communist unlike Stalin was, so there's little I like in your politics other than the economics.
    • Heinrich Himmler (////) Not much to like in this ideology, pretty horrid and I quite dislike National Socialism for the racialism and pan-nationalism as well as the invasions associated with that. Only thing that I can say is that I respect some of your religious views, but that's about it.
    • Joseph Goebbels (////) Pretty silly in that you larped as a "German Communist", pretty much just a standard anti-Marxist socialist common amongst the National Socialists, though with a preference for Soviet aesthetics, so I kind of respect the more socialist economics. Other than that, pretty standard National Socialism, so bad.

    Disastrous

    • Vidkun Quisling (////) One of the worst political figures there are, sold out your nation and had more of your own nation killed than its enemies. Horrid pan-nationalist and class collaborationaist, deserved your fate and worst than it really.
    • Augusto Pinochet (////) Horrible puppet dictator that erroneously is labeled a fascist and murdered a pretty decent leader of Chile. Horrible economics that contradict your so-called nationalism, and overall not very redeemable figure.

    Gallery

    The following Tests are graded on accuracy
    • DozenValues, 1/31/2024, 9/10

      DozenValues, 1/31/2024, 9/10

    • SapplyValues, 11/15/2023, 8/10

      SapplyValues, 11/15/2023, 8/10

    • 8Values, 8/10/2023, 7/10

      8Values, 8/10/2023, 7/10

    • EconValues, 10/21/2023, 6/10

      EconValues, 10/21/2023, 6/10

    • AuthValues, 8/11/2023, 6/10

      AuthValues, 8/11/2023, 6/10

    • CulturalValues, 10/24/2023, 10/10

      CulturalValues, 10/24/2023, 10/10

    • ThirdPositionValues, 2/16/2023, 10/10

      ThirdPositionValues, 2/16/2023, 10/10

    • HateValues, 3/01/2024, 9/10

      HateValues, 3/01/2024, 9/10

    • PolitiScales, 8/27/2023, 9/10

      PolitiScales, 8/27/2023, 9/10

    • RightValues, 9/20/2023, 8/10

      RightValues, 9/20/2023, 8/10

    • LeftValues, 9/20/2023, 6/10

      LeftValues, 9/20/2023, 6/10

    • 6Foundations, 11/15/2023, 8/10

      6Foundations, 11/15/2023, 8/10

    • IdeoShapes, 11/15/2023, 8/10

      IdeoShapes, 11/15/2023, 8/10

    • VanguardValues, 01/06/2023, 8/10

      VanguardValues, 01/06/2023, 8/10

    • ReligiousValues, 11/06/2023, 10/10

      ReligiousValues, 11/06/2023, 10/10

    Test Values

    How I Would’ve Voted

    Most boring endeavor I've done for this page
    • 1788-1789 - - Washington (Independent)
    • 1792 - - Washington (Independent)
    • 1796 - - Jefferson (Democratic-Republican)
    • 1800 - - Jefferson (Democratic-Republican)
    • 1804 - - Jefferson (Democratic-Republican)
    • 1808 - - Madison (Democratic-Republican)
    • 1812 - - Clinton (Democratic-Republican/Federalist)
    • 1816 - - King (Federalist)
    • 1820 - - Abstain
    • 1824 - - Adams (Democratic-Republican/Adams-Clay Republican)
    • 1828 - - Adams (National Republican/Anti-Masonry)
    • 1832 - - Clay (National Republican)
    • 1836 - - Van Buren (Democratic) Reluctantly
    • 1840 - - Van Buren (Democratic) Reluctantly
    • 1844 - - Clay (Whig)
    • 1848 - - Van Buren (Free Soil) Reluctantly
    • 1852 - - Scott (Whig) Reluctantly
    • 1856 - - Frémont (Republican)
    • 1860 - - Lincoln (Republican)
    • 1864 - - Lincoln (Republican) Reluctantly
    • 1868 - - Grant (Republican)
    • 1872 - - Greeley (Liberal Republican)
    • 1876 - - Cooper (Greenback)
    • 1880 - - Weaver (Greenback)
    • 1884 - - Butler (Greenback)
    • 1888 - Streeter (Union Labor Party)
    • 1892 - Wing (Socialist Labor Party)
    • 1896 - Matchett (Socialist Labor Party)
    • 1900 - Debs (Social Democratic Party)
    • 1904 - Debs (Socialist Party)
    • 1908 - Debs (Socialist Party)
    • 1912 - Debs (Socialist Party)
    • 1916 - Benson (Socialist Party)
    • 1920 - Debs (Socialist Party)
    • 1924 - La Follette (Progressive Party)
    • 1928 - Foster (Communist Party USA)
    • 1932 - Foster (Communist Party USA)
    • 1936 - Browder (Communist Party USA)
    • 1940 - Aiken (Socialist Labor Party)
    • 1944 - Teichert (Socialist Labor Party)
    • 1948 - Thomas (Socialist Party)
    • 1952 - Dobbs (Socialist Workers)
    • 1956 - Dobbs (Socialist Workers)
    • 1960 - Dobbs (Socialist Workers)
    • 1964 - Hass (Socialist Labor Party)
    • 1968 - Wallace (American Independent Party)
    • 1972 - Jenness (Socialist Workers)
    • 1976 - Hall (Communist Party USA)
    • 1980 - Hall (Communist Party USA)
    • 1984 - Hall (Communist Party USA)
    • 1988 - Fulani (New Alliance Party)
    • 1992 - Fulani (New Alliance Party)
    • 1996 - Abstain
    • 2000 - Nader (Green Party)
    • 2004 - Calero (Socialist Workers)
    • 2008 - McKinney (Green Party)
    • 2012 - Stein (Green Party)
    • 2016 - Trump (Republican)
    • 2020 - Hawkins (Green Party)
    Turns out there aren't online records about who headed the Labour Party in the late 1890s
  • 1882 - Sverdrup (Venstre)
  • 1885 - Qvam (Venstre)
  • 1888 - Qvam (Venstre)
  • 1891 - Steen (Venstre) Reluctantly
  • 1894 - Unknown (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1897 - Unknown (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1900 - Unknown (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1903 - Hornsrud (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1906 - Nissen (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1909 - Nissen (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1912 - Knudsen (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1915 - Knudsen (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1918 - Grepp (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1921 - Grepp (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1924 - Støstad (Communist Party)
  • 1927 - Furubotn (Communist Party)
  • 1930 - Torp (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1933 - Torp (Arbeidarpartiet)
  • 1936 - Egede-Nissen (Communist Party)
  • 1945 - Egede-Nissen (Communist Party)
  • 1949 - Løvlien (Communist Party)
  • 1953 - Løvlien (Communist Party)
  • 1957 - Løvlien (Communist Party)
  • 1961 - Løfsnes (Socialist People’s Party)
  • 1965 - Løfsnes (Socialist People’s Party)
  • 1969 - Solheim (Socialist People’s Party)
  • 1973 - Gustavsen (Socialist Left Party)
  • 1977 - Furre (Socialist Left Party)
  • 1981 - Furre (Socialist Left Party)
  • 1985 - No Leader (Samfunnspartiet)
  • 1989 - Solheim (Socialist Left Party)
  • 1993 - Nærstad (Red Electoral Alliance)
  • 1997 - Trefall (Fatherland Party)
  • 2001 - Bastesen (Kystpartiet)
  • 2005 - Waage (Kystpartiet)
  • 2009 - Vestå (Kystpartiet)
  • 2013 - Litleskare (Democrats in Norway)
  • 2017 - Kasheikal (Democrats in Norway)
  • 2021 - Lysbakken (Socialist Left Party)

    • Movements

    Feel free to ask me about my placements here
    • This is not a comprehensive list of movements and parties I like, this is only ones I feel strongly about

    Comrades

    • French Revolution (France, 1789 –1799)
    • First French Empire (France, 1804–1815)
    • Fasci Siciliani (Italy, 1889–1894)
    • Italian Fasces of Combat (Italy, 1919-1921)
    • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Republican_Army_(1919–1922) Irish Republican Army (Ireland, 1919-1922)
    • National Fascist Party (Italy, 1921-1943)
    • Kingdom of Italy (Italy, 1922-1943)
    • Norwegian Communist Party (Norway, 1923-)
    • Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista (Spain, 1931-1934)
    • Socialist Party of France – Jean Jaurès Union (France, 1933-1935)
    • British Union of Fascists (Great Britain, 1932-1940)
    • Pērkonkrusts (Latvia, 1933-1944)
    • Political Circle "Zveno" (Bulgaria, 1930-1949)
    • Norwegian Resistance Movement (Norway, 1940-1945)
    • Italian Social Republic (Italy, 1943-1945)
    • People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola (Angola, 1956-)
    • 26th of July Movement (Cuba, 1955-1962)
    • Provisional Irish Republican Army (Ireland, 1969-1997)

    Mixed

    • Bolsheviks (Russia, 1917-1922)

    Atrocious Knaves

    • Democratic Socialists of America (United States, 1982-)
    • Nazi Germany (Germany, 1933-1945)
    • Quisling Regime (Norway, 1942-1945)

    Country Opinions

    This section will cover real countries, and ones from fiction/planned countries from self inserts


    Allies

    Cooperative

    Favourable

    Neutral

    Tense

    No Contact

    • United States of America I don't inherently hate America like other people on this site, but you're still a country without a nation, incapable of making one, and an imperialist force exporting your foul ideology worldwide.
    • Kingdom of Sweden Not a fan of this country, holds key territory of ours, and throughout history has colonized us and worked to subjugate us. If they were to fork over our land, I would be more favourable, but history does not heal so easy.

    Enemies

    Allies

    Cooperative

    Favourable

    • American Separatist Nations I look rather favorably on American separatist movements (sometimes), and would pursue favorable relations with them.

    Neutral

    Tense

    No Contact

    Enemies

    Comments

    If you would like to be added to relations, add a comment here

    Navigation



    1. ↑ Would've put it on your page if I could, but my alias for you is "The Final Boss of Autism" :)
    2. ↑ Friendly; Combining "Caudillo" and "Alstūd"
    3. ↑ How I pronounce it
    4. ↑ How it is probably pronounced actually
    5. ↑ File:HegelianContextIMPORTANT.jpeg
    6. ↑ From my understanding of Humanism, I am against it, thought I have heard many conflicting definitions so correct me if I'm wrong here
    7. ↑ Jokingly albeit total foid death grrrrrr use artificial wombs to make them obsolete
    8. ↑ I am not against the existence of gay nor lesbian people, just the LGBTQ movement is what I refer to here
    9. ↑ “Such an anti-intellectualism does not imply a hostility to culture, but a hostility to a decadent culture.”
    10. ↑ For lack of better words I use the words "equal rights" here, I don't believe in rights nor equality
    11. ↑ Not Hydra's gross definition, which is child marriage. I mean marriage between 1 man and 1 woman, both adults and consenting
    Retrieved from "https://pcbwiki.net/index.php?title=Alstūdism&oldid=526438"

    Recent changes

  • Iziaslavism
    Iziaslav • 2 minutes ago
  • Iziaslavism
    Iziaslav • 4 minutes ago
  • Iziaslavism
    Iziaslav • 9 minutes ago
  • Iziaslavism
    Iziaslav • 10 minutes ago