Neo-Nasakomism

Self Insert "People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism This page is meant to represent Nurisk5'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.

Neo-Nasakomism
Basic Information
Aliases	Nuriskianism Materialist Traditionalism Duginism-Limonovism Nermalism Left Quarkism Normal Pills Indonesian Nazbol Dugin-Land synthesis with Indonesian characteristics Based Nationalist "Job and tribe = brain feel meaning" Unenlightened Spook
Alignments	AuthLeft Culturally Right Socialists Nationalists Communists
Ideological Influences
Influenced by	Fourth Political Theory Nomadology Marxism-Leninism National Bolshevism Pancasila Nationalism Federalism National Palingenesis Traditionalism Industrialism Mercantilism
Ideological Information
Notable Theorists	Nurul “Nurisk” Iskandar (?-), Indonesia
Notable Examples	Indonesian Soviet Republic (1927-)
Variations
Schools of Thought	Anarcho-Nasakomism Makhnovism Social Anarchism National Anarchism
Character Information
Likes	Pancasila Nasakom Red Alert 3 NieR:Automata
Dislikes	Individualism Nihilism Liberalism Cosmopolitanism
Song	Dekon

"National Bolshevism is the last revolutionary doctrine in history. It absorbs into itself all previous anti-system, non-conformist ideologies, which are resolved into a general intellectual and practical synthesis. The concreteness of economic and social requirements flows without contradiction into the highest spheres of metaphysics."

Alexander Gelyevich Dugin, Templars of the Proletariat

Hey, how's it going? I'm Nurisk, and I advocate for Nasionalisme, Agamisme, Komunisme. I'm Metaphysically a Materialist, culturally right wing and economically left wing.

click here for the Indonesian version.

Summary

1. We will establish a Socialist state following the principles of Pancasila.
2. We will revive Nasakom (Nationalism, Religion, Communism) to give clearance to the meaning of Pancasila, ending political division in Indonesia..
3. We will dissolve all government bodies and replace them with elected worker councils and be subdivided proportional to population who will continually elect delegates from district to national level and only workers can participate in it.
4. We will nationalise and collectivise all industries, agriculture, and media and hand them over to cooperatives and soviets federated by state enterprises.
5. Differences in Race, Ethnicity, and Culture will be dissolved and a focus on the specialisation of each unique Individual's skills and interests to provide for the nation.
6. The Economy will be guided by a planning committee to oversee and manage the Indonesian economy.
7. We will transition Indonesia away from fossil fuels and into renewable energies and we want to expand public transport and railways.
8. We will establish a Vanguard Party as the intellectual organ of Indonesian society to ensure social and political unity and clarity.
9. All Indonesians regardless of gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity, and so on have complete and total freedom over their lives with equal obligation to serve the nation in any way they could (unless they are severely debilitated), those who reject this obligation and freeload will be ostracised from society.
10. All Indonesians from across the islands will participate in the development of their own islands and reject petit tribalism and primitivism.
11. We will claim all territories in the Nusantara archipelago from the Malay peninsula, to East Timor, to North Kalimantan, and to Eastern Papua.
12. Who counts as "Indonesian" is not defined by race or ethnicity but by association and commitment towards the cultural and industrial development of Indonesia.

Beliefs

The Neglected Class

The Proletariat and Peasantry are neglected often by the Traditionalists and instead, they focus on the aristocracy. This fact alone should anger you against them and their pompousness. While the aristocratic sovereigns hold their position because they can do so. But without the class of labourers, they could not win their wars or live such frivolous lifestyles.

The Proletariat and Peasantry yearn to seize political power, to flip the balance of power over its head, to create the order of labourers. Many a Traditionalist fear Democracy, an enlightenment ideal as it promotes equality among the classes, that is why we do not support Liberal Democracy.

Time for the Materialist is of the essence as our reigns over the world are timed, limited, and constrained. There is no God that could save us from the ticking clock. Either we act now or die later, the window of opportunity is narrow before the development of technology causes the extinction of humanity or the gridlock of the labor classes to be stuck with no way up.

Tick Tock Motherfucker.

The Bourgeoisie must be stopped as soon as possible, we must launch the great trial as soon as possible, the cleansing of the world of white progressivism. The European chauvinists so carelessly declare that their values are the superior ones that they proclaim themselves as "progressives". Well, that's why we're not.

The Conservatism of the Bourgeoisie and of the Proletariat are very different as capital cannot do anything but deterritorialise what limits it which is reflected in what it supports such as familialism, the idea that the ideal of the everydayman is to be passive towards the system, to continue gluing their faces onto the world of commodities but just "with their families" which only exists to produce more laborers and consumers. Proletarian Conservative values are based on what the proletariat does not have: a tribe.

Gangs, Nomads, Tribes, and Punks are the purest expression of this kind of revolutionary conservatism, truly revolutionary as opposed to passive. That is why I admire the Russian National Bolshevik Movement. What we need to understand is that National character cannot be commodified as it is something inherently emergent as opposed to manufactured, that's why capitalism is hellbent on its destruction and why we need to shake off the delusion that nationalism is inherently capitalist; it's not.

The proletariat as a class of wage labourers only exist because of the bourgeoisie, they have no country because the bourgeoisie have taken it away from them, we cannot take from them what they don't have and we cannot force them to associate with those they do not want to associate with. Capital is inherently internationalist hence why wage labour must be anti-globalist (although the movement is still international).

Alienation and Postmodernity

Capitalism alienates... and we're just getting started. The Wage-Labourer and Peasantry are alienated from the control over their own life as they live under the boot-heel of their Bourgeois and Landlord Masters.

Not ever have the commoners ever had control over their own livelihoods, but not their own "being" is being stripped away from them. The virulence of capital destroys sociality in favor of alienation, atomisation, and categorisation. Identity has transformed from something that emerges from gangs of people into something that can be bought and worn as a costume. One does not simply become but now is.

Man's sovereignty is the only thing that we could classify as ontologically "good" for the socialist whilst being thrown around is the ontological "evil" for the socialist. Capital can be represented by the myth of Lucifer as the Roman goddess "Venus" represents fertility and can be related to the fertileness (capitalist) production. The fall of Lucifer is the fall of this goddess and thus also the fall of capital as escaping from the grip of man and overtaking it, shaking man's kingdoms and nations.

The salvation of the Morning Star is the socialist revolution in which production has become socialised and returned under the control of man. The alienation of man from production was caused when the kings of Babylon (the oppressor class) emerged out of the commons, overthrowing common property in favor of private property as the model of production. The emergence of the patricians was the greatest tragedy for man as now he lives under tyranny. Capital has turned God himself into a commodity.

The rise of the bourgeoisie was no better, the peasantry had been replaced by the proletariat. From paying rent to selling labour-power, we are right now in the Kali Yuga; the Historical Materialist calls this period "the period of capitalism".

During this period; the worker is alienated from his means of production, from his own labour, from his folk, and from his own sovereignty. Capitalism has ravaged the world by way of war, imperialism, and exploitation. It is no coincidence that the rise of capitalism occurred around the same time as the rise of liberalism, the rise of modernity and postmodernity. The Spirit of Modernity is defined by the conflict over who can be the most violent, the Spirit of Postmodernity is defined by deconstruction and negation of what we held true.

Naturally, modernity leads to postmodernity, from tearing at each other to tearing themselves. Liberalism right now is eating itself alive, it is tearing itself apart as it has nothing left to tear apart. Liberalism has already defeated Fascism and Communism. The current world order is that of Nihilism: alienation, atomisation, deterritorialisation, disintegration.

Progressivism: The Failed Messiah

Progressivism must be rejected by the communist movement because it failed. How? Why?

Progressivism failed because it followed the current of Capital. Instead of rejecting the degeneration, it affirms it.

Now, when I say "degeneration" I mean the deterritorialisation of social identities, the things that makes us us. Many a communist talked extensively about how communism affirms the individual; I don't disagree, but the problem is what do we even use if we have nothing? Again, we cannot take from the proletariat what they do not have. Identity as it exists right now is defined by purchasing relations than emergent relations. For example; "Japan" is no longer of the "Japanese". Japan, as it exists, is of capital, its culture is being twisted and bent by the whims of capital and commodity fetishism. The Japanese people no longer create Japan, it is capital that creates Japan. Japan has been stripped of its identity and what remains is merely a puppet played by the bourgeois ventriloquists that the Japanese people have just come to accept.

The Progressives think that we can hijack the process from capital (we can't). Progressivism isn't the radical movement we think it is, it has been diluted by capital into being the status quo and the norm. There is no "radical progressivism", there is no "anti-corporate" queer movement, all within the corporation, nothing outside the corporation, nothing against the corporation. Haven't we learned anything that we cannot counter hegemony by following said cultural hegemony? The only radical thing is radical conservatism, revolutionary conservatism, and traditionalism; now that's real radicalism.

Many would like to cry out: "Reactionary!", "Fascist!" and other buzzwords, thrown around haphazardly. First of all: "Reactionary" would imply you are against radical change which would be the status quo (i.e. progressivism), secondly: Fascists are progressive, they are the only remnant of that old revolutionary progressivism, that war between which nation's hegemony should dominate, fascists are just progressives who've lost the battle for hegemony.

If we look at progressivism, it seems to be the case that it is eurocentric, it arises from Europe and thus embodies European values but yet says it preaches anti-racism. How? How can you proclaim to be anti-racist if you're imposing European values to evaluate who is "better" and "worse"? It is inherently Eurocentric, and even more it is the type of hegemony that capital participates in.

But hey, at least whether you're black or white, gay or straight, we're all equally slaves.

Also, side note: Western-style "conservatism" won't save you, it is inherently bourgeois too.

The Most Radical Movement in History

Fascism failed, Revolutionary Conservatism failed, Soviet Communism failed, the May 68ers failed, the last bastion of Revolution would have to be National Bolshevism.

National Bolshevism, a synthesis of all revolutionary theses from the Radical Left and Radical Right is what we must affirm, the Economic views of the Left and the Cultural views of the Right.

Many would like to call us reactionaries but that is simply not true. Reaction is a rejection of change, the 'real' reactionaries are the liberals and nihilists who affirm the status quo. Revolution cannot be nihilistic, it has to be against nothing. The National Bolshevik Movement in Russia proudly proclaims: "Russia is everything, the rest is nothing!". That's true, what isn't a part of the tribe is what is bad, "all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." Mussolini said.

When we think about what the National Bolsheviks and the Fascists have said, the struggle of the nation is against nothing. Not as in nothing that there is nothing there, but against Nihil as an entity. Nihil is the grim reaper, after all, the National Bolsheviks are fighting an upward battle against death.

The sea of desire is messy and chaotic, no real forms, only impermanent waves. This sea is where the first sparks of life emerged, at the bottom of the sea in hydrothermal vents that eventually formed the first biological machine. This little entity soon found itself becoming a fish, then it grew legs, and then became what he is today: Man. Man's destiny and evolution many would like to say is "in his own hands", it is no longer bound by the laws of nature that make him grow wings in his body or grow horns on his head, but instead he manufactures stealth bombers and forge swords.

The "left-wing" corresponds with the left-hand path, the path of defiance and revolution, the right is of the status quo, letting the world do as it wills. The Left, being on the side of the most thrown-around sections of society leaves them with no choice but to reject hierarchy, to reject the sovereigns that dominate and allow the subjects to enact revenge. The Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie replaced with the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

The will to dominate has dominated the spirit of modernity, but this chaotic release of energy where we threw bullets, knives, and bombs would eventually come out with the rise of a clear victor: Liberalism. Liberalism won and this raging beast took a rest as he had exhausted his energy, he has now become passive instead of sadistic. The wars it wages right now are just cleaning off what remains that tries to disturb its sleep. With it, it decays back into the earth, back into chaos, this is the era of postmodernity, the heat death.

The political freedom provided by liberalism is inherently chaotic, it is a political anarchism however still impotent. Ideological Anarchism meanwhile is potent and is able to exert its own will upon the object by way of domination, destruction, and the creation of chaos to create a new social order. The classical anarchists are the only ones who carry this power as they believe in order without hierarchy, for them; a society without superiors destroys transgressors and thus, orderly.

Note that we've discussed the existence of two kinds of chaos and order: masculine and feminine; the masculine is defined by domination and sovereignty whilst the feminine is defined by submission and subjection. Masculine Order is private as it seeks to become a "lone wolf" while in its chaos is transgressive, forcing all to submit to his will. Feminine Order and Chaos is the opposite as feminine order is social and feminine chaos is repulsive and separative. The "order" I spoke of refers to the sex of the subject and the "chaos" is the gender of the subject; my mention of Venus previously refers to how her fall caused the rise of him (Lucifer) and swears against God to reek havoc upon the peoples and nations of the world.

Liberalism is masculine in its order and feminine in its chaos, National Bolshevism is feminine in its order but masculine in its chaos; they are total opposites, Liberalism is an effeminate man whilst National Bolshevism is an emasculated woman. The National Bolsheviks are nomadic warriors in spirit, they embrace the social/communal production of the left as their form and the transgressiveness of the right as their expression, meanwhile, liberals are femboys as they advocate for private production and separative expression.

As we see, it is not a clear binary; the National Bolsheviks are of the Tomboy Venus whilst the Liberals are of the Femboy Lucifer. We wish to revive the social sadism of old, the Nomads, they are our role models.

The reason why the progressive movement fails is because they are impotent, they have nothing, their movement is thin, they forewent the potency of partisanism, of the great horde. The contemporary postmodern anarchist s stress the idea that they need not a party or party lines and that is why they fail, but Lenin has already addressed this more than a hundred years ago in What is to be Done? in which he refutes spontaneity and exercises the importance of the vanguard party and democratic centralism. In order for revolution to succeed, we need a party to unite under to concentrate our firepower upon; we need to understand that since deterritorialisation is on the side of capital and the existing socio-political hegemony, our revolution has to be that of a reterritorialising manner.

We cannot bleed our hearts out if it can simply be sucked up by the existing social structure and be assimilated, it has to be truly radical. The National Bolshevik Movement is the most radical movement of all because it exhibits the sovereignty of the individual over the system, the recapturing of desire by the individual (this is why the NBP is Anti-Paternalist). We may create a federation of communes federated under the party in order to effectivise our strategy.

If Communism is our aim as Historical Materialists and human society started in the phase of primitive communism, then it's only fair to say that our movement must be to go back, i.e. archaic.

The Impotence of Pancasila

Pancasila as it exists today is impotent, it has no soul, it has no direction, no mind. Pancasila as it exists today is only so because it is just a tool by the dajjal (capital) to divide the Indonesian masses, to laten real action, to laten their rise to power. Only during the Soeharto years did Pancasila receive a direction, led by Golkar. Now, with the reformation, there is no direction anymore, only confusion.

The Indonesian Bourgeoisie now no longer needs authoritarianism as capital will take it from here to develop our society in its image whilst we remain divided by political parties just like during liberal democracy (1945-1959). Pancasila is a tool, not an ideal, not a principle. Pancasila, in order to grow a brain and to sharpen its beak and talons must be interpreted through the lens of Nasakom: a lost art.

Nasakom is the only thing that can save us, whilst originally a loose political alliance of the nationalists and the military, the communists and the laborers, and the religious clerics must be revived. Notice how I did not mention the Indonesian bourgeoisie? Exactly, the Indonesian bourgeoisie are traitors to the nation and have played us for absolute fools, they are a part of the international cabal of capital. There can be no such thing as a "National Bourgeoisie", "National Capital", or even a "National Proletariat". We adopt Nasakom to abandon our Class identity in favor of the National identity.

Pancasila as it stands has no idea what it is, its principles are made vague so that everyone can agree with it. This is good if you're uniting factionalists, but Indonesia doesn't just have factions, but entirely different political parties with different visions of what Indonesia should be. It has already been traumatised to believe that communism is a great evil, but this is a lie. The 30 September Movement would have given Pancasila a real direction, an idea of what it is going to be, where it will be heading, to dissolve factions in Indonesia and formalise the Indonesian National Ideology.

But alas, the liars had won, the deceivers, the antichrist, they've already deceived the Indonesian masses and have killed of the revolutionaries who will give clearance. General Soeharto, whilst he certainly was an anti-communist was not too bad of a figure, he at least gave a direction for Pancasila but whether he knows it or not, he is nothing more than a useful idiot for the forces of international capital. Before he knew it, he would be deposed but the Indonesian Oligarchy would remain. The Protestors in 1998 were too impotent to desire something more radical: Socialism; and now that the revolutionary wave is over, we can only hope that a window of opportunity would soon open itself up for another revolution.

The Indonesian Socialist Empire

Indonesia is a Tellurocracy. It encompasses thousands of ethnicities, cultures, religions, and so forth that have pledged allegiance to the same ideals and family. The Indonesian Nation (and subsequently, world) encompasses the entire archipelago from Sabang all the way to Merauke (although I'd argue we should include Eastern Papua) including North Kalimantan (Brunei, Sarawak, Sabah), Malaya (including Singapore), and East Timor. This is our sphere, our geographic and ethno-racial boundaries.

Now, does this "Empire" bear any semblance to capitalist imperialism? Of course not; our Empire is Tellurocratic (Land-Rule) than Thalassocratic (Sea-rule).

But how? A country where much of its area is water being tellurocratic? Impossible!

Well, that's only the case if we take the words quite literally. You see, tellurocracy and thalassocracy is different in how the control of territory is managed and how each polity within the empire interacts with another. In the Tellurocracy, whilst there is a "center" of the empire, the regions of the empire are treated no less "inferior" than another (e.g. Rome, America, the USSR, China, and so on). In a thalassocracy, inferiority is the norm as the imperial core exploits the regions beyond it. It is inherently unequal as the core exploits the outer bounds for resources to amass its wealth.

This is also reflected in the way that we talk about them too; when we speak of "the Roman Empire" we speak about the territory as a whole, "Rome" and "Roman Empire" are synonyms in this case whilst in the context of the "British Empire", "Britain" is not synonymous with it's empire, her colonies are completely separate from the core. The name "Indonesia" itself couldn't be more tellurocratic as it is as there is no region within "Indonesia" that "is" "Indonesia" unlike Rome and the City of Rome or the British Empire and the island of Great Britain. There is Java, Sumatra, Kalimantan, Papua, Sulawesi, the Maluku Islands, and the Nusatenggara Islands (and Malaya), there is no "Indonesia" that isn't describing the whole thing, and there is no "origin point" of Indonesia, Indonesia emerged out of the whole archipelago swearing to unite under one banner.

Now, of course there are regions within this Empire that contain severe inequalities (particularly outside Java) and we should definitely address them, but I want to make it clear that we should have no intention in the dissolution of Indonesia but instead we should initiate a Revolution, one similar in Russia in character and spirit but without the Atheism.

The Radical Revolution shall bring about the creation of a new social order based on the Federation of Communes. We shall create 8 Republics corresponding to the 8 clusters: Java, Sumatra, Kalimantan, Papua, Sulawesi, Nusatenggara, Maluku, and Malaya. Further, we divide into provinces based on regions within the republics, then we divide further into communes/cities, and then we subdivide those based on districts. These subdivisions would be administrated by Workers' Councils who are elected based on profession and district who then elect on the communal, provincial, republican, and finally national levels. The Economy will be managed by State Enterprises under which the councils will be federated under.

Men and Women would be given total freedom in their private lives as they will serve the same public function in the eyes of the state. Children would be fostered by the community and be prepared physically for life as the state would prioritise what the individual can offer as opposed to the radical equalisation of all its citizens, the state would foster the development of character rather than the development of total and equal perfection.

We will overhaul completely the city and countryside. Industrialisation shall commence in the countryside however those there shall not be expected to leave for the cities, but to develop the countryside to become new cities. The distinction between city and country shall be dissolved by making all land owned by the state and managed by the communal councils. Railways and roads will be constructed and interconnectivity for all islands is a priority for efficient resource allocation.

Reading Recommendations

Texts that are in bold are the most important.

1. Fourth Political Theory by Alexander Dugin
2. Templars of the Proletariat by Alexander Dugin
3. The Guattari Reader by Gary Genosko
4. State and Revolution by Vladimir Lenin
5. What is to be Done? by Vladimir Lenin
6. Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism by Vladimir Lenin
7. Islamism and Communism by Haji Misbach
8. Philosophy of Life by Tan Malaka
9. Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx
10. Wage Labour and Capital by Karl Marx
11. Estranged Labour by Karl Marx
12. The Fetishisation of Commodities and the secret thereof
13. Workers Councils by Anton Pannekoek
14. Foundations of Leninism by Joseph Stalin
15. The Other Russia by Eduard Limonov

How to Draw

Flag

1. Draw a ball outline in black
2. Make two smaller black circles with black for the eyes
3. Color the eyes white
4. Fill it in Red
5. Make a White Circle in the center
6. Draw a Garuda in the middle surrounded by half of a gear on the left and wheat on the right along with a five pointed star above the garuda's head in the circle all in black
7. You're done!

Color Name		HEX	RGB
	Red	#cd1127	205, 17, 39
	White	#ffffff	255, 255, 255
	Black	#000000	0, 0, 0

Self Insert Relations

Gem

Philosophical Nuggets thought - Gemmy, but far too short. Also not a fan of Agrarianism, Neoluddism, and Strasser.
Calmism - cool or whatever
Conor - Gem user.

Carbon

Ultroneism - It's certainly interesting to note about how an Egoist embraces tradition and sacrality and I certainly agree with much about what you have to say. Our value systems, you being an Egoist and me being a Collectivist seem contradictory, what I deem to be "Nihilism" is a heat death. A heat death of politics, a heat death of society, and so on which is only possible within a Unipolar perspective. You seem to only define Nihilism as destruction; whilst true that is how I define it but also the very lack of energy within the system, the lack of entropy which causes a breakdown of organised systems and so on. Reading the summary (I'm too lazy to actually read the dense stuff lmao), yeah I mostly agree with you.
Social Nationalism - a Nationalist SocDem, nothing to say tbh.
Alstūdism - Nationalistic Socialism is cool and all but why Fascism?.
Agricoetism - Alright i guess.
Great British New Left You're just Mark Fisher innit?
Patrick Thought - Nothing is really to be said, why Monarchism in America?

Coal

Zelligism - Whole Ideology has pretty much be dunked on by Marx in Chapter 3 of the German Ideology

• I read it for myself. I wouldn't consider it a "debunking" of any kind but rather a criticism. He definitely has some valid points about the failures of Christianity and the fixed desire of sexual intercourse, but otherwise I'm going to have to kindly disagree.
  

Barbaric Socialism - BRUH YOU ARE LITERALLY CONTRADICTORY TO YOU OWN VERY PREMISE AND EVERYTHING I HATE ABOUT INDIVIDUALIST POSTMODERNIST NONSENSE
Venatrixism - I don't like posties.
Second Anidiotoncrack Thought - Name says it all
Schumacherianism - Diabolical Libertarian jibber jabber
Shellshocked Communism - Stll kind of a hippie but still Anarcho-Larp with no real substance.
Hyperfascism - The one time I suggest a Non-Anarchist to read On Authority. Dugin takes from the Right is the appreciation of Tradition, not Supremacy. Communism rejects any kind of “sacredness” that Liberalism has for the Individual or Fascism has for the Nation and instead focuses on the critique of all that exists, this then we can place new lines of expression without it eating itself into Totalitarianism nor disintegrating itself into Individualism, this is what Dugin means when he wants to reject the Materialism that Communism upholds. Also, No, War is not a necessity for rejuvenation, one does not need to be in constant conflict to follow the Sufi path nor invent Algebra.
Hispanic Reactionary Monarchism - Reactionary Larper, not even the semi-decent ones (neoreactionaries)
Caesar Thought - boring reactionary fascist.
Baundoun Thoughts - I don’t like Reactionaries what do you expect?
Generouschalk0 thought - coal, no like solarpunk, ocalan, bookchin, democracy, or progressivism.

Hysteria Thought - Whole lotta yap, dawg you are NOT the next Nick Land. Poeticism is cool and all and Neologism, sure, if you can explain it but Dawg, YOU LITERALLY USE MULTIPLE FONTS JUST TO TALK ABOUT YOURSELF I AIN’T TRYNA DECIPHER FUCKING ANCIENT EGYPTIAN ASS LANGUAGE. Anyway too much yap to call yourself an AnCap.
Neo-StockMarketCrash Thought - Steaming Pile of Proudhonian, Tuckerite, National Anarchist Coal
DECBism - Atlanticist Brimstone
Brazilian Liberalism - a liberal what do you expect
Radenism - Silly.
Distributist Reactionarism - 13 year old who doesnt understand reaction
Necro-Anarchism - The Nyxian-NatAn pipeline is real
Timocratic Neocameralism - Watered down Neocameralism
Romantic Egoism - I don’t like Individualists.
Rigby Thought - erm wjat
Cosmic Vanguardism - White people stuff.
Lankajori Thought - Petit Bourgeoisie's strongest soldier.