⠀ism

Icons: (////)

⠀ism
“He who says that the time for philosophy has not yet come or that it has passed is like someone who says that the time for happiness has not yet come or that it has passed.”
Basic Information
Aliases	Ace Grammont (pen name) Munnechiæn Model File:New16384.png ⠠⠃⠗⠁⠊⠇⠇⠑ ⠠⠏⠁⠞⠞⠑⠗⠝ ⠠⠃⠇⠁⠝⠅
Alignments	Right Unity Metamodernists  Optimists  Individualists  Christian
Ideological Influences
Influenced by	Metamodernism Nietzscheanism (partially) Individualism Optimism Christian Theocracy Noocracy/Technocracy Austrian School
Ideological Information
Notable Examples	The Noocracy of Munnechiæ
Variations
Sub-Ideologies	My Grandma Thought Metamodernism Aristocracy Conservatism Socratism Aristotelianism
Character Information
Book	In the notepad.. fates are written Cause “Pandora” didn't listen. Time will march in here with me, THE SCREENS THE LAST YOU’LL EVER SEE.
Likes	Grand narratives Sleeping and napping

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.

Plato

⠀ism is the self insert of ⠀. It is metamodernist and Nietzscheanist.

Beliefs

Philosophy

Metamodernism

What is Metamodernism?

Metamodernism is a concept that has become increasingly popular in recent years as a way to describe the evolving cultural landscape. It suggests that we have moved beyond the postmodern era of the late 20th century and entered a new phase of cultural development. This shift is characterized by a desire for change and a rejection of the notion that history has come to an end.

In the face of numerous crises, such as climate change, economic instability, and global conflicts, there is a collective yearning for something more meaningful and transformative. Our generation, raised on a diet of postmodern irony and criticism, has come to realize that there is a need for sincerity, trust, and a search for universal truths. Metamodernism acknowledges the value of postmodernism's deconstruction, relativism, and skepticism, while also embracing a renewed sense of earnestness, sentimentality, and the power of grand narratives.

Rather than simply returning to naive ideological positions, metamodernism recognizes the oscillation between the perspectives of both modernism and postmodernism. It is a state of informed naivety, a practical vision that fluctuates between sincerity and irony, deconstruction and construction, apathy and passion. It seeks to find a unique position that combines both humor and truth, understanding that one does not necessarily negate the other.

The term "meta" in metamodernism derives from Plato's concept of metaxis, which refers to the interplay and concurrence of opposites. It is not a matter of finding a balance, but rather a continuous pendulum swing between various positions. Each time metamodernism leans towards sincerity, it is pulled back towards irony, and vice versa.

Metamodernism can be observed in various forms of artistic expression, such as films by directors like Spike Jonze and Alejandro González Iñárritu, music by artists like Donald Glover and Janelle Monáe, television shows like Parks and Recreation and Breaking Bad, and literature by authors like David Foster Wallace and Zadie Smith. In the visual arts, there is a shift towards materiality, influence, and the sublime, as seen in the works of artists like Olafur Eliasson and Guido van der Werve.

Furthermore, our generation is witnessing the flourishing of more abstract modes of thought, with philosophies like Speculative Realism and Object-Oriented Ontology, as well as social movements like Occupy and Black Lives Matter. Metamodernism itself is not a defined philosophy or art movement, but rather a way to articulate the ongoing developments associated with a collective desire for change, for which the vocabulary of postmodern theory is no longer sufficient.

Why do you support/believe in Metamodernism?

As an ardent proponent of metamodernism, I am compelled to expound upon the profound philosophical underpinnings that inform my support for this conceptual framework. Metamodernism, in its essence, represents a paradigmatic shift, a departure from the postmodern mode that has long dominated our cultural landscape. It beckons us to embrace a new dialectical synthesis, one that transcends the inherent limitations of both modernism and postmodernism.

At the core of my philosophical allegiance to metamodernism lies its rejection of the notion of history's conclusive denouement. In an era that confronts us with multifaceted crises, ranging from environmental degradation to social inequality, the perils of complacency and resignation are all too apparent. Metamodernism, in stark contrast to its postmodern predecessor, compels us to courageously confront these challenges, to actively engage in a transformative praxis. It impels us to transcend the veil of irony and cynicism, to cultivate a renewed sense of sincerity, trust, and a penetrating quest for universal truths.

Metamodernism's intellectual allure is further bolstered by its dialectical reconciliation of modernist and postmodernist tenets. Rather than summarily dismissing these movements as obsolete relics, metamodernism embraces their respective contributions while simultaneously transcending their inherent limitations. It recognizes the perpetual oscillation between seemingly dichotomous perspectives, a dialectic oscillation that is indispensable for the advancement of knowledge and societal progress. By reconciling irony and sincerity, deconstruction and construction, metamodernism affords us a nuanced and holistic lens through which to apprehend the intricacies of our existence.

Moreover, the philosophical impetus behind my support for metamodernism lies in its propensity to engender critical reflexivity and epistemic subversion. It exhorts us to interrogate the prevailing narratives, to question the veracity of established norms and ontological assumptions. This intellectual emancipation is particularly germane in an epoch characterized by rapid technological advancement and profound socio-cultural transformations. Metamodernism, in its revolutionary spirit, empowers us to envision alternative futures, to reimagine the boundaries of possibility, and to actively participate in the co-creation of our shared reality.

Finally, the philosophical merits of metamodernism are poignantly manifested in its fecundity as a crucible for artistic expression and cultural production. This conceptual framework provides artists with an ontological playground, a fertile terrain upon which to explore the dialectical tensions and contradictions that permeate our contemporary condition. Through various artistic mediums, including film, music, literature, and visual arts, metamodernism affords us the opportunity to engage with the profound complexities of our zeitgeist, to grapple with its existential quandaries, and to evoke an emotional resonance that transcends the limitations of mere intellectual discourse.

What’s the difference between Postmodernism and Metamodernism?

In the realm of philosophical discourse, we traverse the intellectual landscape to discern the variances between Postmodernism and Metamodernism. Postmodernism, in its essence, dismisses narratives on the grounds of their perceived inadequacies in capturing absolute truth, relegating them to a state of abandonment. Conversely, Metamodernism espouses a philosophy that embraces the coexistence of multiple narratives, fostering an environment of competition and tolerance. It implores us to strive for a refined version of truth, one that aligns with the existential values that shape our very existence.

Nietzsche

Who is Nietzsche?

Friedrich Nietzsche was a prominent German philosopher, cultural critic, and writer who lived in the 19th century. He is best known for his radical critiques of traditional morality, religion, and philosophy, and his exploration of themes such as the "death of God," the will to power, and the concept of eternal recurrence. Nietzsche is frequently regarded as a profoundly individualistic philosopher. According to this interpretation, his focus lies primarily on the welfare of select individuals, while he pays minimal attention to the collective mass, commonly referred to as "the herd." However, Nietzsche acknowledges the significance of the herd only insofar as they either assist or obstruct the endeavors of these exceptional individuals and their pursuit of self-development.

Nietzsche's beliefs were complex and multifaceted, but some of his key ideas include:

1. The "Death of God": Nietzsche famously declared that "God is dead" in his writings. By this, he meant that traditional religious beliefs and moral frameworks were no longer viable in the modern world. He argued that the decline of religious faith and the rise of secularism had left a void in human existence, and it was up to individuals to create their own values and meaning.
2. Will to Power: Nietzsche proposed that the driving force behind human behavior was the "will to power." He argued that all human actions and desires were motivated by a desire for power, dominance, and self-assertion. He believed that individuals should embrace their personal will to power and strive for self-mastery and self-overcoming. Nietzsche's concept of the Will to Power was never explicitly and systematically defined within his works, which has led to various interpretations and debates among scholars. Although Nietzsche did not provide a comprehensive definition, the term can be understood as a notion of self-determination and the process of actualizing one's will upon oneself or the external world. The Will to Power aligns closely with the idea of egoism, emphasizing the individual's pursuit of their own desires, ambitions, and self-assertion. This concept of the Will to Power captures the profound and dynamic nature of human agency, highlighting the fundamental desire for self-empowerment and the assertion of one's individuality.
3. Critique of Morality: Nietzsche's rejection of morality stems from his belief that it is inherently disvaluable, or a negative aspect of human existence. He argues that morality, as traditionally understood, hinders the development and flourishing of individuals capable of living the highest kind of life. This raises significant questions that are crucial for comprehending and evaluating Nietzsche's critique. Nietzsche considers morality to be a bad thing. According to his perspective, morality imposes a set of external values and rules upon individuals, inhibiting their ability to fully express their unique individuality and exercise their personal will to power. Nietzsche perceives this limitation as detrimental, preventing the flourishing of exceptional individuals who possess the potential to reach extraordinary heights in their lives. Undoubtedly, Friedrich Nietzsche asserts that the dichotomy between good and evil is primarily established through the definition and understanding of evil. According to Nietzsche, the notion of good is essentially a negation or opposition to this particular conception of evil. However, the slave rebellion in morality brings about a complete inversion of the concept of good. Nietzsche refers to this profound shift as the "revaluation of values." In Nietzsche's philosophy, the prevailing understanding of good and evil is largely shaped by the dominant ruling class or those in positions of power. The powerful determine what is considered evil, and subsequently, the concept of good arises as a response or rejection of this prevailing notion of evil. This dynamic creates a hierarchical system where the powerful dictate and impose their moral values upon society. However, Nietzsche argues that the slave rebellion in morality disrupts this hierarchy and challenges the established values. The oppressed and marginalized, who are typically considered the "slaves" in this context, challenge and subvert the dominant moral framework. Through their rebellion, they redefine the understanding of good and evil, effectively turning the traditional values upside down. This inversion of values, as Nietzsche terms it, represents a radical shift in the moral landscape. The oppressed, through their rebellion, redefine what is deemed good and evil, thereby challenging the established norms and values upheld by the ruling class. This reevaluation of values signifies a transformative process that seeks to liberate individuals from the constraints of the prevailing moral order.
4. Eternal Recurrence: Nietzsche introduced the concept of eternal recurrence, which suggests that the universe and all events within it will recur infinitely. He presented this idea as a thought experiment, challenging individuals to live their lives in a way that they would be willing to repeat every moment for eternity. In Nietzsche's philosophy, he posits the existence of an eternal cycle characterized by the repetition of similar circumstances in the world. This implies that humans are destined to continually face these recurring situations, encompassing both moments of happiness and periods of pain. Alternatively, Nietzsche's concept of Recurrence can be understood as the presence of both joyous and tormenting aspects of life manifesting in all things. Of utmost significance to Nietzsche is the manner in which individuals approach this reality. According to his perspective, it is essential to fully embrace this inevitable fate rather than becoming disheartened by the inability to evade it. By wholeheartedly accepting and confronting this cyclicality, individuals can infuse their lives with meaning and seize the opportunity to revel in the joys of existence. Nietzsche contends that genuine living necessitates an acceptance of both the pleasures and sufferings of life. Shunning one or the other, he argues, leads to a state of decadence and detachment from the true nature of reality. To truly live, one must acknowledge and embrace the inherent duality of life's experiences, recognizing that both happiness and suffering are integral parts of the human condition.

Nietzsche's ideas have been interpreted and understood in various ways, and his work remains subject to ongoing scholarly debate. His writings have had a profound impact on philosophy, literature, and cultural thought, influencing thinkers from existentialists to postmodernists.

How did Nietzsche influence you?

Nietzsche's deeply individualistic philosophy has had a profound impact on my worldview. Embracing this belief has allowed me to prioritize the well-being and growth of a select few individuals, including myself, above all else. I find myself caring little about the concerns and opinions of the collective masses, commonly referred to as "the herd," unless they directly contribute to or hinder the aspirations and self-cultivation of these exceptional individuals.

This perspective has freed me from the constraints of societal expectations and norms, enabling me to focus on my own personal development and fulfillment. By recognizing the importance of self-cultivation, I have come to understand that true progress and self-realization can only be achieved by prioritizing the needs and desires of these exceptional individuals.

By embracing Nietzsche's individualistic philosophy, I have learned to value my own uniqueness and the uniqueness of others. I understand that each individual possesses their own distinct talents, aspirations, and potential for greatness. This realization has empowered me to pursue my own passions and goals, without being weighed down by the judgments or limitations imposed by the herd.

However, it is important to note that this individualistic perspective does not equate to complete disregard for others. Rather, it emphasizes the significance of surrounding oneself with individuals who share a similar drive for self-cultivation and growth. These connections provide support, inspiration, and collaboration, fostering an environment conducive to the realization of our individual potential.

While some may view this individualistic stance as selfish or detached from the concerns of the larger society, I firmly believe that it is through the cultivation of exceptional individuals that true progress and innovation can be achieved. By focusing on our own self-development, we can contribute unique perspectives, ideas, and advancements that ultimately benefit the collective whole.

In essence, Nietzsche's individualistic philosophy has shaped my worldview by encouraging me to prioritize the well-being and growth of select individuals, including myself. It has liberated me from societal expectations, allowing me to pursue my own passions and goals while recognizing the importance of surrounding myself with like-minded individuals. Through this lens, I believe that embracing our individuality and fostering exceptional individuals is the key to unlocking true progress and realizing our fullest potential as a society.

Individualism

What is Individualism?

Individualism is a philosophical and social belief that places primary emphasis on the rights, freedoms, and autonomy of the individual. It values the unique qualities, desires, and pursuits of each person, emphasizing their independence, self-reliance, and personal responsibility. Individualism promotes the idea that individuals have the right to make their own choices, pursue their own goals, and determine their own values and beliefs, free from undue influence or interference from external forces, such as the government or society. It recognizes the importance of personal liberty, self-expression, and the protection of individual rights, including freedom of thought, speech, and action. Individualism also emphasizes the potential for individuals to contribute positively to society through their unique talents, ideas, and perspectives, as well as the importance of diversity and inclusivity in fostering a thriving and dynamic community.

Why do you support/believe in Individualism?

My perspective is shaped by a deep appreciation for the uniqueness and autonomy of each individual. I firmly believe that every person possesses their own distinct set of talents, desires, and aspirations that should be nurtured and celebrated. Embracing individualism means recognizing and valuing the inherent worth and potential of each person, and rejecting the notion that one's identity and purpose should be defined or limited by societal norms or expectations.

Individualism empowers individuals to take ownership of their lives, making choices and decisions that align with their own values and goals. It encourages self-reliance, personal responsibility, and the pursuit of self-fulfillment. By prioritizing the needs and desires of the individual, we create a society that respects and supports the autonomy and agency of each person.

Supporting individualism does not mean advocating for selfishness or disregarding the well-being of others. On the contrary, it recognizes that when individuals are free to pursue their own passions and aspirations, they are more likely to contribute positively to the collective whole. By fostering an environment that encourages personal growth and self-expression, we unleash the potential for innovation, creativity, and progress.

Individualism also promotes diversity and inclusivity. It celebrates the rich tapestry of human experiences, recognizing that different perspectives and ideas contribute to a more vibrant and dynamic society. By embracing individualism, we create a space where individuals are free to express their unique identities and contribute their talents and perspectives, fostering a society that is more tolerant, accepting, and understanding.

At its core, individualism is about empowering individuals to live authentically and pursue their own paths in life. It rejects the notion that one's worth is determined solely by external factors such as social status or conformity to societal expectations. Instead, it emphasizes the importance of personal growth, self-actualization, and the pursuit of happiness according to one's own terms.

History

History is like a fractal, patterns repeat, and it’s infinite.

Mandelbrot sequence, a fractal.

General Politics

Civics

Noocracy

What is Noocracy?

Noocracy is a concept that encompasses a form of governance or societal organization in which decision-making power is vested in those individuals who possess superior intellectual or knowledge-based capabilities. Derived from the Greek words "noos" (meaning "mind" or "intellect") and "kratos" (meaning "power" or "rule"), noocracy proposes that the most capable and knowledgeable individuals should lead and govern society.

In a noocratic system, leadership is based on meritocracy, where individuals with exceptional intellectual abilities, expertise, and wisdom are entrusted with the responsibility of making decisions for the betterment of society as a whole. The emphasis is placed on rationality, critical thinking, and a deep understanding of complex issues. Noocracy envisions a society in which decision-making is guided by reason, knowledge, and a commitment to the collective welfare.

Proponents of noocracy argue that this form of governance has the potential to mitigate the pitfalls of other systems, such as autocracy, oligarchy, or democracy, which may be susceptible to corruption, populism, or the dominance of special interest groups. By prioritizing intellectual prowess and expertise, noocracy aims to ensure that the most qualified individuals are entrusted with the task of shaping policies and making decisions that address the multifaceted challenges faced by society.

Critics, however, raise concerns about the practicality and feasibility of implementing a noocratic system. They argue that determining who possesses the necessary intellectual capabilities to lead can be subjective and prone to manipulation. Furthermore, questions arise regarding the potential exclusion of diverse perspectives and the concentration of power in the hands of a select few, potentially leading to elitism or authoritarianism.

Why do you support/believe in Noocracy?

I advocate for the implementation of noocracy, a system that places decision-making power in the hands of the wisest and most intellectually capable individuals. My unwavering support for this concept stems from a deeply held belief that the wisest among us possess the intellectual acumen and discernment necessary to make the most informed and effective decisions for the betterment of society as a whole.

I firmly contend that intelligence and wisdom are invaluable assets when it comes to navigating the complex challenges that confront our world. Those individuals endowed with exceptional intellectual capabilities have honed their critical thinking skills, enabling them to analyze problems from multiple perspectives, identify underlying causes, and propose innovative solutions. By entrusting decision-making power to these intellectually superior individuals, we can harness their profound insights and expertise, thereby ensuring that the best possible choices are made.

The wisdom and knowledge of these exceptional individuals offer a safeguard against the perils of populism, demagoguery, and short-sighted decision-making. In a world where emotions and biases often cloud judgment, the noocratic system provides a counterbalance by prioritizing rationality, evidence-based reasoning, and a deep understanding of complex issues. By placing decision-making power in the hands of the wisest, we mitigate the risks of ill-informed choices driven by personal interests or popular sentiment.

The implementation of noocracy promotes a meritocratic ethos, where individuals rise to positions of leadership based on their intellectual prowess and expertise. This meritocracy ensures that those most qualified to address the intricate challenges of our time are entrusted with the responsibility of making decisions that shape our collective future. By valuing intellectual capacity and knowledge, we create a system that rewards excellence and encourages the continual pursuit of wisdom, fostering a society that thrives on the foundations of intellectual growth and innovation.

Critics may argue that determining who is the wisest among us is a subjective and potentially biased endeavor. However, the inherent imperfections and challenges of any system should not deter us from striving for a governance structure that maximizes the potential for wise decision-making. It is through rigorous evaluation, open dialogue, and a commitment to transparency that we can establish mechanisms to identify and empower those individuals who demonstrate exceptional intellectual capabilities.

Personality and Behavior

⠀ism behaves like just the real User ⠀. They also are not afraid to kill or cause mass genocide to please their ego, but refrains from doing so for the sake of philosophical conversation.

Relations

Gifted

• Timocratic Neocameralism - Our beliefs intertwine in a remarkable manner, as we share a profound appreciation for the principles of freedom and an ardent advocacy for nuclear power. Moreover, I find myself drawn to the merits of your Georgist economics, recognizing the potential it holds in fostering a more equitable and just socio-economic framework. My inquiries lead me to transcend the boundaries of religion, for I hold no agression towards the diverse tapestry of faiths that exist in our world. It is inconsequential to me whether your religious convictions differ from my own, as I firmly believe in the inherent worth and autonomy of each individual, irrespective of their spiritual inclinations. In embracing this inclusive perspective, I aspire to foster a climate of understanding and respect, where the richness of our diverse beliefs can coexist harmoniously, nurturing a collective tapestry of shared values and mutual appreciation.

Correct

• File:New16384.png Personne Thought - The relations between our respective beliefs is evident, albeit with nuanced disparities in terms of the extent of authoritarianism and advocacy for monarchist ideals. Nevertheless, I must express my dissent with regard to your Imperialist convictions, as they diverge from my own framework.
• Calculust - On the whole, I find your perspective commendable, although I must express my disagreement specifically in relation to your adherence to Meta-Marxism.
• Necro-Anarchism - I have found myself harmonizing with a multitude of viewpoints, save for your unwavering support of racism and voluntarism. As a seeker of truth and wisdom, I recognize the inherent fallacies and moral deficiencies that underlie such ideologies, which stand in stark contrast to the principles of human dignity. I cautiously concede that there exist circumstances in which violence may regrettably manifest as a necessary means of defense and our own hapiness. Also note that given your endorsement of death, it becomes apparent that the manifestation of violence becomes an indispensable catalyst in bringing about the ultimate demise, a concept that you appear to ardently champion. Yet, as I delve deeper into the recesses of contemplation, I implore us to exercise profound introspection and discernment, for the utilization of violence should not be taken lightly. In our ceaseless pursuit of personal fulfillment and happiness, it is incumbent upon us to use the role of violence within the broader framework of our existence. We must reflect upon the ramifications of our actions, evaluating whether they contribute to the well-being of ourselves and others, or if they perpetuate a cycle of suffering and discord. Thus, as we navigate the labyrinthine complexities of existence, let us embrace the mantle of philosophical inquiry, engaging in rigorous examination and reflection. May our discourse be guided by reason, empathy, and a steadfast commitment to the pursuit of truth, ultimately leading us towards a world where racism and voluntarism are relics of a regrettable past a distant memory in the annals of our collective history.

Tranquil

•  Baxism - I disagree with your conceptualization of war and its relation to the bourgeoisie. While it is true that the bourgeoisie may exploit individuals who are unwittingly ensnared in their machinations, I contend that this exploitation targets mere mindlessness. Rather, it is a systemic exploitation perpetuated by the bourgeoisie's wielding of power and influence. Endorsement of war as a means to challenge the bourgeoisie may be nessescary. Turning our attention to the concept of ochlocracy, I must express my disagreement with your advocacy for this form of governance. Initially, I had perceived you as an egoist, an individual who prioritizes self-interest above all else, disregarding the well-being of others. Egoism, in its essence, encourages actions that maximize personal benefit without concern for the collective good. However, I am cognizant of the potential for evolving perspectives, and I am open to exploring the nuances of your position. On the subject of racism and suicide, I find myself in agreement with your viewpoint. Racism, as a reprehensible social construct, perpetuates systemic discrimination and injustice. It is incumbent upon us to challenge and dismantle these structures, fostering inclusivity and equality. Similarly, I concur with your assertion that suicide is a profound tragedy and should be approached with compassion and medical assistance. Recognizing the complex interplay of mental health and societal factors, it is crucial to provide support and resources to individuals who may be contemplating such a drastic course of action.
• Schumacherianism - “Dear Ancaps, You claim you want no regulations, but you want to be regulated by the NAP. Curious.” - Avaritionism
• DECBism - I appreciate the thoughtfulness of some your perspectives, although I must admit that I hold reservations when it comes to your liberal and democratic policies. even though the classification of my own beliefs as liberal is subject to debate.

Incorrect

• Neo-StockMarketCrash Thought - WIP
• Brazilian Liberalism - Autism isn’t a philosophy I find myself in alignment with the tenets of your individualist and optimist philosophy, as they resonate with my own contemplations. However, when it comes to the realm of economic theory, I must respectfully express my dissent regarding your adherence to Keynesian economics, Autism, and your support for Third Way. I am compelled to delve deeper into the intricacies of these perspectives, scrutinizing their underlying assumptions and implications. In doing so, I seek to unravel the complexities of human society and its intricate relationship with economic systems, aiming to uncover alternative pathways that may better reflect the profound interplay between individual agency and the collective well-being. By engaging in this philosophical inquiry, I aspire to contribute to the ongoing discourse, fostering a more nuanced understanding of the multifaceted tapestry of human existence and the various schools of thought that shape our socio-economic landscape.
• Venatrixism - Just to clarify, I’m not capitalist. I must express my dissent towards the concept of Futurism, as I firmly believe that our journey towards progress necessitates a symbiotic relationship with the treasures of the past. It is my conviction that within the annals of history lie indispensable inventions, timeless techniques, and magnificent architectural marvels that continue to bear relevance in our contemporary world. These artifacts of human ingenuity and wisdom stand as testament to our collective narrative, serving as touchstones that can guide our present endeavors and inspire the trajectory of our future pursuits. In embracing the essence of philosophical inquiry, I implore us to honor the profound interplay between tradition and innovation, recognizing that the wisdom of antiquity can imbue our present with a sense of rootedness and depth, facilitating a more holistic and enlightened path forward.

Theory

Have already read

WIP

• Philosophy: A Christian Introduction, James K. Dew Jr. and Paul M. Gould
• Metamodernism (Radical Cultural Studies), Robin van den Akker, Alison Gibbons, and Timotheus Vermeulen
• Metamodernism: The Future of Theory, Jason Ānanda Josephson Storm
• Metamodernism and the Return of Transcendence, A. Severan and Brendan Graham Dempsey
• Metamodernism: Historicity, Affect, Depth, Alison Gibbons and Timotheus Vermeulen
• The Listening Society: A Metamodern Guide to Politics, Book One (Metamodern Guides 1)/Nordic Ideology: A Metamodern Guide to Politics, Book Two (Metamodern Guides 2), Hanzi Freinacht
• Might is Right, Arthur Desmond
• Classic Philosophy for the Modern Man (Classics for the Modern Man Book 1)/ Classic Spirituality for the Modern Man (Classics for the Modern Man Book 2)/ Classic Political Philosophy for the Modern Man (Classics for the Modern Man Book 3), Andrew Lynn
• The Fourth Political Theory, Aleksandr Dugin