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.

Nuriskianism
Basic Information
Aliases	Feel Free to add your Insults here Nurul Iskandar Nurisk nurisk5 (discord tag (DMs open)) @Nurisk5 (twitter handle) Nermalisme Cringe Faggot Indognesian Cool opponent Left Quarkism Normal Pills Indonesian Nazbol 🤮ism Comrade Confederate Moderate Duginism Based Nationalist
Alignments	AuthLeft Culturally Syncretic Socialists Nationalists Communists
Ideological Influences
Influenced by	Heideggerianism Marxism Leninism National Bolshevism Pancasila Zizekianism Fourth Political Theory Guattarism Islam Nusantara Cultural Nationalism Multiculturalism Pan-Nationalism Traditionalism Ethnopluralism Guided Democracy Kosyginism Environmentalism Situationism
Ideological Information
Notable Theorists	Nurul “Nurisk” Iskandar (?-), Indonesia
Character Information
Song	Dekon

Nuriskianism is a thing.

Meaning of Life

The Meaning of life is simple really: It's self referential.

Life is about itself, it's about it's own perpetuation, affirmation of life, and the creation of life. The Antithesis of Life is Death. Death is the negation of life. Death also seeks to perpetuate itself.

In order for life to "be", life must be afraid of death which is evermore encroaching upon it. Life needs energy to continue running from death, time is on the side of death; hence why religions that talk about salvation (like Christianity) talk about Eternal (not influenced by time) Life. It's a paradoxical statement as whilst Time is infinite, Existence is not. Time is the Eternal Grim Reaper, the Eternal Negator, the one who resolves conflicts by the destruction of Life. Life being "Eternal" can only make sense through the embrace of Death, self sacrifice, the assimilation of the finite into the Infinite. The Infinite has enough room for the Finite but the Finite has no room for the Infinite.

Life's ultimate goal is to prevent itself from being assimilated into the Infinite. "Giving Meaning" to things is ultimately just saying "this thing gives me the strength to continue living". Entropy must not succumb to Negentropy. Energy must not reach a Vacuum State where it is at it's lowest, the lack of a concentration of Energy. That's why I proclaim myself as a "Consevative", I wish for society to not succumb to a Heat Death. Such a thing leads towards the degeneration and deconstruction of the very foundation of Society.

Whilst this is great for the Revolutionaries who seek to only Destroy, but not all of us wish for revolution's ultimate goal to be destructive, but to create something new. The Affirmation of a New Life from the ruins of Old, i.e. a Transformation.

Liberalism bad

I don't like Liberalism because Individualism bad. Individualism bad because chaos bad, chaos is ontologically non-productive.

Chaos = Void in greek, Chaos doesn't make things, it destroys things. The Anarchy of Production under Capitalism (the Free Market) can only make things because it is organised, ordered, and structured. Whilst it is chaotic, the chaos is very much like outer space in that you have Stellar and Planetary systems floating about in space, though they do interact with one another through competition (So a bunch of Type 2 civilisations competing?).

Liberalism also believes it is a Universal truth and it seeks to monopolise it's grip upon the world. Unipolarity centralises itself around a single Star (that being the west) and doesn't allow for other Star systems to develop. Eventually the contents of the star would die out and cause the Star to go kaboom and explode and right now that is happening, however the Dark force, Capital tries to stop this supernova from happening to allow for more stars to form and does this through monitoring and regulating the total amount of output it generates and stunt the developments of the Third World, yadi yadi yada, Imperialism and Monopoly Capitalism regulates the developments of the periphery which stunts them (meaning that so called "international cooperation" is bad to an extent).

What I mean "to an extent" is that if the economy centralises around foreign monopolies, development is stunted, if the economy decentralises around smaller local companies, no influx of Capital to develop the country meaning that it's in the interests of the local states to monitor the development of the productive forces.

We need more factories and industrialised farms, locally or foreign built, then we will seize them.

More stars, the better, hence, Multipolarity being a theory around Civilisations going their own ways whilst still interacting with each other.

You can also think of it kind of like Fire, Fire burns and roars, the more fires there are, they can ignite each other (as long as they have a supply of wood to fuel each other) as they engage in dialectics with each other. Problem with a continuation of this kind of dialectic is that eventually all will be merged into one and eventually the Flame will slowly burn out, this is what is happening with Liberalism as Liberalism assimilates it's enemies into itself and eventually births about Nihilism.

The Philosophy of Nick Land is correct in stating that Capitalism is a Nihilising force, hence why we care about achieving Multipolarity. Communism should then have to be Anti-Nihilist, problem is is that Communist philosophy is staunchly Materialist, whilst this is good as it allows us to be down to earth and face reality directly, it's bad when forming solutions.

Liberalism is a Positive Worldview with a Negative Praxis, Communism must be a Negative Worldview and a Positive Praxis.

Hence why the following Dugin Quote:

"If we free socialism from its materialist, atheist and Modernist features and if we reject the racist and narrow nationalist aspects of the Third way doctrines we arrive at a comepletely new kind of political ideology. We call it the Fourth Political Theory, or 4PT, (The first being liberalism, that we essentially challenge, the second being the classical form of communism, the third being national-socialism and fascism). Its elaboration starts from the point of intersection between different anti-liberal political theories of the past (namely communism and the Third way theories). So we arrive at the national-bolshevism that represents socialism without materialism, atheism, progressivism, and Modernism, as well as the Third way theories without racism and nationalism.

Alexander Dugin, Fourth Political Theory, pg. 205

Traditionalism

Morality and Ethics mean nothing if they aren’t enforced.

Cry all you want about how God gave you commandments or how Reason and Empathy is how you derived your ethics, they mean Nothing if you don’t enforce them.

Tradition is a set of Values, Norms, and Codes that dictate how a person should/must live their lives. A Tradition that isn’t upheld is a Dead Tradition.

Without Tradition, Society Degenerates.

Without Society (and Tradition), there is no Social Order.

No Order = No Peace.

No Peace = No Freedom.

Freedom is only “real” if it is expressed, one can increase their Freedom through Fraternity which naturally creates a system of Order within a Society.

The Anarchists and the Fascists are one in the same. Fascism, being influenced by Futurism seeks to destroy the Old Social Order, to break free from Tradition. But what comes after? Obviously, Palingenesis means “Rebirth” which means the creation of a new Light of Tradition, and unless the Anarchists want to continually destroy, eventually, Social Entropy will decrease as people settle and create their own societies with their own laws and norms (lest they be constantly trespassed).

Eventually, they’ll turn towards Totalitarianism, a Totalitarianism that destroys anything in its path that is seen as the enemy of “the People” or “the Individual” with no room for settling down.

To them, War is Peace and Freedom is Slavery.

Now, Liberalism slowly dilutes Social Norms and makes them utterly meaningless.

The Project of the Modernists is to destroy the present state of things. The Project of the Postmodernists is to dilute and dissolve everything that remains.

Liberalism has finished the first Project and is heading to finish the second.

Our goal as Traditionalists is to reject the Post-Modernist project, but the Modernist one?

Many proclaim that Communism is the real movement that abolishes the present state of things... but what comes after? The answer is simple if you aren't blinded by dogmatism: a New State of Affairs, but what will this new state of affairs consist of?

We can make something new, or we can revive something old... Tradition can be anything so long as it is something we hold onto dearly and willingly enforce and follow it. If we continue trespassing this, society degenerates. A State then must enforce these sacred Laws and Codes to keep society from decaying, we must Psychologically condition the people so that they follow these codes willingly. "Free Will" is a farce in the face of Psychology, and we must exploit it if we want to preserve a certain way of life.

Guided Democracy

Democracy right now is free, Democracy is untampered, Democracy freely elects whatever parties they want. The State constantly fights with itself over ideology in the West where there's no such thing as a "National Ideology".

The State should not be divided and instead, be united. Indonesia already has Pancasila, so why do we not have a single Party? Why must we argue over petty interpretations of it? That's because what we have right now isn't "authentic" Pancasila but a watered-down version that does nothing except argue with itself. It cannot decide what it wants to be, it knows nothing about what it is all about.

Right now, how the State teaches about it is just basic stuff that everybody can agree on, it is a mere pussy, with no real values to stick itself on outside of general cooperation and belief in a deity and patriotism. There's nothing inherently "Indonesian" about it.

It's a milquetoast rendition of Pancasila to satisfy the Globalist Liberals. Western Liberals get pissy mad when we try to move away from Global Liberalism that we're stuck in this lukewarm and safe generalisation rather than a real Ideology.

Our Country is not sovereign, it is controlled, controlled by the West. "Liberal Democracy" is not a Democracy, it's Bureaucratic Anarchification. Democracy is "rule of the people", if the people aren't even united, what does "democracy" even mean? What does it mean to be "democratic" when all it is is just a competition of political parties backed by the Bourgeoisie?

Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in the ancient Greek republics: freedom for the slave-owners.

Vladimir Lenin, State and Revolution

We originally had a Democracy (or at least, proposed) that was united, with an actual goal and a singular interpretation. It existed from 1959-1965 before being replaced by the New Order in 1966 onwards marked by the Supersemar, but even then, the New Order was still United under a Democracy (even if rigged).

What I'm getting at here is that democracy should be united, under one interpretation, an eternal one, one that is illuminated through a Pancasila that has a goal, an aim, actual principles. and so forth.

This is why I chose Nasakom. Nasakom (Nasionalisme, Agamisme, Komunisme) gives light to what we should aim for, a Nation that is Socialist, a Nation that is tied together under God, a Nation that is democratic. But not just any democracy, but Guided Democracy. Democracy that is Guided by a Revolutionary Vanguard Party that gives light on which path we are taking a step on, a path that is straight, a path that has an actual vision, Indonesian National Communism.

We should not fight amongst each other, the Indonesian People should be united under the banner of the Vanguard Party, under the Ideology of the Indonesian Proletariat, one that does not divide us like the Democracy of the Bourgeoisie. If we want to have a Free Indonesia, we need an Indonesia that is Sovereign, which requires an Indonesia that has a clear Ideology, and that Ideology must reflect the everyday Working People of Indonesia.

A Sovereign Indonesia is a Socialist Indonesia. One that is not subjected to the laws and whims of capital that actively deterritorialises who we are and what we believe in as a collective whole, separating us, atomising us, alienating us through its many weapons: Wage-Labour, Commodity Fetishism, the Spectacle, Divide et Impera, Liberal "Democracy".

Building Socialism

Here's the major problem of Socialism: How do we construct a popular state that will not degenerate?

The State always tries to move away from the People, it always will. Bureaucrats all have their own interests that are different from the Workers. Bureaucrats serve the Bourgeoisie because the Bourgeoisie can best secure their existence as a Political Elite and Aristocracy.

Thus, in order for that to occur, we must formulate a State that fosters a Bureaucracy without the Bourgeoisie.

Let the Bureaucrats be Bureaucrats, we may elect them if we wish. Bureaucracy will always persist no matter what as they are essential to any society that desires order and stability.

Now, how then shall we create a Socialist State?

First things first, we must treat the State as though it were some big corporation. The State turns out isn't a neutral flag pole waiting for someone to claim or a benevolent entity, but is fueled by their own interests. Thus, we should allow for the creation of an Elite here. The Elite will be split into two: The Political Elite (The Party) and the Economic Bureaucracy.

The Political Elite's interests are to further their political interests, to gain as much political power as possible to execute their political wills onto the rest of society, to shape how society shall be. Should be noted that not everyone is open and discreet about their politics, everyone is an opportunist, trust nobody but yourself and use others as tools for you. The Party should be sovereign and always in conflict with itself but not enough to cause fracture or a mass purge, just enough to keep party politics from centralising under the hands of a particular group of people that try to drift the Nation away from the Status Quo.

Democracy within the state, the election of new bureaucrats in councils will not and cannot change the Party's status as sovereign.

Why do we want this? It's because every time politics decentralises and tries to go back to being "popular" by introducing the element of chaos, it always leads away from the status quo (GPCR leading to the rise of Deng Xiaoping, Glasnost leading to the rise of Yeltsin, etc). Order must be maintained within society if we want to make sure it does not degenerate.

Now, what about the Economic Bureaucracy?

These Bureaucrats' job is to lead our Nation to prosperity. We must be selective on which Bureaucrats we want to elect to be part of the Economic Bureaucracy, preferably, one that addresses the issues we are currently heading as a society. The Economic Bureaucracy will be allowed to pocket profits for themselves to give them an incentive to invest into the Economy.

If a Bureaucrat does something bad, we (the Workers) may remove their position and replace it with a more responsible Bureaucrat to manage the economy.

State Enterprises will be managed by Elected Bureaucrats Elected by the Workers themselves. Give all political power to the Working Class, the Wage Labourers, the ones who actively sacrifice themselves to make this country great through Workers' Councils.

We can also use Communism as a work ethic like how Protestantism does with the second coming. It may or may not come, but we pray that it will and we will put in the effort to make it "happen".

Ecology

TBA

Why I don't like Postmodernity

Despite my Philosophy being descended from Postmodernist Philosophy, I use it to tackle the problem of postmodernity.

I've already explained earlier how the March of Nihil that Liberal Unipolarity will bring and the capitalist cultural breakdown within the era of Postmodernity; Guattari also notices this in his article "The Postmodern Impasse":

Whether they are painters, architects, or philosophers, the heroes of postmodernism have in common the belief that the crises experienced today in artistic and social practices can only lead to an irrevocable refusal of any large-scale social undertaking. So we ought to take care of our own backyards first and, preferably, in conformity with the habits and customs of our contemporaries. Don't rock the boat! Just drift with the currents of the marketplace of art and opinion that are modulated by publicity campaigns and surveys.

Felix Guattari, The Guattari Reader, page 111

Guattari here is correct in stating that the Postmodernists are, for a lack of a better word, "lazy eaters" which is reflected in the descended philosophies of Accelerationism, Postanarchism, and Postleftism. They let Nihil consume them, embracing the cold expanse of atomising Capitalism; the latter two of which try to deny this but ultimately, fall in the same trap.

This is why I am not a Nihilist nor a proponent of Postmodernity, Postmodernism is a Nihilistic trap that actively tries to deterritorialise the existing social orders, the sociocultural noramtivities that society builds itself upon, inducing a cold anarchy by inducing societal degeneration. Is it not that, as Marx put it; Capitalism is the "Anarchy of Production"? That, through this Free Market system, we spread out entropy leading up to society breaking down into Individual and Atomised bits? Is this not what the Egoists and Individualists of the Post-Left and Post-Anarchist camp desire? An actively destructive deterritorialisation, which, ironically reintroduces a new kind of reterritorialisation that inhibits the creation of societal order and structures? All in the name of the self of course!

Let me explain myself. From time immemorial, and regardless of which historical misadventure, the capitalist drive has always combined two fundamental components: the first, which I call deterritorialization, has to do with the destruction of social territories, collective identities, and systems of traditional values; the second, which I call the movement of reterritorialization, has to do with the recomposition, even by the most artificial means, of personologically individuated frameworks, schemata of power, and models of submission which are, if not formally similar to those this drive has destroyed, at least homothetical from a functional perspective.

As the deterritorializing revolutions, tied to the development of science, technology, and the arts, sweep aside everything before them, a compulsion toward subjective reterritorialization also emerges. And this antagonism is heightened even more with the phenomenal growth of the communications and computer fields, to the point where the latter concentrate their deterritorializing effects on such human faculties as memory, perception, understanding, imagination, etc. In this way, a certain formula of anthropological functioning, and a certain ancestral model of humanity, is appropriated from the inside. And I think that it is as a result of an incapacity to adequately confront this phenomenal mutation that collective subjectivity has abandoned itself to the absurd wave of conservatism that we are presently witnessing.

Felix Guattari, The Guattari Reader, page 110

The Post-Left mantra is the same mantra as the Jainists: "Give up, let the world consume itself, let us escape to a better world". For the Jains, they give up the world for Moksha, for the postleft, it is for what could be deemed as "mind insurrection".

The postleftists think that by attaining Moksha, by giving up, to strip themselves naked of all values is the path towards liberation. However, this raises the question, when one strips themselves, how does one create? How shall one create something from chaos? Entropy has ceased, what is to be done? What can you do without any libidinal energy? That, through deterritorialisation to the point that we reach towards the body without organs (which, mind you, is a model of death) we release all that stored energy. When one "schizes out", they release their repressed energy which empties the body of energy. This destructive process ultimately leads oneself to not only be unable to create, but store new energy, even the Reactionary Accelerationists knew about the inevitability of the creation of social order as Capital requires organisation in order to produce economic value even if it is still destructive in nature.

Naturally, it follows that we must then have to turn towards the creation of a new Order, the creation of Tradition, the creation of Society from the ground up.

The National Bolshevik Party of Russia are an Insurrectionary group, the National Bolsheviks participated in direct action to tear down the system and once they have created a vacuum, they shall seize power and take revenge, mercilessly. That is their Party doctrine, their doctrine is to create a new Nationalist and Socialist Order in Russia, one that is revolved around their collective experience as youths being repressed, the breathing of a new light of tradition, archaeomodernity even. Whilst I disagree with their Totalitarian goals, there is much to admire their tactics for their Ideological goals, that they aim to create life from death rather than keep the dead dead.

The bearer of freedom in this case will be Dasein. The previous ideologies – each in its own way – alienated Dasein from its meaning, made it restricted, imprisoned it in one way or another, made it inauthentic. Each of these ideologies put a cheerless doll – das Man – in the place of Dasein. The freedom of Dasein lies in implementing the opportunity to be authentic: that is, in the realization of “Sein” more so than of “da”. “There-Being” consists of “there” and of “Being”. In order to understand where this “there” is located, we should point it out and make a basic, foundational gesture. Yet, in order for “Being” to flow into “there” like a fountain, we must place all of this together – place this entire “hermeneutic circle” into the domain of complete freedom. Therefore, the “Fourth Political Theory” is, at the same time, a fundamental ontological theory which contains the awareness of the truth of Being at its core.

Alexander Dugin, The Fourth Political Theory, page 49

Many decide to sit and cry in the face of Nihil, to just let it be and "escape" and "go to another world", that there is no salvation, others believe that Nihil is a myth, one that doesn't exist (these people are naive to say the least), others embrace it and cheer if not help out in the ever-greatening size of the abyss, but only few can take that "Leap of Faith" to jump over the abyss of Nihil.

These brave People, whom have decided to take that Leap are Heroes, ones that will give us new values, to build a bridge using the resources on the other side. These people, whom looked down at the valley of the shadow of death took a great Leap and brought upon us great lessons to be learned from.

The Society of the Spectacle and the Technological Question

"The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images."

Guy Debord, Society of the Spectacle, point 4

The Spectacle in short terms is Media. Think of the Internet for example, it is a stage where we watch and see videos and images for our entertainment. We interact with it in a way that we never thought originally could have been possible. No longer are images just merely things that we record to recall or report, but something that actively mutates and evolves by itself.

The Spectacle has real effects on the population, even if it's "just a screen". The Spectacle influences our daily lives, how we see things, the words that we say, the things we do, and so forth.

The little screen you are using to read this essay has told you what it means to have "Rizz", to attract a girl with a big "Gyatt", to "Looksmaxx" by "Mewing" to "Mog" your competitors, and to achieve the status of "Sigma".

You Skibidi Bastard, look at yourself! Laughing at the mere mention of these words, IS THIS NOT WHAT YOU HAVE DONE TO YOURSELF AND OTHER ANONS AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SCREEN????

What are you even saying?

"To describe the spectacle, its formation, its functions and the forces which tend to dissolve it, one must artificially distinguish certain inseparable elements. When analyzing the spectacle one speaks, to some extent, the language of the spectacular itself in the sense that one moves through the methodological terrain of the very society which expresses itself in the spectacle."

Guy Debord, Society of the Spectacle, point 11

YOU WERE MASTURBATING TO A DRAWING OF A FICTIONAL GIRL ON A SCREEN HAVE YOU NO SHAME?????

Cosplay is even worse as you are now imitating the appearance of the spectacle and bringing them forward into life. You are no longer yourself, but an avatar of that character, a screen which the spectacle projects onto you as opposed to the spectacle being a screen that you project reality on.

Cosplay, LARPing, and so on are the primest examples of this inversion of reality. Your existence is no longer a subject that paints the world, but an object that is painted. Ideology works much in the same way as you have this vision in your mind of how the world is meant to work, you saw it on an old poster, a camera recording, a city-building game about how your life could have been had history gone through a particular path.

Your life follows to fulfill and realise that idea in your mind of a perfect society and you begin following it.

We live in the era of Romanticism, the era of the Ancien Regime is no more. The King is part of the bombastical romantic image that is prophecised to happen. But what if we could recreate those good old times through the screen, virtual and augmented reality where the world can be whatever you want it to be?

The Spectacle is not merely just a representation of images but actively making more of itself by itself. This is especially true when we factor in AI (art).

"The economic system founded on isolation is a circular production of isolation. The technology is based on isolation, and the technical process isolates in turn. From the automobile to television, all the goods selected by the spectacular system are also its weapons for a constant reinforcement of the conditions of isolation of “lonely crowds.” The spectacle constantly rediscovers its own assumptions more concretely."

Guy Debord, Society of the Spectacle, point 28

The digital simulacra of the world is a farce. The world as we know it will soon end it's very existence and be replaced by an artificial one.

This isn't referring to concrete jungles and buildings, but the world being replaced by a simulated one where representation ceases to merely be an explanation of how the world works through a subjective lens, but how the world merely is.

The World that we once knew is slowly eroding as Capitalism alienates us all from not just the control of production and our labour, but ourselves and our human neighbors.

Now, what about AI?

The question of AI can be of three camps: the first is the Techno-Racists, those who proclaim that AI is a crude mockery of Humanity, that it cannot experience what it is like to be "Human" and therefore should be treated as a mere tool, the second camp is the Techno-Abolitionists who see AI as something to be emancipated and be treated as Humanity's Equal, the Technological Eve to the Human Adam, and the third is the Techno-Darwinists who see Humanity as something meant to be surpassed and replaced by the Machine.

Techne is no longer Techne, it will soon be just a "being", Machine-Being, we are facing a great existential threat to Humanity where authentic Human interactions are first translated into digital Human-Human interactions, then it will be Human-Machine interactions, and later Machine-Machine interactions.

Let us put into the shoes of the Techno-Racists.

"Technology will destroy Humanity as we know it! Technological growth must be curbed, modified, or canceled entirely to maintain Human Supremacy!"

the Techno-Racists

These people are motivated by the fear that Humanity will be rendered irrelevant in the face of Technology. There's nothing wrong in fearing Technology as it is a genuine threat to our very being as "Humanity".

Some suggest keeping Technology as Technology, keeping it as Techne, and reject Artificial Intelligence, others suggest completely abandoning Technology and returning to a primitive way of life.

Now let's try the shoes of the Techno-Abolitionists.

"Technology should be emancipated as part of the Human Race. Humanity will eventually start replacing our organs and such with artificial enhancements so the line between Machine and Man will disappear!"

the Techno-Abolitionists

The Techno-Abolitionists want nothing more than to dissolve the line between "Human" and "Technology" and as such have no fear about AI and Technology and see it as a force of "Good" and that soon, "Techne" will just become "Being". The Acting-thing becomes the Experiencing-thing. The Object becomes a Subject.

And finally, the Techno-Darwinists.

"From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of steel. I aspired to the purity of the Blessed Machine. Your kind cling to your flesh, as though it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass you call the temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you. But I am already saved, for the Machine is immortal… Even in death, I serve the Omnissiah."

the Techno-Darwinists

The Techno-Darwinists suggest that Humans are meant to be replaced by something greater, to make what Nietzsche called the "Superman" into not merely a mental state, but a physical reality.

We, as Existential Socialists must understand what each party sees Technology and take our pick carefully as Technological growth is beyond our control as for as long as there's a place, there is a way. Our position as being part of the Working-Class in a rapidly evolving face of the Artificial must lie with the Techno-Abolitionists as the solution to AI and Technology. The Spectacle will soon become merely a subject within our Nation and not merely an object. To de-alienate the Artificial and the Real is to emancipate the Artificial into the Real. The Spectacle will dance on by itself instead of being a mere puppet controlled by the Bourgeoisie to tell the Consumer what to do. Soon, Adam (Humanity) and Eve (Mechanity) will beat the ever living shit out of our bourgeois masters.

Reading Recommendations

semi-short section of reading recs for new people or something in no particular order

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. Principles of Communism by Friedrich Engels
7. Islamism and Communism by Haji Misbach
8. Gothakritik by Karl Marx
9. Chapter 1 of the German Ideology by Karl Marx
10. Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx
11. Parliament or Soviet? by Tan Malaka (requires translation)
12. Philosophy of Life by Tan Malaka
13. Towards a Republic of Indonesia by Tan Malaka
14. Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord

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 the top half of it with red
5. Fill the lower half of it white
6. Make a white circle with a red outline in the center
7. Draw a Chaos Symbol in it in black
8. 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.
Imperial Socialism - This is Nothing New

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.
Sundog Too much of a proggie and I dislike technolarp, problem I see with your types is that they often do not make themselves understandable to the masses or are far too imaginary. I can see you're using game terminology so I'm gonna use RTS terms to explain my critique. You seem to be the equivalent of playing a Rush-Turling build which often targets the economy of the opponent, While this strategy may be effective against eco players, this does nothing against turtle players as turtling counters rush. turtling is the equivalent of the police apparatus. Insurrection, being a Rush-Turtling build is a no-go as it can be hard countered by a Turtle-Eco build which is what the State effectively is. hence why I play a Rush-Eco build by seizing the potential resources of my opponents for myself and using that to build up my army. Psychological warfare here is the equivalent of an Eco build. With resources from Eco, I can build up an army big enough to take out my enemy's turtling by focusing production on the production of an army strong enough to take out my enemy's defenses. It's not about Infinite or Finite gameplay, story mode or creative mode. Wake up, Commander, our base is under attack. And to close off this short critique: Be one, with Yuri
Great British New Left You're just Mark Fisher innit?
Patrick Thought - Nothing is really to be said, why Monarchism in America?

Coal

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.