 |
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 is a thing.[1], expect sluggish development.
Metaphysics 
Unlike Dugin, I'm a Materialist, so I take Heidegger the same way thinkers like Graham Harman take Heidegger. (even doe i never read harman)
That's the one major difference between Me and Dugin, the other being that I'm more leaning toward Communism.
Sacredness exists for each Civilisation which contains within a Myth, Myth that expresses itself in ways either Mystical, Artistic, and so forth. I am personally apathetic but Sacredness is certainly important for Culture, we should invert Marx’s idea that the people will pursuit a “Material happiness” because, let’s face it, that’s just consumerism is it not?
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 god, 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.
Indonesian Political Platonism 
Pancasila is just rebranded western humanism, it's something for the Indonesian people to have as our Special values so as to not have to lean towards Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, or any other religions specifically.
Pancasila is a compromise among all Religions, the five principles in it I'm not going to attack but will take critically. Pancasila, in my opinion, cannot be interpreted willy nilly or else we end up with it falling into the hands of "the wrong people".
First of all, I want to emphasize that the first Sila, "Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa" should be the most prime principle, hence why it is the first principle. The presupposition of a "One" we cannot extract any values of "Good" from there. I suppose one could describe me as a "Pseudo-Platonist" though whilst I am technically a Nominalist, I recognise that Plato is the first step in creating National value systems and Traditions, even when we do not realise it.
Plato's grip is very tight on Collectivism, the "One" emanates "the Many" and "the Many" are simply extensions of "the One". Therefore, whatever benefits "the One" is morally good as opposed to what benefits "the Many".
By "Many" and "One" I am referring to Individuals and Wholes respectively, Individuals are many and have their own interests, Wholes are comprised of Individuals (although Platonists would like to say the other way around).
The Platonic Republic is nothing short of a State that focuses on the Whole than the Individual, the Collective society, but not necessarily Democratic (at least, in the liberal sense). What Democracy manifests itself as in the Platonic Republic is what Guided Democracy was for Indonesia (1959-1965) and the New Order (1966-1998). TNO and GD both had their positives and weaknesses, I want to focus on a synthesis between GD and TNO by utilising the teachings of GD and the open developmentalism of TNO.
First of all, let's set things clear here, the Individual is a member of the Whole (i.e. the Nation or some other group), whilst it is Socially constructed, the relations emerge Organically through a common Social, Cultural, and Economic Life that manifests among a people living within a territory and sharing a History.
Second of all, I want to revive Nasakom in a modern context. Nasakom, (Nasionalisme, Agamisme, Komunisme (Nationalism, Religion, Communism) will be the way that we will interpret Pancasila, why? Why not Liberalism? Or Fascism?
Liberalism is already what we are trying to fight against here, Liberalism will implode in on itself within the next Industrial Revolutions ahead as a Multiplicity of Economic forces arise in competition against the existing Economic forces from the Imperial core.
We need to develop productive forces, we need to brush away the specks of the small petty proprietors and move towards another Industrial Revolution, we need Capital to flow through and develop our productive forces. It matters little if the Capital is local or foreign, we need to understand that without Industrialisation, there can be no way for our Nation to rise in the upcoming age of Multipolarity, and with it, also Socialism.
We, even as Communists, thank Soeharto for the development of the productive forces, even if it came from the expense of Millions of our lives, the real tragedy was the transition into Liberal Democracy again.
Nasakom tells us that we must overthrow Property ownership, to "give up" trying to amass control over things, and allow the whole of society to use them, this, Communism, we abandon what it means to own "private property" as, instead, we hand it over to the whole of society. We surrender the Individual into the Whole, the Many into the One. What it means for us to manifest the idea of "Persatuan Indonesia" is the organic unity of all members of Indonesian society. Social Ownership fulfills the principles of "Keadilan Sosial bagi seluruh rakyat Indonesia" and "Kemanusiaan yang adil dan beradab".
Social Ownership entails that the Means of Production is handled in a socialised manner through the Nationalisation of all Land and Production which would be managed by delegates whom oversee the production and management of the Economy over a given Commune. These delegates will be delegated by society through an entrusted sovereignty, that, they serve the particular interests of a given section of the Economy.
Note how not once have I referred to "the people" as a collective and indiscriminate whole? There's a reason for that. "The People" as a whole is unspecified if given no adjectives, each "People" are their own with their own economic and social lives, even between jobs, that the life of a Farmer is far radically different from the life of a Waiter, or that of a Fisherman.
The culture of National, Ethnic, Religious, and so forth collectivities are also guilty of difference (which should be obvious).
What this means is that to say "the interests of the people" would be a foolish statement due to the diverse nature of what even makes up a "people", anyone who uses "the people" without an adjective is untrustworthy and does not value or recognise diversity, Equality is not a real thing, instead, we try to stretch the definition of "Equal" so much because we see it as some sort of "virtue" that we should have. It is a common political tactic amongst populists that inevitably lead toward Fascism (and here we have gone full circle).
Certainly, the Elites are of a concern for us but we should be careful when campaigning for Anti-Elitism.
A common notion is that "Elitism bad because the money and the country belongs to the people!" and then coupled with "That's why we need (insert name for "good" elites) in charge!". I want a Politico-Cultural Elite, I want the Indonesian People to be Guided, I want a return to Guided Democracy, is that too much to ask? Let's call them "Partisans" whom are part of the "Vanguard Party", yeah, that feels better.
Vanguardism 
The Original formulation of the Vanguard Party was as a Party of the most advanced sections of the Proletariat to guide the development of Socialism.
The Dictatorship of the Proletariat emerges out of a Revolution in which the Proletariat are compiled into a Party, the Party is a collectivity of Proletarians.
The job of the Vanguard Party is the illumination of the path toward socialism, our Socialism will not be progressive in the liberal sense at all, our Socialism will be conservative, preserving the culture and traditions of the Indonesian people as well as generating culture through an Intellectual Elite within the Party, the Proletkult.
The Proletkult (Proletarskaya Kultura (Proletarian Culture)) will be the basis of the expansion of our National Culture by utilising both our past and present to construct a future that is Unnihilistic. Communism will be a revitalisation of the National and Ethnic spirits.
Our project is to revive Nasakom, as a replacement to Global Liberalism, Pancasila right now is in it's Liberal phase again, we need to change that if we are not to fall alongside the Liberal world. Whether we truly seize power or not is not necessarily our main focus anymore, but rather the waking up of the masses, we may as well play a backseat role take control of the State insidiously, de facto under our control but de jure it is not.
The Communist Party had done this, it's hands were all over the Indonesian Government influencing it's politics left and right, we must understand that Revolution is unlikely in our current situation and thus we need to carefully assimilate the Indonesian State back to Nasakom, back to Guided Democracy, guided by the Proletkult and our Party, whether we do this through participation in activism or other means it does not matter, what we need is to win the Indonesian people in the Psychological front.
We must impregnate within the Indonesian people, a crossbred clone of the Old and New Order. There is no room to call out "Opportunism" or "Revisionism" or "Tailism" unfortunately, the conditions we have right now is radically different from what Lenin theorised in. Nasakom must develop by herself, she has been living by the side of the road, neglected ever since her childhood when her mother, the communist party trying to defend itself by the new CIA led Soeharto regime, the Father, Pancasila cheated with the new regime.
The New Order Revivalists and the Old Order Revivalists must unite if they ever want a chance in fighting against Liberalism and survive in the Multipolar World.
Nasakom, the Mother of the Household will raise the Indonesian people and shape them by producing new noeses through the combined strength of the teachings of the three caretakers; Pancasila (the Father) taught her to treat her fellow Indonesians with dignity and to resist against foreign occupation, Her Ustadz taught her the value of Religion and Myth in sparking the soul of the Indonesian people towards everlasting peace, And Communism (the Mother) taught her how to treat others, to be Social, to not be isolated and atomised from society.
The New Order grew up in a rich family, he knows much about business, whilst certainly his family was quite.... "corrupt" to say the least.
Indonesia benefit heavily from REPELITA under Soeharto, we need a new one however, perhaps one that isn't corrupt and not backed by the Western Powers.
The Marital Union is what we will have as "Indonesian Socialism", true Industrial Socialism unlike the petit bourgeois "Marhaenism" which stunted our development and growth. No, we need Industrial Socialism, a system that is Industrial and Social, a Socialism that emphasizes on cultural expansion through the mass production of Media. Media that exists as an expression of culture, a simulacrum of Indonesian culture, if you will.
Metaphysics of Guided Democracy
Previously we discussed why we need a Vanguard Party and Psychological Warfare is needed as well as Political Platonism. Here I'll get into the metaphysics of that.
Democracy is Popular Rule, it is the "Rule of the People". "The People" as I've said is not one homogenous mass, it's a large collective of individuals with varying interests and desires.
The struggle of politics is about the struggle to control these desires and interests for a particular desire and interest of a certain group of people. When we speak about "Democracy" and the struggles of Populism, we aren't talking about politics "by and of" but "for" the people, the fantasy that the people actually want them, which they have to work hard to realise that dream.
The Political Machines work overtime in order to secure their positions and claim as much territory as possible on the political mapping which at no point actually is by and of the people, but for the people. Parties are a mere Representation of a Simulacrum of the People's will when it finally supports the Party in it's fullest, it's a coping mechanism which for some reason is very effective (or not) at realising it's own desires for control.
Democracy strangely enough has never been "by and of the People", only "for" the People. Often when a Party gets in control of a government, their task after is to desensitise the People so that they do not get removed from the power. (Liberal) Democracy has never been Democratic except when the People all share the same "will".
Hence why Democracy must turn a blind eye to the Free Market of Ideas and and turn toward Guided Democracy, Vanguardist Democracy.
Democracy here has been truly manifested, where the People are no longer divided and truly are "The People". This Homogenisation is the sublation of all Political differences and the transformation of all Individuals into the Collective, there will be no "Free Market" of Ideas, only the National Backdrop and the People's interpretation of it.
Pancasila is a great example of this, Indonesians do not claim any other Ideology other than Pancasila (or so they say), but they do hold on to partisan politics, presidents in and presidents out. So called "flawed democracies" or "fake democracies" are actually the fullest expression of Democracy because if we allow the People to think without a National Ideology to interpret from, what you have is Not Democracy, but Anarchy.
It is Chaotic, "Chaos" means "Void" in Greek, the void of space is filled with many Planets and Solar Systems, it is a Multiplicity in the Macro sense, Macropolitics in contrast to "Micro" politics which is a Multiplicity of the small. Micropolitics investigates and creates multiplicities in the small scale, expanding from the smallest bits of the whole. Whilst Macropolitics is busy colonising other Solar Systems, Micropolitics concerns itself with the intricate details of the system and expanding upon it.
Guattari explains in "Everybody wants to be a Fascist" that we concern ourselves a lot about trying to get people "think correctly", as though there's something "objective" to thought, that we must "raise" class consciousness. We may talk all a bunch Politics using Freudianism where the Proletariat actually wants X but is substituted for Y, but this is merely a cope.
Though I must admit, as a Communist, it pisses me off that people are Liberal, indeed, the Proletariat are all Liberals, they've all been "duped" into Liberalism, hence why we must engage in a Psychological rewrite of the Proletariat, to "raise" class consciousness.
This Idea that the People must think "correctly" is nothing more than Totalitarianism, Liberals too are Totalitarian, the Open Society (more accurately, the Society of consensus) is a Society that is Totalitarian, there's no need to point at a Stalin figure or a Hitler figure in this society, the enemy are the people themselves, the ones who force others into having to think the same as the masses. This is what happens when you have a Society that rejects any sort of "National Values" in the first place.
In Traditional Societies, take Islamic Societies for example, they originally were very open about the developments of Tassawuf because it was not a threat, everyone knew that Islam was the truth and the way, so whether one is a Shia or a Sunni matters very little.
However, now, in Modernist Societies, Islamic Societies have become radicalised, that their specific interpretation must be imposed 100% onto others, whilst these strands did exist in the past, this wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Many such scholars were few and far between. There's a reason why Salafism is a type of "Islamic Modernism", it is only Socially Reactionary (in the sense that it "Reacts" against any development beyond the salaf), it is Modernist because it wishes to impose upon others it's ideas of how Modernity should go, that we need to lay down a particular trajectory and never stray away from it.
I agree, we should not stray away from God's path, but it should be important to note that we should not just persecute others for following their own fiqh, tariqa, sect, and religion.
Thus, Reject Totalitarianism, but also Reject Open Society, the path is Guided Democracy.
But What is Guided Democracy? Guided Democracy is Democracy that is Guided, that is, it has an existing "Ideology" within it. We already have this, Pancasila. our Interpretation? Nasakom.
"Therefore, a micropolitics of desire would no longer present itself as representing the masses and as interpreting their struggles. Which does not mean that it would condemn, a priori, all party action, all idea of party line, of program or even of centralism, but it would endeavor to locate and relativize this party action in terms of an analytic micropolitics which, at every turn, would stand in opposition to the Manichean dualism that presently contaminates the revolutionary movements. It would no longer seek support from a transcendent object in order to provide itself with security. It would no longer center itself on a unique objectthe power of the State, which could only be conquered by a representative party acting in lieu of and instead of the masses-but rather, it would center on a multiplicity of objectives, within the immediate reach of the most diverse social groupings."
Guided Democracy is the future, we have a National Backdrop, we need nothing else, all that is left to do is to develop these relationships within Pancasila-Nasakom. We need to birth new Socio-cultural linkages through the Liberation of culture from the necessity of "Progress" towards a "correct" path that only permits those who have "true Faith" into the pearly gates of Liberalism.
This corresponds beautifully with Dugin's passage in the 4PT:
"Freedom is always fraught with chaos, and is open for opportunities. Placed into the narrow framework of individuality, the amount of freedom becomes microscopic, and, ultimately, fictitious. [...] it is totalitarian and intolerant of differences and the implementation of a great will. It is only prepared to tolerate small people; it protects not so much the rights of man, but, rather, “the rights of a small man”. This “small man” can be allowed to do anything, but he, despite all his desire, will be able to do nothing. [...] Having left the limits of individuality, man can be crushed by the elements of life, by dangerous chaos. He may want to establish order. And this is entirely within his right – the right of a great man (“homo maximus”) – a real man of “Being and Time” (Martin Heidegger). And, like any order, this possible order, the coming order may be embodied in individual forms. Nonetheless, this is not individuality, but individuation; not empty rotations around that which is given and which is meaningless, but the execution of tasks as well as the taming of the restless and the exciting horizons of the will."
Now, does Guided Democracy suppress opposition? Yes, Psychologically. Does Guided Democracy oppose change? No. How does Guided Democracy remain stable? By developing the People's conscience along it's lines, that the People work within the National Ideology to build and develop it, hence engraining it into them, swearing loyalty to it. Does Guided Democracy use Force? Maybe, but we strongly prefer using the tools the Open Society has given us to ensure cohesion. Can we visualise it? Well, if you know Rhizomatics, you cant tell there is no specific "shape" when it comes to the Rhizome, the Rhizome conjoins and splits as it wills and desires, constantly changing and adapting, but if you had to Imagine it, Imagine a Fandom, a Fandom has a particular theme, people are welcome to expand the Fanon as they wish, nevermind that it may contradict the existing canon, if so, either it is retconned, or that it is retracted or deemed "uncanonical", That is the Rhizome of Guided Democracy, it is a Ginger per se, a Ginger is one mass onto itself but technically has no "center" so to speak, a Ginger farm may as well be the model for Multipolarity.
Ethnos and Tradition 
Ethnos is an Organic entity that emerges out of a common Culture, Myth, Logos, etc.
Dugin isn't some weirdo Russian fascist or whatever, he is critical about the direction society is going and what this means for Russian society. Ethnosociology works by analyzing the Ethnos and from there we could use that as a basis for the revitalization of Society.
Dugin is facing off against Postmodernity, its nihilistic shortcomings, and skeptical of the idea of constant "progress" as a source of meaning. Dugin can be described as an “Alternative” Postmodernist where he wishes to go towards beyond Modernity whilst at the same time critiquing what remains of it within Postmodernity, Postmodernity is still following the Liberal myth of “Progress” as a necessity which neglects the differences between peoples and replaces it with Western Civilisation.
Indonesia, being a Majorityless Nation-State is an interesting case study as no one group can claim superiority over the rest. Javanese people do not even make up a majority. I believe that in order to correctly fulfill the rejuvenation of each ethnic and cultural group we would need a process of Korenisation. The Creation of Island Republics based on each Island cluster, 8 to be precise, Sumatra, Malaya, Java, Kalimantan, Nusatenggara, Sulawesi, Maluku, and Papua.
Each Republic would contain it it a division of the Proletkult with representatives of each ethnic group whom would focus on generating culture for the Islands. The collective Nous would be focused on, the development of each Island according to the cultures of the ethnicities of the Island. Media would be produced by each localised Proletkult for each Island and Ethnicity for the projection and development of culture into those regions.
Tradition is something we must preserve as it gives life the backdrop for meaning, we may reevaluate Traditions and improve upon them, but we should understand that without Tradition, Nihilism grows and thus, it is our job to conceal Nihilism behind a dam else our Civilisation be wiped away in a flood.
Indonesia as a Multicultural society cerrtainly has many different "essences" of a society that can be "captured", I personally speak as a person from Java (though not Javanese) thus I cannot say for certain what the "essences" are for each society, the accumulation of culture and history that amounts into a particular cultural aspect or values that are unique to each culture. I can say that we all are beginning to share a similar culture Post-Colonially as we adopt more of an Indonesian identity. "Indonesian" is not an Ethnic or Cultural identity, but a geographic one that existed due to the History of the archipelago, especially Post-Colonial times. One cannot say they are an "Indonesian" without outing themselves out as a Civic/Geonationalist, our nation is built on Pan-Nationalism, that we are told that we are Bhineka Tunggal Ika, that Indonesia is one Nation, it is a similar situation as those in the British isles that call themselves a "One Nation Conservative".
"Britain" is a Geographic identity, of Anglos, Scots, Irish, Welsh, Cornish, Indians, and Blacks. "British culture" does not exist, what it is is merely Anglo culture imposed on all other ethnicities. "American" is a similar situation.
"American" does not exist, only Italians, Anglos, Germans, Jews, Hispanics, Blacks, Natives, Asians, Irish, and many more. What separates them from their mother countries (Italy, England, Germany, Israel, Spain/Latam, Africa, Asia, Ireland, etc.) are the fact that they have come together in a "unique" way that manifests a sense of "American culture" whilst still having their own cultures unique to each other. What we deem "American culture" is nothing more than Italian, German, and English (with a bit of Mexican and Afro-Carribbean) mixed together.
Even Black America is nothing like Africa, their culture has been Anglicised unlike Africa (though certainly colonialism (even from Arabs) has influenced them). America and Britain should continue being, being what they are, as they are. <==== NOT TALKING ABOUT STILL BEING LIBERAL CAPITALIST IMPERIALIST STATES
Indonesia thus should strive for it's own path towards manifesting a Cultural Identity, for sure it is mostly Javanese with hints of Malay (and a (very miniscule) bit of others) as it is the largest (yet still not majority) ethnic group, it is something to note.
Building Socialism 
Party to People = Shaping Culture - People to Party = Feedback
Enterprises to Government = Taxes - Government to Enterprise = Agenda
Enterprise to People = Commodities - People to Enterprise = Purchase
People to Communes = Feedback - Communes to People = Policy/Law Enforcement
Commune to SSR = Feedback - SSR to Commune = Agenda
SSR to Party = Feedback - Party to SSR = Agenda
Ecology 
TBA
How to Draw
- Draw a ball with eyes, mouth, and hair
- Color the hair Black
- Color the Irises Red
- Fill the top half of it with red
- Fill the lower half of it white (or leave it blank if the page isn't transparent)
- Make a white circle with a red outline in the center
- Draw a Chaos Symbol in it in black
- 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
Hoodism - Communist Gem, though suffering mainstream communist rhetoric coal
Baxism - Ego-Paetelism? Eh, close enough
Philosophical Nuggets thought - Gemmy, but far too short. Also not a fan of Agrarianism, Neoluddism, and Strasser.
Daniel Sansón Thought - I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you’re fine but needs working.
Carbon
Social Nationalism - a Nationalist SocDem, nothing to say tbh.
Alstūdism - Nationalistic Socialism is cool and all but why Parliamentarianism? Why Ethnonationalism? Also, Modernist.
Agricoetism - Alright i guess.
Coal
Schumacherianism - Diabolical Libertarian jibber jabber
Shellshocked Communism - Literally everything I hate about hippies manifested into a page.
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, me no like solarpunk, ocalan, bookchin, democracy, or progressivism.
Cannabis Anarchy - Absolute Postie NPC. Too much works that lead up to the same message with nothing interesting to provide. Consider going outside of it for once and stop malding when someone has doubts about the usefulness of Egoism, You are the Living Proof that me leaving the Post-Left was the Right Move and my Thesis on Individualism is correct. Also read Dugin, lib. 
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.
Leviathan - Whole lotta yap just to say “I do not understand how Social Darwinism works, therefore I will worship der Fuhrer and take whatever edgy quotes and works and misinterpret them”. Your “critique” of Freedom sucks and unlike mine it’s literally just about how good and smart and shit il Duce is than about having the balls to assert dominance over anyone who thinks you shouldn’t have that power and/or the concept of “freedom from”.
Meadowsin's Basilisk - A Post-Leftist. How I ache that your ideas be so contradictory. You want all to have Freedom yet you still haggle over Ideology? Why do you insist that to be free one must abandon these false Faiths and join your set of Moral truths? Ideology is inescapable, embrace Multiplicity, not Negation.
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.
Lankajori Thought - Petit Bourgeois.
 Nationalists - For The Motherland! 
| |
| Moderate
|
Main Nativism • PatriotismRelated  Protectionism •  Isolationism Self-Inserts |
|---|---|
| Main
|
Main Nationalism •  Separatism •  Pan-NationalismDefinitions  Volkish Nationalism •  Ethnic Nationalism •  Cultural Nationalism •  Linguistic Nationalism •  Religious Nationalism •  Racial Nationalism •  Civic Nationalism •  Species NationalismApplication  Universal Nationalism •  Fictional Nationalism •  Left-Wing Nationalism •  Eco-NationalismRelated  Ethnopluralism •  Racism •  Directed Socialism •  Indigenism •  TinismOther Ideologies  National Agrarianism •  National Capitalism •  National Communism •  National Conservatism •  National Liberalism •  National Libertarianism •  Welfare Chauvinism
Self-Inserts |
 Chauvinists
|
 Ultranationalism •  Jingoism
Self-Inserts |
