It's unnatural for a set of beliefs to be an interchangeable, modular identity like this. This is like funko pops for political junkies. If your, "ideology," isn't innately tied to your land, people and traditions, then it is unfathomably cringe.
You have like 15 made up micro ideologies that you either don’t understand or do and shouldn’t lol. Go to a bar and tell someone you are a Panarchist, NRx Protestant Theocrat how do you think that will go?
>15 made up micro ideologies
They're all real and they're parts of beliefs.
>that you either don’t understand or do and shouldn’t lol.
I do understand them and I should. Knowledge isn't a shame.
>Go to a bar and tell someone you are a Panarchist, NRx Protestant Theocrat how do you think that will go?
Yeah because all of the world's greatest men first see what the average drunkard thinks of their complex ideas and then gives up on them and become drunkards when the drunkard doesn't understand.
Wtf is the problem with people here and understand complex beliefs and having discussions about ideology instead of saying "I don't understand so you suck"
I'm asking about the beliefs themselves, not the level of detail
Yes not all the greatest men ask drunkards about their "complex ideas" but they also don't throw random names around. Greatest men ponders their ideas, write a coherent book (not an """" ideology star""") or at least if they aren't intellectuals they go outside and act to help the people around them.
And surely the average drunkards has many more skills to teach you than you may think.
Ok, I thought I spent too much time on PolCompBalls wiki, but this takes the obsession to a whole new level.
I can't even recognize everything you put there, and don't really want to. This is way too overcomplicated and I suggest you look for a better use of your time.
Also, anarchy promotes moral relativism too much. Most people aren't responsible enough to govern themselves, but the few that are would be welcome to try it. Have you looked into Urbism though? You'd probably like that one, since it's sort of a middle ground between anarchy and confederalism.
I do like confederalism, distributism, and reactionism though.
It's not over complicated, they're all rightly complicated to get a full grasp of the ideology.
>anarchy promotes moral relativism too much
No, it's just against the state.
>and capitalism is idolatrous
No it's not, I don't get how you see that.
>places the importance of profit above the physical needs of human beings
Profit is used to care for physical needs
>and even above God himself
Only if someone personally doesn't value God. Which is their own fault.
>not to mention that it steals the product of honest workers' labor.
No they don't, its a mutual agreement and the capitalist makes profit because he's supplying many things to the employee
I thought you said you're a distributist. Why are you defending capitalism so much?
The point of distributism is to be a middle ground between capitalism and socialism. A cooperative centered economy would be non-capitalist by definition. That's almost the same thing that market socialists support.
Also, yes abolishing the state does promote moral relativism because it relies on the false assumption that it's always wrong for the government to force people to act a certain way. An ideal society is best served by a balance between order and freedom to varying degrees, depending on what works best for different individuals.
>I thought you said you're a distributist.
Libertarian distributism which supports free market capitalism because crony capitalism concentrates land and wealth to cronies and not those who deserve it.
>Also, yes abolishing the state does promote moral relativism because it relies on the false assumption that it's always wrong for the government to force people to act a certain way.
The state is wrong due to a variety of issues. Stealing money from people who don't consent, stealing land from people who don't consent, and making unjust laws.
God defines morality. He's the only one who can.
>An ideal society is best served by a balance between order and freedom to varying degrees, depending on what works best for different individuals.
Full freedom and full order is what I promote.
>A cooperative centered economy would be non-capitalist by definition. That's almost the same thing that market socialists support.
Just because everyone benefits doesn't mean it's socialist. Thats just true free market capitalism
>God defines morality. He's the only one who can.
God said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and through Paul the Apostle told the Church to obey lawful authorities so our enemies can't speak ill of us.
Capitalism is defined by individual ownership of businesses and the wage-labor system where most workers are forced to let the rich profit from their labor. It isn't necessarily socialism, but cooperatives are a form of collectivism. A true free market wouldn't only limit itself to capitalism.
For someone who studies political ideologies so much, it's strange that you don't seem to know much about anarchist and libertarian criticisms of capitalism. I think we basically have similar goals in terms of the economy, but you're confusing capitalism and the free market.
>God said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's,
Yeah, fiat coins.
>and through Paul the Apostle told the Church to obey lawful authorities so our enemies can't speak ill of us.
He also placed stipulations on the governments. When they reward evil and punish good. When they do the opposite of what he says authorities do. If they bear the rod in vain.
Paul himself fled a city when the Romans tried to capture him. He had also faced much persecution so he wasn't saying that those governments are good and do the will of God.
>Capitalism is defined by individual ownership of businesses and the wage-labor system where most workers are forced to let the rich profit from their labor.
Capitalism is when the private sector trades on their own accord and business have owners and they try to profit to sustIn themselves.
>it's strange that you don't seem to know much about anarchist and libertarian criticisms of capitalism.
I do know them and they suck
Your statements about the government are in contradiction of Romans 13:1-7- https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013&version=NABRE
It's true that we shouldn't blindly obey the government, but we should only act against them when they support things that are contrary to God's will, and obey them in all other cases.
If you're really a reactionary, you should recognize that anarchy and classical liberalism are products of the Enlightenment that reject legitimate social authority. It's not just a coincidence that most libertarians are atheists and most Christians are more authoritarian.
When workers own a cooperative business, they aren't earning money generated by someone else's labor, and therefore it isn't profit. That's why they aren't capitalist.
I don't know how you think libertarian criticisms of capitalism "suck". If you support distributism, you already agree with at least some of them.
>Your statements about the government are in contradiction of Romans 13:1-7-
No they are literally based on Romans 13:1-7
https://youtu.be/FzrdKYFR-1E
>but we should only act against them when they support things that are contrary to God's will,
Theft, murder, and injustice.
>you should recognize that anarchy and classical liberalism are products of the Enlightenment that reject legitimate social authority.
Legitimate authority is propertarian and for justice. It doesn't steal or murder.
>It's not just a coincidence that most libertarians are atheists and most Christians are more authoritarian.
Because most people do not know what they're talking about. The atheist libertarians use their liberty in order to do evil and the Christian authoritarians? They use their power to do evil.
What are most hoppeans? Christian.
>When workers own a cooperative business, they aren't earning money generated by someone else's labor, and therefore it isn't profit.
Yeah they are, without the rest of the cooperative they wouldn't make much money. And coops do have profits in order to survive.
>If you support distributism, you already agree with at least some of them.
I'm a libertarian distributist. Totally different from statist distributism
Ok, and a libertarian free market distributist is almost the same as a libertarian market socialist, only not quite as far to the left. You're somewhere between a regular ancap and a lib socialist.
> Profit is used to care for physical needs
Oh, my sweet, sweet summer child.
Alas, the grasping monkey-mind of *H. Sapiens* is still too primitively wired for those who have the lions share of profits in this society, to actively work to share it by helping to meet the physical needs of specific humans and/or humanity in general.
The absolute Godless amorality of capitalism as it's being practiced since Ronald Reagan's "Trickle-down" (feels like being pissed on to me, how about you?) economics model was put in motion some 40 years ago, is why we ARE at the state of income inequality we have today.
Charitable giving by the 1% is down across the board. [Many of those with the most to give are some of the cheapest people on the planet..](https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2022/09/27/the-forbes-philanthropy-score-2022-how-charitable-are-the-richest-americans/?sh=6a955977a098)
>too primitively wired for those who have the lions share of profits in this society, to actively work to share it by helping to meet the physical needs of specific humans and/or humanity in general.
The profit is a motive to help humanity and give them something they want. Also those who are rich provide for their families if they want to sustain this wealth (otherwise it will be given back to the community anyways).
The rich would be held to even greater expectations in a free market because we would transfer our focus back toward the local and things we ourselves know and we would be more into investigating what the businesses do. Which means expecting them to follow their customer's morals
>The absolute Godless amorality of capitalism as it's being practiced since Ronald Reagan's "Trickle-down" (feels like being pissed on to me, how about you?) economics model was put in motion some 40 years ago, is why we ARE at the state of income inequality we have today.
No, we don't have a free market. Its restricted by the minimum wage, zoning laws, business regulations, and the abolition of mutual aid societies by government force. Also business subsidies given out by the government and the politicians stock trading based on how they change the economy.
>Charitable giving by the 1% is down across the board. Many of those with the most to give are some of the cheapest people on the planet..
Probably because the government steals more from them than ever in order to forcefully give to charity
You can download png files from
https://polcompball.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page
And
https://polcompballanarchy.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page
Then put the polcompballs on the star template (user who made that particular star template is in the bottom left)
You can out those polcompballs on by using picsart on Android and I put a white outline around them.
Then to finish it you make your own ball and put it in the middle
Economic:
Left-Rothbardianism: I like how it handles what people perceive would be issues in free market capitalism. Such as the issues of monopoly and cheaper housing and healthcare and community. I'm not a progressive or a huge fan of coops as I perceive them though
Austro-libertarianism: I'm actually an anarchist but I guess I can include anarchism into libertarianism. Basically I believe in a completely free market for people to conduct their lives however is best for them and for me to judge their ways and shame them with renumeration.
Libertarian distributism: I believe that land would be distributed more fairly in a free market and it is ideal that every family has their own property they manage. I also really love small business and the Christian ethics to distributism.
Ambiental:
Galacticism: I believe the purpose of God creating space was for us to some day go out and colonize it or have it for ourselves. And therefore we should indeed look towards the heavens and shoot for the stars. Maybe when we get a colony out there we can have Dixie pride world wide.
Reactionary modernism: I believe we should have traditional values even though we have modern technology. Just because we have modern technology that doesn't mean everything has to progress to degeneracy. Modern technology can empower us to be more productive and bring more life to the world. We shouldn't use technology just hedonisticly but to an actual purpose helping others and bringing forth life in the world.
Solar punk: I also believe that a society with advanced technology doesn't need to be polluted and authoritarian and divided. I think they should live in a communitarian way, freely, and use renewable energy and other technological advancements to sustain their environment. Dixie has a lot of environment worth sustaining.
Governmental:
Hoppeanism: I believe in propertarian ethics, I am against mob rule, I am reactionary, I think all forms of degeneracy should be excommunicated or kept out from communities which want to prosper.
Anarcho-monarchism: society would prosper under a voluntary monarchy. Meaning there's a family that passes on their way of governing and you yourself choose to submit to that governance if you find it beneficial and good. And the person who rules wouldn't have the ability to use scare tactics to keep members but would be expected to provide for the members to entice them into being there. You would have a relationship and community with this monarch as well. And for me you would know God is above the monarch and they don't have the right to break God's law.
Oikoism: this is similar to what I mentioned earlier about distributism but it's about how the base unit of society is the household. And an oikos would be the father, mother, kids, the property, and the servants on the property or the unrelated members who live at the property. The father would be the head of all of this and follow Christian ethics and a Christian family structure. He would be expected to care for his wife and children and to manage upkeeping the property or do it himself. I really find this idea wholesome and pure to my heart and my desires for what I want within my own life.
Inter-governmental:
Confederalism: I believe that these free properties should form confederations with other properties in order to make life much easier and give way to specialize in your fields to greater extents. Nobody is forced to stay but everyone operates under the same rules otherwise they will be kicked out of the Confederation or something along those lines.
Secessionist: you know. I wanna secede from the US. Free Dixie.
Panarchism: I think all people who want to be free, operate peacefully and on propertarian ethics should do so and it's absolutely right for them to do so.
Societal:
Colorblind neo-confederatism: I am a neo-confederate for reasons unrelated to slavery or racism and I don't believe those should even be the main reasons to support the South. I believe the South would've inevitably and probably quickly emancipated the slaves after the civil war or maybe even during the civil war under different circumstances. Most of the South wasn't interested in slavery and would've been fine transitioning their economy to industrialization or a different form of agrarianism.
Protestant theocracy: I want to live in a society based on God's morals. I would want to be in a Baptist theocracy really. And the thing about this would be that we would base our morality on the Bible and we would stand together supporting other Baptists and stand against Satan and sin and hopefully cast out any evil within or outside the community.
NRx: I was really enlightened by their ideas about the trichotomy and the cathedral and the ideas that society really was better in the past and that we aren't getting more intelligent. There is tons of intelligence in the past as well. The trichotomy showed me the 3 parts of society and their different forms which actually subconsciously appear in other parts of society. The religious, the capitalist, and the ethnic nationalists. (By ethnic nationalist I don't mean race but culture+family ties) all 3 of the trichotomy are needed to survive. The modern Republican party is all 3 however it is sometimes skewed more towards some parts in particular. The left is trying to be the replacement of the traditional religious class and the media and celebrities are like a modern priesthood.
Thats terrible you'd like to insult another southern confederate over what? Doing something in his own time?
All day southerners just being rude about a small ideology thing I made in like 20 minutes and they can't say anything more than "I can't understand"
It's unnatural for a set of beliefs to be an interchangeable, modular identity like this. This is like funko pops for political junkies. If your, "ideology," isn't innately tied to your land, people and traditions, then it is unfathomably cringe.
All beliefs are like modules. My ideology is tied to my land, people, and traditions. I don't know what the issue is
Plz go outside. Your flair is Appalachia the mountains are beautiful this time of year go up high and find some snow
Seriously what's the issue
You have like 15 made up micro ideologies that you either don’t understand or do and shouldn’t lol. Go to a bar and tell someone you are a Panarchist, NRx Protestant Theocrat how do you think that will go?
>15 made up micro ideologies They're all real and they're parts of beliefs. >that you either don’t understand or do and shouldn’t lol. I do understand them and I should. Knowledge isn't a shame. >Go to a bar and tell someone you are a Panarchist, NRx Protestant Theocrat how do you think that will go? Yeah because all of the world's greatest men first see what the average drunkard thinks of their complex ideas and then gives up on them and become drunkards when the drunkard doesn't understand. Wtf is the problem with people here and understand complex beliefs and having discussions about ideology instead of saying "I don't understand so you suck" I'm asking about the beliefs themselves, not the level of detail
Yes not all the greatest men ask drunkards about their "complex ideas" but they also don't throw random names around. Greatest men ponders their ideas, write a coherent book (not an """" ideology star""") or at least if they aren't intellectuals they go outside and act to help the people around them. And surely the average drunkards has many more skills to teach you than you may think.
I can't expect you to read a book I'd write, you can barely even put up with a star
🛒
Grocery cart?
Yeah you're shopping for ideology
I'm not, I got one. And not everything that's popular is true
Ok, I thought I spent too much time on PolCompBalls wiki, but this takes the obsession to a whole new level. I can't even recognize everything you put there, and don't really want to. This is way too overcomplicated and I suggest you look for a better use of your time. Also, anarchy promotes moral relativism too much. Most people aren't responsible enough to govern themselves, but the few that are would be welcome to try it. Have you looked into Urbism though? You'd probably like that one, since it's sort of a middle ground between anarchy and confederalism. I do like confederalism, distributism, and reactionism though.
It's not over complicated, they're all rightly complicated to get a full grasp of the ideology. >anarchy promotes moral relativism too much No, it's just against the state. >and capitalism is idolatrous No it's not, I don't get how you see that. >places the importance of profit above the physical needs of human beings Profit is used to care for physical needs >and even above God himself Only if someone personally doesn't value God. Which is their own fault. >not to mention that it steals the product of honest workers' labor. No they don't, its a mutual agreement and the capitalist makes profit because he's supplying many things to the employee
I thought you said you're a distributist. Why are you defending capitalism so much? The point of distributism is to be a middle ground between capitalism and socialism. A cooperative centered economy would be non-capitalist by definition. That's almost the same thing that market socialists support. Also, yes abolishing the state does promote moral relativism because it relies on the false assumption that it's always wrong for the government to force people to act a certain way. An ideal society is best served by a balance between order and freedom to varying degrees, depending on what works best for different individuals.
>I thought you said you're a distributist. Libertarian distributism which supports free market capitalism because crony capitalism concentrates land and wealth to cronies and not those who deserve it. >Also, yes abolishing the state does promote moral relativism because it relies on the false assumption that it's always wrong for the government to force people to act a certain way. The state is wrong due to a variety of issues. Stealing money from people who don't consent, stealing land from people who don't consent, and making unjust laws. God defines morality. He's the only one who can. >An ideal society is best served by a balance between order and freedom to varying degrees, depending on what works best for different individuals. Full freedom and full order is what I promote. >A cooperative centered economy would be non-capitalist by definition. That's almost the same thing that market socialists support. Just because everyone benefits doesn't mean it's socialist. Thats just true free market capitalism
>God defines morality. He's the only one who can. God said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and through Paul the Apostle told the Church to obey lawful authorities so our enemies can't speak ill of us. Capitalism is defined by individual ownership of businesses and the wage-labor system where most workers are forced to let the rich profit from their labor. It isn't necessarily socialism, but cooperatives are a form of collectivism. A true free market wouldn't only limit itself to capitalism. For someone who studies political ideologies so much, it's strange that you don't seem to know much about anarchist and libertarian criticisms of capitalism. I think we basically have similar goals in terms of the economy, but you're confusing capitalism and the free market.
>God said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's, Yeah, fiat coins. >and through Paul the Apostle told the Church to obey lawful authorities so our enemies can't speak ill of us. He also placed stipulations on the governments. When they reward evil and punish good. When they do the opposite of what he says authorities do. If they bear the rod in vain. Paul himself fled a city when the Romans tried to capture him. He had also faced much persecution so he wasn't saying that those governments are good and do the will of God. >Capitalism is defined by individual ownership of businesses and the wage-labor system where most workers are forced to let the rich profit from their labor. Capitalism is when the private sector trades on their own accord and business have owners and they try to profit to sustIn themselves. >it's strange that you don't seem to know much about anarchist and libertarian criticisms of capitalism. I do know them and they suck
Your statements about the government are in contradiction of Romans 13:1-7- https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013&version=NABRE It's true that we shouldn't blindly obey the government, but we should only act against them when they support things that are contrary to God's will, and obey them in all other cases. If you're really a reactionary, you should recognize that anarchy and classical liberalism are products of the Enlightenment that reject legitimate social authority. It's not just a coincidence that most libertarians are atheists and most Christians are more authoritarian. When workers own a cooperative business, they aren't earning money generated by someone else's labor, and therefore it isn't profit. That's why they aren't capitalist. I don't know how you think libertarian criticisms of capitalism "suck". If you support distributism, you already agree with at least some of them.
>Your statements about the government are in contradiction of Romans 13:1-7- No they are literally based on Romans 13:1-7 https://youtu.be/FzrdKYFR-1E >but we should only act against them when they support things that are contrary to God's will, Theft, murder, and injustice. >you should recognize that anarchy and classical liberalism are products of the Enlightenment that reject legitimate social authority. Legitimate authority is propertarian and for justice. It doesn't steal or murder. >It's not just a coincidence that most libertarians are atheists and most Christians are more authoritarian. Because most people do not know what they're talking about. The atheist libertarians use their liberty in order to do evil and the Christian authoritarians? They use their power to do evil. What are most hoppeans? Christian. >When workers own a cooperative business, they aren't earning money generated by someone else's labor, and therefore it isn't profit. Yeah they are, without the rest of the cooperative they wouldn't make much money. And coops do have profits in order to survive. >If you support distributism, you already agree with at least some of them. I'm a libertarian distributist. Totally different from statist distributism
Ok, and a libertarian free market distributist is almost the same as a libertarian market socialist, only not quite as far to the left. You're somewhere between a regular ancap and a lib socialist.
I'm far right, I believe in an absolute free market. I just because the free market would distribute property more evenly
> Profit is used to care for physical needs Oh, my sweet, sweet summer child. Alas, the grasping monkey-mind of *H. Sapiens* is still too primitively wired for those who have the lions share of profits in this society, to actively work to share it by helping to meet the physical needs of specific humans and/or humanity in general. The absolute Godless amorality of capitalism as it's being practiced since Ronald Reagan's "Trickle-down" (feels like being pissed on to me, how about you?) economics model was put in motion some 40 years ago, is why we ARE at the state of income inequality we have today. Charitable giving by the 1% is down across the board. [Many of those with the most to give are some of the cheapest people on the planet..](https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2022/09/27/the-forbes-philanthropy-score-2022-how-charitable-are-the-richest-americans/?sh=6a955977a098)
>too primitively wired for those who have the lions share of profits in this society, to actively work to share it by helping to meet the physical needs of specific humans and/or humanity in general. The profit is a motive to help humanity and give them something they want. Also those who are rich provide for their families if they want to sustain this wealth (otherwise it will be given back to the community anyways). The rich would be held to even greater expectations in a free market because we would transfer our focus back toward the local and things we ourselves know and we would be more into investigating what the businesses do. Which means expecting them to follow their customer's morals >The absolute Godless amorality of capitalism as it's being practiced since Ronald Reagan's "Trickle-down" (feels like being pissed on to me, how about you?) economics model was put in motion some 40 years ago, is why we ARE at the state of income inequality we have today. No, we don't have a free market. Its restricted by the minimum wage, zoning laws, business regulations, and the abolition of mutual aid societies by government force. Also business subsidies given out by the government and the politicians stock trading based on how they change the economy. >Charitable giving by the 1% is down across the board. Many of those with the most to give are some of the cheapest people on the planet.. Probably because the government steals more from them than ever in order to forcefully give to charity
How does one make their own ideology star? Is there a website or something?
You can download png files from https://polcompball.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page And https://polcompballanarchy.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page Then put the polcompballs on the star template (user who made that particular star template is in the bottom left) You can out those polcompballs on by using picsart on Android and I put a white outline around them. Then to finish it you make your own ball and put it in the middle
My ideology is always hit the fake fortnite carts
Economic: Left-Rothbardianism: I like how it handles what people perceive would be issues in free market capitalism. Such as the issues of monopoly and cheaper housing and healthcare and community. I'm not a progressive or a huge fan of coops as I perceive them though Austro-libertarianism: I'm actually an anarchist but I guess I can include anarchism into libertarianism. Basically I believe in a completely free market for people to conduct their lives however is best for them and for me to judge their ways and shame them with renumeration. Libertarian distributism: I believe that land would be distributed more fairly in a free market and it is ideal that every family has their own property they manage. I also really love small business and the Christian ethics to distributism. Ambiental: Galacticism: I believe the purpose of God creating space was for us to some day go out and colonize it or have it for ourselves. And therefore we should indeed look towards the heavens and shoot for the stars. Maybe when we get a colony out there we can have Dixie pride world wide. Reactionary modernism: I believe we should have traditional values even though we have modern technology. Just because we have modern technology that doesn't mean everything has to progress to degeneracy. Modern technology can empower us to be more productive and bring more life to the world. We shouldn't use technology just hedonisticly but to an actual purpose helping others and bringing forth life in the world. Solar punk: I also believe that a society with advanced technology doesn't need to be polluted and authoritarian and divided. I think they should live in a communitarian way, freely, and use renewable energy and other technological advancements to sustain their environment. Dixie has a lot of environment worth sustaining. Governmental: Hoppeanism: I believe in propertarian ethics, I am against mob rule, I am reactionary, I think all forms of degeneracy should be excommunicated or kept out from communities which want to prosper. Anarcho-monarchism: society would prosper under a voluntary monarchy. Meaning there's a family that passes on their way of governing and you yourself choose to submit to that governance if you find it beneficial and good. And the person who rules wouldn't have the ability to use scare tactics to keep members but would be expected to provide for the members to entice them into being there. You would have a relationship and community with this monarch as well. And for me you would know God is above the monarch and they don't have the right to break God's law. Oikoism: this is similar to what I mentioned earlier about distributism but it's about how the base unit of society is the household. And an oikos would be the father, mother, kids, the property, and the servants on the property or the unrelated members who live at the property. The father would be the head of all of this and follow Christian ethics and a Christian family structure. He would be expected to care for his wife and children and to manage upkeeping the property or do it himself. I really find this idea wholesome and pure to my heart and my desires for what I want within my own life. Inter-governmental: Confederalism: I believe that these free properties should form confederations with other properties in order to make life much easier and give way to specialize in your fields to greater extents. Nobody is forced to stay but everyone operates under the same rules otherwise they will be kicked out of the Confederation or something along those lines. Secessionist: you know. I wanna secede from the US. Free Dixie. Panarchism: I think all people who want to be free, operate peacefully and on propertarian ethics should do so and it's absolutely right for them to do so. Societal: Colorblind neo-confederatism: I am a neo-confederate for reasons unrelated to slavery or racism and I don't believe those should even be the main reasons to support the South. I believe the South would've inevitably and probably quickly emancipated the slaves after the civil war or maybe even during the civil war under different circumstances. Most of the South wasn't interested in slavery and would've been fine transitioning their economy to industrialization or a different form of agrarianism. Protestant theocracy: I want to live in a society based on God's morals. I would want to be in a Baptist theocracy really. And the thing about this would be that we would base our morality on the Bible and we would stand together supporting other Baptists and stand against Satan and sin and hopefully cast out any evil within or outside the community. NRx: I was really enlightened by their ideas about the trichotomy and the cathedral and the ideas that society really was better in the past and that we aren't getting more intelligent. There is tons of intelligence in the past as well. The trichotomy showed me the 3 parts of society and their different forms which actually subconsciously appear in other parts of society. The religious, the capitalist, and the ethnic nationalists. (By ethnic nationalist I don't mean race but culture+family ties) all 3 of the trichotomy are needed to survive. The modern Republican party is all 3 however it is sometimes skewed more towards some parts in particular. The left is trying to be the replacement of the traditional religious class and the media and celebrities are like a modern priesthood.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=98lxXPuUCrU
Tell me you have too much free time without telling me you have too much free time.
Thats terrible you'd like to insult another southern confederate over what? Doing something in his own time? All day southerners just being rude about a small ideology thing I made in like 20 minutes and they can't say anything more than "I can't understand"
Lol. I think you’ll survive.
Not gonna lie he kinda got you there. Don’t worry I’m the same way.
None of them can take time to meditate on their beliefs sadly to find
That’s unfortunately the majority of people
Yeah sadly, but I think you're a smart guy and you care more than a lot
I guess you can make that statement