What Sup Forumsitical ideology do You have Interest in or subscribe to Sup Forums?

What Sup Forumsitical ideology do You have Interest in or subscribe to Sup Forums?
> mutualism.

monarchism

what about It makes you Interested In The ideology? How would You Implement a monarchy without Making it over authoritarian or authoritarian at all.?

no monarchy has ever been as authoritarian as the democracy we have in the usa today

Yeah, I suppose But It has been authoritarian and we Don't really have a democracy In the u.s more of a corporate fascist society.But what I was trying to ask is how would You keep it from Becoming authoritarian in general?

Are you retarded
>1700s British Empire
>German Empire
>Russian Empire
>Every Muslim calpihate
>Every sultan of the the ottoman empire
>all the emperors of china
>Literally anyone who has a leader not held accountable to the demo
>etc.

Faggot, sorry Had to The image said so.

>mutualism
please explain this shit to me i understand ancap and ancom but not mutualist

I'm not a fascism but your understanding of it is fucking retarded

Its somewhere in between, we believe that the state should be replaced By credit Unions That Give out free credit Either without interest or Very little, we don't agree with Private Property Instead opting for Personal possession, Property Only existing because of The state and we Think Larger Business should be Owned By the workers but smaller scale Business would be made up of Individuals who Employ freelancers to do things he or she cant. Public services would Be provided By those who donate Money to The mutual bank instead of taxes. we are usually against rent depending who you ask as well as usury. In short, we subscribe To the idea that The only real way To make Money is through actual work and Not Having the product of our labor being taken By a capitalist or the state and we distribute goods through free markets.

Not really corporations have Influence Over everything in our daily Lives just like how a Fascist government would. Also, The libertarian solution wouldn't be Money But revolution.

>corporations have control over are lives like the ""fascissts""
>we need to have a ""revolution""
In other words we need the replace the people who are currently at the top based on merit through a violent revolution where we will make an even more totalitarian system where the people at the top wouldn't have gotten there on merit but there belief in the communist party

Great idea, never been tried before

Why do you live in a democracy? Why not move to a country that has a monarch?

Because we BTFOd them in 1776

Then why be a monarchist?

Because you really, really, REALLY like sucking the cock of someone who doesn't live in you country, participate in your government or have any relation to the populace of the governed

National Socialism.

>2018
>not being a liberalist

Why is it actually though that people hate sargon so much

Because he's more successful than most if not all of the people that don't like him. And he's really smug about it

I fucking knew it

Ever since kruat became retarded the fuckin ehtno nationalists have been trying to find reasons to shit on him because he wont larp with them about the jews

But that right there is an actual logical explanation as to why they do this thanks for the clarifacation

Never said violent.

and again im not a Commie i do believe in free markets.

Check d for constitutional monarchy with a two house Westminster system

m8 how do you have a non violent revolution

what are you going to do, hug it out with the riot control when they show up to stop you from toppling there government

Yeah it's literally because he makes over $8k a month on patreon alone. After one stream they were gloating about his sub count going down a few, it was pretty cringe desu

He should honestly just stay away from it but he's too smug not too

Get rid of the an-com flag then, faggot.

Republicanism

there isn't a mutualist flag a mutualists used red first faggot.

anarcho syndicalism

huh, how do you purpose a society without markets or currency?

The whole Warski/"internet blood sports" thing is ultracringe. It's low-brow and bereft of any valuable content/insights/arguments. The people that think this shit is cool are the same people that like Jackass, still listen to nigger music, and worship MMA. White trash.

I won't even go into Sarg'n but he's slowly killing himself with the Liberalist garbage and the inability to either give or receive bantz and move on.

The gWAR party.

Read "Towards a New Socialism" by Paul Cockshott.

I don't think AnSynds oppose markets or currency much.

Syndicalism doesn't preclude markets categorically. In fact syndicalism is literally the inspiration for fascism, its directly democratic corporatism. Its the most viable form of left anarchism as well.

I think the mutualist flag is orange actually

or all meme flags are garbage and you shouldn't use them

No shit commie.
Yeah cause Commies stole our color.

Be quiet, your ideology is an obscure meme.

Distributism.

No, no it's really Not its just the only one To be Implemented.
Implementation =/ most viable.

There are Various forms of Mutualism in practice Today such as co-operative living and Credit unions which are Very effective whose to say this wouldn't work widespread?

fuck off Commie cunt Marx was sucking Proudhon's dick Until he said he agreed with markets.

Self Monarhism

Atleast its not a retarded meme

...

>its just the only one To be Implemented.
Pretty sure when you've been trying every variation of your nonsense the world over the only to work is the most viable.

Also two things,
1) mutualism is not leftwing, as mutualists must recognize the inherent inequality of man, or they wouldn't be mutualists
2) co-op living isn't viable and all constructed co-op communities collapse in less than a generation. Co-operative workplaces are nearly always syndicalist corporate entities in either form or function.

>what is information inequality

based

we do Recognize the inequality of man read Proudhon's theory of exploitation and Condominiums tard.

>Paul Cockshott
>Cockshott
>Cock
>Shot

You've got to be shitting me.

Mutualism is Left wing and we do recognize inequality in society you should read Proudhon's Theory of exploitation and No one said anything about what about condominiums They have a good track record and are co-op owned. also, People can Own Their own property in mutualism which is dictated By Occupancy Not Who bought the property.

ancapism

Sorry I got through like half of that sentence then decided i wanted to change what i was going to say im soooper baked rn.

I like the form of state capitalism practiced by city states like Monaco and Singapore.

Pick Unrelated. I changed my mind in the middle of righting that.

British fascism

Your meme is stupid

Your image forgot To leave out that an individual can Own the means of production for themselves as well.

what meme i see no memery here.

Proudhon was a left of center anarcho liberal who became a right of center anarcho liberal when he grew up, advocating for property by homestead and mandatory militia service.

Also you can say that people are inherently equal and then turn around and say mutual interactions are the height of ethics when mutual transactions nearly always result in inequality. Also I'm high as well that's no excuse for illiteracy.

Ok whatever, it doesn't matter whether he was left or center I've heard it both ways, and you said almost always That implies Not always and Plus Homelessness and poverty would be at a significant decrease.Honestly, i don't see things as left or right Just individual Vs. collective Many of the arguments the left and the right have are over semantics and it stays within the statist Paradigm.

national socialism
do you have a reason to be high, or are you a foul degenerate?

Monarchism.

idk about him I'm just a degenerate.

well sober is best, ive been respected much more by my community since i been clean

Just Pot dood Nothing crazy.

anarchism
voluntarism
cumulativism

House Stark

Welcome Fellow market anarchist!

i was mostly into pot too, mushies from time to time. i got sick of being dependent various plants and getting thought of as lazy.

Voluntarism and Anarchism Kinda Interchangeable since Voluntarism is The main Tennant of anarchism. if an anarchist school of Thought doesn't agree with that then they aren't anarchists.

Sorry to hear that, for me, its been the opposite My grades have gone up since i started smoking regularly ( im a senior on hs.)

Just Thought of this But He wasn't an anarcho-liberal But just an anarchist Because Mutualism was the First anarchist school of thought although he held many Liberal Views he rejected Many aswell such as Capitalism but agreeing with free markets.

I am willing to indulge most of the drugs that have accompanied our civilizations I see no reason not to unless theyre blatantly terribad like deliriants and such.

Actual capitalism is free markets too. Labor has prices, and those prices are based on supply and demand. Capital is simply a more efficient way of allocating capital to people based on the human capital they provide to the market than is bartering or centralized note, ticket, ledger or bond.

I'm unironically a transhuman eugenicist.

Capitalism is when Capitalists have a monopoly on the means of production Not markets. The Lie That Markets = capitalism was started by neoliberals, a capitalist society requires a state to subsidize corporations as well as being used as a tool By 1% bourgeoisie.

>implying corporations are natural capitalist entities.
Corporations are state tax engines that happen to be useful to the middle class.
>Capitalism is when Capitalists have a monopoly on the means of production Not markets.
1) State monopolies are state monopolies. Natural monopolies are not. If a man owns the only place in a county with the only place suitable to grow or make a certain thing, he will have a monopoly on it. It is a fact of free markets that when demand exceeds supply values rise. This applies both to human capital and goods. Youre taking issue with a natural product of the market because it creates inequality when in reality the inequality is inevitable. Capitalism simply mitigates the risk of abuse. The profit motive and growth compel the capitalist to both grow his wealth and disassemble his monopoly. Only state intervention allows the capitalist to use unjust force. The funny thing is anarchocapitalism provides for methods of self policing, self defense and self regulation, without a monopoly on legitimate force, while left wing anarchists do not. Capitalism only takes on that hue if you think property is theft. I mean unless you think ownership by homestead and/or the abolition of information as property is gonna abolish capitalism. Hint, it wont. Try arguing that opinion to Lysander Spooner friendo. Even Proudhon dropped property as theft.

Capitalism provides for the abolition of monopoly on authority
Capitalism provides the mechanism for the reduction of scarcity and better distribution through more accurate price allocation
Capitalism provides for mutual transactions and voluntary participation
Capitalism is the mechanism by which the public most accurately and efficiently operate the means of production

Stop believing in labor value economics, stop being an ideological Marxist.

see, I agree with Most of what your saying this like i mentioned before is why I abandoned the left-right paradigm because we say the same thing differently, what a Mutualist says something is capitalist ancaps say corporatism Neither are wrong, private, personal It doesn't matter.

when he said 'property is theft' he meant it in direction of rent, people can still own property so long as it is occupied. and im not an ideological Marxist, Marx is a ideological mutualist since Marx influenced Marx.

*proudhon influence marx

I don't agree with rent or usury But I do believe in supply and demand, I don't believe in limiting the market or taxation, we have many similarities and Honestly, ancaps and mutualists should be friends, i dont believe you are an ancap But im just taking the anarcho version of capitalism and applying it to this scenario

Marx was an vanguardist who believe in the liquidation of whole classes of people and thought wages were slavery. Explain yourself.

No I'm 100% a Republican I believe in a strong military and private military expeditionary ventures, I believe in corporatism, the Church, Patriarchal Society, the Constitution, the limited franchise, expanded property rights, inherited estates, the Military-Corporate Industrial-Research complex etc etc.

opps

well Marx's Class struggle hierarchy was pretty much ripped straight from Proudhon. marx later criticized Proudhon But Marx was also a huuuuge prick.

I Believe in wage slavery exists but only in some cases, like if a Boss was severely Underpaying They're workers. I Think people should Only work for the benefit of themselves using co-ops as a way of making that more efficent.

Marx was a good historian and journalist but he was a hack political thinker. Lets be real if were gonna start dividing and delineating classes fascist/syndicalist class unity in economic struggle is far more stable and producers far better results.

The left is shit and people aren't equal come on man you know this.

Wages are slavery when the government refuses to enforce laws against industrialists who use force to break up strikes and unions. Hasn't been a problem for a long time.

How could you support this? i mean think of all the lives that have been ruined.
The state needs to stay out of the market, period. and i don't even like marx he plagiarized most of his shit, eliminating class would be impossible But they should all have an equal say with no centralized power.

I mean I'm pretty dissatisfied with our government over the past century or so, but the fact of the matter is historically successful societies have certain characteristics. Think about how many lives were created by the Aryans, the Mesopotamians, the Indians, the Romans, the British, the Chinese.

The greates ethical transgression wuld could enact would be voluntary extinction.

It's better to just let people live freely who cares if the society is successful as long as it is successful within its occupants.

Because they'll institute democracy, turn to atheism, antinatalism and hedonism, appoint a totalitarian dictator and implode under barbarian encroachment.

you don't Know that will happen, nothing can be predicted because of How chaotic our universe is. democracy if correctly done without political parties can be just as good. if they turn to atheism and hedonism who cares at least they can choose.

>the eternal relativist
That might be a more compelling argument if the same thing didn't keep repeatedly happening.
>if they turn to atheism and hedonism who cares at least they can choose.
Well firstly Id imagine the victims of their antinatalism and nihilism might care.

whatever man i am sooo fucking baked right now i barely know what im saying.

Nice cop-out satan, looks like the forces of tradition win again lul

Its been swell c ya fag

Hoppean minarchism
this is fine too