Where are you?

Where are you?

Other urls found in this thread:

geokey.de/literatur/doc/neo.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

That really dark read part to the left.

Correct answer

Ancap jusnaturalist.

I wanna say classical liberalism but if we're being realistic, facism.

ANCAP
I wanna buy recreational nukes with heroin sold to kindergratener prostitutes

I'm sympathetic to classical liberalism, social democracy, market socialism, anarcho-syndicalism, mutualism, Luxemburgism, democratic socialism, anarchism, council communism, syndicalism, and progressivism, in that order.

I am absolutely opposed to Maoism, Stalinism, Leninism, fascism, right-wing populism, and corporatocracy, in that order.

Ancap/progressivism.

Probably the closest is
Syndicalism Anarcho-Communism
even though I don't embrace communism as an overarching social system. "Communism" within a family/tribe/syndicate of freely associating people within a larger free-market capitalist system is my ideal.

Instead of trying to choose the best (least evil) solution for everyone in a society, I'd rather be free to associate and commune with a smaller group of like-minded individuals and compete with all other groups.

can you explain how that thing is structured?

>Where are you?
at home.

I would be a Right-wing populist, I guess. Or just a regular good-old-days conservative.

The further you get from the center (anarchism), the more concentrated political power becomes, and the larger role the state plays in the lives of its citizens.

Moving clockwise from 9-3, the more concentrated economic power becomes.

huh... after reading about them, I think I'm a "mutualist"... weird

should have put that in the empty white boxes

Geolibertarian shaped by Georgist/Geoist ideals.

...

It's all shit, it's either "you us everything for nothing" or "you own me everything for nothing" or "I own you nothing for everything"

TL;DR
socioeconomics makes no cents

SWEDEN YES

Some form of right-wing anarchism I suppose. I find national-anarchism interesting. As a Britbong, I still have a certain romanticism for the monarchy of old, but those days are gone and not coming back. The shittiness that passes for modern Statism ultimately pushed me to sympathy for anarchism, though modern anarchism is a shambles too, so who the fuck knows any more.

I favour free market not out of any sense of ideological purity particularly, but more because the calamity of modern politicians trying to regulate the market strangles small business. It's time to roll the dice with much less regulation (at least internally, I'm not opposed to protecting British/local businesses over foreign businesses).

Distributism is also interesting, though it's unclear to me how it would work in practice. Maybe I just find Chesterton and Belloc compelling writers.

Mostly though, the more I think about politics the less sure I am about it. I prefer to discuss moral issues than political or economic ones these days, which I suppose would put me somewhere on the right.

If feeling constant doubt over most issues compared to a few years ago is getting closer to enlightenment, I'm getting pretty sick of it.

Luxemburgism.

>I find national-anarchism interesting

lol so do I, in the same way I find other utter and total contradictions interesting too

i'm paleoconservative to the point that i wouldnt mind living in a peace filled, tech free, very humble agrarian society.

kind of like the amish but with less fire and brimstone.

Ta-da

Weird but yeah land "ownership' is bullshit anyway. I pay the government $600 a month in property tax because I have a large lot on the very edge of a county with a big city full of gibsmedats. Even if I paid off my mortgage the government can literally just charge me monthly for my land and take it from me if I don't pay. They are raising it by fifty bucks again next year too.

my position isnt shown

ok and now explain wtf libertarianism does where it is

Facts of life for Libertarians

>All property rights depend upon a state

>Markets depend upon states, market forces are shaped by states

>Karl Marx was more anti-state than any Libertarian author you love, whose ideology simply wants to privatize the state rather than abolish it.

RIght wing populous.

Why the fuck is Facist on the right side with capitalism? All facist governments have only supported socialism. Prove me wrong.

the problem is that fascism isnt about any dimension depicted in there so placing it anywhere only yields confusing results. Like placing fascism next to progressivism and social democracy.

>All facist governments have only supported socialism. Prove me wrong.

The Nazis banned all socialist political movements and then privatized huge chunks of state assetts to their capitalist supporters, thus increasing the rate of profit massively and enriching their paymasters at the expense of the working class. See graph for proof.

The labels outside the wheel are broad groupings of ideologies. Socialism on the left, capitalism on the right, Anarchism in the center, libertarianism for those ideologies that believe in a strictly limited state. It is there for explanatory purposes.

>fascism
>capitalist
rly makes u think

What about a communist society without a state, as per the actual definition of communism (as opposed to Marxism-Leninism?) shouldn't that also feature alongside both Libertarianism and Anarchism?

Most Anarchists I know of think of themselves as being communists.

Anarcho-Syndicalist

FUCK THE SYSTEM!
MILLIONS OF DEAD COPS!
FUCK YOU I WON'T DO WHAT YOU TELL ME!
OI! OI! OI!

Georgist here

well, I'm for:
* cheap education and vocational training
* free healthcare
* legalized drugs (definitely hallucinogenics, at least)
* more fancy clothes
* legalized nudity, and encouraged nudity for hawt chix
* more naked hot black, latin, middle eastern, indian, and Asian chicks (pic related)... a culture that promotes the "pear shape" of skinny on top, but with a BIG fucking ass
* emphasis on technological advances benefitting the general public, via state sponsorship, but still have an economy run by an efficient market (think the "mixed economy" type deal)
* more traveling
* more cheese
* more seafood
* more protected forests
* mascot is a fox and a tortoise, national bird is a crane
* national sport will be a cross between MMA, hockey, and gymnastics... guys in cool outfits will fight each other on ice, and instead of cheerleaders, on the boarder of the rink you'll have gymnasts in one piece thong bikinis scoring points for their teams through impressive routines. Instead of muay thai and bjj, the fighters will use kyokushin and judo
* popular music will be a fusion of bebop jazz and post-hardcore punk
* popular religions will be Zen, Quakerism, and Sikhism

Does not apply
I don't fit in that graphic

See Anarcho-communism. Your point is taken, but space constraints make it difficult to put all the possible ideologies within a sector

Mutualism.

BUT

"try loving your neighbour then tell me the outcome of that"

might be anarcho-capitalism then

1. makes little sense to put libertarianism outside of the two dimensions when it is basically the only political ideology sufficiently described by the two dimensions you chose.

2. why did you choose a confusing wheel structure that missrepresents how far apart ideologies are?

Luxemburgism, ofcourse

>makes little sense to put libertarianism outside of the two dimensions

It is not outside; it is used here as a broad umbrella term for stuff like classical liberalism, communalism, and georgism

then you really missrepresent what libertarians think about economic freedom.

>neoconservatism is on the right-wing
>literally birthed by trotskyites

hundreds of keks

Classical Liberal

so hard to notice you luxemburg-chan

fascism

neoconservatism

I don't trust facist leaders but we've all seen what a weak government brings

Paleocon minus the teaching creationism in school parts

Not all libertarians are Ayn Rand capitalists. Libertarian socialism is a thing

Marxism–Leninist, with some healthy /leftypol/-approved anti idpol of course.

guys, guys, GUYS,
it's me again ()
who wants to come to my country?

Where's fascism?
I'd also be okay with monarchy but I don't see that either

What a shit wheel

Fascism is the shit-stain in the upper right

the whole thing seems like what an idiot child does with that blocks put into the right mold game: Hammer it in until it "fits". Typical error of bending the thing you want to describe so it fits into your description.

Georgism

Oh didn't see it
Why is it on the capitalist side?
Fascists saw capitalism as Jewish as fuck

Corporatocracy

Sounds like blade runner future

Libertarianism, which is too cool to be on the chart with all those other losers

Libertarians are "minimum state before anarchy". As such, how do you prevent concentration of wealth in the hands of a few? Or are you one of those guys that only want an ideology and dont care about consequences? There cannot be a libertarian socialism as preventing the rich from becoming richer is not necessary to avoid anarchy, but it is increasing the power of the state. So it is not "a government which governs least".

Probably classical liberalism, although i don't know what that means. Whatever the founding fathers were

>I'd also be okay with monarchy but I don't see that either

Because you can't put it on that chart when a monarch can act like any of those according to his personal preferences. It would be like putting "democracy" (without any other adjectives like "social" in front of it) on the chart.

prolly somewhere between mutualism and social democracy

well, I'm for:
* cheap education and vocational training
* free healthcare
* legalized drugs (definitely hallucinogenics, at least)
* more fancy clothes
* legalized nudity, and encouraged nudity for hawt chix (pic related)
* more Latin and Arab chicks... a culture that promotes the "pear shape" of skinny on top, but with a BIG fucking ass
* emphasis on technological advances benefitting the general public, via state sponsorship, but still have an economy run by an efficient market (think the "mixed economy" type deal)
* more traveling
* more cheese
* more seafood
* more protected forests
* mascot is a fox and a tortoise, national bird is a crane
* national sport will be a cross between MMA and hockey... guys in cool outfits will fight each other on ice, and instead of cheerleaders, on the boarder of the rink you'll have gymnasts in one piece thong bikinis scoring points for their teams through impressive routines. Instead of muay thai and bjj, the fighters will use kyokushin and judo.
* popular music will be a fusion of bebop jazz and post-hardcore punk
* popular religions will be Zen, Quakerism, and Sikhism

>how to stop wealth concentration
>result of the current system/not libertarian system

How the fuck do people always make this argument? We have a compeltely non-libertarian society and have the greatest wealthy disparity. So uyou think having completely different societal conditions would create the same result as now is what you're saying? Wealth concentration comes from government collusion with corporate interests. It comes from regulations.

Libertarian socialism entails the eradication of private property and worker control over the means of production, with decentralized political structures such as workers councils.

Are we being raided?

I mean monarchy was the original right but everyone has seemed to forgotten that

It's actually quite different than the rest since there is some aspect of democracy within all the ideologies presented on the wheel
Monarchy has zero democracy

Of course I wouldn't expect someone so closed minded to see that

I'm guessing this wheel was created by a communist who had sympathy for libertarians
So a Chomsky faggot

Probably a "Classical Liberal".

>No social-nationalism

In the trash

>Libertarians are "minimum state before anarchy"

No. This has not been true since the term was coined, and it is not true today -- you may be confusing it with the big-L Libertarian Party, but in reality "libertarian" encompasses all forms of minimal government including anarchy.

> There cannot be a libertarian socialism as preventing the rich from becoming richer is not necessary to avoid anarchy, but it is increasing the power of the state.

The best way to illustrate the difference between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism is that they both want the current state removed for different reasons. The libertarian capitalist believes in privately owned property and that the current state is infringing on that. The libertarian socialist believes that property can only be owned by those who work it and that the current state is enforcing private property.

The libertarian socialist isn't using the government to prevent the rich from becoming richer, he just believes that privately owned property is a criminal activity (or that, without the state enforcing it, it would be very difficult to maintain private property).

ancap

Anarcho-Capitalism :^)

>le fascism is capitalism maMay

I have at no point compared libertarianism to the current state of any country in the world.

History has shown untold times that wealth tends to concentrate in the hands of the few if there are no interventions in the system. If you try to prevent this (to get to the left side in your graph), you have to raise state power so it actively redistributes wealth in a lawful way (not libertarianism anymore) or rely on people to steal from the rich in an unlawful way (anarchy). Neither of those results in a libertarian socialist society. Except when you ignore human nature so the original problem does not exist.

geokey.de/literatur/doc/neo.pdf
read this faggot

GUYS!!! check my triple zeros and tell me what you think. Will you visit my country?

which is not libertarianism because these worker councils are state structures, just dressed up in a fancy revolutionary title. At its root, its the community (aka the state) governing over the individual.

>rely on people to steal from the rich in an unlawful way (anarchy). Neither of those results in a libertarian socialist society.

Except the term "libertarian" was coined by anarchists.

What is the Too long; Didn't Read?

The wheel was obviously created by a commie who sees everyone in the west as right wing
That's what I've always found hilarious about commies

,They have all these different terms that all basically mean the same shit to describe themselves and see the world through a worse doomsday lens than Sup Forums
It's cute desu because they think they're lucid

Classical liberalism probably, but the right side of it.

That is what distinguishes it from anarchism, yes.

dude, cuck off, seriously.

>No. This has not been true since the term was coined, and [...].

I basically restated the only sentence presented in the graph to describe libertarianism. "minimum state before anarchy" is the least amount of state possible before you have no state.

If you, however interprete "least" in a very opinionated way, as in "least amount to achieve goal X", then the sentence describes any ideology ever: nobody increases state power just for fun, but to achieve some other goal. Fascism needs lots of state power to achieve its goal of preventing people from stepping out of the line. In a way, it is "governing the least".

>The libertarian socialist isn't using the government to prevent the rich from becoming richer, he just believes that privately owned property is a criminal activity (or that, without the state enforcing it, it would be very difficult to maintain private property).
This is literally what I described above the quote. You put in another variable, the belief that private property is wrong. To achieve that goal, you raised "governs the least" to "governs the least to enfore that no private property exists". Welcome to "not libertarian" or "libertarianism is a useless term that could describe any ideology ever". Your choice.

please elaborate your argument because I didnt find any.

guy says that nationalized land, free trade, and Abolition of Usury is the best system of commerce

Interesting. Thanks.

>To achieve that goal, you raised "governs the least" to "governs the least to enfore that no private property exists".

Here we have our conflict: libertarian socialists would argue that the existence of private property is what needs to be enforced; the lack thereof is closer to the natural state of things.

To have private property with any meaningfulness requires laws to prevent theft and trespassing, and a state large enough to enforce those laws.

FUCK YOOOUUUUUU!!!!!

YOU ARE CLEARLY THE KEK HERE

FUCK OFF INTO SPACE AND BEAM AWAY UP, CAPTAIN KEK!!!

To all anarcho-kiddies, what happens when I get the strongest buddies and decide to take everyone else's stuff? There's nothing wrong with a union of egoists, right? :^)

As for leftypol, go read an economics textbook for once in your life.

State socialism

>YOU ARE CLEARLY THE KEK HERE
Bow before your Kek!

>Fascism
>Capitalistic

>Libertarianism being below anarchism
>Social democracy bordering fascism

shiggy

>libertarian below anarchism

Those are just umbrella terms for what is above them.

you mean the government user? or maybe the big corporations who own the government?

Between georgism and market socialism.

This is objectively the best view.

>go read an economics textbook

BTFO
T
F
O

Much like capitalism is used as an umbrella term for progressivism and conservatism and whatnot.

I claim something that im holding in my hands. No state needed. I call it my private property. No state needed. Now there are two ways to make me get in line with libertarian socialism. a) Punish me for claiming something to be private property and take it away from me forcefully as a group, sanctioned by the community. There you go, you reduced my freedom in society. Not libertarian anymore.
b) steal it from me as an individual, getting into conflict with me. There you go, anarchy is coming.
c) not doing anything except stating "I dont recognise your property but I dont accept it". Oh hell I can live with that. And so can everyone else that just follows my lead soon after. Have fun in your 5 minutes of worker's council government before a real political ideology comes along.