What political ideology do you identify as?

[Phoenicaea]

..also, Progressive may be an ideology (as Conservative is into the pool).

you may unify Socialism and Communism and have a place for Progressive (at Social-Democrat place). this leaves a free place however, for Populism (which may be interesting).

also, put Religious at Centrist place.

you may also add Libertarian, into the Anarchism option (so liberals will be split between liberal and anarchist-libertarian, but it is already the same for liberals and conservatives)

[Thermodolia]

Authoritarian Syndicalist Cultural Nationalist aka Stalin 2.0

You've sure changed a lot since I first saw you round these parts.

And yet I feel like I haven’t changed at all

[Dumb Ideologies]

You've sure changed a lot since I first saw you round these parts.

And yet I feel like I haven’t changed at all

None of us can avoid growth and change. Horrible, horrible progress.

[Fivme Archeofvtvrista]

Decentralized nationalism, like some extreme form of federalism

[Kubumba Tribe]

And yet I feel like I haven’t changed at all

None of us can avoid growth and change. Horrible, horrible progress.

I went from being a US Democrat, then to being a Democratic Theocrat/Demo-Theocrat, and now I'm a(n) (Pan-)Islamist

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a worldwide republic is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction. This will be coupled with a parental licensing system, so as to ensure that children are not raised by abusive/neglectful parents.

---

This makes some sense, right?

[Joriker]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a world-state is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction.

---

This makes some sense, right?

What about...
Freedom?

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a world-state is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction.

---

This makes some sense, right?

What about...
Freedom?

But the people will do all manners of wickedness and cruelty to their fellows if given too much freedom, you know? I fear a war of all against all, and seek to prevent it.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

Jesus basically. It is what the Catholic church preaches(without practicing it as it is a very questionable wealth grabbing monarchy).

Christ did not teach Communism. Communism is a human ideology from the 19th century that is entirely materialist. Christianity isn't materialist. Jesus does tell us to be charitable and help those in need, but Communism is neither of those. Christians are to freely give their possessions. Communism is about forcibly taking possessions and redistributing it. There is no charity in that. When Orthodox priests are throne into gulags and when Spanish Republicans murder Catholic Priests, it becomes clear that communism *might* be opposed to Christianity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism

[Kyrinasaj]

Almost feels like social democracy is passe

Oh it is, partying like it is 1933 is much more in vogue now.

Marching on Rome like it's 1922

[Kyrinasaj]

And yet I feel like I haven’t changed at all

None of us can avoid growth and change. Horrible, horrible progress.

This hits close to home

[Soleos]

In the United States: Pinko commie gay loving trans protecting heathen godless Globalist Communist Nazi Liberal.

In East Asia: Progressive Liberal.

In Europe: Neoliberal Social Democratish aka Semi-automated business class bisexual planetary centrist.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

Almost feels like social democracy is passe

Oh it is, partying like it is 1933 is much more in vogue now.

"They say in 1945 the Party's over and I agree;
But tonight let's Nazi Party like it's 1933..."

[Aleckandor]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a worldwide republic is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction. This will be coupled with a parental licensing system, so as to ensure that children are not raised by abusive/neglectful parents.

---

This makes some sense, right? :unsure:

To have a nominally technocratic governance that collectivizes all goods, production of goods, and trade thereof whilst also enabling mass direct e-democracy seems a bit counterintuitive, just saying.

Generally speaking, people in democracies largely vote for what they regard as their immediate economic self-interest (or whatever they may happen to arbitrarily define as their self-interest at the moment). If the technical experts who have spent considerable amount of their time, energy, and willpower specializing in their particular field to help build and maintain the society you envision can be countermanded by the fickle electorate, then what is the point of vesting the authority of decision-making to alleged technocrats?

Also, lmao at the 'growing people in state-owned vat facilities' meme.

[Crylante]

I generally just identify myself using "democratic socialist", maybe even "left-libertarian". I'd like to think my views continue on from the British socialist movements of the past two centuries, adapted to the modern day; I support democratic reform to achieve social ownership of the means of production, supporting trade unions and co-operative businesses. I have a progressive outlook on social issues: I support efforts to reach greater levels of equality based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation etc. I'm also a staunch environmentalist; I strongly support green energy, conservation etc.

In terms of foreign policy, I'm rather pacifist; I feel the UK should not intervene as much in foreign conflicts, and instead support focusing on combating climate change, eliminating poverty and standing up for human rights. While I support Irish unification, I'd consider myself relatively patriotic of Britain in the modern day, although not blindly so. In terms of Brexit, I would have voted to Remain in the referendum and I support a referendum on the final deal, and worry about how a hard Brexit would affect the Northern Irish border, the British economy etc, but I am far from uncritical of the EU.

[Kyrinasaj]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a worldwide republic is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction. This will be coupled with a parental licensing system, so as to ensure that children are not raised by abusive/neglectful parents.

---

This makes some sense, right?

I don't think Brave New World was supposed to be a guide book.

Genetically engineered NWO, AI-managed, vat grown communism

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a worldwide republic is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction. This will be coupled with a parental licensing system, so as to ensure that children are not raised by abusive/neglectful parents.

---

This makes some sense, right?

To have a nominally technocratic governance that collectivizes all goods, production of goods, and trade thereof whilst also enabling mass direct e-democracy seems a bit counterintuitive, just saying.

Generally speaking, people in democracies largely vote for what they regard as their immediate economic self-interest (or whatever they may happen to arbitrarily define as their self-interest at the moment). If the technical experts who have spent considerable amount of their time, energy, and willpower specializing in their particular field to help build and maintain the society you envision can be countermanded by the fickle electorate, then what is the point of vesting the authority of decision-making to alleged technocrats?

Also, lmao at the 'growing people in state-owned vat facilities' meme.

I admit, my political philosophy is quite muddled at this moment, mostly consisting of disparate ideas hastily (figuratively) duct-taped together.

As with regard to the notion of growing the citizenry in vats, what are you to propose as an alternative? I find the... traditional method of reproduction to be haphazard and fickle and uncontrollable. And that simply won't do in a proper civilization, you know?

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

My ideal government would likely be a mildly-authoritarian technocratic state, which would support a social order in which altruism would be rewarded and radical selfishness punished. I believe that the almighty power of the state should be used to promote the common good, and rehabilitative justice should be used to reform criminals and evildoers. I'm also convinced that an electronically-enabled direct democracy would be the best system in the near future, i.e. where citizens use computer networks to vote directly on most matters regarding the state. It'd still be authoritarian by modern American standards, due to an emphasis on the collective weal, not to mention maintaining public order, as opposed to the mass disorder spawned by radical individualism, but nevertheless democratic. My political philosophy is influenced my collectivist moral philosophy; people should behave altruistically and prefer the needs of the group to individual desires.

Other aspects of my political philosophy include:

The creation of a worldwide republic is both beneficial and necessary to ensure peace, prosperity, and brotherhood among all humanity.

Sometime within the near-future, routine government administration/bureaucracy and economic planning can and should be automated by machine intelligences, so as to insure a sustainable, thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption.

The state must seize the means of reproduction for the good of all, growing people in controlled conditions (i.e. vats) as opposed to the haphazard nature of "natural" reproduction. This will be coupled with a parental licensing system, so as to ensure that children are not raised by abusive/neglectful parents.

---

This makes some sense, right?

I don't think Brave New World was supposed to be a guide book.

Genetically engineered NWO, AI-managed, vat grown communism

I remember reading it and finding myself agreeing more with the World Controller for Western Europe, Mustapha Mond, and his arguments in favor of the World State during his conversation with John the Savage.

[Kyrinasaj]

I don't think Brave New World was supposed to be a guide book.

Genetically engineered NWO, AI-managed, vat grown communism

I remember reading it and finding myself agreeing more with the World Controller for Western Europe, Mustapha Mond, and his arguments in favor of the World State during his conversation with John the Savage.

This is doomed, I am going to live in the forest with a big family and shoot trespassing globalists

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

I accidentally posted twice, please see the post below. Thank you.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

I remember reading it and finding myself agreeing more with the World Controller for Western Europe, Mustapha Mond, and his arguments in favor of the World State during his conversation with John the Savage.

This is doomed, I am going to live in the forest with a big family and shoot trespassing globalists

Ｆｏｒ ｔｈｅ ｇｒｅａｔｅｒ ｇｏｏｄ, ｙｏｕ ｗｉｌｌ ｂｅ ａｓｓｉｍｉｌａｔｅｄ; ｐｌｅａｓｅ ｄｏ ｎｏｔ ｒｅｓｉｓｔ.

[Kyrinasaj]

This is doomed, I am going to live in the forest with a big family and shoot trespassing globalists

Ｆｏｒ ｔｈｅ ｇｒｅａｔｅｒ ｇｏｏｄ, ｙｏｕ ｗｉｌｌ ｂｅ ａｓｓｉｍｉｌａｔｅｄ; ｐｌｅａｓｅ ｄｏ ｎｏｔ ｒｅｓｉｓｔ.

Melt down those heaps of bolts, we gotta go back. People seeing the borg as a utopia

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

Ｆｏｒ ｔｈｅ ｇｒｅａｔｅｒ ｇｏｏｄ, ｙｏｕ ｗｉｌｌ ｂｅ ａｓｓｉｍｉｌａｔｅｄ; ｐｌｅａｓｅ ｄｏ ｎｏｔ ｒｅｓｉｓｔ.

Melt down those heaps of bolts, we gotta go back. People seeing the borg as a utopia

I mean, in the post you quoted (The one on assimilation), I was exaggerating my views for comedic effect. You don't go full Borg, for one should never go full Borg.

[Kyrinasaj]

Melt down those heaps of bolts, we gotta go back. People seeing the borg as a utopia

I mean, in the post you quoted (The one on assimilation), I was exaggerating my views for comedic effect. You don't go full Borg, for one should never go full Borg.

Genetic engineering and ai-control is already crossing a pretty big line for me. There's nothing democratic about it either, not that I am one to praise democracy

[Wolflanden]

My view varies quite a lot depend on the topics/ subjects, but I can say that I am a centrist.