What is your general ideology? (read more before voting)

[National Capitalist United States]

Socialism and Nationalism.

That's pretty sus

[-Ocelot-]

Productivism doesn't constitute an ideology. It's a belief, sure, but it doesn't really meet the threshold of being an ideology as such.

I think it's meant to be the "anti-environmentalism" stance here.

[And Spaces]

A mix of liberalism, republicanism, and regulated capitalism.

[Greater Cesnica]

We just got ourselves two Nazis now.

Socialism and Nationalism.

That's pretty sus

Refer to viewtopic.php?p=38445222#p38445222

[Alcala-Cordel]

Environmentalism and socialism are both broad terms, but I strongly support specific forms of both.

[Punished UMN]

I would say that, ideologically speaking, I'm a Christian anarchist or at least have a lot of leanings that way. However, I realize that the world we live in isn't ready for that and thus tend to have a more realistic view of political events.

[Sanlibutan]

I am very pleased by the quantity of votes and the feedback offered. Much appreciated to everyone who has participated!

Could Republic Nationalism work? That is what i would go to. And i am sort of trying to do that with Atheara.
I guess im a nutcase.

Yes (to your first question). Under my ideological classification system, that sort of ideology would be termed "democratic nationalism," being a combination of republican and nationalist principles.

Productivism doesn't constitute a ideology. It's a belief, sure, but it doesn't really meet the threshold of being an ideology as such.

more or less, it can be defined as "anti-environmentalism", or an opposition to protecting the environment.

Productivism doesn't constitute an ideology. It's a belief, sure, but it doesn't really meet the threshold of being an ideology as such.

I think it's meant to be the "anti-environmentalism" stance here.

It's correct that the intention is for productivism to be sort of the "opposite" to environmentalism, but under my system of classification they are not necessarily considered mutually exclusive, hence why no "anti" is included in the system. They can be complementary. A system that seeks to combine both environmental preservation or restoration with widespread exploitation of natural resources. Maybe a sort of anthropocentric environmentalism, a system that views the environment as mere resources to be exploited by humanity but at the same time does not want such exploitation to threaten the longevity of human survival. Whether or not such a system would work in practice is not the purpose of the classification system.

I know of people for instance who hold a religious view of productivism, believing that their deity has commanded humans (the deity's "children") to make use of the environment to its maximum extent. At the same time, they would not support clear-cutting of every forest or unrestricted pollution into the air and water bodies. They support the intensive farming of animals but only in a way that would be beneficial to humans — at least in theory.

Again, this system only measures values, not what is necessarily achieved in practice.

Add an option for Anarchism, or at the bare minimum Libertarianism- Liberalism in my eyes does not go far enough in encompassing individual liberty and freedoms.

The system is indeed imperfect, however I keep it limited to 10 options. Where anarchism and libertarianism would fit depends on the individual values of the anarchist or libertarian in question. For a right-libertarian, or someone that believes that individual liberty and property rights should be the priority, they would be considered an adherent of "classical liberalism" (being a combination of liberalism and capitalism).

By design, the system forces generalization. In reality of course a liberal is not the same as a libertarian or an anarchist. They all share many of the same basic principles however: the belief in the respect for individual freedom. Where they differ is to what degree or what form of individual freedom they desire.

The reality that in practice, liberal parties (or parties that identify as liberal) are so ideologically distant from libertarians or anarchists is not taken into account by the system. All that is concerned with is where they generally fit in categorization, the "colour" rather than the "saturation" is all that is considered for the sake of simplicity.

There are many other stances that are not present in this system. For instance, no real distinction is made between ideologies that either support religion (not necessarily conservatism) or are opposed to it. And even if I were to include such a distinction, it could be further argued that even that would not be precise enough as an ideology may not support all religion, but maybe only one or a few, or most, or all except one. Unfortunately such imperfections are just part of the nature of categorization systems, especially those that attempt to measure and categorize views.

We just got ourselves two Nazis now.

That is not what that means.


Im a Democratic Socialist and an Irish Nationalist. Irish Nationalism is a predominantly left-wing strand of nationalist belief based on popular sovereignty and self determination. And in Northern Ireland, where im from, it is characterised with a struggle for civil rights and equality under the law after facing decades of discrimination based on ethnicity, national identity and religion.

As far as Nazism is concerned, I would say it fits best under a combination of nationalism and authoritarianism. Under my classification system, this would be deemed "fascism" as it is a combination of nationalist ideology with an authoritarian government (referred to elsewhere sometimes as "ultranationalism"). However, not all "fascists" in this system are necessarily the same. Racial views are not taken into account.

For people who are a combination of socialists and nationalists, the system refers to them as "left-wing nationalists," being a combination of left-wing economics with a nationalist identity. Of course this doesn't take into account what their views are socially. The question is asked simply what one or two values they fit most in.

[Old Tyrannia]

To be fair, as broad and vaguely defined as these categories are it's really not the worst attempt to categorise political positions that I've seen. From the poll options I chose conservatism and environmentalism. I like to preserve things.

[Roegerland]

Ruh roh!

ooh boy....

*Snip*
The same thing applies here.

Says you.

It was more of a joke anyway tbh

[The New California Republic]

more or less, it can be defined as "anti-environmentalism", or an opposition to protecting the environment.

I think it's meant to be the "anti-environmentalism" stance here.

It's correct that the intention is for productivism to be sort of the "opposite" to environmentalism, but under my system of classification they are not necessarily considered mutually exclusive, hence why no "anti" is included in the system. They can be complementary. A system that seeks to combine both environmental preservation or restoration with widespread exploitation of natural resources. Maybe a sort of anthropocentric environmentalism, a system that views the environment as mere resources to be exploited by humanity but at the same time does not want such exploitation to threaten the longevity of human survival. Whether or not such a system would work in practice is not the purpose of the classification system.

I know of people for instance who hold a religious view of productivism, believing that their deity has commanded humans (the deity's "children") to make use of the environment to its maximum extent. At the same time, they would not support clear-cutting of every forest or unrestricted pollution into the air and water bodies. They support the intensive farming of animals but only in a way that would be beneficial to humans — at least in theory.

Again, this system only measures values, not what is necessarily achieved in practice.

It's still not an ideology though.

[Sanlibutan]

It's correct that the intention is for productivism to be sort of the "opposite" to environmentalism, but under my system of classification they are not necessarily considered mutually exclusive, hence why no "anti" is included in the system. They can be complementary. A system that seeks to combine both environmental preservation or restoration with widespread exploitation of natural resources. Maybe a sort of anthropocentric environmentalism, a system that views the environment as mere resources to be exploited by humanity but at the same time does not want such exploitation to threaten the longevity of human survival. Whether or not such a system would work in practice is not the purpose of the classification system.

I know of people for instance who hold a religious view of productivism, believing that their deity has commanded humans (the deity's "children") to make use of the environment to its maximum extent. At the same time, they would not support clear-cutting of every forest or unrestricted pollution into the air and water bodies. They support the intensive farming of animals but only in a way that would be beneficial to humans — at least in theory.

Again, this system only measures values, not what is necessarily achieved in practice.

It's still not an ideology though.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

[Nakena]

Socialism and Nationalism.

That's pretty sus

That's where the fun begins.

[Ancapimania]

I am usually minarchist but that counts as liberalism so I'm liberal

[Sanlibutan]

I am usually minarchist but that counts as liberalism so I'm liberal

I appreciate your participation in the poll, as well as everything who has participated thus far!

[Czechostan]

At this point, I'm becoming more and more postmodern, so I'm rejecting all ideologies. Socialism and environmentalism have been core influences on me, but I wouldn't call myself a socialist or environmentalist anymore.

[Novostia]

I’m Centrist-Liberal but I don’t wanna be labeled as a Liberal so I usually say I’m a Social Democrat or Progressive

[North Rosmana]

Socialist Environmentalism I think.

I am hard to label.

[Voxija]

My ideology is an esoteric blend of Jewish Democracy and Socialist Capitalism, with memetic characteristics and a side of fries.

[National Capitalist United States]

We just got ourselves two Nazis now.

That's pretty sus

Refer to viewtopic.php?p=38445222#p38445222

Idk man, she used the trans Strasserist flag in the trans discussion thread, so I feel like she's very sus

[Nakena]

Refer to viewtopic.php?p=38445222#p38445222

Idk man, she used the trans Strasserist flag in the trans discussion thread, so I feel like she's very sus

I am simply the best and you know it. Also it's Stransserism which is not to be confussed with Strasserism.

[Suriyanakhon]

Environmentalism and socialism, although I'm sympathetic to left-wing nationalism, I'm not a nationalist.

[National Capitalist United States]

Idk man, she used the trans Strasserist flag in the trans discussion thread, so I feel like she's very sus

I am simply the best and you know it. Also it's Stransserism which is not to be confussed with Strasserism.

That's why I said "trans strasserist"

[Nakena]

I am simply the best and you know it. Also it's Stransserism which is not to be confussed with Strasserism.

That's why I said "trans strasserist"

Seems you got an entry too! National Capitalism

Looks 100% non-sus.

[Suriyanakhon]

Refer to viewtopic.php?p=38445222#p38445222

Idk man, she used the trans Strasserist flag in the trans discussion thread, so I feel like she's very sus

Ironic Nazism is still Nazism.

[Mercatus]

Nationalistic Capitalism (if that's a thing?). If we were allowed more than 2 options in the poll I could've added liberalism too. Classical Liberalism, not modern left-wing bullshittery.