What is this ideology? And what are your opinions? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
A while ago I posted asking what my ideology would be. I have since fleshed it out further and would like to ask again; what ideology would this be and what are your opinions on it?

It is my belief that the state should be the embodiment of the nation and strive towards cultural and social ideals based on this. As the nation and the state are one and the same; nationalism should be readily encouraged and national culture celebrated. Although I advocate nationalism, I do not support ethnic nationalism and segregation but rather a civic form of nationalism which seeks to unite people of all races and origins to love their country and its history. My form of nationalism is based on pride not for accident of birth but for the will to defend the nation from its enemies and willingness to work to make the nation great. I also believe strongly in economic nationalism; defending the stability of imports and exports to the country through protectionist means.

The state achieves legitimacy from the citizenry - who I regard the children of the nation. A state cannot be a legitimate representation of the nation if it is not democratically chosen by the people, thus I believe in popular sovereignty. Since the state is the representation of the nation, the people are obliged to respect its authority and bow to its rule. In return the state is required to submit to the national will and protect its citizens. The state must uphold their liberties, protect them from themselves (fight crime), give them employment and carry out their wishes. The state cannot be corrupt and must work in the favour of the people as that is in favour of itself. In short, the state is a slave to the people's needs. If the people have reason to believe the state is not legitimate or is not doing enough to protect them, they have the right to stage a revolution and forge a new constitution which enshrines their values. Any corruption on the state's part is of the highest mode of treason and must be dealt with immediately and harshly with the state stripped of its corrupt representatives. The right to buy representatives should be outlawed, with such forms of bribery labelled "lobbying" made illegal. An ideal representative is not the agent of some millionaire who dangles pennies ahead of him on a string but rather the hardworking servant of the electorate - whether they voted for him or not.

All workers are employees of the state thus their loyalties should lie with it and not any businesses they may also work for. Therefore a national minimum wage must be a living wage. The state should not give up any authority to large multinational companies and must be firm with any company that wants to conduct business there - the wellbeing of the workers comes before the profits of the company. Small local businesses will be protected by the state, but large ones should be watched to make sure they comply with national regulations.

Since the state is expected to always know best it has the right to be regulate and control the markets, as long as individuals get paid their due. The state's main priority is towards its citizens and market liberalism is a second-thought, thus the interference in market politics is justified. However, although beneficially paternalistic, the state must respect the freedoms of its citizens when they do not compromise national security. Thus freedom of speech and opinions must not be censored, and debate and discussion should be encouraged. Thus free platforms like the internet shall not be interfered with. The state also should not get involved with a citizen's personal and religious beliefs as I strongly adhere to the principle of separation of church and state. Likewise, a citizen should respect their religious beliefs should have no basis in state policy and keep it to themselves. The state must not be dogmatic in pushing an ideology but rather promote political debate.

It is my belief that in every society there is the weak and the strong, however instead of ostracising and discriminating against the weak, the state must hold them as equals and uplift them into society. I am strongly egalitarian as I believe all children of the nation are brothers and thus it is our duty to help those "weaker" or less fortunate than us. The weak need extra attention from the state to fulfil their true potential thus I believe in welfare, free education and a national health service. The state must provide for the weakest in society out of compassion and solidarity - the state is slave of both the highest king and the lowliest peasant, after all. The fruits and property of the state should belong to all citizens, and citizens should be thankful for this generosity, inspiring devotion to the nation.

As I believe in both the strong and weak of society, with such a mindset there has to be a hierarchy of sorts, and there is; a hierarchy of responsibility. The weak owe allegiance and loyalty to themselves and the state (the nation), the strong have the responsibility to defend and empower the weak, as well as owing their allegiance to the state. The weak are low-level workers, the unemployed, the homeless, marginalised minorities and anyone else shunted and trapped in our modern society. The strong are the middle classes, the politicians, the bosses and all those with power and privilege. The weak and the strong must not be set against each other as they are in contemporary political systems, they must co-exist harmoniously and equally, for the better of themselves and the nation. It is possible for persons to move up in this hierarchy providing they have the skills to do so. This system of social standing would be meritocratic and not based on wealth, assets or accidents of birth. Solidarity between all sectors of society for the national good is the most effective track towards a peaceful, prosperous state.

In regards to crime the state should take the approach of tough love. It is my belief that most petty crimes are committed not as a choice of the individual but rather the fact they are trapped within a cycle of self-destruction and harmful behaviour, coupled with a nihilistic worldview. Criminals are already prisons of their own weak psyches and thus do not need to become physical prisoners, punished for misdeeds which are merely an extension of their fragile and ignorant mindsets. Rather, the state should be tough on the causes of crime and focus their efforts on rehabilitation of offenders. The state must teach them to become productive members of society with optimistic and positive outlooks. These criminals should in turn be thankful to the state for providing such opportunities to abandon their ignorance and work for the betterment of their community. However I do recognise that the stare cannot maintain endless patience with criminals and some just cannot be reformed thus for the most serious offenders, prison is most definitely an option.

I believe that society is inherently gendered and that this is not a bad thing. There are differences between the genders that I believe the state must acknowledge and fully incorporate into its public and political institutions. Instead of glossing over these differences with a thin veneer, I believe the state should embrace them. I do believe in a peaceful matriarchal prehistory that occurred at the dawn of the agricultural revolution. This great matriarchal consciousness led to some of the first great advancements for humankind. I do not doubt that this matriarchy was suddenly and violently usurped by a radical, action-dominated patriarchal mode of thought that has been dominant since. The strained relationship between these two opposing sides in our world directly descendants from this ancient mutiny. Yet I do not seek to elevate one outlook over the other but rather desire to reconcile the ancient pacifist matriarchy with the reactionary masculine society of today's world into a shining beacon of unity and aspiration.

This gender difference shall play a prominent role in state education. From a young age children shall learn about the two components of their being and establish them as separate but equal. The curriculum shall encourage the chosen aspect of the child’s psyche - whether the athleticism apparent in the patriarchy or the sensuality that predominates in the matriarchy. By allowing young people to draw this distinction I believe it shall do a lot to support their spiritual well being. For misguided adults such as criminals or those at the bottom of the hierarchy, comprehensive adult education must be offered to allow them to reconnect with their true calling.

I do not ascribe to the Neo-Luddite view that the advancements we are seeing in technology are of a detriment to the stability of society. Rather, I believe that pertaining to the status quo in times of fantastic potential such as this is not only a waste of time, but an actual adversary to the notion of a better society. We must accept the unrelenting progress of the sciences with open arms, preparing for a revolution so great that it's magnitude shall dwarf that of patriarchy’s triumph over the feminine ideal.

Every man shall be so free as to become a king unto himself. Instilled within each ruler will be a love and loyalty towards the motherland that they shall see themselves for what they are - a nation of kings. There will always surely come a time when the citizen proudly asserts his independence from the state. The state mustn't punish him for it as it is only natural a child will feel a sense of autonomy at some stage during their life. The state must rather realize the needs of the citizen and deliver, hopefully allowing the citizen to realise the state is a magnanimous and generous extension of himself and everyone he loves. Thus the state cannot infringe on any established civil liberties or discriminate - whether by legislation or cultural authority - against s citizen based on their race, gender, sexuality, class or whatever happens to define them.

I shall bring this ideological discourse to a close by stating I believe that everything is a means towards an end. Every action is simply a reaction to the one that came before, all flickering transiently in the void towards the same ending. What is the end I am striving for? To create a happy and healthy people who care deeply about their place in the universe and their legacy. The state is there to ensure the continual safeguard of these legacies until the end of time.
This sounds like good ol' 19th century nationalism ergo nationalism in the original sense of the word. It seems like your beliefs are pretty much centered around the nation and its offspring, the nation state but do so in a democratic, yet conservative way. So yeah, this is pretty much the spirit of 1848 and its nationalist revolutions and uprisings.

If posting shite is your idea of doing fine, you […]

Trump's Dumb Economics

AT&T is among several large corporations whose[…]

As i said before, short term protest will not ach[…]

Yes, by all means Youtube can be arbitrary. Facebo[…]