UserWiki:Duck-Citizen

Self-Insert

"People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism
This page is meant to represent Duck-Citizen's political views. Please do not make any major edits without their permission.

As they say: "If you're not a radical when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."

Anti-war

Any radical political change requires to change current authority, it also starts civil war and it gives no freedom, no prosperity, no equality. We cannot predict when it will end, and who will win, always state of civil war is worse than order in which we are living. I don't want to stop anybody from doing it, I will not be on anyone's side either. Normal wars share all traits, I want to avoid them as well. So, my personal opinion on all this things is negotiation, I prefer politicians with the same attitude, but I do not support them in full sense, since I don't want to die for them, this is what I want to avoid.

Relations with society

It comes from certain ideas:

1. Heraclitus - Flux
Everything changes, our history teaches us that nothing we had back then we have today, people are part of this process.

2. Max Stirner - Unique
People are different, unique even, it doesn't mean we are always doing something different from the rest of us, it means that we share nothing, obviously you can try to unite some humans under something only they share, but here is the problem mentioned above, people are changing.

3. Jacques Derrida - Différance
We cannot understand each other. Différance, this idea was mentioned in some form by Lacan and Wittgenstein as well. Language, text or any other form of information will never be able to fully transfer all information we want to express, any idea therefore can be understood differently and subverted to the opposite of what author wanted. Laws, constitution, tradition, culture and orders are primary force of society building. So, even if people are the same for some time we are still in danger to misunderstand each other and create conflict.

4. Justice is subjective, product of the human mind, your idea how to make things right isn't better than ideas of others, no more right and no more wrong, just system cannot exist for everyone.

5. Ralph William Souter - Economics imperialism
Economics is a part of social sciences, field where people are trying to learn how human relations work, and economics successfuly steals ideas from other studies, other social sciences successfuly steals ideas from economics, it indicates us that human relations are market relations, and only in conflict we can escape market. Communistic ideal to abolish market relations forever cannot be achieved.

6. Thomas Hobbes - Social Contract
It's noticable how I condemn civil war on this page, influence of Hobbes is obvious, I disagree on the form, if you will read enough on practice of various forms of government it will become obvious that not only his vision of authoritarianism can uphold civilization, even Proudhon agreed with his idea of social contract but obviously compared it with his model of anarchist commune. The other part I disagree with is human nature. By Hobbes all people are innately believe that everyone have evil plan against them untill they create covenant.

Demand of ideology

Socialist is a person who understands the world from specific point of view, such person believes that society should be organized differently or horrible disaster will happen, and with socialism everything will be fine. It means socialist must always live under a pressure, and to ease its burden it must act, must do something, socialism is a radical ideology, it doesn't believe that something can be changed legally, socialist must work for this cause. This is what means to truly be a socialist. If you don't do anything you cannot call yourself socialist and the same can be told about any other ideology that isn't status quo. If you believe in capitalism, conservatism then you must be ready to protect this system with your life, because otherwise something terrible will happen. If you plan to hide or run during civil war then you cannot call yourself conservative or whatever -ist.

I'm honest with myself, I will not do anything, not fight for new, not protect the old, I will only care about my own life, I'm not any -ist, just apolitical.

File:Omni-Market-icon.png Markets are literally everywhere

Market is an act of voluntary exchange, but it extends beyond just material exchange, you can buy services, doesn't matter which: someone can teach you, talk with you on a specific topic you want, touch you, whatever you want. On the other side you can use almost anything as a currency if the other side will agree on such payment: money, gold, iron rods, cycle of lections, other types of information or 5 minutes of silence. As you notice just by talking with someone you already participate in a market exchange, since person agrees to give you information under the certain conditions. Now, lets try to imagine a world where markets are abolished: everything is taken by plunder, every human being seen only as a package of stuff, with only difference of how hard is it to take. In other words State of Nature from Hobbes' Leviathan book. Other theoretical absence of market is the world where you can ask machine anything and receive it, fully automated post-scarcity. But obviously if you want to abolish market here and now you need to take the first approach since the second is not possible.

Relations

Good (Apolitical/Reformists)

• File:LordCompU.png Ultroneism - I practically stole your lifestyle of ideology, but life circumstances enforced me to take this, I had to accept it to not lie to myself, I'm exactly this - apolitical.
• File:O'Langism.png O'Langism - Even tho you expect to use direct action at some point, I'm too, not promise anything, it's just unimaginable for me to use it now.
• Ultra-Enlightenment - I suppose you just want to wait until liberalism become this, but actually progress and regress are entirely subjective and there is no direction of history, markets will always be here, but not neccessary in the form of capitalism and liberalism.
• File:Philosophicism.png Philosophicism - Great but pessimistic. You dream about apocalypse despite the fact we don't know much to predict the future, first it was Christians who waited end of the world which will lead to the Last Judgment and New Heaven, later it was communists who waited proletarian revolution which will lead to the proletarian dictatorship and communism, you are falling into the same logic.
• Neo-Phibunsongkhram Thought - While we have almost nothing in common, your strategy in life is fight for power inside of legal framework, attempt to improve current system of Thailand, good luck then.
• HelloThere314ism - I can see an influence of Situationists and Baudrillard. While I do know what Marx wrote about future, I never read them, nevertheless you accept their prediction explained through contraditions of capitalism that will cause its downfall/dystopianisation, while it is something that have to be proven, and their arguments are not convincing. You expect to struggle against it through non political insurrection, and expect society to eventualy evolve into many communes of egoists, where market relations will be abandoned. In other words desire to seek profit from your own actions will be abandoned. I can agree that people can participate in collectives without thinking about "how will it benefit me", it will make such interaction "unmarket", but thinking everyone will depart from it? That would be a rejection of unique principle of egoist philosophy.
• Evolutionary Socialism
• File:BERNHEism.png BERNHEism - In my eyes you are trying to commit suicide, you want country to be ruled by elites that will not bother to make life better for you, that will not care about national hegemony, you want full automatization, and can't be sure those elites won't simply throw you away from their state, because of your uselessness. Unless of course you are part of elites. Dictablanda is an old story about selfless leader, how many times it became real? I think you can count on one hand. Pure luck cannot be recreated or predicted. AI rule is something we don't have right now, chatGPT isn't technically one, so called strong AI might not even be real. Even if I can see appeal in your economical views, it doesn't matter because elites can be driven not by ideals of efficency but by something else, African dictators' lifestyle isn't less luxurious than others. Your other idea, enslavement of prisoners basically creates an incentive to put everyone in jail.

Bad (Revolutionaries)

• Ego-Progressivism - We are very different, you support revolution, insurrection, "pink terror and queer rage must be unleashed", I really don't see how can revolution help queer people, when their comfort on a basic level will be gone. And theory of classes is something I can't agree, all people are just individuals with their own goals.
• File:Catalys.png Catalysism - Predictions about the world 10+ years later always tends to be false, if you will look at the great empires if 1900, 1920, 1940 you will see that nothing foretold their demise. Yet people continue to make predictions and yours will be false as well. AI rule? Transhumanism? Urbanization and death of enviroment? Its all can never happen, and your political thought is entirely concerned about world tomorrow, I believe that politics should serve the world of today, we need to know what to do now, not in the future.

Test

• File:Duck politscales.png

Others

Read:
Alan Carter - Analytical Anarchism
LordCompost86 - The Sovereign Egoist: The State of Nature in Hobbes and Stirner
Paul Émile de Puydt - Panarchy
Max Stirner - The Unique and Its Property
File:Descarte.png Rene Descartes - Meditations on First Philosophy
Aristotle - Ethics
Sigmund Freud - Civilization and it's Disconnects
Henry Hazlitt - Economics in One Lesson
Bob Black - An Anarchist Response to Crime
Bob Black - The Abolition of Work
Benjamin Tucker - Individual Liberty
File:Plato.png Platon - Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo
File:Plato.png Platon - Cratylus, Theatetus, Sophist, Statesman
File:Plato.png Platon - Parmenides, Philebus, Symposium, Phaedrus
Immanuel Kant - Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals
Post-Anarchism: a reader
Baruch Spinoza - Ethics
Arthur Schopenhauer - Essays and Aphorisms
John Stuart Mill - On Liberty
File:Nietzsche-icon.png Friedrich Nietzsche - On the Genealogy of Morality
Carl Schmitt - The Concept Of The Political
Reading:

Comments

• Ego-Progressivism - Add moi?
• HelloThere314 - Add me?
• - Some day I written alternative interpretation of Anarcho-Nihilism, that doesn't focus only on "life is bad" but on negation of politics in few words, can you consider it? I quite agree with sentence that being existential nihilist and alive is impossible.
  • Duck-Citizen - Ok, I admit that your anarcho-nihilism is different and movement itself is too diverse to even put under the same umbrella. So I will remove my comment on it entirely.
• File:PosadasComrade.png PosadasComrade - Add me
  • Duck-Citizen - No praxis info on the page.
• File:Catalysalt.png Erissky - Add me?
• File:NeoPostAutism.png Neo Post-Left Autism - Could You update me? I am not that pessimistic and defeatist today.
  • Duck-Citizen - By pessimism I meant your belief about inevitable collapse of the system, that something is horrible is destined to happen in the future.
• Template:Cyberdelic Egoism - add me
• File:Structmodern.png Neo-Levithianism - Add me,we have some similarities
• Brazilian Liberalism - Add me