Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q56,76 - Revision history

Reversedragon: The American Revolution wasn't

2026-09-04T06:58:47Z

The American Revolution wasn't

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:58, 4 September 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:
	so, this statement is weird. it's not true of material reality but it may be baked into Liberal-republicanism and some anarchisms, as operating assumptions that are true specifically of those ideologies and the social-graph-objects (Social-Philosophical-Material Systems) they create.		so, this statement is weird. it's not true of material reality but it may be baked into Liberal-republicanism and some anarchisms, as operating assumptions that are true specifically of those ideologies and the social-graph-objects (Social-Philosophical-Material Systems) they create.

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_exstruct" data-qid~~="55,91~~" value~~="5591~~" data-dimension="F2">~~{{TTS\|html=abbr\|tts=Liberal-republicanism\|Liberalism}} requires no revolution / Creating Liberal-republicanism didn't require a revolution (Hannah Arendt) -> this is flat out false twice over and yet a lot of people still repeat versions of it. in the United States, there was the "American Revolution". it did have consequences. it did "mess things up for the next 200 years". it eventually birthed Andrew Jackson. in Europe, there was a really clear change between the era where there had to be a bunch of freemasons and alchemist philosophers and the era where there didn't. now people with money just do whatever "helpful" things they want to in the open. but there was a time where they absolutely couldn't do that, and they had to meet in secret so some greater authority wouldn't notice their power and start calling them a threat. there was a time where small owners, Artisan types, and Careerists were oppressed. Galileo. like, I can show why Arendt's proposition is wrong in a sentence one word long. Galileo. and there was an overall revolution that happened in however many steps to create a Europe where that particular thing wasn't an issue. this overall series of steps is a Liberal-republican revolution. in the same sense of the word.<br />		{{li\|I=F2/LR\|Q=55,91\|Q2=5591}}{{TTS\|html=abbr\|tts=Liberal-republicanism\|Liberalism}} requires no revolution / Creating Liberal-republicanism didn't require a revolution (Hannah Arendt) -> this is flat out false twice over and yet a lot of people still repeat versions of it. in the United States, there was the "American Revolution". it did have consequences. it did "mess things up for the next 200 years". it eventually birthed Andrew Jackson. in Europe, there was a really clear change between the era where there had to be a bunch of freemasons and alchemist philosophers and the era where there didn't. now people with money just do whatever "helpful" things they want to in the open. but there was a time where they absolutely couldn't do that, and they had to meet in secret so some greater authority wouldn't notice their power and start calling them a threat. there was a time where small owners, Artisan types, and Careerists were oppressed. Galileo. like, I can show why Arendt's proposition is wrong in a sentence one word long. Galileo. and there was an overall revolution that happened in however many steps to create a Europe where that particular thing wasn't an issue. this overall series of steps is a Liberal-republican revolution. in the same sense of the word.<br />
	there is so much thick illusion going on for people to think that isn't true. what is it? is it people trying to act like "the Galileo days" were a [[E:bad fake historical period\|bad fake historical period]] that wasn't a Real period of history, just a fake totalitarian invented fabrication made up by [[E:generalized dictator\|bad evil meanies]]? do people believe that only a certain class of people that assembles into certain physical structures {{em\|is actually human}} and all other possible Bauplans are an outright deviation from humanity. I guess that would explain why they hate Bolshevism so much. but that aside, I don't even understand why this is so scary by itself and what denying that Liberal-republicanism has a revolution actually gets you. like, maybe my brain has been corrupted by Trotsky but I don't see why someone can't believe in one kind of republic that's created by a revolution and hate another kind of republic anyway. Marxists do it all the time so why can't you. why do they lie about this? it's many times stupider than Trotskyism. it makes Trotskyism look smart		there is so much thick illusion going on for people to think that isn't true. what is it? is it people trying to act like "the Galileo days" were a [[E:bad fake historical period\|bad fake historical period]] that wasn't a Real period of history, just a fake totalitarian invented fabrication made up by [[E:generalized dictator\|bad evil meanies]]? do people believe that only a certain class of people that assembles into certain physical structures {{em\|is actually human}} and all other possible Bauplans are an outright deviation from humanity. I guess that would explain why they hate Bolshevism so much. but that aside, I don't even understand why this is so scary by itself and what denying that Liberal-republicanism has a revolution actually gets you. like, maybe my brain has been corrupted by Trotsky but I don't see why someone can't believe in one kind of republic that's created by a revolution and hate another kind of republic anyway. Marxists do it all the time so why can't you. why do they lie about this? it's many times stupider than Trotskyism. it makes Trotskyism look smart

			{{li\|I=F2/LR\|Q=55,91\|Q2=5591}}The American Revolution wasn't / The United States requires no revolution to continue to exist because creating Liberal-republicanism did not require a social revolution; this is to imply but not state that Communist revolutions are revolutions but Liberal-republican independence movements are never revolutions / The American Revolution was the only good revolution because it was a political revolution and not a social revolution (Hannah Arendt) -> more clearly stated version of this proposition.<br/>
			this proposition is the basic reason I originally titled [[E:Q17,77\|Q17,77]] "United States independence movement". it was a bit of dry irony at people like Arendt, taking what they say as literally as possible.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 31:		Line 34:

	* ES onto LR		* ES onto LR

			== Subpages ==
			* [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-ArendtAgainstUSIndependence/x01\|ArendtAgainstUSIndependence]] - bot log / essay correction exercise; did Hannah Arendt actually think there was no American Revolution?

Reversedragon: Monarchism never ended

2026-09-04T06:47:29Z

Monarchism never ended

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:47, 4 September 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=liberal democracy\|User=RD\|E=Q56,76\|NoContents=y}}		{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=liberal democracy\|User=RD\|E=Q56,76\|NoContents=y}}
	== ~~Prototype notes~~ ==		== Main entry ==
	~~<noinclude>~~{{HueCSS}}~~</noinclude>~~<ol class="hue clean">		{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/LR/ES\|tradition=ES onto LR\|Q=56,76\|Q2=5676\|h4= liberal democracy }} (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/LR/ES\|tradition=ES onto LR\|Q=56,76\|Q2=5676\|h4= liberal democracy }} (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />
	this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, [[E:United States population\|we]] literally built [[E:United States\|our country]] on thoughtcrime. [[E:United States bourgeoisie\|we]] built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times [[E:United States lobbyists\|we're]] allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology\|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />		this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, [[E:United States population\|we]] literally built [[E:United States\|our country]] on thoughtcrime. [[E:United States bourgeoisie\|we]] built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times [[E:United States lobbyists\|we're]] allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology\|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />
	and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83\|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.		and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83\|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.

			</li></ol>

			== No. ==
			<ol class="hue clean">

			<li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="ES, PT, Fy" value="5882" data-dimension="S2">Monarchism never ended -> the claim that because monarchism was not actually about installing a designated ruler, and was really about unifying multiple populations into one population, Liberal-republicanism did not abolish monarchism, and only elaborated on it.<br />
			this sounds absolutely nuts if you have not been way deep in trying to figure out the real relationship between Communism, anarchism, Liberal-republicanism, and imperialism. but this propositions has its reasons for being. it's things like... who was it, Heidegger [[E:Twentieth-Century Continental Philosophy\|I think]]? I don't remember exactly. claiming that a Communist International couldn't solve countries' problems because they were based on nationalism and "internationalism wasn't creating a better nationalism". that shouldn't matter, because the goal of "internationalism" isn't to do what nationalism already did! but now let's say that {{em\|was}} true. if Communist Internationals can only create a better nationalism, then it's logically true that Liberal-republicanism never stopped being monarchism and everything it does can only create a better monarchism. I think George Washington did think like this a little bit. he genuinely thought the United States was just one population instead of multiple populations, split at least along state lines into 50 discrete populations with material antagonisms against each other, maybe split into two politically-defined populations uniting it into a civil war.<br />
			so, this statement is weird. it's not true of material reality but it may be baked into Liberal-republicanism and some anarchisms, as operating assumptions that are true specifically of those ideologies and the social-graph-objects (Social-Philosophical-Material Systems) they create.

			</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="55,91" value="5591" data-dimension="F2">{{TTS\|html=abbr\|tts=Liberal-republicanism\|Liberalism}} requires no revolution / Creating Liberal-republicanism didn't require a revolution (Hannah Arendt) -> this is flat out false twice over and yet a lot of people still repeat versions of it. in the United States, there was the "American Revolution". it did have consequences. it did "mess things up for the next 200 years". it eventually birthed Andrew Jackson. in Europe, there was a really clear change between the era where there had to be a bunch of freemasons and alchemist philosophers and the era where there didn't. now people with money just do whatever "helpful" things they want to in the open. but there was a time where they absolutely couldn't do that, and they had to meet in secret so some greater authority wouldn't notice their power and start calling them a threat. there was a time where small owners, Artisan types, and Careerists were oppressed. Galileo. like, I can show why Arendt's proposition is wrong in a sentence one word long. Galileo. and there was an overall revolution that happened in however many steps to create a Europe where that particular thing wasn't an issue. this overall series of steps is a Liberal-republican revolution. in the same sense of the word.<br />
			there is so much thick illusion going on for people to think that isn't true. what is it? is it people trying to act like "the Galileo days" were a [[E:bad fake historical period\|bad fake historical period]] that wasn't a Real period of history, just a fake totalitarian invented fabrication made up by [[E:generalized dictator\|bad evil meanies]]? do people believe that only a certain class of people that assembles into certain physical structures {{em\|is actually human}} and all other possible Bauplans are an outright deviation from humanity. I guess that would explain why they hate Bolshevism so much. but that aside, I don't even understand why this is so scary by itself and what denying that Liberal-republicanism has a revolution actually gets you. like, maybe my brain has been corrupted by Trotsky but I don't see why someone can't believe in one kind of republic that's created by a revolution and hate another kind of republic anyway. Marxists do it all the time so why can't you. why do they lie about this? it's many times stupider than Trotskyism. it makes Trotskyism look smart

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 12:		Line 24:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	~~</li>~~<li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="30,42" value="3042" data-dimension="S">undialectical idealism, historical non-materialism, and class non-analysis / ([[User:RD/9k/30,42\|9k]])		<li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="30,42" value="3042" data-dimension="S">undialectical idealism, historical non-materialism, and class non-analysis / ([[User:RD/9k/30,42\|9k]])

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: number / fix "we"

2026-09-04T06:41:07Z

number / fix "we"

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:41, 4 September 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=liberal democracy\|User=RD\|E=~~Q55~~,76\|NoContents=y}}		{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=liberal democracy\|User=RD\|E=Q56,76\|NoContents=y}}
	== Prototype notes ==		== Prototype notes ==
	<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">		<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/LR/ES\|tradition=ES onto LR\|Q=55,76\|Q2=~~5576~~\|h4= liberal democracy }} (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/LR/ES\|tradition=ES onto LR\|Q=56,76\|Q2=5676\|h4= liberal democracy }} (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />
	this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, we literally built our country on thoughtcrime. we built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times we're allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology\|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />		this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, [[E:United States population\|we]] literally built [[E:United States\|our country]] on thoughtcrime. [[E:United States bourgeoisie\|we]] built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times [[E:United States lobbyists\|we're]] allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology\|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />
	and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83\|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.		and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83\|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== ~~Related~~ ==		== {{int:hue-prototype-related-items/en}} ==

	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

Line 17:		Line 16:
	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== ~~Ideologies~~ ==		== {{int:hue-prototype-trads-or-fields/en}} ==

	* ES onto LR		* ES onto LR
Line 24:		Line 23:
	[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming		[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
	redirects: [[User:RD/9k/Q5576]]		redirects: [[User:RD/9k/Q5576]]
	duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|~~9k/~~Q55,76]] -->		duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|Q55,76]] -->

Reversedragon: formatting

2026-08-05T00:21:43Z

formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:21, 5 August 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">		<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_exstruct" data-~~tradition="ES onto LR~~" data-qid~~="55,76~~" value~~="5576~~" data-dimension~~=~~"S">~~liberal democracy (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/LR/ES\|tradition=ES onto LR\|Q=55,76\|Q2=5576\|h4= liberal democracy }} (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />
	this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, we literally built our country on thoughtcrime. we built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times we're allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology\|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />		this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, we literally built our country on thoughtcrime. we built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times we're allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology\|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />
	and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83\|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.		and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83\|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q56,76 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q56,76: Moving 9k pages to EC: or nickels/5c to R: talk for search purposes

2026-08-04T22:57:26Z

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q56,76 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q56,76: Moving 9k pages to EC: or nickels/5c to R: talk for search purposes

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:57, 4 August 2026
(No difference)

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q55,76 to User:RD/9k/Q56,76 without leaving a redirect: Entity number or thesis portal structure was not final

2026-08-04T22:56:59Z

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q55,76 to User:RD/9k/Q56,76 without leaving a redirect: Entity number or thesis portal structure was not final

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:56, 4 August 2026
(No difference)

Reversedragon: page title

2026-02-06T07:12:02Z

page title

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:12, 6 February 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~<!-- == Ontology entry~~ ==		{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=liberal democracy\|User=RD\|E=Q55,76\|NoContents=y}}
	~~{{HueNumberPreview~~\|E=Q55,76}}		== Prototype notes ==

	~~-->~~== Prototype notes ==
	<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">		<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">

Line 15:		Line 13:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="30,42" value="3042" data-dimension="S">~~undialectical idealism, historical existentialism, & class non-analysis /~~ undialectical idealism, historical non-materialism, and class non-analysis ~~-> there is this particular constellation of things opposite to Marxism that you often see put deliberately and directly together. this motif is not a strict science~~, ~~there may be a varying number of things in it, but the key part of it is that the author takes all the anti-Marxisms and deliberately connects them almost as if they inherently went together.~~		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="30,42" value="3042" data-dimension="S">undialectical idealism, historical non-materialism, and class non-analysis / ([[User:RD/9k/30,42\|9k]])

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 24:		Line 22:


	[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] ~~{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=liberal democracy\|User=RD\|E=Q55,76}}~~ <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming		[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
	redirects: [[User:RD/9k/Q5576]]		redirects: [[User:RD/9k/Q5576]]
	duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|9k/Q55,76]] -->		duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|9k/Q55,76]] -->

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q5576 to User:RD/9k/Q55,76: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

2025-12-30T09:41:21Z

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q5576 to User:RD/9k/Q55,76: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

← Older revision	Revision as of 09:41, 30 December 2025
(No difference)

Reversedragon: liberal democracy (motif) / copy markup from 9k/Q691

2025-12-30T09:39:32Z

liberal democracy (motif) / copy markup from 9k/Q691

New page

== Prototype notes ==
<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="ES onto LR" data-qid="55,76" value="5576" data-dimension="S">liberal democracy (motif) / democratization of human life through becoming more modern and getting good modern values that cause people within some country to build constitutions and codify long lists of human rights and throw out ideas such as the idea of attempting to rule people as a king, the idea of government acting as an organ for Catholics or Protestants to ban each other's representatives or churches or publications, and the idea of codifying chattel slavery instead of giving everyone the right to have legislators and cast a ballot for president -><br />
this particular motif has very specific connotations. it doesn't refer to Liberal republics as countable countries; it isn't a type of country. it's a strictly Idealist look at Liberal-republicanism that totally eschews the idea of material objects existing beyond individual human beings, like, a republic is not a material object, country borders are not a material object, kings and royal palaces are not a material object, Congress is not a material object, the presidency is not a material object, human rights are not defined as material processes, Catholic or Protestant churches and the process of forming a congregation is not material, publishing houses are not material objects, the Confederacy is not a material object, slave plantations are not material objects, polling places are not material objects. nothing that Congress or the constitution deals with is actually considered as a material object. everything is considered as just good ideas and bad ideas and mandatory ideas. and it's infuriating at times. because it's like, we literally built our country on thoughtcrime. we built the constitution on defining parts of government committing thoughtcrimes and times we're allowed to force the government not to think certain ideas. but crazy as it sounds, I think this is how a lot of people actually see things. I think to most people, "liberal democracy" and "liberalism" are truly uncountable. there is no concept in people's minds of these things being material transformations that happen to material objects the way (meta-)Marxism conceives of countries. there is a certain slice of Liberal-republican theory taught in grade-school age materials and the media in general that isn't even Liberal-republicanism, but is actually [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology|Existentialist]] models, Existentialism onto Liberalism.<br />
and in the end it's kind of disgusting because there is [[User:RD/9k/Q29,83|no way for it to not be "colonial"]]. there is no way you can build a society built on mandatory and prohibited ideas and not literally bake prejudices into it such that prejudices are normalized and everybody will have at least one — "nobody is allowed to think about being king" is a prejudice, even if it seems innocuous and beneficial when we only look at enforcement. and this is what enables Liberal-republicanism to have such toxic prejudices against workers' states. it's one big pile of prejudices from the beginning and it's never been anything else.

</li></ol>

== Related ==

<ol class="hue clean">

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="30,42" value="3042" data-dimension="S">undialectical idealism, historical existentialism, & class non-analysis / undialectical idealism, historical non-materialism, and class non-analysis -> there is this particular constellation of things opposite to Marxism that you often see put deliberately and directly together. this motif is not a strict science, there may be a varying number of things in it, but the key part of it is that the author takes all the anti-Marxisms and deliberately connects them almost as if they inherently went together.

</li></ol>

== Ideologies ==

* ES onto LR

[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] {{NextNineThousand|PPPA=liberal democracy|User=RD|E=Q55,76}}