Bioregional

I am very open to not so deep down inside being radically passive lean provisional support on Bioregionalism being implemented but only if its implemented alongside Pan Secessionism 

Ideally it would be as diverse and inclusive as Canada was under Pierre Trudeau 

This is what Pan Secessionism is: 

Statement of purpose. : https://attackthesystem.com/statement-of-purpose/                                        Diversity and inclusiveness: https://attackthesystem.com/unity-in-diversity-and-against-war-and-statism/, https://attackthesystem.com/americans-for-self-determination/   https://attackthesystem.com/?s=inclusive

The City state idea from Attack the System is interesting because it allow Conservatives to not have to live near or even interact with Liberals. (though I wouldn't personally want that). Of course vice versa too

Why are these ideas interesting? With the ideas below, no longer would right wing snowflakes say  "those liberal folks who want big government sticking its nose into everything thing, raise taxes through the roof, confiscate the guns of honest people, and persecute people who hold to traditional values.” check this out https://attackthesystem.com/2014/10/22/the-case-for-the-city-state-system/

Our political, cultural and fiscal systems would be sustained better and be more humane if they were organized differently (i.e around areas that are naturally defined called bioregions).  

I always thought that humans are not the best people to create borders. 

Only God/nature could create good borders. I feel its better for borders to be defined naturally, through things like watershed boundaries, and characteristics of soil and terrain as the way that nature drew them up.   

This also promotes more interaction with the locals of those areas who can help with focused knowledge and solutions to better sustain such areas than through man made boundaries.  Case in point, whenever someone needs help in a new town or city, who is the best person to help them? A local! 

Our bioregions' geography, climate, plants, animals etc are a big factor in our interactions and actions toward each other, in short we are 'products of our environment' . 

As such having bioregions in this post state country or limited/minimal state country will deepen those natural connections we have with our bioregions, allowing them to shine fiscally, culturally and politically while we become further connecting to it in ways that are liberating. 

This would also be better than regional naming which is very fuzzy and imprecise (ask 100 people what states are in the Midwest for example and most of them would not have the same exact states on their lists)

Some bioregions I feel would be great ideas in this post state/limited minimal state country would be obvious ones like the Alaskan Pandhandle (Sitka has more in common with Panhandles communities than with Nome or Barrow), Pacific Northwest/Cascadia ,Far Northern California (since once you go north of the Bay Area, it seems like another world from even places like Sacramento, Chico and Napa Valley, more so than areas in inland Southern California do), Ozarks (which even culturally are way different than places in other areas of their states i.e St Joseph Missouri, the Mississippi River valley in Arkansas, Texarkana area of Arkansas, the parts of Oklahoma and Kansas that border Colorado and Nebraska etc)

Over industrialization and increased urbanization has hurt the environment. The industrial revolution started this mess and deindustrialization is a way to fix it . Central Park in NYC is one example of how to do this.I am against modern urbanization

Cities should strive to replace polluted industrialized areas with rivers, green areas ,forests, hills and mountains (to make those places like a real life Wilderness Lodge/Final Fantasy 1 type of rustic wilderness)

Bioregionalism is good in case of a civilization collapse . Our relationships will be organic and natural in such a world. There would be natural structures, arrangements, and pecking orders

I support protecting the environment and maintaining a clean environment. To do this we need a balanced approach and use new tech and resource gathering to do this.

This is why I am open to Native American sovereignty Communalism and Libertarian Municipalism

I feel Communalism and Libertarian Municipalism would replace the nation-state . This would include creating networks of direct democracy in the form of citizen  assemblies in individual communities and cities in a confederal sort of way. This is one of the reasons that I support radical localism

I agree with Leopold Kohr that bigness (opposite of radical localism) causes social issues (brutality, negative collectivism, aggression etc) This is due to the overconcentrated social units 

Libertarian Municipalism would be constitutes of the politics of social ecology, a revolutionary effort in which freedom would be given institutional form in public assemblies that become decision-making bodies.

These institutional forms would take place within differently scaled local areas.

This would be a societal structural change so that people would gain power. This would be done through the municipality—the city, town, and village—where we would have an opportunity to create a face-to-face democracy

Libertarian municipalism would create a situation in which the two powers—the municipal confederations and the nation state couldn’t coexist. Basically, it would strive to expose the inherent power imbalance and tension that exists between the nation state and the municipality. 

This would be done to challenge and overcome state power. This would be a means to achieve a rational society, and its structure would become the organization of society. 

I can empathize with people who relativize human losses by looking at losses as a trade between nature and the afterlife to make the person who died happy through entering the afterlife and the Earth happy as it replenishes itself. A collapse of humans would cull the herd

Civilization can be seen as the cumulative construction of alienation. The original human societies in paleolithic times, and like minded societies today (like the !Kung and Mbuti), live a non alienated and non oppressive form of life that is based on primitive abundance and closeness to nature. 

This can be an instructive comparison which can be used to denounce contemporary (especially industrial) societies, Contemporary society is a world of misery that is built on the psychological production of a sense of scarcity and lack. The history of civilization is the history of renunciation; what stands against this is not progress but instead the Utopia which arises from its negation.

Even though I wrote about nihilism above, an even though I support a stateless, classless society, and that I am shedding my attachments to all theories entirely (or at least in ways that can be seen in this blog) this does not make me anti-civilization.  

I have hope but not illusions.  There are other (legal) ways to express opposition to the brave new world above as can be seen throughout my blog,. Moreover a stateless, classless society is still a civilization it just doesn’t have the state, hierarchies , classes . In those ways it is very pro civilization

But I still see civilization as an antagonist of Earth

I am against anyone provoking said changes as can be seen here and here  . I instead advocate for people literally being one with nature since if they are part of the Earth and ecosystem they will thus make up for them destroying the eco system and planet since they defect from being the planet and eco system destroyer to being part of the eco system and planet. This would be a spiritual ideal that is derived from a sense of rootedness in one’s personal autonomy interwined with the land

This would include a synthesis of individualism and collectivism that would reject the left, right, and center in favor of a deep connection with the Earth and as mentioned in this section, more organic, affinity communities instead of humanistic communities

We need to strike so to speak against civilization and this is one way to do so. This include a return to sustainable livelihoods that rejected modernity. I touch on similar themes here and here

We should seek a return to authentic relations between humans and the world that is unmediated by symbolic thought. 

This ideal return, would require a reimagining of civilization. Maybe this would include Temporary Autonomous Zones. Which would be a liberated and erotic space of orgiastic, revolutionary poesis. This would transcend right and left.