Axiological Leftist: involves eclectic Liberal and Leftist conceptions mainly involve Natural Rights Libertarianism, Left-Libertarianism, Anarcho-Naturism, Green Anarchism, Dialectical Naturalism, Anti-capitalism, Progressive, Secularism, Democratic Socialism, Libertarian Municipalism, Radical Minarchism, and Anarcho-Mutualism Political Philosophies with Axiology.

Axiological Leftist would value mutualistic municipal type minarchism small-government egalitarianism with nobody as a one leader no president, governor, mayor, etc.

Two things I think you’ll find common to most mutualists: an advocacy of a kind of market socialism and a strong emphasis on ethics, particularly on “mutuality” and reciprocity.

While this page may be outright negative to the right, conservatives, or republicans and at times somewhat positive to some democrat values or positions, It will challenge and attack democrats as well if applicable.

Overall Axiological Leftist is not Statist (Hierarchicy) but can lean toward Liberal values, supporting Civil Rights, Women’s Rights, LGBTQI Rights, Human Rights, Universal Health Care, Abortion Rights, Same-Sex Marriage, Radical Federalism, Direct Democracy, Non-Hierarchical Governance, Reasonable Gun Control, and Environmental Protection.

Axiological Political Science: For Hartman, “the science of Politics and Social Ethics” consists in the application of intrinsic value to groups of persons. Formal Axiology originally developed by Robert S. Hartman. Formal axiology identifies the general patterns involved in (1) the meaning of “good” and other value concepts, in (2) what we value (value-objects), and in (3) how we value (valuations or evaluations). It explains the rational, practical, and affective aspects of evaluation and shows how to make value judgments more rationally and effectively. It distinguishes between intrinsic, extrinsic, and systemic values and evaluations, and discusses how and why they fall into a rational hierarchy of value. It demonstrates the intrinsic worth of unique conscious beings and develops an axiological ethics in the three value dimensions.

The ending paragraph Hartman wrote for The Structure of Value, states, the application of axiology to actual situations through the applied axiological sciences is a task for new generations of pure and applied axiologists, pure and applied social and moral scientists, and finally, the mechanics and craftsmen of social and moral situations. As the achievements of the natural scientists analyzing natural situations in terms of mathematics, have led to the building of factories turning out new and undreamed of things, so the achievements of the moral scientists of the future, analyzing moral situations in terms of formal axiology, will lead to the building of a new society with new people, living on higher levels of awareness and possessing undreamed of insights into the subtleties and depths of moral reality.

The authors of The Federalist Papers clearly understood that following the right kind of political system can result in the political happiness of the population, and that a political system is “right” if following its guidelines results in the political happiness of the people who dwell within that system. Facilitating the achievement of this felicitous circularity is the aim of axiological political science.

Natural-rights libertarianism: also known as deontological libertarianism, philosophical libertarianism, deontological liberalism, rights-theorist libertarianism, natural rights-based libertarianism, or libertarian moralism, refers to the view that all individuals possess certain natural or moral rights, mainly a right of individual sovereignty, and that therefore acts of initiation of force and fraud are rights violations and that is sufficient reason to oppose those acts.

Left-Libertarianism: (socialist libertarians, anarcho-socialist, or Left-wing libertarianism) names several related but distinct approaches to politics, society, culture, and political and social theory, which stress equally both individual freedom and social justice. Libertarian socialism is the anti-state tradition of socialism. In a broad sense, people who may share with “traditional socialism a distrust of the market, of private investment, and of the achievement ethic, and a commitment to expansion of the welfare state” might sometimes be described as “left-libertarians.”

Anarcho-naturism: for me is advocating free love, nudism, hiking and an ecological world view within anarchist groups and outside them. Anarcho-naturism promoted an ecological worldview, nudism as a way to avoid the artificiality of the industrial mass society of modernity. Naturist individualist anarchists saw the individual in their biological, physical and psychological aspects and tried to eliminate social determinations.

Green anarchism (or eco-anarchism): is a school of thought within anarchism which puts a particular emphasis on environmental issues.

Dialectical Naturalism: explores the complex interrelationship between social problems, and the direct consequences they have on the ecological impact of human society. Dialectical naturalism can be seen as a contrast to “empyrean, basically antinaturalistic dialectical idealism” of Hegel, and “the wooden, often scientistic dialectical materialism of orthodox Marxists.” As a philosophy, dialectical naturalism stresses the incorporation and advancement of scientific understanding as an integral part of the development of an ecological human understanding. Dialectical Naturalism rejects “the revival of ‘pre-scientific’ archaisms,” and stressed the importance of incorporating a broad scientific understanding from the literature of multiple disciplines. As such, the project of social ecology is a holistic one, dealing with communities and ecosystems in their totalities not just as the sum of their parts, but as the fullness of the interdependence of the many diverse and special parts make, as the saying goes, the whole become more than the sum of its parts.

Libertarian Municipalism: represents a serious, indeed a historically fundamental project, to render politics ethical in character and grassroots in organization. It is structurally and morally different from other grassroots efforts, not merely rhetorically different. It seeks to reclaim the public sphere for the exercise of authentic citizenship while breaking away from the bleak cycle of parliamentarism and its mystification of the “party” mechanism as a means for public representation. In these respects, libertarian municipalism is not merely a “political strategy.” It is an effort to work from latent or incipient democratic possibilities toward a radically new configuration of society itself-a communitarian society oriented toward meeting human needs, responding to ecological imperatives, and developing a new ethics based on sharing and cooperation. Libertarian municipalism proposes a radically different form of economy one that is neither nationalized nor collectivized according to syndicalist precepts.

Radical/ Libertarian Minarchism: is not refer to any old vaguely “small government” philosophy, but specifically to what I would call “radical minarchism” or a strictly “bare bones” view of government. There is an assumption that both libertarian anarchism and libertarian minarchism share the many of the same basic premises, the basic difference that distinguishes them can be thought of simply in terms of what conclusions are reached from those premises. At a basic level, libertarian minarchism proposes that the initiation of the use of force is wrong and concludes that we should have a government that is limited to the point at which it does not initiate the use of force, while libertarian anarchism proposes that the initiation of the use of force is wrong and concludes that we should have no government. So here we arrive at the basic conflict between “limited government” and “no government”. At this point, an interesting question that arises is the extent to which the disagreement between these two ultimate conclusions revolve around nothing more than semantics over the word “government”. The minarchist tends to define “government” in a way that leaves open the possibility of having a government that does not initiate force, while the anarchist tends to define “government” as inherently involving the initiation of force. I personally prefer to make a formal distinction between “state” and “government.”

Anarcho-Mutualism: is an economic theory and anarchist school of thought that advocates a society where each person might possess a means of production, either individually or collectively, with trade representing equivalent amounts of labor in the free market. Integral to the scheme was the establishment of a mutual-credit bank that would lend to producers at a minimal interest rate, just high enough to cover administration. Mutualism is based on a labor theory of value that holds that when labor or its product is sold, in exchange, it ought to receive goods or services embodying “the amount of labor necessary to produce an article of exactly similar and equal utility”.

Democratic Socialism: is a political ideology advocating a democratic political system alongside a socialist economic system, involving a combination of political democracy (usually multi-party democracy) with social ownership of the means of production.

To help you get my Political Page I am not bound to any specific political Ideology exclusively I do as I see right I want and support all progressive positive humanitarian equalitarian change.

For those who only know the standard Libertarian (right-Libertarian to me) this is like their opposite similar to how liberal is different than conservative. Put it easier for some on a political test I am 86% Democrat and only 7% republican.

I have a Facebook page: Axiological Leftist

Formal Axiology and Karl Marx

Karl Marx wrote with an astute intuitive grasp of Formal Axiology.
In my new essay I show how the Value Calculus is implicit in Marx’s basic criticisms of the nightmarish value disorder in capitalism. “Communism” was not a defined standard for criticizing capitalism. His critique began with the person as an intrinsic value, and then he described and denounced all the transpositions thereof.

The essay illustrates how Formal Axiology can help people who want to see capitalist social relations as Marx saw them – as structures of value

Robert S. Hartman predicted that the precise knowledge of the value sciences “ought to make us more sensitive to moral reality.” Just as the natural sciences have improved the quality of health and of material life for much of humanity, Hartman hoped that the new value sciences would lead to a rise in the moral level of human civilization.

Here is a great starting place:

Power Authority Oppression

Limiting the power to a point in authority, maximize the potential for oppression. This is referring to the need for greater inclusion of many instead of the exclusion driven only by the few. Moreover, how this greater inclusion can be adopted is non hierarchical political structure and more direct democracy. Such as a “Heterarchy” which is a system of organization where the elements of the organization are unranked (non-hierarchical) or where they possess the potential to be ranked a number of different ways. Definitions of the term vary among the disciplines: in social and information sciences, heterarchies are networks of elements in which each element shares the same “horizontal” position of power and authority, each playing a theoretically equal role.

Liberal, Progressive, and Leftist

The Myth of Police Protection

A Challenge to My Democratic Political Thinking

A Little On MY Revolutionary Politics

By Damien Marie AtHope

References 12345678910