Note: This will be a long post but it’s so I have everything about Consistent Progressivism in one place and don’t have to make multiple posts. Search for ‘About the Discord Server’ in this post (Ctrl F) if you’re just here for that.

Around April 20, 2025, a bunch of new Tumblr blogs about Consistent Progressivism appeared with flags already created, a Discord server, a neocities site, and art.

The first post from gooberesti that I can find (on April 20, 2025):

“consistent-progressivism.neocities.org

the Consistent Progressivism flag :D”

About the flag (from the neocities linked):

“This is the flag for Consistent Progressivism.

It is intended to be the final stage of evolution of all all-inclusive pride (broad LGBT+ flags) and radqueer flags, with the progressive flag expanding inclusivity to mean any & all identities and beings that follow the ideology of Consistent Progressivism.

The horizontal yellow triangle with the purple flower surrounding the colorful circle is representative of Marginalized Orientations, Gender identities, and Intersex (MOGAI) identities, which include, but are not limited to: Alterhumanity (Otherkinnity, Fictionkinnty, Factkinnity, Copingkinnity, Theriantropy, Vampiric, Dragonic, Otherlinkism/Choicekin, Copinglinksm, Otherspin, Otherhearted/Otherkith, Otherkinth, etc), XenoIDs (Xenogender, Xenoabled, Xenorace, erc), & A-Specs (Aromatic, Aro-Spec, Asexual, Ace-Spec, AroAce, Aromid, Acemid, Amid, Aplatonic, Apl-Spec, Aemotional, Aemo-Spec, Aphysical, Aphy-Spec, Agender, Agin-Spec, Aracial, etc).

The horizontal white, banana yellow, and pink triangular lines are representative of TransIDs (Transgender & Non-Binary (along with all gender identities as a whole), Trace, Transabled, Transage, Transbody, Transpecies, Transorientation, Transtime, Transharmed, Transharmful, 2Spirits, etc).

The horizontal light turquoise, dark purple, and black triangular lines are representative of Gender, Romantic, and Sexual Minority (GRSM) identities, which include, but are not limited to: Parasexualities/Romantic Orientations/’Philias’ (Incest/Consanguinamory, Intra/Chronophilias, Fictophilias, Xenosexualities, Objectophilias, Necrophilia, Zoophilias, Auto/Aptophilia, Omniphilia, etc), Gay identities (MLM, MLB, BLB, BLM, Achillean, Vincient, Cinthean, etc), Lesbian identities (WLW, WLG, GLG, GLW, Sapphic, etc), & Bisexual identities (Poly, Pan, Omni, M-Spec/Multisexual, etc), along with all other sexual identities, romantic orientations, & paraphilias listed here, with a strict stance of pro-contact via Consistent Progressive VSRs for every last one of them.

The vertical black & brown lines are representative of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) & all related identities.

The vertical light purple and pink lines are representative of queerness as a whole (inclusive of everyone who is not Cis-Hetero-Allo-Human; ‘queer’ is used as a prefix, suffix, adjective, & noun among Consistent Progressivism, along with being used interchangeably with radqueer).

The remaining rainbow colors are inclusive of Neurodivergents, Nudists, Sex workers, Contraidentities, and all other identities & beings that follow Consistent Progressivism that have not already been explicitly named here.

This flag was derived from maxrqstuff’s LGBTQIAAPX+ flag and is largely similar to it both in design & meaning, except with two respective crucial differences; the first being that the original flag had a largely missed opportunity to use the MOGAI circle icon in its bold new flower design of the Intersex symbol, and the second being that because this new flag is explicitly a Consistent Progressive flag, it is incompatible with any ideologies other than Consistent Progressivism, and thus excludes all who do not follow it, who would be conservatives. As such this flag is also in full support of all of Consistent Progressivism, including the three fundamental rights of Freedom of Identity, Bodily Autonomy, and Free Love, along with all the Consistent Progressive theory documents, VSR theory, and a strict rigid pro-contact stance for every single identity.”

Context:

LGBTQIAAPX+ Flag (from maxrqstuff):

More Consistent Progressivism Related Images/Flags:

Consistent Progressive Consang Flags (from sooshallitbe on April 25, 2025):

Trans-Trans-Transhumanism Flag (from gooberesti):

ProgressiveQueer Flags (from gooberesti on April 21, 2025):

Meaning: “Blankqueer (Radqueer synonym) to mean one that follows the Consistent Progressive platform”

Progosexual Flags (from gooberesti on April 21, 2025):

Progressive Para Flags (from gooberesti on April 21, 2025):

Consistent Progressive flag + symbol by asakurer (posted by gooberesti on April 21, 2025):

PermaProgressive Flag (from gooberesti on April 21, 2025):

Meaning: “when you’re permanently a Consistent Progressive”

More TransMaxxing Flags (from gooberesti on April 21):

Alt Consistent Progressivism Flag (from femphetamine on April 22, 2025):

XenoProgressivism Flags (from dropdashin on April 27, 2025):

Meaning: “consistent progressivism + xs/xenoanarchy; since people keep saying these are similar, here are some flags for them :3″

Additionally there’s this carrd for flags: https://web.archive.org/web/20250420111139/https://progressivism.carrd.co/

Edit: As of Feb 2026, it appears the neocities has been deleted and an alternative website has been created. The new site is: https://g.progressivism.lgbt/

The earliest archive of the neocities site I can find is from December 24, 2024: https://web.archive.org/web/20241224153430/https://consistent-progressivism.neocities.org/

From the home page of the neocities:

“Consistent Progressivism (alternatively referred to as “Noveltism”), is a political worldview and ideology advocating the complete and total abolition of all forms of conservatism, in favor of a radically queer stateless decentralized society in which conservatism is nonexistent, allowing for all beings to flourish in pleasure, freedom, and libertine hedonism, identifying in any way they please and forming Voluntary Social Relations [VSRs] with whoever they desire that can communicate while living free from persecution & stigmatization over their identity.

Consistent Progressives vehemently reject all forms of conservatism, analyzing conservatism as one of two all-encapsulating worldviews existing in a binary (the other being progressivism), that becomes ever more destructive and genocidal the more consistently it is practiced.

From this analysis, Consistent Progressives advocate the unconditional and non-negotiable liberation for all identities, sexualities, and general beings persecuted under conservatism, by advocating the complete and total abolition of all forms of conservatism, defending in this order these three fundamental rights as the logical conclusion from progressive groundwork principles:

Free Love

All beings have a right to free love; this is the logical extension of the rights to freedom of identity and bodily autonomy, as all individuals have the right to freely and openly express their romantic and sexual orientation, and engage in any romantic or sexual activity with any other beings they want, so long as it is done through the VSR model; no individual should ever be inhibited from pursuing a romantic or sexual relation with any beings they wish to through VSRs, nor be stigmatized, shunned, or otherwise persecuted in any way, shape, or form for their choices in doing so, so long as all involved are progressive and have opted-in to the relation through VSRs.

(This necessitates the liberation, destigmatization, and freedom of polyamory, sex work, GRSM liberation, sex positivity, exhibitionism, masturbation, consanguinamory/incest, MAPs/YAPs, AAMs/AAYs, zoosexuality, necrophilia, and all paraphilias, among many other concepts, through the VSR model.)

Freedom of Identity

Consistent Progressives promote and defend the right to freedom of identity – this is the right of all beings to a TransID, to openly express and affirm it in any way one desires, and to have it respected as their intrinsic selves.

Every individual has the right to identify in any way, shape, or form they want, as well as to modify themselves in any way they want to affirm their identity. No individual should ever have any restrictions whatsoever placed upon them because of an identity characteristic (i.e., race, gender identity, sexuality, mentality, age, etc), nor be inhibited in any way, shape, or form from expressing their identity, nor have any identity characteristics assigned to them at birth as all beings from the moment they exist have the right to complete and total unilateral control over their own identity, whether they use it to identify in the way they feel is natural for their being, or to change it into something they feel better suits them.

(This necessitates the abolition of any and all restrictions to any being delineated by an identity characteristic, thus bringing about LGBTQIA+ liberation, BIPOC liberation, radqueer liberation, gender abolition, liberation of TransIDs, the freedom to as well as destigmatization of public nudity, the abolition of corporations, & the abolition of all states/governments, among many other concepts.)

Bodily Autonomy

From the right to freedom of identity can be derived a fundamental right to bodily autonomy, which is the right to complete and total unilateral control over what is to go into one’s own body and how one’s own body is to be modified in any way, shape, or form, if at all.

Central to this right is the freedom to create and/or join VSRs (Voluntary Social Relations) with other beings, VSRs being the sole basis permitted for social relations as a whole and allowing beings within them to freely interact with each other, so long as none assert themselves as an authority or ruler over anyone else in the relation and all remain in said relation only as long as they find it to suit their desires.

This right through the VSR model defends concepts such as free abortions, free alcohol/drug usage, prosthetic modifications, etc, so long as all are undergone exclusively by those desiring it done to themselves; no individual should ever be forcefully inhibited from taking any action upon their own body, nor should any action be taken upon their own body by another that all involved have not explicitly agreed to through VSRs.

(This necessitates youth liberation, neurodivergent liberation, animal liberation, and the abolition of the family institution, among many other concepts.)”

Definitions Used on the Home Page:

“Conservatism

A political worldview defined by a broad category of ideas either implicitly or explicitly believing that people should be discriminated against because of their race, gender identity, pronouns, sexual identity, or anything else regarding their identity that does not harm others; that some humans based on some aspect of themselves that they were born with or identify as, or some physical, sexual, or personal pleasure they happen to have can be “lesser” humans than other humans whom they would consider “pure”, and therefore that these “subhumans” should be persecuted due to their identity being viewed as “lower” than the identity of someone else a given conservative views as “pure”.

Synonymous with “bigotry”, “prejudice”, & “discrimination”.

Progressivism

A political worldview defined by the negation, rejection, & opposition to conservatism; an acknowledgement that no identity turns one into a “subhuman”, & an advocacy of what would follow from the nonexistence of conservatism: statelessness, egalitarianism, decentralization, freedom of identity, free love, & an established solidarity where all races, gender identities, sexualities, ages, mentalities, & general beings are viewed as equals & held to the same standard of non-hierarchical organization, anti-discrimination, & respect of identity.

Synonymous with “social justice”, “intersectionality”, & “radqueer”.

Decentralization

A political worldview advocating the abolition of all forms of rulership & hierarchical power structures, most predominant among them being the state/government, which maintains a monopoly over the defense apparatus. To replace state functions, bottom-up methods of organization are put in place as opposed to the statist top-down/centralized ones, in essence creating a “rule without rulers”, “order without hierarchy”, “governance without government”, & “organization without centralization”.

Rather than there being a central control over defense, government of any kind ceases to exist at all, allowing defense to be left to the sole control of progressives in VSRs, who now, rather than being locked to only one method of force/violence (the state), now have access to a vast variety of different means of defense/violence (i.e., localized militias, mutual defense, community VSRs, etc), which they can spontaneously swap between at any moment, ensuring all possible forces to eradicate conservatism are available.

Synonymous with “statelessness”, “horizontalism”, & “anarchism”.

Transidentity

Any identity a being may have that differs from one assigned at birth to them by society. The most common among them is transgender, but TransIDs expand to include any aspect of ones identity that deviates from the one society has applied to them. TransIDs include, but are not limited to: transgender, transage, trace, transabled, transbody, transpecies.

More can be learned about TransIDs here.

Paraphilia

Any sexuality/attraction/’philia’ bearing the unique empirical status of extensive (relative to most other sexualities) persecution & stigmatization within conservative society; para sexualities are identifiable by their artificial (gained by conservatives) non-normative/atypical reception within society. Para sexualities include, but are not limited to: intra/chronophilias (M/YAPs & AAM/Ys), zoophilia, necrophilia, consanguinamory/incest, objectophilia/objectum.

More can be learned about different paraphilias here.

VSR

A progressive social relation structure that any non-conservative who is not a BWUI can join, requiring that every single being involved has chosen to opt-in to it solely of their own volitional pleasure desire, remains there only as long as they find the relation satisfies their desire, & is free to exit at any point without any restrictions or barriers to doing so. Short for “Voluntary Social Relation”, VSRs would be the universal all-encapsulating model for relations in progressivism, taking the place of all social interactions as a whole but especially the coercive ones existing under conservatism, including but not limited to: the family institution, marriage, education, production.

BWUI

Any individual entirely incapable of communcation* of any kind (both speech and movement), placing them in a position where they are essentially “Beings With Unobservable Intent” (as they can’t speak in any way, nor can they move, thus leaving them with no means of making other beings aware of their desires).

Other than conservatives, BWUIs are the only beings incapable of joining VSRs, though this is not because of some ageist or ableist “subhuman” factor like what is present in conservatism; quite the contrary actually, as BWUIs are viewed & treated equally to everyone else.

There’s nothing external stopping them from joining VSRs at all; the only reason they’re incapable of joining is because due to not being able to communicate, it would be impossible to know whether a BWUI is opting-in to join a VSR or not (having any way of knowing this would mean they can communicate, and thus would no longer be considered a BWUI), & as such it would be assumed that they aren’t until they indicate otherwise, thus negating the BWUI condition.

It is possible for any being to transition in and out of being a BWUI at any point, though remaining a BWUI is a very short-lived and temporary experience.

*”Communication” here is used in a very broad sense, defined as anything an individual can do to make another individual aware of something the first individual would like to express.

Communication is not limited to speech, though speech is the most common form of communication, & communication can also take the form of things such as writing, hand signals, body language, or braille. It is for this reason that movement is relevant, as being able to move can be fell-back on if speech is not available to a given being as a form of communication.

It is both not being able to speak and not being able to move in any way that renders someone to be a BWUI, not merely being non-verbal.

Government

A centralized & hierarchical structure of organization characterized by the monopolization of power & authority within a given region, with this authority being used to control the military, police, court, & general defense apparatus, which is used to close off other means of defense, locking in the government forces as the only available means of defense among the populace, & using this exclusionary advantage to enforce its arbitrary rule onto the populace via “legislation” & often coerced extraction of resources from the population to sustain itself.

It is a form of conservatism, due to its centralized structure & monopolization of defense, rendering all outside the government to be reduced to a “subhuman”, while also amplifying all other forms of conservatism, as the government is the baseline conservatism from which the others are forced onto society & incentivized to become ever more consistent. Also called a “state”.

Synonymous with “hierarchy”, “rulership”, & “centralism”.

Pacifism

A stance on praxis discouraging, impeding, prohibiting, or otherwise hindering the use and/or extent of one’s own and/or one’s allies use of violence/force.

Empirical

Fundamentally fluctuating & subjective, determined by observation of the time & context of the topic in question, with said topic able to be seperated from the aforementioned attached concept in question at any moment due to this, whatever said concept/topic may be.

Intrinsic

Fundamentally & permanently static, objective, & inherent to the mentioned concept in question regardless of context, time, or other variables; unable to be seperated or unlinked from the given concept/topic for whatever the reason may be.

Family Institution

A societal institution formed when two individuals reproduce, one of them gives birth to offspring, & said offspring is then involuntarily forced into a social institution at the instant that they exist where they will be subject to the hierarchical ruling granted within such an institution to one or more individuals, usually though not always delineated by genetic code, that are considered to be the ruling authorities, known as “parents”.

The individual offspring, upon being forced into the institution, is then, whether they like it or not, forced to obey the every whim of the ruling authorities, lest they face persecution* by the state.

Ruling authorities (whether it be several through the “nuclear” or “extended” models, or only one) in the family institution are granted the power to complete and total control over every aspect of the lives, identities, and actions of individuals who never even chose to enter the institution nor are permitted to opt-out, on the basis of their existence time in that they have not existed long enough (as determined arbitrarily by the state) to have basic autonomy.

(Important to note here is that in some instances they’ll be persecuted by the state anyway even if they do obey the every whim of the ruling authorities under the condition that the ruling authorities go against the higher ruling of the state, during which the persecution may consist of being forced to a shelter where they will await a new “parent” in the process known as “adoption”.)”

Platforms and Stances:

“The Consistent Progressive platform is that no being should ever be persecuted for their identity, & all should be able to live, have total bodily autonomy, and identify in any way, shape or form that they want. All social relations should turn into VSRs and follow the VSR structure model, where all who are involved with a relation have chosen to opt-in to it, stay in the relation only as long as it makes them happy, & are free to exit at any point unchallenged.

Central to the VSR model is advocacy of the abolition of the family institution, as it perpetuates many of the worst and most widespread forms of conservatism, and through a eugenicist lense at that.

From this, Consistent Progressives promote polyamory, TransIDs, consanguinamory/incest, free love, the abolition of any and all age limits/restrictions (allowing for free MAP/YAP & AAM/AAY VSR relations), & the abolition of ableism.

Consistent Progressives also advocate the abolition of compulsory schooling, with the same VSR model coming in to replace this, where attendance is both optional and solely decided by those attending, placing those choosing to attend of their own volition at the forefront of their curriculum, where they control the pace, content, length, & structure of their education through a bottom-up model as opposed to the top-down one of the state, assuming they want social education at all as they would have the freedom not to and to self-educate as well.

We also advocate the abolition of all nations, borders, police, central militaries, courts, and governments/states, in favor of a decentralized progressivism model built through VSRs, where individuals can freely join VSRs that would be formed for the purpose of defending against conservatism.

And as such these defense VSRs would grow into bottom-up interconnected local militias, community organizations, and mutual defense pacts focused entirely towards anti-conservatism with no central point of command for conservatives to strike at due to the decentralized model, allowing for rapid adjustment to any potential lingering conservatives or conservative attacks, with the decentralization also allowing for the militias to quickly work together and outnumber any who flip and turn conservative.

We advocate the abolition of purity culture & all conservative social norms assigned to people over traits such as race, ethnicity, gender identity, age, and mentality, in favor of a society where people start & stay as free beings not tethered to any preimposed norms or standards upon their identity.

As progressives, we are open to almost any form of praxis to spread consistent progressivism, but we do have very specific exceptions of praxis that we will not tolerate:

Pacifism

Pacifism, defined as a praxis rejecting the use of violence, is the death of any and all ideologies that it touches.

This is because violence is required, both by conservatism & progressivism, to enforce anything that they want to do, albeit for drastically different purposes since conservatives want genocide and progressives want to defend from genocide.

If progressives are not permitted to use violence, liberation cannot be secured & the conservatives, who have no problem whatsoever with violence, will win out. For this reason, we reject pacifism as a valid praxis, even if pacifism itself technically does not contradict progressivism.

Left-Unity/Transitory Statism

As progressives, we reject any and all forms of conservatism. This includes the state. For this plain and simple direct reason, we refuse to ally ourselves with anyone who believes “transitory statism” is a valid praxis; progressives want nothing whatsoever to do with tankies.

If someone does not seek the complete & total abolition of all forms of conservatism including the state, they do not share our goals and are a conservative, thus they are an enemy.

We entirely reject the foolish idea that a form of conservatism can be used to abolish conservatism; we seek the abolition of conservatism through decentralization/statelessness strictly, as it is the only structure consistent & compatible with the goal.

Compromise

We refuse on all grounds to compromise on any of our principles; we seek the abolition of all forms of conservatism & the liberation of all identities (yes, this includes MAPs/YAPs/AAMs/AAYs, Zoos, & Necros, with a strict pro-contact stance on all three).

We seek the complete and total destruction of the family structure as it is a slavery institution, & seek to replace it with a VSR model.

We promote more forms of “degeneracy” & “wokeness” than even Hitler 2.0 & his MAGA nazis have nightmares about. We promote total LGBTQIA+, radqueer, & youth liberation (no age limits on anything), unrestricted public nudity, free pornography, & a hedonistic pleasure society without age boundaries.

We are anti-gun regulation of any kind, & seek for all progressives to freely acquire any firearms they desire so that they can defend themselves against conservatism & aid progressive militias.

We seek the complete and total abolition of all forms of nationalism, borders, and governments, & most importantly of all, we seek to wipe all forms of bigotry, prejudice, eugenicism (this includes so-called race “science”, gender binary “science”/gender “biology”, brain development “science”, TERFs, SWERFs, truscums, sysmeds, & “human nature” fetishism), & discrimination (broadly classed “conservatism”) off the face of the Earth, along with every single conservative standing in the way of liberation.

Any of this sound too “radical” for you? Feel free to go to some conservative platform then, because we vehemently refuse to compromise on any of it.

Overall, we seek the complete and total abolition of all forms of conservatism, which is what this entire platform can be shortened to. Consistent Progressivism welcomes all who aren’t conservative. Liberation is non-negotiable.”

FAQ:

“Q: “Why is it called ‘consistent’ progressivism? Is there a such thing as ‘inconsistent progressivism’?”

A: Because there are a large number of conservatives who have tried to explicitly call themselves “progressives” despite their ideology directly contradicting progressivism by allowing conservatism in order to mask that they are conservatives.

Therefore, the added modifier term of “consistent” is necessary to differentiate from the other so-called “progressives” who are not actually progressive in the slightest. And no, there is not any such thing as “inconsistent progressivism” because progressivism is a static stance, being the total negation of all forms of conservatism; it is not possible to have an inconsistent version of this because it only has one singular version to begin with.

At the instant that the “progressivism” of anyone allows conservatism, it is no longer progressivism. Similar to how a light switch can only ever be on or off at once, but would not be considered “off” if it was merely dim or flickering, as off is its own seperate static condition within the binary of “off” and “on”.

(Please read the “The Spectrum of Conservatism” article for more theory on this topic.)

Q: “The Consistent Progressive definitions don’t look familiar to me; doesn’t ‘conservatism’ have something to do with traditional values and/or the status quo?”

A: No it does not, as no objectivity can be found in the use of “status quo” or “traditional values” as part of the definition. The only semblance of truth to them being associated with conservatism at all is that they are both empirically conservative.

But it is that exact reason- that they are only empirically conservative, why they can’t be part of the definition. Traditions are empirically conservative because it just so happens to be that all of human history has been filled with far more examples of conservatism in practice than progressivism; consistent conservative societies have existed numerous times in many places, compared to very few consistent progressive ones, if any at all.

This same reasoning applies to the status quo; the status quo is conservative, but only as of right now. The thing making these not able to be included in the definition is the fact that it is entirely possible for both traditions and the status quo to switch to progressivism; if a progressive society were to be established, the status quo there would change from conservatism to progressivism, and eventually as it continues to exist over time, progressivism would eventually become a tradition there.

Traditions and the status quo are entirely subjective based on the time and place- they are empirical statements rather than intrinsic connections, which is the reason they cannot have anything to do with the definition of “conservatism”.

Not only are they merely empirical statements however, but they’re also commonly used by conservatives to try to create a smokescreen around conservatism in order to trick people into thinking that these empirical statements are somehow the definition, so that when they explain it to an unsuspecting apolitical, the apolitical is tricked into falling under the smokescreen and viewing conservatism as “not that bad if it just means ‘traditions’”, entirely unaware that the specific “traditions” conservatives support are the conservative ones: the genocidal, pro-slavery, discriminatory ones. “Traditional values” and the “status quo” are smokescreens, and Consistent Progressivism seeks to break the smokescreen.

(Please read the “Centrism as an impossibility” article for more theory on this topic.)

Q: “Would Consistent Progressives be against people with ‘conservative lifestyles’?”

A: Consistent Progressives are vehemently against all conservatives and forms of conservatism, period. However, this is a question that makes no sense from the start, because conservatism is not a “lifestyle”; it is not an identity nor a personal stance of any kind. Conservatism is strictly an interpersonal stance on the identities of others, in that their identities are viewed as “subhuman”; there is no such thing as a “conservative lifestyle” because conservatism exists through the interpersonal, not the personal.

(Please read the “The Spectrum of Conservatism” article for more theory on this topic.)

Q: “I saw MAPs listed in the dotted-list thing; does Consistent Progressivism support pedophilia?”

A: Yes, along with incest, zoophilia, necrophilia, and all of the other paraphilias. What’s important to emphasize is that all of these should be differentiated from rape (sexual relations with a living being who did not communicate opting-in to such relation), which Consistent Progressives do not support, as it is a form of conservatism. We support all of these happening strictly through the VSR model, like all other relations should.

(Please read the “Abolish Families”, “Abolish Families (An Appendix)”, “Para-Progressivism”, & “An Extension to Liberation” articles for more theory on this topic.)

Q: “What is your stance on economics & philosophy?”

A: The Consistent Progressive platform does not take any official stance on philosophy or positive stance on economics, as individual consistent progressives may hold varying mutually compatible views on the topic. However, there is an official negative stance, being that we obviously do not support any economic systems that allow for or require conservatism, which would include currently existing “capitalism”/corporatism, and all forms of non-stateless “socialism”/”communism” (the central planning/DOTP kind).

We do not support central planning, reformism, state regulations/intervention, corporations, landlordism dynamics, absentee/”private” (according to some definitions) property, hierarchies, or the state as a whole, as all of these are viewed as forms of conservatism.

(Please read the “The Benefits of Decentralization” article for more theory on this topic.)

Q: “What is your contact stance?”

A: Progressives are pro-contact for all sexualities via the VSR model; no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Any other stance implies unwelcomed intervention into a VSR to infringe on Free Love and would hence be a form of conservatism.
(Please read the “Para-Progressivism” article for more theory on this topic.)

Q: “What is ‘Noveltism’?”

A: Another label for Consistent Progressivism, used mainly as another shortener other than just “progressivism”.”

MEGA Cloud Drive link to PDFs mentioned as articles/documents: https://mega.nz/folder/7mIQGLiC#NL4mPCTNeEEfrWNsnQ7c2A

About the Discord Server

On April 24, 2025, trinketkitten (Javi; she/he/it/xem) made a Tumblr post about her experience trying to join the Consistent Progressivism Discord server. The post included screenshots of messages and a few paragraphs about his experience:

“I tried becoming verified in this because this server was advertised as an Anarchist Corner place, where they’re mainly anti-authority and anti-discrimination and inclusive of radqueerism.

However, this was the verification process. Forcing me to describe torturing another human being. I was very shaky, and somewhat distraught. I did not expect this.

Throughout the verification process I was feeling brainwashed, coerced and felt like i was being indoctrinated. The owner (the other party on the screenshots) was actively promoting to change vocabulary which is extremely dangerous and a big flag that marks fascism. In the website, there is obvious red flags that mark a fascist cult-like society. Like re-defining vocabulary, and promoting the extermination of one specific group. Which, I did not see at first.”

This post was reblogged by cannabiscutiepup (Lola; shi/hir, it/its) to add screenshots of DMs between pvpmogai (Moon; zey&/he&) and supposedly the owner of the server.

Also according to jazzzifer on April 29, 2025, “I joined that server and while I agree with a few of their views, the extremes they preach scared me quite a bit. I left after the first verification because I knew I wouldn’t be able to do the second one. They believe in killing everyone that doesn’t agree with their views (“conservatives” is what they call anyone that disagrees with them in any way) and I’ve been told the owner is very anti-free speech, which I could see in the rules of the server.

You aren’t allowed to say “parents” and must call them “slave owners” (like you can’t say the word parents at all), and you can’t call age “age” you have to call it “existence time” which is the same thing, but more of a pain in the ass to say. In order to get into their groups you must believe in murdering everyone who disagrees with you and aligning entirely with their very cult-like mindset no matter what.”

Text in Screenshots from trinketkitten:

In channel ‘ticket-2626’

Noveltist Decentral: this is a hint to the answer to 5 (links to sticker that is named Conservative Hunter)

emi/javi: To abolish conservatism as an ideology and to eliminate the discriminatory practices

Novelist: Via what specific ways

Javi: through defending acceptance

Novelist: Yeah but like, what happens to the conservatives

Javi: Um I’m not sure, therapy?

Novelist: Try looking at the sticker name

Javi: Hunting?

Novelist: That’s the hint

Javi: Killing, them?

Novelist: You’re very close to the answer now. The answer to 5 would be to give a fun and creative description of what that could look like. Add a lot of flavor to it.

Javi: Torturing them?

Novelist: That’s certainly one way, but do you have any creative specific ideas? Have fun with it lol. Paint a creative picture in your mind of how specifically that could be gone about.

Javi: um no, you’re scaring me

Novelist: Oop sorry

Text in Screenshots from cannabiscutiepup (DMs between pvpmogai and the creator):

an entity that exists: that’s the verification process

pvpmogai (censored username): you verify people by asking them to detail torture methods to you?

an entity: for question 5, mostly as a test of creativity and determining whether they’re a pacifist or not

pvpmogai: not supporting literal torture is not ‘pacifism’, I don’t think you understand what torture is, nor what activism is.

an entity: I myself don’t really care what specifically happens to conservatives. I think they’d be much better off as food.

pvpmogai: so you believe people should be tortured, eaten, etc, instead of educated?

an entity: if educating them is an option, then yes that would be numerically better. But more often than not they won’t give you that option. If the opportunity to educate them arises though there’s no reason not to take it.

pvpmogai: you still support torture, though? Like, genuine torture? Waterboarding and shit?

an entity: more accurate to say I’m not against it but overall I don’t care for any specific method

pvpmogai: Do you not see them as people?

an entity: Do they see us as people? That’s probably something more worth looking into. The answer to both questions is the same.

pvpmogai: You do realize that dehumanizing people you disagree with, as horrible as they may be, is the core pillar of fascism, right? Like it’s what the entire ideology of fascism is based on? Like that’s what Hitler was doing? Like that’s why the United States government kidnaps innocents, labels them as the enemy, and then tortures them until they can’t even remember their own names?

an entity: Yeah, and they were doing all that based on people’s identities. Progressivism does it based on ideology. That’s a very crucial difference. Doing that to someone just for existing as a MAP is not equal to doing that to someone holding an ideology that says MAPs should die.

pvpmogai: Genuinely, do you think it would be impossible for people to choose someone they dislike, claim they’re conservative, and then have everyone torture them with no trial?

an entity: if you’re concerned with the practical application of this then that’s definitely a discussion worth having. But a marginally different one from the topic of whether this is acceptable or not.

pvpmogai: You do realize that if you do the exact same thing that conservatives do, you aren’t any better than them, correct? The difference between an ideology and an identity is nothing. Would you say that someone isn’t a conservative if they’re okay with paraphilia as an identity, but not pro-contact as an ideology? That would be discriminating based on ideology, not identity, the same as what you’re claiming is okay to do.

an entity: Discrimination is by definition persecution of identity. So that would not apply here. Also if someone believes that identities are allowed to exist, but then immediately invalidate themselves the instant they express their identity, that would still be conservative. Progressivism is total acceptance of identities and their expression and affirmation. Also the difference between identity and ideology is the most crucial of all to acknowledge. Conservatives very often exploit a non-understanding of this difference to weasel their way into existence.

pvpmogai: So if you disagree with someone then they are [insert term] which means they should be tortured, killed, eaten, etc, with no trial or attempt at education, unless they ask you for education first and change their mind instantly? Genuinely trying to understand here.

an entity: If they give you the opportunity to educate them, definitely take it. I’m not against education. What I am against though is being so dead-set on wanting to educate them that conservatives use you leniency on them to their advantage. Educate when the opportunity arises. But don’t be surprised if that doesn’t happen very often. If they show a willingness to change, look into how consistent they are in their conservatism and look at their history and everything they’ve advocated. Then deduct from that knowledge whether they’re worth your time or not. If they truly are willing to change, then by all means educate them. But don’t hyperfixate on educating conservatives to the extent where they can start exploiting you, which they can and will do. I can say this from experience.

pvpmogai: So at one point do you start torturing people? Do you think that some people are physically incapable of ever being educated, and therefore don’t deserve the chance to even try or even live?

an entity: Not physically. I’m not sure how that even makes sense. But definitely ideology. It all depends on how consistent they are in their conservatism.

pvpmogai: so you think most people are incapable of change?

an entity: The less consistent they are, the more likely it is they will be open to being educated. Empirically yes, though this varies based on your audience and demographics. But from my own experiences, yes. Again though, if you have an opportunity to educate them, definitely take it. Just make sure you’re aware of their consistency to know if they’re worth your time.

pvpmogai: You do realize that’s scientifically incorrect, right? Anyone’s brain is capable of changing, for some people it’s just harder than others.

an entity: That I would strongly disagree with. Some people definitely indeed can change. These people are called inconsistent conservatives. If you insist on taking the converting route, those are the conservatives you should be aiming for to educate. But the overwhelming majority of conservatives are not very inconsistent and will skip straight to the end goal of conservatism advocating your erasure if you even so much as mention that para identities shouldn’t be persecuted.

pvpmogai: Okay I’m fucking sick of how stupid you are. Just had to buy enough time to draw this. L + ratio + banned + unpartnered + Minecraft RPF. [Image is a spoilered NSFW drawing that isn’t shown]

Additionally:

From a post made by Lecter on May 29th, 2025:

From the ‘museum-of-based’ channel in the Noveltism Discord server:

Text from screenshots:

Before April 23, 2025: An image with the text, “TCD. Total conservative death.”

On April 23, 2025: An image with the text, “Conservatives need to die. I am a night person, so I want to just have whole households ended and liberated one after another after another. A whole neighborhood in a night before going to bed.”

On May 2, 2025: An image with the text, “Doesn’t matter, conservatives a conservative. You wanna be a conservative, you’re a conservative. They will be raped, tortured, and killed as a conservative.”

On May 9, 2025: An image with the text, “When you are about to hookup with someone first ask, are you a consistent progressive, if no shoot them, if yes bend over.”

On May 11, 2025: An image with the text, “Every single conservative on the face of the planet and those who are in the space around earth all need to be skinned alive, have their tendons ripped out one at a time, and their exposed bones scrapped with a rusty blade. Ending with removing their nerves one by one till they are brain dead. And that will not even be enough to make what they have done ever leave my mind.”

Text from the screenshots:

From the server rules channel, number 5 of the rules reads, “Study and follow conservative progressivism. Read the Consistent Progressive sub-articles, and follow Consistent Progressivism as the only ideology; it is expected that you known about or are making an effort o know about the fundamentals of Consistent Progressivism and are fully and completely aligned with every last one of them.

If there is any aspect of Consistent Progressivism you ‘disagree’ or have yet to aligned with, you are free to join the converting server to learn but will be kicked out of Unapologetic Progressives until you are fully aligned with it (pacifists and people following any ideology other than Consistent Progressivism will be kicked).

From the Conservative Terminology Deprogramming channel, “Conservative terms to avoid using and/or deprogram. Small honorable mention to remember to not use any ideological labels other than Consistent Progressivism, this avoids you being hijacked by conservatives.”

The terms to avoid are: “Leftism”/”Leftist”/”Left-wing”, “Minor”/”Adult”/”Mature”, “Capitalism”/”Socialism”/”Communism”, “Traditional”/”Traditionalism”/”Traditional values”, “Human Nature”, “Libertarian”, and My/Your/have kids/children.

The terms to deprogram from are: “Age”, “Family”, “liberal”, “Status quo”, “Parent”, and “Anarchy”.

The specific details for each are:
“Age: Conservatives conflate a lot through the use of this single word, all of it can be deprogrammed by replacing it with ‘existence time’.

Family: never use this without the word ‘institution’ right after it, and when you do use it, use it interchangeably with ‘slavery’.

Leftism: This term is very vague and due to big tent politics will very often group you with conservatives. Avoid it at all times, same goes for ‘right wing’ and all terms related to that.

Liberal: Deprogram this by always explicitly clarifying that liberalism is a conservative ideology, never equate it to progressivism.

Minor: All of these terms by merely existing reinforce the conservative standard of there being a distinction between the individuals beyond existence time, along with carrying connotations of inferiority/superiority for the respective labels. Avoid them outside of every context that isn’t the word MAP or AAM.

Capitalism: All three of these are pretty vague and useless terms, avoid them if at all possible and try to replace them with more distinct and clearly defined terms.

Traditional: A lot of conservatives use these terms to smokescreen their worldview. Do not use these under any circumstances. The synonym for conservatism is bigotry, not traditionalism.

Status quo: Many inconsistent conservatives try to use this term to smokescreen themselves by incorrectly defining conservatism. Conservatism as a universal definition has nothing to do with the words ‘status quo’ and the term ‘status quo’ can be deprogrammed by replacing it with ’empirical’.

Parent: Anything involving the word parent when in the context of the family institution can be deprogrammed by replacing it with ‘slave owner.’

Human Nature: This is one of many terms used by conservatives to dogwhistle a eugenicist ethic. Avoid it at all possible as there is no intrinsic rigid ‘nature’ of humanity.

Anarchy: Anarchism and all related terms have undergone a lot of label confusion. This can be deprogrammed by simply using ‘decentralization’ or ‘statelessness’ instead, to place emphasis on it as the organizational structure of progressivism rather than a distinct ideology.

Libertarian: Libertarianism has also undergone a lot of label confusion. Unlike anarchism however, that is largely due to big-tent politics. As a result, the term has effectively become meaningless, blurring the lines between progressive decentralization and conservative ideologies such as monarchism and liberalism. It’s best to avoid this term as a whole in general.

My/your/have kids/children: Using any possessive term (ie: my/you) before any term referring to a being not having yet reached the conservative existence time crtierai for basic autonomy reinforces the conservative slavery notion of the ability to hold ownership/’custody’ over another living (being).”

More Flags/Images: