Am Pragm patedms

Marxian Dark violet Lib rightism (Lib rightism as in Libertarian right)

I am ok with the US having expansionist foreign policy goals if said goals are a class struggle between the US and other nations only, as with this ideology

This ideology is Marxism that is purged of its counterfeit and hairbrained links with OhrneyngpDi configuration and replaced with practical thought like Methodism

I am not exclusively for any class , I do not show favor for the liberal 2.0, left or right, but I instead preserve morally righteous concepts from all three wings.   

This ideology imports from Marxism, the imaginative, clever, socialism that is alive 

This ideology includes virtues including values like being truthful and frugal that is influenced by Enlightenment and also Pietism. This ideology also includes other values like being on time, system disposition and conscientiousness in paying proper attention to a task

This ideology would have elements of Maoism's New Democracy which would also include collaboration with the national bourgeoisie in the early stages of this revolution because like with Mao's analysis back then, much of the social and economical structures of feudalism are still present (or a threat to return) in the US at this time (like see here and here)

By the very Marxist idea of progression, the interests of the bourgeoisie and of the "proletariat" (which is to say peasantry in this particular case) align themselves in a feudal mode of production.

In summation: I advocate this ideology adopt Maoist like collaboration with the national bourgeoisie in the early stages of the revolution, for they will oppose imperialism, their interests will mostly align with those of the masses and they will help develop the productive forces so socialism can successfully take its place.

This method for this ideology would reject elitism as a method for the dissemination of class consciousness, straying away from normative Bolshevik notion of the party vanguard. 

This could be done via the territorial principle which can be substituted in cases where minority populations risked being subjugated by majorities. This would include resurrecting Karl Renner's notion of the "personal principle" as a way of gathering the geographically divided members of the same nation.This is an important way of doing way with sub-national territorial identities as undemocratic and allowing for the oppression of non-majority populations within each nation.

Maybe we can make it so that in this system, the only elites would be the minorities who would rule over the majorities (like implementing a dominant minority(s) type system where BIPOC become the dominant minority(s) in the US)

Like paradoxically, the more normative Marxist structure of the core inner circle of educated urban intellectuals within the US political parties with Social Democracy ideology as a platform would have also developed in the US political parties with Social Democracy ideology as a platform and remain at the center of party politics, which would then reflect a gap between the ideological persuasions of said party leadership and that party's behavior in practice . 

It would often end up being manifest in other circumstances, like with the relative lack of concern toward insufficient housing until the housing crisis to necessitate the introduction of substantial construction projects.

Anyway as seen above this would be built on a national resolve and would be anti Internationalist 

This ideology would be based off the hard truth that nature is inherently unequal and that inequality is also the consequence of free choices. 

Now this ideology would fix some elements of natural inequality via legislation. For example, for a disabled person who is unable to fend for themselves, this ideology would say that the state should provide for them, so that they can live as good a life as possible; but it would also recognize that inequality will remain regardless of what legislative action is taken. 

Beyond this, this ideology also is built off the fact that actually seeking to eradicate inequality between people would require a great deal of authoritarian overreach and would necessitate restrictions upon freedom and liberty, actions that I would not countenance.  

Natural inequality. Some people are stronger, some smarter, etc. Even these small basic differences allow individuals to develop specific abilities, further allowing them to gain differential advantage. A smart person could work their way up some chain of power, and a strong person a different one. It is interesting how most advantages don't make too much of a difference in the end. Each advantage most likely can lead you to every ending.

This ideology would realize that natural inequality is simply the result of naturally occurring phenomena and the Pareto principle. It would stress we are not equal to ourselves yesterday, and tell us thus we should not try to compare ourselves to someone else who had an entirely different life, upbringing and even biology from us 

This ideology also embraces the unique talents of other people (every person has one or more talents that are better than most people at that particular thing). It would use this type of talent classification system

It would also embrace leaders who are book smart and rational

This ideology would have an Enlightened Centre left/Enlightened Centre right view of and policies for migration  (Enlightened Centre left/Centre right in this case means in a world where the left wing position on and policies for migration is this type of left wing view of and policies for migration and not the left wing position of and policies for migration that exists now in our world

This ideology would include collectivization like in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin, retaining most of the kolkhozes but these collectives would be renamed something that shows they are communal.  These would be basically agricultural co-ops

This ideology would also embrace this type of thought and The Nationwide Proletarian movement (NWPM)