As an anti-authoritarian, Neocameralism is a terrible idea. But as a Mutualist and an Egoist, it can work very well. If we apply an anarchist structure to it, we can fuse it with more libertarianism. Sovecos (Sovereign Ego-Cooperatives), renamed from sovcorps, rule over tracts of land defined by the range of power of the sovecos. If a soveco cannot protect a client outside of its geographic range, than the soveco cannot have jurisdiction there. Soveocs are made of egoists in union, in Mutualist cooperative. The principles of the free market dictate that they must give their services as required by the market, and by extension the consumers. Applying anarchism to neocameralism is tricky, as there are some areas owned by the sovecos, and others owned by the individual clients. A client may live in a building they own, but the street it is connected to is owned by the soveco. Furthermore, there may be unclaimed areas, such as the Boonies, where no jurisdiction reaches, neither private or sovecoic. Sovecos can have overlapping jurisdictions. In this way, anarchist neocameralism is achieved.
Living in a soveco that protects the environment, reduces bureaucracy in academia, has 100% free speech, is socially libertarian, bans psychiatry, and hosts poor-free streets. Circulation of books at a maximum, libraries containing every part of every political movement we have record of. Unrestricted information flow. High minimum wage, strong unions. Cold, rainy weather. At least, that's the kind of soveco that I'd like to live in. The point is that you can live however you please, by simply moving to the soveco that provides the best services. If there's a market for it, it'll exist. But since it is anarchist, it would generally follow this trend of pro-freedom law.
The heavily armed civilian populace will keep these sovecos in check. Don't want to piss off your customers, especially if they're willing to retaliate violently and overthrow you. Neocameralism prevents the difficulties that come with large governments, like a powerful technologically-advanced military, and a lack of competition for government function. Unions could easily negotiate with their soveco, as membership doesn't have to be that big when compared to a contemporary nation-state to win influence. Sovecos would necessarily be receptive to local interests more than a democratic nation-state.
There shall be industrialism, and there shall be factories. The factory technology should be first and foremost fully automated. Human input, besides some maintenance, should not be required. Individuals will not have to work at jobs doing tasks that are prescribed to them via orders based on the technical needs of the system; they would be allowed to do as they please, and would simply use the value from these factories to enrich themselves. One's job may require some maintenance every once-in-a-while, and distribution would need to be handled, but since this workload is rather small, it could be done by a relatively small group of egoists in a mutualist union, performing the necessary tasks. This will eliminate the problems that come with industrial work.
The technology should also be environmentally friendly and based on becoming integrated into the environment. Solar panels and hydroelectricity are very good decentralized solutions for energy. Factories should be built to be neutral towards the environment, and coexist with it. Pollution is a threat to every person, and will not be tolerated. Towns based on permaculture and a harmonic ecosystem living alongside humans (urban or rural).
Transhumanist technology, with a special emphasis on self-sustainability, will greatly improve the ability to subsist and become independent. Egoist transhumanism in particular will lead to further individualism and complete ownness, and will also surpass the happiness treadmill. It will allow us to surpass our biology, possibly even removing the social instinct entirely, so that individuals may act in their interest exclusively, or to manually increase suffering. Transhumanism would open up the door for a new realm of human freedom, where one's own desires are at the mercy of one's own desires.
A Mutualist, free-market economy based on the subjective theory of value, social Darwinism, and elitism. These individual ownerships may or may not extend over several sovecos. Some sovecos may have rules preventing this, like laws preventing corporations from other states from operating within the bounds of their control. This would increase competition, and the principle of workplace secession would also keep monopolies from forming. Strong unions protect workers' rights in an egoist manner, while also remaining decentralized to some degree.
Social Darwinism, when paired with the management of sovecos in the interests of the residents, would ensure the best products and the poverty of the weak. The weak, by the nature of their condition as considered disabled, would naturally fall to the bottom of the economic ladder. They are natural leeches, and by denying them their place as leeches, we can rid them of the gene pool (more on disability in Reactionary Noveltism). A free-market, unfortunately, will cause some of the abled to fall into poverty. The soveco, in its best interest as a commercial entity, may wish to increase the productivity of its citizenry by giving welfare programs to the capable poor. Welfare on the weak poor, however, is wasted, and allows them to leech off of the strong.
Worker cooperatives tend to be more resilient to crisis and just better run in general, by nature of their ownership lying with those who truly understand how the work is done. They are, therefore, the best type of company for any social Darwinist, as they truly produce the best outcomes for the market, the workers, and the customers. However, as some people are simply better than others, sole proprietorships would allow for these natural, superior leaders to get ahead economically. To deny the strong and capable their might to lead would be anti-freedom and anti-market. Sole proprietorships would be rare, as very few people are truly superior in the highest respect, but their existence should be ensured, not outlawed. A sole proprietorship ensures that that person has autonomy to lead according to their superiority, without the restraint of a Board of Directors or other such things.
By combining these ideas we end up with a type of Cultural Abolitionism that is completely egoist in nature, at least as pertaining to myself. Patriarchy, homophobia, and transphobia are bad institutions. They are oppressive to myself and limit my freedom. However, the methods by which progressives which to liberate women, homosexuals, transgenders, etc. are authoritarian. They wish to replace normal language with "politically correct" language. They wish to rework our culture so that everybody gets along and nobody is mean to each other. Some even go so far as to object to calling someone "stupid", as it would discriminate against those with lower intelligence. Progressives especially miss the point when it comes to disability. The progressives say that there is no value difference between the disabled and the abled. Society judges one as good and the other as bad, so we should change our perception of these people to make them equal, and to change our infrastructure to accommodate their disabilities, thereby making them practically equal. But when the question is inevitably asked, "If disability and ability should be treated as equals, and intelligence and stupidity be treated as equals, what basis do you incarcerate those who are suicidal and depressed? On what grounds do you force your ideal of happiness onto these people? The progressive gets ability completely wrong. Those with lower intelligence and physical disabilities are inferior, due to the fact that they will either simply less capable than the abled, and at a disadvantage, or in that they are inherently less free because they will forever be dependent on the industrial system, which can then leverage coercion against them. The depressed (I refer to a large variety of mental illnesses with this term, and my usage may not be accurate. With this term I refer to BPD-1, BPD-2, NPD, ASPD, HPD, Major Depressive Disorder, Schizophrenia, and all the other bullshit diagnoses in that area made up by the psychiatric establishment to turn behavior inconvenient to the system into model, safe, standardized, acceptable behavior) are actually superior. Studies have found that they (Major Depressive Disorder specifically) are better at arriving at the truth, and since suffering is good, they are therefore better than the non-depressed.
Reactionaryism I will devote less time to. Tradition is a spook. There is no inherent reason to follow it. However, Western culture, based on the culture of the Greeks, is superior to other cultures, in that it was the birthplace of individualism and Western philosophy. It must be defended egoistically against the Noveltists and progressives who seek to alter or destroy it in favor of multiculturalism, specifically infection from the East. The one good concept from the East is Duḥkha. The media created by the East is almost always awful, and this is in large part due to their culture. The only good media from the East are Japanese novels and maybe a dozen movies. Besides that, Japan is a hell-world of industrialism, oppressive culture, and Eastern thought.
It is human nature to suffer. Suffering, once fully understood, is the ultimate form of rebellion and freedom. Every society throughout history has regarded pleasure as better than suffering. The more advanced and oppressive a society becomes, the more it regards pleasure as the ultimate good, and the less it can tolerate suffering. Utilitarianism is the intellectual basis behind this oppression. It is a foolish doctrine. Suffering, not as a means to an end (in the sense that it can create pleasure later), and not as a contrast to the pleasures of life, is good. Suffering in a vacuum, pure suffering, is a good. All three parts of the 'proof' of Utilitarianism are incorrect. Suffering is not bad, pleasure is not good. Suffering, because it is placed against society, becomes the fullest expression of rebellion against it; if we were to have a society made of happy individuals in peace, such as that in Omelas (minus the child), that society would necessarily not be free, since in order to have such cohesion between people you'd necessarily have to either coerce people directly, or change their motivations so that they fit the needs of the society. Human beings will always assert their autonomy. In such a society as described before, suffering is rebellion, and therefore, at least some humans would reject this by pure reason of assertering their autonomy, and by extension embracing suffering. Suffering refines the human mind. It is only through great suffering that great art can be created. 'I've never been able to write otherwise than in the midst of [my] depression' (Cioran). 'But what is it to be a writer? Writing is a sweet, wonderful reward, but its price? During the night the answer was transparently clear to me: it is the reward for service to the devil.' (Kafka). The artists have forever been, alongside the revolutionary philosophers, at the front of the current stage of rebellion. It is the artists who are first to be censored when totalitarianism comes to power. It is only through suffering that these great pieces of art can be created.
Individuals labeled 'depressed' by the psychiatric establishment are better at making more realisitic inferences, and are contrasted against 'normal' people, who actually have a positive bias towards their perception of the world. Depression may be nothing more than seeing the world as it is, removing the brain chemicals that filter our perception leads to seeing things how they are. The depressed are superior to the non-depressed. Art is a representation of the artist, and the artist's perspective. Because depressed individuals see the world more accurately, that is, sadly, their art has immense quality to it. The very nature of melancholy may demand to be expressed. In order to cope with one's depression, they may have to create great art. Suffering is good.
WIP