As has already been stressed, Comprachicos is fundamentally humanitarian and not formally associated with any political or religious ideology. Of course it will be said that our tenets do naturally overlap with certain positions or groups, and whether does that coincidental alignment change over time has all to do with the ebb and flow of the world in which we live, since any individual committed to truth and human development as concepts must necessarily shirk allegiance (which threatens our commitment to the contextuality on which truth depends).

I, personally, identify as a holist in all aspects, and upon such a foundation I have erected this collective, believing that the varied parts of a system can only be understood within the context of the whole. Moreover, I aim to avoid writing off perspectives with which I disagree, understanding that all beliefs and positions in our midst may be taken as a reflection of our humanity; and those of us seeking after a higher standard owe it to our species to at least listen in to the various viewpoints in circulation—which, even when not deemed sound on the ideological level, can each be viewed as offering a valuable insight into the underlying problems at play (despite often falling short of providing an accurate interpretation… let alone a valid solution). Once more, I speak in this case of my personal stance, and I understand that the perspectives held by participating members may vary, although I would not want for the tone of Comprachicos to stray too far from this type of holism, as it supplies our collective with a certain objectivity which is crucial to its mission (which, as I previously put it, is ‘to seek after the health and welfare of humanity on the whole and not just the specific clusters that we agree with’).

Things get a little more complicated when looking at the topic of religion and spirituality: a body of ideas that holds more sway over the population than just about anything else with which we are working, given how it plays into our connatural insecurities on such a grand, existential level.

Notwithstanding my personal stance on religion, I have tried my damnedest to keep religion out of this endeavor as I do not want this to be viewed as a vehicle for anti-religious sentiments. In a world of destruction, Comprachicos strives to be a constructive force. My efforts, after all, are more sincere than some power grab or hate group and I would hope that the tremendous potential inherent in this cloak is not overshadowed by the ego and idiocy of those who take it on. Yet it must not go denied that the body of religion—taken as a whole—constitutes perhaps the greatest source of anti-human and anti-progressive thinking in our society and it would be ludicrous to deny as much, being that that is precisely the sort of thinking against which we collectively stand. Textbook religion is anti-knowledge, anti-psychology and overall anti-human—not least due to its promotion of the abhorrent idea that our species is fundamentally incapable of acting virtuously and even civilly in the absence of some divine commandment. It is horrific to see so many people willingly embrace the notion that a healthy humanity is not possible, and that the destruction of our earth is not only inevitable but good. Such ideas are not simply dangerous but vile, and I do not doubt the manipulative intent with which they were propagated among our impressionable sphere.

Human society has spent thousands of years holding up uncorroborated accounts as proof and justification for why evil exists in our midst, and it has devastated our world in ways beyond our imagining. Fictitious misdeeds, empty threats and false promises are used to keep us from actually combatting the true cause of our errors, along with preventing us from standing accountable for the wrongs we’ve committed unto ourselves and others. It’s mighty difficult to accept responsibility or even seek the justice of a slighted people when a significant percentile of the population is raised to believe that it’s all but the fulfillment of some ancient prophecy cooked up by individuals who were forced, by cause of the available means, to substitute understanding with desire and assumption. For crying out loud, half of the population still believes the mentally ill to be possessed by demonic spirits. This is a problem absolutely and I am not going to pretend otherwise so as to avoid signaling the fundamentalist belligerents who would rather defend their flag than consider my points.

I do not support the feel-good notion that all beliefs merit our respect, although I do believe that we are to respect one another’s agency, which includes the rights of each individual to determine their own beliefs for themselves (which, of course, isn’t to say that the public shouldn’t intervene in cases where those beliefs end up exposing innocent parties to danger).

Also, it must always be kept in mind that health never becomes of cruelty, and our disapproval does not entitle us to act out in hateful and inappropriate ways toward others. We contend not against evil but a lack of understanding, and if you wish to save the ignorant and misguided from themselves then the way to do so is not by desecrating their icons and by giving them all the more reason to double down on their persecutory delusions, but to see to it that all knowledge and options are made available to everyone, and this goes beyond simply penning an encyclopedia and letting it sit; this will involve continued attempts at establishing and/or demonstrating the relevance of a given idea unto the lives of all. Where ignorance is as darkness, knowledge is as light. It’s as unobtrusive as a weekend buffet. Yea, to see that all options are represented unto all the living: it is not only unforceful and devoid of all inherent disrespect, but it shall not be the cause of offense for anyone who is honest unto their own heart and confident in their ways.

We can’t go battling ignorance with knives. It ain’t only ineffectual, but utterly uncalled for, given the nature of ignorance, which is adopted and maintained in an absence of a proper and holistic grasp on the context in which an individual and their acts are existing. Lest you forget, all life shares a common enemy in ignorance. And the people whom we label as monsters: they are but children who have been forced to form their conclusions in the absence of guides (or at the mercy of machinators); and if your frustration is so great, when dealing with such individuals, that you cannot find the resolve to handle them appropriately through this lens then you are no more equipped to guide them than those who failed them previously.

All feelings aside, I do not discriminate on the basis of religious affiliation and welcome participation from persons of all beliefs and backgrounds insofar as they swear to honor and uphold the main principles hereinbefore laid out. I won’t deny my being a bit skeptical as to the degree to which that is actually possible, seeing as the average religious devotee can’t seem to express their belief in some higher power without also denigrating humanity (or designated out-groups) and existence in the process, though I’m not gonna close myself off to the possibility, and it’s always a pleasure to be proven wrong. After all, it is well-known that I myself am deeply ‘spiritual’ in my leanings and my aims and I wouldn’t want people making assumptions about my groundedness and level of investment in the mundane world. Coming to mind is the fact that more and more ‘progressive-minded’ churches are popping up which do not openly discriminate against homosexuality and other demographics that are standardly held as being at odds with the church and its teachings. I definitely question their motives for doing so, as it really does seem to require a bit of contortion on their end, but at the same time I want to believe that it has led to positive development on both sides of this withered old fence.

Anyone wishing to gain further insight into my views on religion, metaphysics and existence, itself, may peruse my dissertations on the topic of Aseitism, wherein I discuss my position at great length. It is natural that my ontological beliefs will inform my worldview to some extent, and therefore I imagine that those who identify with the general aim and attitude of Comprachicos will take interest in my philosophical ideas or some aspect thereof. However, I will be making no attempts to force an affiliation between the two schools and do not require members to affiliate with said philosophies in any way. As long as you see the importance in improving the state of humanity through service to its mental, emotional and spiritual health and are wholly committed to doing so then it really doesn’t matter to me what cocktail of materialistic and/or metaphysical beliefs brought you to that conclusion.