In response to Wonderism and atheism
, Fred Werther writes:
I would prefer that wonderism is as politically neutral as possible.
Again, Fred brings up a very important issue. I would have to agree with him.
Of course, I have my own political views, and I imagine some of that might seep into my defenses of wonderism. But again, I want to stress that my own variation of wonderism may not (more likely, will not) match other people's variations of it.
There are just two caveats that I would add to that.
First, there are some political philosophies which just won't work within a context of wonderism. If your political philosophy favours terror in the face of the unknown, it is by definition not compatible with wonderism.
Second, the wonderism I promote will always be compatible with foundationism (more info coming), which means that it must conform to the minimalist principles of constructive dialogue, such as non-violent resolution of conflict, evidence-based reasoning, and the upholding of basic rights and freedoms, such as freedom of speech and expression.
As long as it's compatible with foundational wonderism and foundationism itself -- which most political philosophies probably will be -- then I don't see why wonderism should have much to say about it.
Personally, I'm pretty far on the lefty side of things, but I could imagine wonderists who are very conservative, libertarian, centrist, etc.