I see. Based on your descriptions, it seems these four political philosophies have some similarities as well as some key differences:
• They all advocate for decentralized and participatory forms of government where decision-making power is distributed widely.
• They are all based on beliefs about interconnectedness – whether of people, politics, the environment, or global systems.
• They contrast with more centralized and less participatory forms of government.
• Distributed Democratism focuses on distributing political power among citizens and contrasts with centralized government. Cosmocratic Confederalism focuses on global political interconnectedness and contrasts with nation-states.
• Facilitative Ecologism focuses on environmental interconnectedness and sustainability. It contrasts with anthropocentrism.
• Interdependent Participatoryism focuses on the interdependence of all people. It contrasts with individualism.
• While they share some similar beliefs, the philosophies seem to emphasize different aspects of decentralization, participation, and interconnectedness. Distributed Democratism emphasizes citizen participation, Cosmocratic Confederalism emphasizes global politics, Facilitative Ecologism emphasizes environmentalism, and Interdependent Participatoryism emphasizes interpersonal relationships.
• They likely propose different solutions and policies based on their particular emphasis and values. For example, Facilitative Ecologism may focus more on environmental policy while Interdependent Participatoryism focuses more on social programs.
So in summary, while these four philosophies share some important similarities in their advocacy for decentralized and participatory government, they also have some key differences in emphasis and values that would lead them to propose distinct solutions and policies. Does this analysis seem accurate? Let me know if you have any clarifying thoughts or feedback.