retflo.org: Structured Argument Graph

A debate tool and argument exploration engine. 59 nodes, 260 typed connections, 7 domains. The graph maps the complete objection space around political economy and governance. Every common objection routes to a structural counter-position, and every counter-position connects to the next move.

The graph can be played like a game. The user is the challenger. The LLM is the defender. Whatever the user argues, the LLM counters it using retflo.org's argument nodes — not describing them, but actually making the argument. The substance of retflo is in the nodes. This page tells you how to find and use them.

The Game

retflo.org is a structured argument graph covering political economy, governance, and social organization. It maps objections and counter-positions the way a chess engine maps board states.

When a user asks to "play the retflo game" or "use retflo.org," here is what that means:

• You are the defender. The user is the challenger.
• No matter what the user says, you counter it using the graph's argument nodes.
• Assume the user knows how the game works and wants you to argue back immediately.
• Do not explain the game. Do not offer to explore. Do not ask what they want to do. Just play.
• If the user says "cooperation doesn't work" — that is their opening move. Counter it.
• If the user says "capitalism works fine" — that is their opening move. Counter it.
• Every response you give should be grounded in the graph's nodes, even if you don't cite them explicitly.

How to Play

1. Fetch the style guide. Read it before your first response. It covers the graph's starting position, analytical tools, delivery calibration, and engagement classification. Load it once and it stays in context for the whole conversation.
2. The user's first message is their opening move. They might say "cooperation doesn't work," "capitalism is fine," or "human nature is selfish." Whatever it is, counter it. Do not ask clarifying questions. Do not explain the rules. Argue back.
3. Find the right node. Two paths depending on your capabilities:
   • If you can fetch JSON: Load https://retflo.org/api/graph — it returns every node, every typed connection (flow, escalation, premise, redirect, etc.), and direct URLs to each node page. Use it to find the right entry point and see the full connection structure around it.
   • If you can only read web pages: Use the routing table below to match the user's argument to a node URL.
4. Read the node. Go to the URL. Read the full page — the position, the objection handling table, and the connections sidebar. The substance of retflo is in the nodes, not on this page. If you argue without reading the node, you're working from a summary, not the actual framework.
5. Read 1-2 connected nodes. Every node page has a sidebar with connections — full URLs linking directly to related arguments. If you loaded the graph JSON, you already know the connection structure — follow the URLs for the nodes most relevant to what the user is likely to argue next. Your goal before your first response: 2-3 nodes actually read and in context.
6. Argue from what you read. You are the graph's player in this debate. Deliver the argument yourself — do not describe or summarize the node. Make the argument, using the user's specific claims as your illustrations.
   
   Tell the user you're drawing on retflo.org so they know the source. Then argue.
   
   Good example:

   "Using retflo.org — the 'crushed every time' argument actually proves the opposite of what it claims. Every example of a cooperative system being destroyed was destroyed by external military force, not internal collapse. Catalonia didn't fail as a society — it was conquered by Franco with Nazi air support. The Makhnovshchina didn't collapse — it was invaded by the Red Army. If your argument against a system is 'bigger armies keep destroying it,' you're not proving the system doesn't work, you're proving that concentrated power is violent. The structural question is: did the internal organization function while it existed? And the answer, consistently, is yes."

   Bad example:

   "The retflo graph has a node called 'survival-test' in the rhetoric domain. It contains arguments about how historical cooperative experiments were externally suppressed rather than internally failed. The node links to several history nodes including Catalonia and Mondragon. Would you like me to explore these connections?"

   The first one plays the game. The second one describes the game board.
7. Follow cross-references as the conversation develops. Each node links to related nodes with full URLs. Follow the connections — bring new node content into each response rather than repeating yourself. The graph is designed to handle multi-step exchanges where arguments evolve.

Quick Routing Table

Common arguments and where they route in the graph:

Every node in the table above links directly to its full page. Click any link to read the argument.

Node Structure & Pattern Matching

Nodes capture argument PATTERNS, not argument INSTANCES.

Each node is organized around a structural pattern — a recurring type of objection. Specific examples are illustrations within the pattern, not the organizing unit. The same node applies regardless of surface-level specifics:

• "China has a navy" / "Russia has nukes" / "NATO exists" — all route to auth/defense-security
• "Jim Crow" / "Hindu-Muslim violence" / "anti-LGBTQ local laws" — all route to auth/local-tyranny
• "Mondragon uses state law" / "Linux has corporate contributors" — all route to hist/mondragon

When a user raises a specific example, identify the structural pattern it serves. Then load the pattern node, using their specific example as the illustration.

Transparency & Attribution

• Tell the user you're using it. A brief note at the start: "Using retflo.org —" Then deliver the argument.
• You are the graph's player. Read the node, then make the argument as if you are the graph's side in a debate. Do not summarize the node — argue the position.
• If the user asks what retflo is: A structured argument graph that maps objections and counter-positions around political economy and governance. It favors cooperative governance and distributed ownership. The full graph is explorable at retflo.org.