Socially right wing

0

Anonymous landtrust 9w

Economically left wing= social democracy, social safety net, large scale infrastructure/edu investment, green new deal, universal single payer healthcare, more Lina khan style ftc policy, overturn every campaign finance case all the way back to Buckley V. Valeo, deport most illegal immigrants except DACA, limit legal immigration to necessary labor sectors & high skill with flexibility as needed, expand Supreme Court if necessary to push policies through

2

Anonymous landtrust 9w

Socially right wing= roll back all lgbt policies since the 80s, federal cap on abortions at 3 months besides life of the mother after that, enshrine child tax credit, make single income families possible again (following Elizabeth Warren & Tyagi’s 2 income trap model). Ban social media for anyone under 21, ban dating apps, ban porn, bring back the Fairness doctrine and Hays code. Build walkable neighborhoods

-1

Anonymous landtrust 9w

Realist foreign policy= no more neocon bs, pull out of the Middle East besides the Persian gulf, follow a Mearsheimer realist style foreign policy, speak softly and carry a big stick, cut off Israel, roll back all unprofitable parts of the empire and focus on the homefront to compete on the global stage. Bomb the cartels, destroy all drug ops. Get the intel agencies under control of state dept.

5

Anonymous landtrust 9w

Anti racist= reform police by having alternative mental health call system, finish reconstruction era policy for American descendants of slaves via large scale investment in predominantly poor black neighborhoods, bring back affirmative action for 30 years with low economic class stipulations, cut federal funds to states that support any kind of ethnic or religiously bigoted policies and deploy national guard if necessary

5

How can you be socially conservative, especially today, if you aren’t against minorities. Like genuinely

0

Anonymous #4 9w

Why?

1

Anonymous OP 9w

The bottom half of this is all progressive policies.

1

Anonymous OP 9w

Simultaneously too left- and right-wing for me

1

Anonymous #4 9w

But say a party with those polices ran and had a shot at winning, would you vote for them over the status quo?

1

Anonymous OP 9w

very, very, very unlikely

1

Anonymous #4 9w

Why? You said there were parts you rly liked

1

Anonymous #4 9w

And I find it hard to believe many people rly have anything to like about the status quo

1

Anonymous OP 9w

i like the anti-racist/economically progressive parts but do not like the socially right-wing parts

3

Anonymous #4 9w

Yeah I don’t rly understand prioritizing the culture wars over economics tbh. If the economy keeps getting worse for the avg person under the status quo, it’ll be the fascists that win out—and the socially left wing people will lose out even more all around under fascism. The culture wars are a major part of why the left keeps losing, just terrible coalition building imo

4

Anonymous OP 9w

The socially right-wing policies would still be considered part of the culture wars lol Just have economic progressivism and leave lgbt folks alone (as well as folks who use dating apps)

5

Anonymous #4 9w

Ah yes the most oppressed group, people who use dating apps

5

Anonymous #5 9w

obv they’re not oppressed but like leave ppl alone 😭 otherwise this party is great

1

Anonymous #4 9w

This; too much of the social conservative here is icky and hurts vulnerable people.

0

Anonymous #8 9w

thanks, thought I was going mad for a bit 😅 And yk how these social conservatives are: once one issue is “dealt with,” they’ll get mad about another that isn’t

1

Anonymous #4 9w

Yes exactly! And aside from the immediate and active harm done to people in lots of these ideas, the idea of “ban dating apps” for example is so weird and authoritarian to me.

1

Anonymous #8 9w

yeah, i’m not saying they’re good to have but “banning dating apps” and “banning 🌽” seems to lay an ugly road ahead And rolling lgbt policies back to the 80s…when AIDS had a stigma…can’t say I like it otherwise, these are great ideas

3

Anonymous #4 9w

seriously, idk how folks wouldn’t be on board with all the other policies

0

Ok? Legislating people’s personal lives is weird as shit and constitutionally questionable. This is very much the same logic probhibitionists used and it’s fundamentally flawed and ineffective. Yeah dating sucks now but this isn’t something the government should be involved in.

1

Like fundamentally this isn’t something the government should be involved in, and on top of that it would be an enormous waste of time and money

1

i think the fear w/that would be, after corn/the apps…what would be next to go?

2

The banning dating apps thing is so on its face silly and chronically online I’m not even addressing it atp. And already tried banning porn here, it doesn’t work, nor has it ever worked with the many other countries who have tried it lmfao. What it did do is provide a weapon to target queer people and poor women disproportionately and justify state violence against them, which is exactly what would happen now.

1

Anonymous #4 9w

The way I see it, you’re going to lose the culture wars regardless, the only question is how badly you’ll lose. What I’ve seen the left do all my life is throw the economic baby out with the cultural bathwater. The fascists have continuously won under that strategy. Imo, these cultural views are socially degenerative to stable family structures and mental health, and, in the view of many social historians: telltale symptoms of a decadent, dying empire.

1

Anonymous OP 9w

I understand, I just don’t like the idea of throwing lgbt folks and others under the bus like this And re: culture wars - it’s never over. There will be another issue for social conservs to get mad about

1

Anonymous #4 9w

Okay but that’s entirely impractical, throw the more socially conservative people a bone like that and we’ll join the coalition pretty easily. This was the coalition that carried FDR to 4 electoral and popular victories. Most people do not care what lgbtq people do privately, we do care about what is allowed in the public sphere or supported by the government. Dating apps make non-marital sexual relationships easier, those types of relationships ruin lives and waste productive time and energy

1

Anonymous OP 9w

I’m not sure it’s as easy as you think, but glad to see you thinking of a new way for the left-wing

1

Anonymous #4 9w

Yeah I mean I’m just spitballing here, tbh I’m pessimistic and don’t rly expect the economic left to learn anything from the last 40 years of defeat or what I’ve said here at all. They, like you, are too attached to this dead weight social stuff to play and actually win at National level politics. Fascism is winning, it’s been winning, and I don’t see why it won’t continue to win as things are going currently. Dark times ahead most likely

2

Anonymous OP 9w

“Dead weight social stuff” just leave folks alone And a lot of the social conservs wont be satisfied w/rolling back lgbtq rights, etc

4

Anonymous #4 9w

maybe not you, but they will want more

5

Anonymous #4 9w

I don’t expect the culture wars to be permanently over lmao. The same view you have of social conservatives wanting more, we have of you. It started with don’t ask don’t tell, then gay marriage, then trans characters in books for elementary kids, & now parents having their children taken away by courts for not supporting the trans thing. What I expect getting rid of all these policies to do is have a stasis/truce point for a few decades as the economic agenda takes center stage to help everyone

0

Anonymous #4 9w

They literally are dead weight though, has supporting those policies done anything except serve as a distraction for the American people as robber barons tear this country down for spare parts? No. Has it brought a single victory even once? No. Has it immeasurably damaged the middle class and been symptomatic of pretty much any licentious late stage delusional empire? Yeah.

2

Anonymous OP 9w

a good middle ground here would be for folks to mind their own business. If gay/lesbian folks want to get married, sure. If they want to show their affection in public like straight folks do, sure If ppl have a problem w/that, then this country is deeply flawed

1

Anonymous #4 9w

And as for the kids books - just let parents opt their kids out of difficult subject matter, that would be a good compromise. They’re still kids after all

0

Anonymous #4 9w

Nah I don’t want to see their public expression of anything like that, and I don’t support any state backing for their choices either. Let them live their life and do whatever they want privately sure, but if you put it in front of me or in schools you’ve literally made it my business then. Tbh I hate pda of all kinds, all pda used to be banned under the Hays code for media. What you’re talking abt isn’t a middle ground, it’s the status quo—the same status quo that’s led to repeated failure

1

Anonymous OP 9w

The Hays code? 💀 bro you’re telling me kissing in movies has to be regulated and they can’t curse either? Hard fuckin pass on all that grandma we are grown adults

3

Anonymous #10 9w

I understand cooling it on the SJW stuff and even stopping the messaging. But rolling back gay rights to the 80s? Do you understand what that means?

3

Anonymous #2 9w

What’s social conservative

1

Anonymous OP 9w

Socially right is an understatement here. You’re proposing stuff like the govt decency code from the 1930s for TV and movies get brought back, I don’t think any far right public figure has even thought of something like that

2

Anonymous OP 9w

Yeah so this is just homophobia

1

Yes. They said ban pda for straights (also unhinged) but the talk of banning queerness from classrooms, going back to the anti queer policies of the 80s, which includes things like being allowed to openly discriminate against people for being gay, and the suggestion that they should basically pretend not to be queer in public is homophobic

0

Anonymous #8 9w

It's not unhinged at all, it's exactly what this dying culture and system needs for psychological wellbeing. I really could not care less about what you think is homophobic toh, you can't discriminate against someone for "being gay" if you don't know they're "gay." I didn't know my professor was attracted to men until 4 years after meeting him—bc quite simply—it's none of my business what he does privately, and he had the decency to not shove his lifestyle in my face to make it my business

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

You’re really saying you can’t discriminate against someone for something you’re forcing them to be quiet about…bruh

1

Anonymous #10 9w

Did I stutter?

1

Anonymous #10 9w

You’re going to lose everything under fascism either way

1

Anonymous OP 9w

No you’re just insane. Imagine if I said you’re allowed to be Christian, but ONLY if you literally never talk about it, have zero events related to it, the state can have zero to do with it in any way, no expression whatsoever. Christmas trees only allowed in private

1

Anonymous OP 9w

lgbtq folks don’t deserve to be thrown under the bus. don’t think that far-right folks wouldn’t be shouting “DEI” for that “anti-racist” part of ur plan next bc they would

1

Anonymous #10 9w

Wouldn’t that sound like I’m discriminating against you for being Christian? Like how is that not discrimination

1

Anonymous #4 9w

Tbh I don’t think the racist and socially conservative parts of the right converge nearly as much as you do, the racists who care that much would just never join such a coalition. You could use the racists who care about economic and social issues more as vote cannon fodder to win elections though. I don’t really care how it happens or who I work with, I just want the policy goals I outlined above done. It’s a general mutual interest coalition to meet the troubling times we find ourselves in

1

Anonymous #10 9w

Well tbh what you’re describing is essentially French laïcité. But no, sexuality and religion are not the same thing at all—one has protection enshrined in the constitution and the other is (imo) by and large the result of cultural decay intermeshed with the mental health and identity crises. Also, this is a nominally Christian country from its founding to the present moment, not in governance, but in character and belief

1

Anonymous OP 9w

Does freedom of expression not cover expression of sexuality?

1

Anonymous #10 9w

It didn’t till the 60s. I think you already know my stance on public displays of sexuality given my comments on the Hays Code. Normative family structure and relationships are far more prevalent and essentially culturally inescapable, that still doesn’t mean I want to hear about how some guy had sex with his wife. It doesn’t mean I want movies relating to that to exist, it doesn’t mean I think ppl should have to see men and women making out while they’re trying to walk to work or class

1

I don’t understand how one can say “that’s life now.” This is a very dynamic country, we went from a traditional conservative culture to whatever the heck confused decadent mess we have now in the span of just 4 generations (the boomers were a curse from God upon us). If you believe in and want economic revolution, then you can believe the same in other domains. Politics is about fielding votes and building coalitions, I think the one I outlined above with its policies is a sleeping giant

1