none of this is new, all of these were standard practice during cold war times, by both sides
No, not so much.
Cold War versions of this were like fighting with wiffle bats. We armed based freedom fighters in Asia and Africa, they armed cringe communists in those places. Even Afghanistan, which was roughly the Russian Vietnam, was never seen by the Kremlin as being of
vital strategic importance to the continued existence of the USSR. They could tolerate eventually losing there. They don't see this fight in Ukraine in the same way, they think its importance is existential for Russia.
Economically, the West and the USSR didn't really compete at all. The latter was a closed system, though we did trade with them to some degree and Ford, Pepsi etc. did business in Russia. What we're saying now is different:
* This is a global economy
* We've just deplatformed you from the global economy and stolen all the assets you parked in the West
Cold War 2.0 is less stable and more dangerous because there's no detente, no mutual understanding of the other side having legitimate spheres of influence, and the economic order that allowed the USSR to just ignore Western banks, sanctions etc. no longer exists.
Also there was no mainstream voice in Western politics calling for us to bomb Russia. When Regan said it as a mic test, it was a punchline. Now there's a substantial number of influential people in the policy making class who are openly demanding a "no fly zone", which would lead to the same outcome. They're not joking, and it's possible they will get their wish.