What do you think of "economically leftist with socially rightist characteristics"?

[JohnnyG]

If that's what constitutes fiscally-liberal/socially-conservative then it's ideal, but the left seems to want want to extend stuff like social safety nets and universal healthcare to everyone who crosses our open border.

So what would you call someone who isn't as far left fiscally, only wanting those benefits for Americans?

Nahtzee! And I don't say that ironically or to be edgy, but as the sincere belief of the theatre kids who've taken over the institutions that decide such things (Media, Corporate HR, Universities, Hollywood, unifireable government bureaucracies, etc).

You may think that wanting your tax dollars to go toward improving your community and people, instead of cultivating degeneracy and importing the world's violence and poverty, is natural and reasonable but your employer, admissions office, bank, social media company, and elected representative have all decided that makes you a Nahtzee, so sharing that view in effect makes you one.

I'll repeat: the fact that Leftism allows for some economic dissent but no criticism of perversion or third-world behavior, means that Leftism is rainbow-ghetto worship.

 

[Ser Prize]

Either a slide thread or some nigga who's never dealt with socialized medicine. I know a lot of Americans think it's some free healthcare paradise in leafland, but our medical system has been an utter shit show since before even covid. The wait times for anything are super long, you pay like over half your income in tax to keep the bloated public health programs funded and you're still worse off than Americans who have to pay for everything.
Off topic powerlevel, but if Socialized healthcare was so great, I wouldn't still be waiting for a new family doctor after losing mine in like 2006, coming up on a 20 year wait, still nothing.

Don't forget zero dental and eye coverage, along with basically any specialist.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Nahtzee! And I don't say that ironically or to be edgy, but as the sincere belief of the theatre kids who've taken over the institutions that decide such things (Media, Corporate HR, Universities, Hollywood, unifireable government bureaucracies, etc).

You may think that wanting your tax dollars to go toward improving your community and people, instead of cultivating degeneracy and importing the world's violence and poverty, but your employer, admissions office, bank, social media company, and elected representative have all decided that makes you a Nahtzee, so sharing that view in effect makes you one.

I'll repeat: the fact that Leftism allows for some economic dissent but no criticism of perversion or third-world behavior, means that Leftism is rainbow-ghetto worship.

Yeah, but everyone right of Marx is a Nazi to them, and I hear he hated fags, so he'd probably be considered a Nazi by now too.

 

[JohnnyG]

Yeah, but everyone right of Marx is a Nazi to them, and I hear he hated fags, so he'd probably be considered a Nazi by now too.

But they can't fire, de-bank, or censor him, and accusations of hypocrisy, "the REAL racists", or "if the roles were reversed..." won't keep them from doing it to you. Just saying, don't think holding populist economic views will earn you a pass from Lefties, if you run afoul of their actual religion, which is gay-ghettobesity YAAASing.

 

[PhoBingas]

Sounds like a Canada problem, cause it works pretty well in Europe.

I don't imagine it's hard to be a more well put-together country than Chinadastan. Maybe its better in Europe, I don't know I'll probably never go there, so it doesn't effect me. Most countries in the EU though are a hell of a lot smaller than Canada. Probably easier to run shit when you can cross your country in an afternoon by car.

 

[X Prime]

This is called "being normal and pro-community."

The problem is the lack of foresight. Most people like this do not grasp that the second you let one zealous social leftist near the levers of power, then things go straight to hell. The price of this kind of view is eternal vigilance, but it's the kind of price nobody wants to actually pay.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Another issue in the idea is that it assumes only the government can help people, as if there are no small communities that have a shared account to give money to members when they need it, plus give free services to members in need. I know that in the orthodox jew communities they make sure widows and their children are well taken of financially.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

We do kind of see this in America in the form of “Christian Socialists” often of the “I believe in Catholic social teaching” Catholic variety. Ultimately, they just become DNC/establishment leftists with a semi-private traditional religious life they may or may not bring up. It doesn’t help religions are increasingly leftist, so “being religious in private” often doesn’t mean “socially conservative” anymore.

As for answering OP on what I think? I think the few people I know who admit to being devout Christian Socialists are rather brave in current year+8 for picking an ideology that pisses off all sides in unique ways.

C*tholicism is incompatible with American values.

 

[WitchfyndeGeneral]

Very dumb and retarded. If you call those people conservatives, they are the weakest conservatives in the conservative crowd. These people are the first to betray and turn their back on conservatives when something major happens. Too many people these days focus too much on social issues, and not fiscal ones. This is why I say, to define what ideology you fiscal beliefs are before you tackle on Social and cultural issues

 

[Halfnium Bomb]

Socialism? But like, Nationalist? It could be cool, but it still sounds a bit faggy, like the kind of thing an art student would come up with.

the weakest conservatives in the conservative crowd

Conservative or Reactionary? You could call the national socialists many thing, but definitely not "weak conservatives".

define what ideology you fiscal beliefs are before you tackle on Social and cultural issues

Very dumb and retarded--nobody understands economics, even after decades of study. Why should laymen spend years pouring over the abstract comparative advantages of competing economic models before agreeing "troons bad"?

 

[Irredemable Retardation]

Counterfactual and attracted to individuals of the same gender.

So a National Socialist? Last time it was tried it didn't work well.

The issue with this worldview is that it's basically "I want my specific group to get free shit and everybody else to pay for it" which can quickly exclude you once the management switches, or include others you didn't mean to. Equality is a black hole of mediocrity, at least with right wing the faggots need to pay out of their own pocket for their degeneracy.

National Socialists were not socially conservative, the only reason they ever had "traditionalist" positions was to propagate the Aryan race and social-darwinism, and they were willing to discard any notions of "traditional" morality if the "struggle for existence" demanded it
If I remember well Goebbels did not give a shit and wanted to conscript women earlier.

This is the fundamental contradiction in National Socialism, how can they even reinforce social-darwinism and meritocracy when the society, culture and state promotes drone behavior?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

National Socialists were not socially conservative, the only reason they ever had "traditionalist" positions was to propagate the Aryan race and social-darwinism, and they were willing to discard any notions of "traditional" morality if the "struggle for existence" demanded it
If I remember well Goebbels did not give a shit and wanted to conscript women earlier.

This is the fundamental contradiction in National Socialism, how can they even reinforce social-darwinism and meritocracy when the society, culture and state promotes drone behavior?

In the end it's the same bullshit as the OP wants, wanting the best of both world no matter how contradictory and hypocritical it comes as.

 

[Kankichi Ryotsu]

The reason why that ideology is not as popular nowadays is because it was (unfortunately) defeated in 1945. It's what mussolini believed.

 

[AgendaPoster]

So a National Socialist? Last time it was tried it didn't work well.

The only reason it "didn't work out well" was because the shitheaded Germanoids invaded Russia, like 20IQ mongrels without any knowledge of history, drunk on their own pride.
TBH it all went down the moment they invaded Poland, Serbia etc.

 

[Irredemable Retardation]

The only reason it "didn't work out well" was because the shitheaded Germanoids invaded Russia, like 20IQ mongrels without any knowledge of history, drunk on their own pride.
TBH it all went down the moment they invaded Poland, Serbia etc.

We will never know what a National Socialist government without war in mind would be like because, unlike what popular myth says, Germany was already heading towards a war economy by 1933.

 

[AgendaPoster]

We will never know what a National Socialist government without war in mind would be like because, unlike what popular myth says, Germany was already heading towards a war economy by 1933.

The ideology was far too popular to be a one time dead meme.
Sometimes in the future, a redistributist, socialist-market economy combo plus open ethnonationalism will reemerge.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

I support it, but not as much as I did when I was younger. I realize there's a lot of fair critiques of socialist economics and unions which don't necessarily benefit people, but overall it's a very good ideology and the only realistic one. I find full-on fascism/Nazism too difficult to sanely implement in modern society, but the more moderate form, so long as it has the ideological background to not drift left on social issues, is very good.

China right now thanks to Chairman Xi is doing some interesting things in this direction since they've been smacking down CIA-backed gay groups, deemed feminists enemies of social morality, and promoted Confucianism and traditional Chinese culture, but the CCP is still too rooted in communism, has a huge corruption problem, does not follow through on promises like their newfound commitment to environmental preservation, and seems to be most interested in self-preservation that just so happens to usually help the average Chinaman and Chinese nation on most issues.

But that combination has been sidelined by the Western empire, because BioLeninism / Spiteful Mutants / Coalition of the Fringes is a more powerful ideology: the West created too much wealth and comfort to have a socialist revolution, but give power to tards who know they'd never earn it in any healthy society, and they will be 100% loyal to helping you tear down the "oppression" (hierarchy) of functional civilization.

To paraphrase that twitter post, you can still be part of the Left while holding non-Lefty economic views, but you cannot dissent event slightly on tranny/race issues, therefore that's all Leftism is at this point: ghetto rainbow worship.

It is a socialist revolution, it's just that unlike Marx's prediction, instead it has been a creeping and slow change. A lot of people, including many self-described socialists, believe there is a distinction between socialism and communism. A communist knows there is no distinction between the two and their only difference is how it will be achieved. Communists want a revolution to make socialism happen, but socialists believe it will happen gradually. This is the ideology of all so-called "social democratic parties" since the 1870s (i.e. Gotha Program among German socialists), but the best example is the Bri'ish Fabian Society, which still exists and has huge influence on socialism globally. This was their logo for many years.



Yep, a wolf in sheep's clothing. That's what behind the politics your average leftist, knowingly or unknowingly, supports. The only end result is a defacto one party state ("Our Democracy"), suppression of dissent, and all manner of leftist degeneracy.

So... the Soviet Union? We drifted so insanely wide to the left socially that Stalin's and Che Guevara's opinions on social issues would be seen as right-wing extremism. Actually further right than extreme, guys like Fuentes or Vox Day are way tamer than they were.
It is nothing short of astonishing, probably the largest social change over short time ever, except maybe primitive civilizations after getting colonized.

Ancient Rome comes close.

Rome in 310 AD - Follow whatever religion you want as long you worship the Emperor, paganism is great, let's sponsor those temples, like 15% of people are Christian
Rome in 380 AD - Follow the particular flavor of Christianity the Emperor approves of, paganism is bad, let's sponsor people to loot those pagan temples, a fuckton of people are Christian

We will never know what a National Socialist government without war in mind would be like because, unlike what popular myth says, Germany was already heading towards a war economy by 1933.

Mussolini had a good run at things in the 1920s, although Italy was a really fucked up place after World War I and half the country was an honest to god third world shithole.

FDR's regime was also influenced by national socialism because he had to absorb the Huey Long/Charles Coughlin supporters. Mussolini praised FDR's program. Here's a libertarian take, with interesting observations like comparing the TVA dams to megaprojects favored by Hitler and Mussolini. FDR is beloved by the left and took a lot of unconstitutional actions, but let's also recall that of all the states rights he infringed, among those he didn't was the right for states to determine their racial policy. He also took until 1941 to desegregate the federal government. And while Roosevelt set the template for the federal government trampling on our rights, a lot of the worst federal agencies and programs were not his creation and he didn't do shit like the Civil Rights Act (both the 1964 one and the even worse 1968 one).

 

[Linako 2.0]

Isn't that just National Socialism or whatever? You're just describing the Nazis.

 

[Ser Prize]

I don't imagine it's hard to be a more well put-together country than Chinadastan. Maybe its better in Europe, I don't know I'll probably never go there, so it doesn't effect me. Most countries in the EU though are a hell of a lot smaller than Canada. Probably easier to run shit when you can cross your country in an afternoon by car.

Also easy to fund such a thing when you have a homogenous and productive population. Shame EU countries fucked that up by importing browns, so now there's is gonna be just as shit.

 

[cybertoaster]

So fascism then, commies like to sperg about fascism and nazism being what liberal capitalism inevitably leads to but in reality those ideologies were shit for business since all companies were essentially subjugated to the will of the nation/party and thus weren't for-profit anymore but for the good of the nation (which the fascists decided what it was). Don't like it? statization, your company is now forcibly taken by the state, you own nothing now and you're stuck in jail for insubordination. Not sure about fascists but nazis would place party members to the boards of all german companies and the equivalent of political commissars on every factory (BTW the chicoms do the same thing now).

Just google what hitler and mussolini thought about bankers and capitalism...

So yeah why isn't that a more popular ideology in the west?

Because we bombed it to hell.

in the U.S there are seems to be only two options
1. Will give you universal healthcare and social safety nets,

Except they don't? the democrats just keep the reaganomics playbook going with more free trade agreements that are only good for outsourcing stuff and tax evasion, obamacare was a fraud and the gibs are limited to certain "special interest groups"

but will make you pay a billion dollars for healthcare while giving tax cuts to the ultra rich

So same as the left is doing? even in the "socialist" european countries corporations pay very little in taxes while the middle class gets its paychecks obliterated to pay for everything.

or the Third-World countries we haven't droned into RainbowKiddyism

Plenty of third-world countries are fully into the gendershit insanity, see brazil.

all those central american illegals will happily take your tax dollars

Except their are fleeing their countries because taxes there are higher than here.

To paraphrase that twitter post

Link?

So... the Soviet Union?

The initial soviet union with lenin was incredibly libertine, talking total 180° to the point that they legalized homosexuality and a bunch of other things. It was stalin who stopped that partly because he didn't like it and partly because he wanted to get rid of all the other commies so he could be top dog forever.

I know that in the orthodox jew communities they make sure widows and their children are well taken of financially.

I've heard different stories about families getting scammed within the community with no resort since everything gets solved within the incredibly corrupt religious courts they have. Or stories about rabbis refusing to do burial rites for people who couldn't afford it.

We will never know what a National Socialist government without war in mind would be like

I think arab baathism counts as a sort-of national socialism since their economies were heavily left while the culture was secular but very conservative. Also I think that vargas guy in brasil was very close to fascist ideas, and wasn't peron from argentina a self-proclaimed fascist?

Anyway, none of those countries did well with those economic systems, but then again its all third world countries with undeveloped economies and insane corruption.