I can't stand the sexual degeneracy and pro-abortion, pro-gay politics of leftist socialist parties and I can't stand the jingoism, racism, and "trickle down" hatred of poor people of right wing parties.
Why are there no parties for my type of people?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
vdare.com
twitter.com
Because it doesn't benefit international gazillionaires or further the interests of globalist corporations.
Duh???
You're on a website wit several boards dedicated to sexual deviants and you're complaining about "degeneracy"?
because politicians and their financial overlords must create an illusion of conflict of interests in societies, so they can reap the profits from both sides
I'm ready to bet my right hand that real mayority of people in civilized world would choose a party described by OP. Myself included. But that wouldn't benefit churches, financial morguls, weapon sellers, marxist opinion-makers in media and so on.
>sexual degeneracy and pro-abortion, pro-gay politics
do they propose government programs that force people to do all that? I support these policies for the sole reason of the State having no right to impose morality on citizens
>no right to impose morality
bullshit. All morality comes ultimately from state laws. What do you think the 10 commandments or the code of hammurabi were if not state laws? The state seeks to protect society from harm, your "right" to harm other people is not a freedom covered under the state. Abortion is a crime against the most vulnerable of society, the unborn, its no less of a crime than allowing children to euthanise their elderly and sick parents would be (leftists support that too). Sexual degeneracy and sodomy spreads STDs, adultery and premarital sex destroys success rates of marriage and the intimacy of a wife-husband bond. How can a husband claim to be sharing something intimate and special with his wife if he's already banged 20 other women? He can't. It causes a deterioration in the marriage, an increase in adultery, an increase in divorce. Divorce leads to more parentless children growing up in broken homes, leading to lives of drugs, crimes, no strong role models, and become corrupted in a vicious cycle.
Someone needs to step in somewhere and stop the vicious cycle, but there will always be people who want the degradation of society to go on in the name of freedom.
>inb4 "hurr durr go back to le /pol/"
fuck off, i hate /pol/, racism is another form of degeneracy caused by poor people looking to misplace their misfortunes on other poor people.
>by poor people looking to misplace their misfortunes on other poor people.
>racism exists due to socioeconomic reasons
You should go to /pol/ to get fucking informed
>The state seeks to protect society from harm,
Sure but none of what you said is involuntarily harmful in the same sense as murder, rape
>Sexual degeneracy and sodomy spreads STDs
More to do with flawed methods and practice of safe sex than sexual degeneracy and sodomy desu
>adultery and premarital sex destroys success rates of marriage and the intimacy of a wife-husband bond
But marriage is a voluntary relationship by two people and they have every to right to preserve or break it as they so wish.
>Divorce leads to more parentless children growing up in broken homes, leading to lives of drugs, crimes, no strong role models, and become corrupted in a vicious cycle.
So? The state should ban divorce?
I won't argue against abortion since I do agree it is immoral but the State has no right to intervene since the unborn is not a recognized as a citizen.
The State should never be a tool of the majority to impose their morality on the minority
Because right wing people have jobs they need to go to. Can't protest all day like welfare queens.
>The State should never be a tool of the majority to impose their morality on the minority
The right of the minority should never conflict with the will of the majority
Most leftist parties in east Asia fit your description
Why aren't there more socially conservative, theologically liberal religious movements out here?
I detest degeneracy, but want a religion with more freedom of theological speculation and mystical practice, which mainstream Christianity doesn't allow.
Are there more people like me?
And deists, new agers, western Buddhists etc generally lean to the left.
>informed
that's an odd way to spell "brainwashed"
>liberal
>speculation
>mystical
freemasonry seems like your fit
Because economic liberalism will make way to social degeneracy. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want people to stop commit 'degeneracy' you have to regulate the consumption and production somehow, so there won't be any economic liberalism.
You basically want to have your cake and eat it too.
Doesn't mean he browses said boards. I'm a functioning adult and not a self hating shitskin so I don't browse /b/ or /pol/. I still use about half the rest of the site and see no problem with this.
Economic liberalism
I'm not OP but I'm pretty sure he isn't arguing for or against economic liberalism, I think he is arguing for economic fsirness/distribution.
Also your post seems at odds with reality seeing as the Republican party in the U.S id against regulation of production and consumption and they often like to think of themselves as against "degeneracy"
>he thinks /pol/ is informative
Whether you believe them or not doesn't matter. Saying racism only exist because Achmed took over Cletus' job is a juvenile reasoning that doesn't even come close to reality. Poor people misplacing their own misfortune doesn't explain slave owners being disgusted at their african slaves, or people holding other ethnicities in contempt for perceived backwards culture.
Unironically go to /pol/.
Huh guess those Tea Party protestors weren't real then.
>my type of people
Are there things you look for? Or are there only things you hate?
Divorce should only be allowed in special cases such as domestic abuse or adultery. Otherwise, "till death do us part" should be enforced in the legal sense.
What you're describing is racial supremacism not racial hatred. I doubt a slave owner would actively hate the man who's doing his gardening and taking care of his kids.
Belief in a racial superiority order does not equate to outright hatred. Hatred very rarely occurs downwards, it's usually against perceived injustices.
Still does not make racism any less complicated then what was said earlier.
Go to /pol/
>Why are there no parties for my type of people?
hmm...
en.wikipedia.org
hmm....
You're a /d/ guy, right?
I can tell.
Same here friend. Socially conservative, economically socialist. I have no idea where to turn.
I guess...
Because social conservatism is a meme.
>Why are there no major socially-conservative economically-liberal political movements?
Is this some kind of trick question?
Virtually all modern conservatives are economically liberal, I mean even the world's most famous one the American republicans are so.
>I can't stand the sexual degeneracy and pro-abortion, pro-gay politics of leftist socialist parties and I can't stand the jingoism, racism, and "trickle down" hatred of poor people of right wing parties.
Catholic paries are often the answer here.
Unless the state is ruled by a minority, which it always is. Every administrative regime in the history of the earth has been ruled by an elite subset of society, either explicitly or otherwise.
It's called national socialism.
Its called paleoconservatism. vdare.com
Come to Poland.
Law and Justice, our gov party, is holier than pope and statist as fuck.
You mean christian democracy??
Because religious/moral conservatism is dying and unless you can find some way to undo the invention of condoms, contraceptives, anti-bacterial medications, assorted labor saving appliances, various advances in medical technology that allow the large majority of women to survive childbirth without serious disability, it's not coming back.
This doesn't mean that the tumblr types are going to win either though, we're already seeing the beginnings of the backlash with the election of trump and assorted other much smaller events that are happening right now.
>You should go to /pol/ to get fucking informed
Good god, someone posted this unironically.
>economically liberal
I don't think you understand what liberalism means. Liberalism = free markets.
there is also social liberalism
you can be liberal in morals and socialist in economy, and vice versa
mind you, "liberal", "socialist", "left-wing" or "right-wing" sometimes mean different things in US and Europe
>How can a husband claim to be sharing something intimate and special with his wife if he's already banged 20 other women? He can't.
t. autist who's never been in a real relationship
>All morality comes ultimately from state laws.
t. I don't know the first fucking thing about philosophy.
Go read more, and grow up a bit, kiddo.
There is something like that, but it exists primarily in former eastern bloc countries, in parties that miss Soviet control and want it to come back.
Real Soviet Communism was very different from the evil empire bs that Reagan peddled to Americans.
kill yourself /leftypol/ kike
>>The right of the minority should never conflict with the will of the majority
Wrong, the entire point of the American Republic is to prevent the tyranny of the majority, AKA mob rule.
I'm not saying Soviet Communism was good or even effective, but it matches the socially conservative, economically liberal slant that OP was talking about. What do you want me to say?
>Because the last economically liberal yet socially conservative movement were the Nazis.
No. That could arguably define America up in tell the 1960s.
In other words,
Labor movements
Until Democrats sold out organized labor after the defeat of McGovern and Reagan permanently emasculated the labor movement in the 1980's.
Left wing economic right wing social party would be a disaster for the ruling class
>You should go to /pol/ to get fucking informed
lel
>Left wing economic right wing social party would be a disaster for the ruling class
Why? If anything identity politics keeps the masses down. Also
>McGovern
Lol, the campaign slogans write themselves
>Why?
Very anti-corruption oriented for one.
>Nazis
> economically liberal
That meme, again?
Like Muh degeneracy? Or like government corruption?
Post the pic with hilter showing his party name to business leaders and workers
>Why? If anything identity politics keeps the masses down. Also
Both sides employ identity politics. It's how you keep the attention of low-information voters.
An economically left-wing party which retains the support of social conservatives would be an implacable party
>Lol, the campaign slogans write themselves
Democrats took all the wrong lessons after that blow out loss, as usual for them
abortion is bad? jeez i guess woman's rights are bad too..
>An economically left-wing party which retains the support of social conservatives would be an implacable party
How? People are more likely to vote on social issues anyway, at least in recent times
>Democrats took all the wrong lessons after that blow out loss, as usual for them
Idk what happened, care to enlighten me?
Because people don't want their freedoms taken away while getting taxed more. You're fucking over people in more ways.
>woman's rights are bad too..
Pretty much.
>How? People are more likely to vote on social issues anyway, at least in recent times
Exactly, so right now we have it where the rubes turn out in droves to vote for guys who quietly turn around and sell the country down the river to billionaires and they'll turn a blind eye to it because muhhh pro-life
Instead, they'd blindly turn out in droves to vote for a guy who is going to advance working class interests and not be bothered by things like earmarks or other routine aspects of public governance which help our government function.
>Idk what happened, care to enlighten me?
the tl;dr is that Nixon was popular because the economy was doing well and the McGovern campaign sputtered and stalled at the worst possible moment due to an unbelievably stupid flap involving his VP selection.
McGovern gets BTFO and unlike the Republicans who hunkered down ideologically after Barry Goldwater's defeat, liberals decided that it was labor's fault that they lost so badly and the divorce of 72 spelled the death of the New Deal as a serious Democrat policy platform and further cemented America's shift towards there being a conservative party and a liberal party (rather than parties with separate wings) Liberals thought that in order to win votes they have to be the Republican-lite party and abandoned organized labor
Flash forward to the Obama administration and you have a left-wing regime which is more corporate-technocratic in character and completely shits all over working people in the interest of serving powerful donors in a bizarro "anti-working class" version of leftism which is really an ungodly patchwork of identity politics with no coherent message or theme. This brand of liberalism (hopefully) died with Hillary Clinton, but considering that Democrats are basically professional losers, it's hard to tell if they'll ever get tired of this arrangement
>Why are there no major socially-conservative economically-liberal political movements
there was and we destroyed it
>You are describing Republicans before they went full Reganomics then was killed by newt Gingrich and burried by W.
You know it's true.
>killed by newt Gingrich and burried by W.
So is Trump despoiling a desiccated corpse?
Because leftism at its core is about subverting traditional institutions in order to grab absolute power. Things like the church, the nuclear family, etc threaten the power of the central government by making the people less reliant on it due to their good upbringing.
Also, most adults realize that right wing economics is the opposite of "jingoism, racism, and hatred of poor people" so they see no point in such a party.
This is like saying your a degenerate if you use craiglist to sell your used books.
This. This guy gets it
>hurr don't impose anything upon me!
Proof that libertarianism is nothing more than pseudo-intellectualism for the autistic degenerate.
Socialism is a meme, a very bad meme that has never worked and yet people still push it. Social conservatism on the other hand has produced the world's greatest and only super power.
He didn't mean liberal in the classical sense.
What are you talking about? Paleoconservatism is 1920s era conservatism, think Coolidge.
>What are Goldwater Republicans
>What are Coolidge Republicans
Lurk more, Regan didn't create the conservative movement he just rode the wave into office.
>Because religious/moral conservatism is dying
Only is western yurope, and how does a vacuum cleaner lead to the decline of morals?
>>What are Coolidge Republicans
Paleoconservative movement which was highly popular until it caused the most devastating economic crash in history and people turned against its ideals for almost 2 generations
>>What are Goldwater Republicans
A failed attempt to rebrand the Republican party. Goldwater just didn't have the charisma to pull it off the way that Reagan did
There's nothing wrong with abortion or gays
There is a thing called islam dude
Islam is economicaly liberal (read islamic banking) and socially conservative