Is it accurate that right wing values are 'old school' and left wing values are more modern?

[MissSunshine2]

[Lliam]

What right and left values are you talking about? Women's rights? Sexual liberation? Monitored immigration? LGBT? Authoritarianism? Religious freedom? Anti-war?

I think many right wingers have a fantasized Victorian attitude toward women that is not much different from Islamic values. But women's rights and sexual liberation started happening in the Roaring '20s when people weren't divided by liberal and conservative labels.

Immigration has been monitored since 1892 since the opening of Ellis Island, although the northern and southern borders were fairly open. People crossing back and forth across the border were not considered to be a problem until WWII. Even then, cross border work and commerce was common and contributed to the U. S. economy. Migrant workers were essential.
Biden fucked that up by not only allowing millions to enter the country illegally, but giving them tax payer funded housing, medical care and money.
That created resentment. Then Trump went on a rampage, drumming of xenophobia and fear. Instead of going after criminals and freeloaders, he started round up every single migrant, even the honest, hard working ones.
People on the right support that. Others think he is going too far and being unnecessarily cruel. And some bat-shit crazies are in favor of open borders and free handouts including voting rights.

In my experience, it was conservatives who used to be pro-authoritarian. But liberals became just as bad. Liberals oppose 2nd Amendment rights and censorship of free speech.

Conservatives seem to be the most opposed to religious freedom and separation of church and state because they consider the USA to be a Christian nation.

They also have traditional attitudes toward LGBT.
On the other side, liberals are totally supportive of LGB and have gone further to embrace the insanity of TQI+++.

At the outbreak of WWI, the majority of Americans opposed getting involved. Major protests against American involvement and especially the draft were brutally shut down by the Wilson government.
In the 1960s and '70s, it was liberals who opposed the war in Viet Nam. But now, the Democratic party and many liberals are just as supportive of U. S. aggression as are Republicans and conservatives.

Modern liberalism no longer bears any resemblance to my 1960s-'70s liberal values of peace, love, open mindeness, tolerance, support for fairness and justice, love of liberty and freedom, opposition to authoritarianism and wars of aggression.

So, in some ways, conservatives have what could be called "old school values" in regards to women, and sex.
Liberals have embraced authoritarianism, violence, and some some really unconventional shit.

Both liberals and conservatives have become radicalized and rather insane.

[Lliam]

Correction. Liberals support censorship.

[beefcakebradybatson]

And righties don't?

[Lliam]

@beefcakebradybatson. Yes they do. I was correcting the sentence where I said "Liberals oppose 2nd Amendment rights and censorship of free speech." I should have inserted "support" before the word censorship.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Second Amendment rights, i. e., allowing every crazed a**hole the right to unlimited weaponry and ammunition because Americans largely hate each other? And you Yanks wonder why your s**thole "society" is circling the drain ala the former Soviet Union two generations ago?

[Lliam]

@beefcakebradybatson. Hah. And Canadians don't value individual rights at all. A bunch of loyal subjects. Sooo obedient to their masters.

You obviously haven't researched gun violence in the U. S. You just swallow the "gun control" propaganda without a thought.
Also, maybe your black brethren should stop shooting each other.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Maybe you honkkkies should stop committing mass murders, you KKK Trump a**hat.

[Lliam]

@beefcakebradybatson. Based on preliminary 2024 data, gun homicides in the U. S. declined, with estimates often cited around 11,717 to over 15,000, depending on the source and inclusion of police-involved shootings.
Let's take the high number just for simplicity. The FBI says that 80% of gun homicides are gang related. That leaves 3,000 for the KKK, Trump, and ALLLL the 80 million crazed gun owners. LOL. And who belongs to all the gags that killed 12,000.

By the way, to put things in perspective, around 40,000 people die from accidental falls each year. About the same number die from accidental poisonings also from vehicular accidents. Compare that to 15,000 gun homicides.

OMG, the U. S. has SUCH a gun problem. We should surrender our rights.

[beefcakebradybatson]

I'm not anti-gun;hunters and sportsmen (and folk protecting their home) should have access to guns, but not arsenals and military-use ammo.

[beefcakebradybatson]

The KKK? Didn't know they still shot people, but OK.

[Lliam]

@beefcakebradybatson. You're the one who mentioned KKK. I was being facetious.

What is "military-use" ammo? .

[beefcakebradybatson]

AK-47s, cop-killer bullets and the like.

[Lliam]

@beefcakebradybatson. The AK-47 is 7.62×39mm. Designed in 1943 (M43), this cartridge is known for its high reliability, heavy-hitting power, and effectiveness in close-to-medium range combat.
It is a medium caliber and velocity. Common calibers like.308 and 30.06 are much more formidable, and there are plenty of even larger calibers.

Cop killer bullets is a myth promoted by the same "gun control" propagandists who invented the term "military-style assault rifles" to describe common semiautomatic rifles that look military.

The only "cop killer" bullets I am aware of are Teflon coated hand gun bullets and those are illegal.
But bullet-proof vests can't stop rifle calibers.

[OlderAndWiser]

Those are labels applied by the left to make themselves look as good as possible. If the right applied labels in that fashion, our values would "proven and successful" and left wing values would be "unproven and experimental."

[Cidknee]

Hey, that's what I said.

[OlderAndWiser]

@Cidknee Yes, you did!

[NaultD]

https://youtu.be/-hQ9wGoadGA?feature=shared

Social security ended elder poverty.

Let's do the same with healthcare?

[OlderAndWiser]

@NaultD

1. Social Security retirement is paid only to those workers who have paid in to Social Security during their working years. Only about 80% of all older Americans actually receive Social Security retirement pay. You are ignoring 20% of all older Americans.

2. Social Security is funded with worker "contributions" collected as a 7.65% tax on earnings, together with a 7.65% "contribution" required from employers. And it is actuarily unsound - as those on the left frequently proclaim in the midst of election rhetoric - because it started in the 1930's paying benefits to workers who never contributed. Do you really think this is a model system?

3. Why is it the obligation of government to solve problems for Americans? Why aren't we supposed to take care of ourselves? Why are you justified in suggesting that the government tax our income to solve other people's problems so that you can feel good about yourself? I would prefer that the government intrude in our lives as little as possible.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Depends on what you view as “old school” because a lot of the loudest right-wing values have more to do with segregationists than any other group, the christian bits are just a front.

[strawberryapple]

The only two labels that matter is common sense and batshit crazy.
Open borders is batshit crazy.

[Snakeyes7]

I don't think so. The left wing loves to play off of tribal politics. Race, gender, citizenship status, you name it, they will rarely say it but they will always advocate for the better treatment for one over the other.

It's a tactic as old as time, war propaganda uses it all the time. If you want two groups to hate each other, spread propaganda that one has unearned privileges or wants to control the other. Even if it isn't true, if the propaganda is being done by a political or institutional power, it's a pretty safe bet to say it isn't, it will definitely cause the groups to hate each other.

What makes the tactic the left is using so sinister is that it's war propaganda used within a society, as opposed to two mutually exclusive ones, which will cause it to quickly collapse in on itself if nothing is done about it.

What we recently found out about the SPLC is a good example of this, and this is a tactic Hitler and Mao Zedong are notorious for.

[goaded]

"Left-wing politics typically involve a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded you just gave me a rose-tinted version of what I just said. Instead of holding everyone by the same standards like we are supposed to be doing, left-wing politics is just lowering the standards needed for the supposedly disadvantaged to participate in society.

The result of that is that now the supposedly disadvantaged will not be so, and will act like animals knowing full well no one will do anything about it because the media will slander them as an -ist or a -phobe, or whatever they have to do for the sake of character assassination, the moment they do.

England for example has a serious problem with Muslims taking over, many of which directly saying so, and the brits have no choice but to take it because Queer Stalin and his "empathy" will sooner seal away those who call it out than do anything about it.

[goaded]

No, I gave a definition from Wikipedia.

People aren't held to the same standards. By the police, the job market, the education system.

If you're rich, you get better education, better jobs, better health care, and better lawyers if they get in trouble, etc..

To an extent, that's OK, until you get to the point where some people don't get any education, so can't find good jobs, no health care, and just five minutes with an over-worked lawyer before their trial while other people get away with killing four people because of their "affluenza".

The left want reasonable minimum standards, the right say that's just the way it is.

In higher education, the US system of legacy admissions is biased towards white people, because for generations the white people were most of the people in university. You can't be a legacy admission if your parents never got to university.

It took DEI to get women into professions and higher education. Both of which are better off with them there.

The right said "that's just the way it is".

You clearly have no clue about what it's like in England.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded you're trying to squash the symptoms using an a force that is already involved and allowed it to exist. I don't know about you but I don't go to a government office and think "Ah yes, I trust these people with my healthcare."

The problem is that we have been ignoring the law of supply and demand for well over a century. We haven't been a capitalist nation for ages.

My solution is abolish the federal reserve for inflating the currency, abolishing the income tax (or better yet the IRS as a whole) so that people have more money in their pockets, reversing Dodge v Ford so businesses can actually do what the customers and employees want again.

We need to go full Bukele on the inner city so that people can no longer be at risk of gang activity, as well as illegal immigrants so that demand can properly be measured.

We need to fix the marriage system so that kids are raised by a mother and father again, and that marriages would never be divorced without good reason.

Finally, citing Marbury v Madison, making all laws and activity within the US that violates the constitution and bill of right null and void.

All of your problems will go away and there will be no risk of state tyranny which is guaranteed when we go your path.

> It took DEI to get women into professions and higher education. Both of which are better off with them there.

No it didn't. DEI is purely race and gender based hiring and acceptance. The only reason why there was a disparity in higher education in the first place was the GI Bill and those retarded feminists took that to mean that men got into school for free when it cost them going to war against the axis powers.

[goaded]

Please! You're at peak capitalism right now. Health care is a really terrible match with purely capitalist systems.

"All of your problems will go away"? Because there were no problems in the 1890s. Everyone was happy, healthy, and wealthy. At least all the people who mattered.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded How can you say that this is peak capitalism when all these things became such a huge problem within the past say 70 years? People used to be able to support a family with a single income, and that was even after the seeds of what is destroying us today has already been sown. What changed? It certainly isn't because the government further interfered with the law of supply and demand.

> All of your problems will go away"? Because there were no problems in the 1890s.

We had similar issues but we managed to not have politicians swayed by lobbyists and they crushed monopolies. Now they welcome them, income tax is now no longer unconstitutional when it previously and rightfully was because it made at least 40% of our labor slavery (work with no pay).

All of your goals sound nice, I would love to have free shit, but until matter can be created out of thin air, we will always have scarcity and nothing will ever actually be free.

Now all publicly traded companies must

[goaded]

"How can you say that this is peak capitalism when all these things became such a huge problem within the past say 70 years?"
Because that's totally untrue.

Life in the US was much worse for most people before the New Deal than it was until the last couple of decades. Now, once again, the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, and they are back in control of the government, thanks to the right.

Once again, monopolies need to be crushed, starting with the health care sector. There needs to be another New Deal, one that gives power back to the people.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded
>Life in the US was much worse for most people before the New Deal than it was until the last couple of decades.

You mean when we had the great depression which was a result of people gathering a massive amount of debt thanks to the invention of credit. People made awful decisions with their money in the 20s for that short burst of lavish lifestyle (which was why it was called the roaring 20s). That combined with the stock market crash caused deflation which only twisted the knife on debtors.

All the New Deal did was create a bunch of ponzi schemes and took more income away from the working class for things that would have happened anyway, employing workers for example. Despite all that, unemployment was 17% by the time the New Deal ended. The only thing it really changed was the GDP because it includes government spending so it was mainly an illusion as far as how well the average person fared. It was only a band-aid that provided a false sense of relief.

The only reason the average person recovered was because of WWII. It was guaranteed employment for the men and it gave enough of a sense of patriotism that it even encouraged the women to work in the military front (Rosie the Riveter). On top of that, the great depression trained people to ration so they had a much easier time saving money even after everything recovered.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded >Now, once again, the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, and they are back in control of the government, thanks to the right.

It really doesn't matter. We have already achieved fascism at a very basic level decades ago with the unholy marriage between business and government (just ask Mussolini). Taxing them will do nothing because the government is just going to do what they want anyway.

Do away with income tax entirely so people can have more money and not be slaves to the government. Reverse or do away with Dodge v. Ford so publicly traded companies are no longer required by law to prioritize shareholders over the employee and consumer. Tell me why these won't help us significantly, because at least for the latter it appears to be one of the biggest sources of our problems.

[goaded]

No, I mean people were working six or seven days a week and still starving.

What do you mean by "the New Deal ended"? Did the laws enacted go away? The 40 hour working week? The prohibition on oppressive child labour? The right to unionise? The Social Security Act?

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded We have state interference with supply and demand to thank for that.

Zoning laws, illegal immigration, and incentives to the oldest generation (something Trump absolutely did not help), and property taxes are part of why housing is so expensive.

Why have the price of new cars gotten so expensive and continue to skyrocket? Because politicians have placed regulations requiring certain features to be available in every car. By 2027, all new cars are required to have surveillance systems that can stop the car or prevent it from starting if it thinks you are unfit to drive, all of that costs money and there are no longer any plain models available anymore. As if cars made within the past 15 years weren't enough of a privacy and security risk. Again, Dodge v. Ford makes publicly traded companies contribute to this problem by law.
Finally we are taxed with every step we take.

It's really not that hard to trace the source of our problems.

Ok fair enough, they didn't go away but it ended in a sense that any action made post that was not for the New Deal effort. However, it wasn't those policies that got us put of the depression, the idea was to soften the blow, but again, that requires the theft of other people's money.

Oh yeah, I also don't see the effort of making sure Americans are employed anymore. Last I checked most of the jobs Americans want are being outsourced to places like India.

[goaded]

Have you forgotten what we were talking about? Not surprising, since it's been nearly a week.

We were talking about people "working six or seven days a week and still starving" 100+ years ago. How did "Zoning laws, illegal immigration, and incentives to the oldest generation" affect them?

So, the New Deal didn't ended passing new laws with that label, but the laws enacted didn't go away. The 40 hour working week. The prohibition on oppressive child labour. The right to unionise. The Social Security Act. (Although Republicans are doing their best to get rid of them, and you pretend that will make things better!)

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded I mentioned those things as examples of why things are so expensive now. The government stuck its grimy and bloody hands where it didn't belong and now it's even harder to afford it. The wages remained stagnant because 20-30 years ago, it would have been perfect.

I don't know how much easier I can explain other than we need to rely on the law of supply and demand again, it's such a no-brainer even an econ 101 student can figure it out.

As much as I think unions are corrupt, I support their right to exist, but I don't think they should be required unlike what some states do.

Yes, I would even go as far as to say that the welfare state needs to go, period. It only keeps people poor, removes all incentives to make something of themselves, and it is all done at the expense of the taxpayer. It's squashing a symptom of the problem but not the core issue.

[goaded]

Well, you were wrong, but also we were talking about how people's lives today are better than in the days of work or die, back around 1900.

What "would have been perfect" "20-30 years ago"? When Clinton left Bush a surplus? Or when Bush turned it back into a deficit with tax cuts that benefited the rich most?

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded I don't know, I was born in the late 90s. However, my parents used to be able to afford college in the early 90s because tuition was about a part time summer job's worth of pay. I think the massive rise of student loans is to blame for the spike in tuition costs by artificially increasing the demand by allowing people to spend money they don't have.

That's what I mean. Things were far more affordable when there were less top-down efforts to make them more affordable.

[goaded]

"State support for public colleges and universities has fallen by about 26 percent per full-time student since the early 1990s". en.wikipedia.org/.../College_tuition_in_the_United_States

It's the absence of "top-down efforts" that's the problem.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded either way, student loans is why it's so expensive now

[Snakeyes7]

Oh by the way, Henry Ford was the one who normalized the 40 hr work week. FDR just encoded it into law.

[Zack-Bann]

Left wingers want to censor and sanitize every word we say.
Want us to taxes through the nose with no real return on them
Murder babies at will…


Sounds pretty old school to me
In fact it’s closer to the middle ages than the modern era

[beefcakebradybatson]

Righties want to control all non-cisgender, rich, straight white males.

[Still-alive]

you have to essentially be psychologically demaged to be on the right in our current age.

they are any, some or all of the following:

- racist

- homophobic

- bigoted

- misogynistic

- likely raped someone or multiple people

- likely pedo's, chomo's

- if not pedos or chomos they overlook or perfectly fine with people who are

- Psycho sexually damaged.

- really REALLY wanna use their guns on people they disagree with

- probably high on meth!

[goaded]

Regressive and progressive, yes.

Just a reminder, progressives freed the slaves, codified weekends, gave women the vote, the right to own property and not be property, enacted minimum wages, workplace safety requirements...

[Cidknee]

You forgot fought for slavery, created the kkk, started Jim Crowe, and voted against equal rights. And they love to tax us.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

@goaded

You fail to mention that it was also a progressive who enslaved people, forced weekend labor, took mother's out of homes and into factories, killed Jews by the millions, and said Merry Christmas was offensive.

[goaded]

@Cidknee No, that's the point. In the 19th century Democrats were the regressive party and Republicans the progressive party. Now it's the other way around. The mid 20th century turned the south against the Democrats because they didn't like the Civil Rights Act. Votes in the south were about 10:1 against it, votes in the north the opposite.

[Cidknee]

Whatever helps you sleep at night. That lie started in the 60s with LBJ and company in order to get the black vote "for two hundred years".

[goaded]

@MissSunshine2 These two will continue to spout stupid talking points, but you can see the votes for yourself:

"By party and region

House of Representatives:[3]

Southern Democrats: 8–83 (9–91%) – four Representatives from Texas (Jack Brooks, Albert Thomas, J. J. Pickle, and Henry González), two from Tennessee (Richard Fulton and Ross Bass), Claude Pepper of Florida and Charles L. Weltner of Georgia voted in favor
Southern Republicans: 0–11 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–8 (95–5%)
Northern Republicans: 136–24 (85–15%)

Note that four Representatives voted Present while 13 did not vote.

Senate:[2]

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) – only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) – John Tower of Texas, the only Southern Republican at the time, voted against
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) – only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%) – Norris Cotton (NH), Barry Goldwater (AZ), Bourke B. Hickenlooper (IA), Edwin L. Mechem (NM), and Milward Simpson (WY) voted against"
en.wikipedia.org/.../Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

[Cidknee]

No @MissSundhine2 its as it would seem. The democrats did all that i say. They, seeing they had lost again when trying to prevent the bill of rights from forming came up with what they always do, lies, lies, and more lies.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

We'll make this real easy. @goaded Are you in favor of slavery?

[goaded]

@Ariesman81Nshiiit Why would you ask such a stupid question? No, I'm not. Are you?

[Cidknee]

😂🖖🫰👍

[goaded]

@Cidknee You'd have her believe Germans are gassing Jews today. That's more recent history than what you're talking about.

[Cidknee]

Wrong again.

[goaded]

@Cidknee Nope.

[Ariesman81Nshiiit]

@goaded
My bad, forgot about you.
No. But then again I am a Republican.

[exitseven]

I think there is truth I this. Conservative values are time tested and proven to be sound. Liberal values are self serving and not well thought out.

[Master_Debator]

I view it more as "spend more - Tax more" and supporting shit like trans over just regular logic on running shit and basic bitch morals. Choose your side.

For me, the "F" in "Communism" stands for food. I see one side that's running every state that they run, into the fucking dirt. I'm not trying to be a dick and I don't got biblical issues... I just see what I see and vote for the less crazy option.

[RavVid]

No. Conservatives minds are disposed to what is known to work. There is an element of fear , if you like, in diverting from what is known to work. That is probably old school though not necessarily so

I don't think you can say Left wing is more modern because what is modern? It is probably more libertine than anything and has little concern for consequences.

[FunkyMonkee]

What's modern about the kkk? They've been around for at least 200 years? If ANYONE'S backwards, it's the DEMOCRATS!!

[whosnumber_1]

No total bunk.

Left wing = more government control, censorship, socialist and bureaucracy

Right wing = free market, free speech more capitalistic less bureaucracy

Both far left and far right are not ideal. In my humble opinion finding middle ground is best. A government that is interested in free enterprise and empowering people and industry.

[sage2021]

Left wing people are crazy! Even President Trump says they are crazy.

If being crazy is more modern then I guess the left is modern crazy! 🤯

[Sirenboobzilla]

Far right and far left are both bat shit retarded. But Trump calling anyone crazy is redundant

[sage2021]

I would just like to add that we didn't always refer to them as the right or the left. I think that's a lazy way of referring to them as Republicans and Democrats.

[strateguy632]

right wing values are 'old school' that worked. Liberals try populism and old marxist.

[darkcloud1945]

The left you refer to is communist, and they are not new; they have been around since 1917, just a different ribbon that wraps it, but it is still the same communist manifesto page for page from 1917.

[OneViewpoint]

The more accurate statement is that Reich Wing values are selfish, authoritarian, and punitive for everyone but themselves while Left Wing values aim at uplifting the majority of society.

[abc3643]

Not really. For the left, there is a lot of "old school" as well but they want to make sure EVERYBODY has access to that old school stuff... like the right to vote.

[NaultD]

Big miss is that progress is always happening.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-hQ9wGoadGA

[Cidknee]

It's that on right they're tried and true vs the lefts idiotic insanity.

[DonaldDarko]

Or right wing values are more organic. Left wing values are more sophisticated and thought out. They just did a shitty job of it.

[slatyb]

Old school? They are racist and sexist. Is that what you mean?

[888theGreat]

Not now. Banks used to be Conservative , now they radical taking all kinds of risks. They know they will be bailed out by FED.

[Mike_Hum]

Left wing values are psychotic.

[bpersona]

expand on that

[Mike_Hum]

@bpersona which part? The modern left in the US is a destructive force and the antithesis of freedom, logic, and decency.

[bpersona]

how is it destructive? and most debates i've seen are leftists being more logical than people who lean more right.

[Mike_Hum]

@bpersona look at any democratic run city. Look at any blm riot or whatever else they’re protesting. War on successful people and whites.

[bpersona]

You don't even know what they're protesting. They're not protesting white people, the most recent protest was the No Kings Protest. They're protesting against the Trump administration. You have a victim complex.

[Mike_Hum]

@bpersona They don't even know what they're protesting, lol.

[Dargil]

I will plug in traditional and trendy.

[Anonymous]

That's a bit simplistic but kind of yeah

[loveslongnails]

"Old school"? Like what?

[Kelly6]

@MissSunshine2 Not accurate

[jjr23]

far left is marxism and result will be communism

[KostasKouvalis]

I would say YES

[beefcakebradybatson]

Broadly.

[jahaims]

No lol

[In_Trance]

Inaccurate

[Iron_Man]

No it’s not

[Anonymous]

No it isn't