I support strong borders and isolationism but am socially liberal ( + gay marriage, abortion). I do support gun rights and am rather mixed on the death penalty. Why are there so few politicians out there who hold similar views? A lot of the opposition to the conservative movement here is a social one, not an economic one.
Pic Unrelated
Other urls found in this thread:
anyone have that counter signal meme of the edgy fedora fag saying shit like "Ha I'm fiscally conservative but socially liberal, you've never debated anyone like me before"
Not really fiscal I suppose, I am not too concerned with taxes I am more interested in not being involved in foreign wars or in multinational orgs and making sure our borders clamp down.
I would wager most people on here share similar views. Who the fuck wants the government telling you how to live your life?
Fuck taxes. Fuck roads.
Well I definitely support a social safety net built with taxes but only on the condition that our population not be rapidly expanding due to new immigration.
On your wavelength
I feel like an outcast
Same way, except I am against taxation and the welfare state since I feel we are entitled to what we work for and how raising taxes really doesn't help. I feel once the welfare state is abolished we won't get much immigrants anyways.
>the old roads meme
Who's to say private roads won't be more efficient?
Well they probably would start costing more money to use after a while.
>socially liberal ( + gay marriage, abortion)
You are either a faggot or a roastie. Sup Forums is anti-degeneracy.
And how does it affect you what people do in their private lives?
Social conservatism plus fiscal liberalism is the true redpill.
And how is a public institution like marriage a private thing?
The social programs he loves so much are buckling already and cannot deal with outliers.
Social conservatism holds out a lot of wedge issues that prevent a lot of younger, female, non-white, or simply poorer people from voting conservative. To enact isolationism and closed borders, which have become desperate necessities at this point, we need a broader wagon of people to travel this trail.
So you're not even close to conservative. You're pretty much an old-school Democrat.
Yeah, fuck you and your kind. Your type let the communists in and then whined when you got communism.
Gays don't confine it to their private lives, they always force their lifestyle on everyone. I don't hate gays but it shouldn't be encouraged.
Old-school democrats were more anti-communist than current democrats.
Social and fiscal issues are often totally separate though, he wouldnt put forward any arguments that were any different to a conservatives (on fiscal policy) or classical liberals (on social policy), only difference is they'd both come out of the same person.
>edgy fedora fag
>is most likely some 19 year old memeing faggot who knows nothing about politics but just likes worshiping hitler and spouting edgy minority jokes all day
>conservatism is unpopular
>therefore let's not be conservative
shareblue pls go
>Give up all those important issues in search of the unicorn liberal who is just waiting to vote conservative if ONLY we would just let the fags piddle kids in peace.
No. Fuck them. I don't want their votes. You sound like Mitch McConnell.
I was
I didn't say I support pedophilia. Stop trying to straw-man me.
Conservative relative to our military and immigration policies currently.
you have about 3 months or less before your ready to throw it up with the rest of us.
I agree. Take government out of marriage and privatize.
>they always force their lifestyle on everyone.
You mean holding hands in public? Gay characters in movies? I don't see how that affects me or anyone else not involved. Unless they literally tried to rape you, then that's an obvious initiation of force.
Sounds like you're more libertarian or classical liberal than modern liberal. I'm a libertarian and I agree with everything you posted.
who /socially conservative and fiscally liberal/
There is only left and right, black and white. Do not think for yourself.
You support fag marriage right? You want those fags to adopt kids, right? Why do two fags need a kid? If they wanted kids, why did they become faggots? OH I WONDER!?!?!
Not sit on the fence and actually pick a damn side. Either go full degenerate or fight against all of it. I'm tired of this "I want to be a little degenerate, but not THAT degenerate" bullshit.
>Take government out of marriage and privatize.
No, the purpose of marriage is to subsidize child-rearing.
You are the essence of nu/pol/. Totally blind to reality. Kill yourself.
fuck this response. do you live for just your life? are you that selfish that you dont care about the future of your race? people need to start thinking objectively. your one biological, objective purpose in life is to procreate and the further the success of your tribe. stop thinking in present tense and actually strive for a better world for your race and kin.
Good taste.
>advocating for lolbertarianism
>we won't get much immigrants
haha yes, like pottery
You guys are the new breed.
Centrist, libertarian, or left/right leaning centrist/ libertarian.
You aren't conservative.
>Correlations between sexual promiscuity/degeneracy and crime, low-iq, disease etc
>Schools, the media,and most peer groups will support propoganda to degrade your children
>You can't even go for a walk without being exposed to graffiti, drug-dealers, homosexuals, trannies/mentally ill, violent criminals, half-naked teenagers etc
Having no effect on me.
I think gays adopting unwanted kids is a useful societal good vs. them languishing in foster homes. I assume they were gay by birth due to conditions in the womb and a genetic predisposition to being easily influence by hormones in a prenatal environment.
I don't think it has to be called libertarianism, I wouldn't say that term defines me. I just think borders and isolationism are the #1 issue we should focus on right now and cracking down on various minority/weak group rights is simple a distraction by pandering politicians from the real issues.
>Why are there so few politicians out there who hold similar views?
Because you haven't come around to the fact that social liberalism is a cancer that destroys Western society.
>He isn't socially conservative AND fiscally conservative.
You may as well leave this board.
Just like having Mexicans, drug dealers, and Sharia-supporting Muslims doesn't affect you, right?
>are you that selfish that you dont care about the future of your race?
I plan to have a lot of kids in the future when I'm settled down with a nice paying job and wife, but I don't see what a small percentage of people do in their private lives does to transgress against my person or property.
>your one biological, objective purpose in life is to procreate and the further the success of your tribe.
Which is why I am against mass immigration, the welfare state, and taxation so that people have an incentive to work and have kids.
hahaha
You might as well start a thead sying "I'm a deranged autist"
It doesn't matter if you do not agree with the label. You could be a variation of libertarianism or Centrist.
You're a centrist, user
You think gay people being allowed unrestricted access to sodomize and rape children is a societal good?
roight here lad.
when will the free memarket die? people are so brainwashed by commodity fetishism that they view the process of production and sale as strictly material. free marketers have no ethics where they matter.
Again with the straw-man. Stop it. My views are clearly too far outside of whatever the Democratic party constitutes now to be seen as liberal or perhaps I am trapped in some sort of centrist hell but I think it is more that the combination of nationalism and socialism is frowned upon even when had without an anti-Jew agenda.
my post was not a criticism of your ideology, but of your grammar.
>>Correlations between sexual promiscuity/degeneracy and crime, low-iq, disease etc
Personal responsibility should be taken for that.
>Schools, the media,and most peer groups will support propoganda to degrade your children
Schools should be privatized. I wouldn't send any kids of mine to schools that promote that sort of subject.
>You can't even go for a walk without being exposed to graffiti, drug-dealers, homosexuals, trannies/mentally ill, violent criminals, half-naked teenagers etc
In a free society you should have freedom of association. Private, gated communities would solve that problem.I wouldn't live in such a neighborhood and neither would most people here either.
Supporting abortion is not liberal. Abortions for potatoes and poorfags should be mandatory.
>but I don't see what a small percentage of people do in their private lives does to transgress against my person or property
exactly my point. you think in terms of yourself. if you dont personally fight against degeneracy, you are an enabler.
What about my grammar was incorrect?
>am socially liberal ( + gay marriage, abortion)
So you're just another degenerate?
You ducking normie gtfo.
You just said you think fags adopting kids is a societal good. I don't know why you think two sexual degenerates who have shown no interest in procreation would want to have guardianship of a child, but most of us who still have functioning brains think that they want the kid for the very obvious reason that a sexual pervert usually wants unrestricted, private access to a child.
I don't really give a flying fuck what your views on nationalism or socialism are, I'm just wondering why you think it's a good idea to put kids in a place where rape and sodomy is probable, and even the best case scenario includes all kinds of horrible mental and spiritual damage.
Even if you cling to traditionalism are you just going to say "oh well I always stuck to my own beliefs" when the overwhelming liberal masses overwhelm our borders because you refused to compromise on anything to amass majority support for closed borders? The more extreme your views the harder it is to actually enact them at large federally so you are essentially just virtue signaling here.
>Why are there so few politicians out there who hold similar views?
Because they're not cognitively dissonant like you. Fuck off, you stupid faggot.
>Let me be a halfway-degenerate or I'll let in the Muslim hoards and drown our country in violence.
Fuck. You.
exactly! now you're getting into the swing of things, user! nothing that happens around you affects you in any way, unless it does so in an immediate, material sense. isn't liberalism fun?!
Hey OP, it's you.
you are filth. there will always be working class people. abortion is simply a woman failing at her one biological purpose. men have to earn the living, gather food, and countless other integral aspects of the once sacred nuclear family.
you said "we won't get much immigrants" when you should have said "we won't get many immigrants."
I am a libertarian. I wasn't calling for any government action to solve problems. I was merely acknowledging that degeneracy has the ability to affect other people.
>i want to be a degenerate but don't want any of the consequences
sorry was conflating much immigration/many immigrants.
...
Obligatory
My argument wasn't really centered around fiscal policy but rather isolationism, border control, and immigration.
So Stalinism?
You don't have an argument, you stupid faggot. You believe whatever you believe is true. You're not even alive, and you should get the fuck out of here.
you're both right. poorfags are natural, and many are decent people who work as hard as they are able. but parasite poor people who don't work and just leech off of the welfare system genuinely are selfish scum, and should be sterilised so that they don't pass their attitude to their children.
>I want to stop taking 30% of poor peoples incomes, therefore I hate them
i was just messing around. im not that great with grammar either. anyway, you have two choices:
>get what you work for through laborer enforced regulation of the means of production
>work for someone higher above you, who has no legal obligation to regulate your labor environment or your ability to reap the fruits of your labor. along with that, they likely have limited experience in the position the average laborer would fill
hmm... sounds tough.
Well my argument is that its nice and all to hold a high moral framework but you are unlikely to actually enact a regressive social framework and by holding out for one you alienate those who could ally with you in hopes of nationalistic goals. This isn't something most of you are willing to openly engage in that you don't have the numbers to enact socially conservative nationalistic policy at this point. What good is your purity spiral if you cannot ally yourself a majority consensus to actually pass the things you support?
>Who's to say private roads won't be more efficient?
Why are no examples anywhere in the world of well-run privatized roads?
Why are no examples anywhere in the world of unicorns?
Same answer.
I am mostly against the importation of cheap third world labor when we have plenty of domestic labor available + a decreasing need for manual labor anyways due to automation.
>why did they become faggots?
Can you become gay if you wanted to or something?
why would you even for a moment, believe that anyone would be that altruistic?
automation can be prevented. if you are fiscally liberal and socially conservative, there will be no third worlders to begin with. syndicalism isnt hand in hand with social marxist theory. thats how mussolini started. a socially conservative syndicalist.
>He's still buying into the "they were born that way" propaganda
>And how is a public institution like marriage a private thing?
Marriage is a legal agreement between two people and the state. But who you marry and why has always been a private affair.
>Take government out of marriage and privatize
You can't. The government is a party to the contract.
The right-wing conservative Muslims are hot to do away with marriage laws so they can have 3 wives and 4 goats, but America not ready for Sharia yet.
>they always force their lifestyle on everyone
Some people are so easily offended.
You're national socialist.
How much have you looked at the way homosexuals behave?
Why should society give marriage licenses to gays? The enforcement of marriages by govt. is to ensure a healthy environment for raising kids. If they dont have kids, why should we spend a cent worrying about thier relationships?
Ibn4
> but adoption!
Not even 1% of gay couples try to adopt and they have worse outcomes (chances of child developing mental issues, crime, and abuse, etc.) than normal people.
People support gay marrige because they haven't thought about it. It doesn't make any more sense than giving car insurance to dogs.
To encourage them to marry so they remain in monogamous pairings. Also it just makes good fiscal sense. Obviously all laws on pedophilia and child abuse are still preserved. Again, that isn't really my focus, it is more about trying to build a broad coalition to enact national policies and if that means handing out some rights candy to minority groups so be it.
> socially progressive
Degenerate.
i didn't say working class. working class aren't poorfags, it's actually easier for a welder or an electrician to get a job than for a white collar humanities graduate. poorfags as in whoever depends financially on the state
if you care more about monetary gain than human life (to a fault) then you arent a nationalist.
>The government is a party to the contract.
They enforce the contract but why should they be allowed to change the contract when they come up with shit like no-fault divorce, custody laws, alimony and child support?
>3 wives
And how wide spread do you think this would be? Harems for rich guys and some useless fucks losing out are society breaking. Shit it might even improve it. Most people would still go for monogamous relationships. I don't think government interference is anywhere near worth the risk.
Broad coalition to do what?
Coalition usually refers to some zoo of contradictory pressure groups backing a socialist candidate.
For instance. The modern democrats have both gays and Muslims backing them. This "coalition" only makes sense for either A. Random nonsense each group wants, with no real plan, complete political opportunism
B. Free shit. And Gibs. Since the only thing these groups have in common is eating and shitting.
*out aren't society breaking
t.classical liberal.
Promote isolationism abroad, not getting involved in foreign wars and limiting our submission to multinational organizations. Closing borders and restricting immigration.
more like
>t. classical pussy-whipped beta male
So you're telling me you're hillary clinton
When you say coalition, what do you actually want to accomplish?
Sounds like you want to be a politician.
Something to consider is that at worst gays are less than 2% of the population.
Why then do we spend so much time on gay marriage? Its a democracy how can they matter? The reason gays matter is not thier votes. Its the liberals who vote on gay marriage as a symbolic issue.
Its mostly an excuse to virtue signal, and irritate christians.
Welcome to the club. I can't fully jump on anyones train and accept all their BS. Most sheep do jump on the train to the left or to the right and brainwash themselves to believe the rest. It just means your smart and think for yourself.
Oh look, another lolbertarian. Before you get red pilled, know that you are wrong and your ideology is complete shit.
I'm economically liberal but socially conservative
Me. I'm conservative socially but economically liberal.