u/OldFaithlessness1335

TLDR: Trying to figure out where my positions map on the left-right spectrum, and looking for liberal feedback. Full disclosure, I posted a version of this in AskConservatives as well to compare reactions.

With the 250th coming and going, I decided to take stock of my current political positions and see where they land. What I've discovered is that I don't think they map cleanly left-right, despite identifying as a progressive.

The underlying principle for every position is that it traces back to reciprocal obligation and accountability. Citizens, institutions, and capital all owe each other things, and most of our dysfunction is these deals being enforced on one side only.

Where I could use liberal views:

- Does framing politics around "obligation" sound too much like bootstraps talk to you, or is there a left version of it?

- Which of the positions below would get me labeled a conservative in this space?

- And what obligation would you say our own side refuses to enforce?

---------- If you're interested, here is the general framework applied to a few specific topic areas ----------

- Service: I spent 7 years in the Army. The GI Bill and VA loan got me an education and a house by 31. Service earned that support, and the deal worked well for me. I'd extend it through voluntary national service with real benefits. Modeling post-service support off something like the VA would help recruit people from all over the country to work together toward moving the country forward.

- Housing and family: I've found myself to be the exception, not the rule. For many in my cohort, the post-WW2 version of this societal deal, work hard and you can afford a family, is broken. I don't think that's a culture problem. It's a broken unspoken contract between generations of Americans.

- Capital: Through my MBA I've come to the conclusion that lower taxes on investment income only make sense if the gains get reinvested. Stock buybacks and hoarding break the deal that justified the preferential tax treatment in the first place.

- Public officials: We've seen plenty of corruption this century from both parties. Cooling-off periods between public and private employment are necessary. They regulated an industry, they shouldn't get to cash out with them the next year.

- The party: I think this one cuts at us specifically. Party leadership owes voters material representation, not poll-tested platutudes. When the establishment stops delivering on economics, primary challenges should not viewed as disloyalty. It is the base using there only enforcement mechanism.

- War powers: This crystallized for me during both the Obama years and Trump's second term. Congress owes the country a vote before a war, and leaders owe the troops a plan. I'd be in favor of stripping the executive of most of its war-making powers, with obvious exceptions for emergencies.

- Immigration: I can't stand the cruelty of the current approach, especially when more effective methods exist. I'd support enforcement at the employer level with E-Verify. Companies owe rule-following the same as workers do. This isn't a call to end deportations, it's saying there are two sides to enforcement and only one is being addressed (and frankly cruelly)

- Firearms: Pro-2A, but I think training and competence need to be part of the deal. To be clear, I 100% support your right and mine to own and bear arms. Liberty, I think, requires obligations attached in order for that same liberty to be lasting.

For example for me its service based. Its why I spent 7 years in the Amry and currently support FEMA. Helping and defending my fellow country man is the definition of loving the place you live. Its has brought me closer to the ideals that this country strives towards.

Id also add that accpeting her for everything this country is, is also a huge part of being patriotic to me as well. The amazing, the good, the bad, and the straight up ugly.

Anyway just curious happy 4th and 250th. Stay hydrated out there if your seeing fireworks! 🇺🇲 🎆

I would love to see him come on the main pod. I think it would help a lot of people see what hes talking about. I know they did those small interviews with of the michigan candidates a few weeks ago. But I only saw clips.

Anyway thanks stay hydrated and happy 4th.

Im honestly not even saying good or bad. I havent completely made up my mind because churn in a workforce is a good thing. It keep the workforce healthy.

But then my mind goes to the opposite hypothetical

And this is a hypothetical extreme. But say theres another firing spree (there will be). Whats ti stop a future dem from doing the same. Then we are in a cycle where the very services people rely on are at the whims of who's in power.

Why would putting an ideological competent to professional service be a good thing? That doesnt put the american people first does it?

I meam look at this MoU that has fallen apart. Part of that was because the diplomatic corps was gutted last year.

Edit: sorry I wasnt 100% clear. Im talking abkut the decision to remove of all indepence form fedeeal agencies. The Slaughter case

Let me be clear up front. I'm not arguing that precedent should never be overturned, and I'm not even arguing that these specific decisions were wrongly decided. I'm asking whether there's any concern about the manner in which it's being done.

By my count there have been 6–7 major precedents overturned since 2022:

- 2022 — Dobbs (overturned Roe and Casey); Kennedy v. Bremerton (effectively buried the Lemon test); NYSRPA v. Bruen (discarded the means-end framework for Second Amendment cases)

- 2023 — Students for Fair Admissions (overturned Grutter / race-conscious admissions)

- 2024 — Loper Bright (overturned Chevron deference after 40 years)

- 2026 — Trump v. Slaughter (gutted Humphrey's Executor, 1935)

Here's what I keep coming back to: nearly all of these broke along ideological lines. Historically, the Court often tried to present a more unified front on major reversals the idea being that landmark case law should rest on broad, bipartisan agreement so it holds up over time. When everything major is decided 6–3 instead, doesn't that lower the threshold for overturning precedent and speed up the pace?

And here's the part I'd genuinely like a conservative answer to if possible. Of the four sitting justices over 70, three are from the conservative bloc. If the balance of the Court shifts in the next decade or so, wouldn't a 6–3 norm just incentivize a new majority to overturn conservative precedents at the same rapid clip

The same way the New Deal-era Court reversed the previous era's economic rulings once the balance flipped? In other words, doesn't lowering the bar cut both ways once you're no longer the one holding the gavel?

I saw a Scott Galloway clip. Normally not really a huge fan (tend to think hes more of a grifter type then someone to take seriously). Anyway the clip i saw of him stated thay people should have three skills comming out of school

- ability to make a narrative arc

- ability to connect (IRL) with people

- he also mentioned that kids should have a hard skillset to fall back on.

I just thought it was intersting cause hes not talking about math or sciences, but the ability to persuade and get your point accross.

Anyway thanks and 🍻

Edit: added not

Edit 2: Just wanted to add another habbit that has been a golden piece of advice.

So when I was in the Army one of commander gave me this piece of advice as I was ETSing

• every 3-5 years re-evaluate where your skillset is in relation to its Market value, then act on that difference.

• For example, right now I work in data/devsecops as a tech lead. Looking at my market value 2.5 years into my current role im underpaid by about 30k. Now I have reoccurring monthly income from my investment accounts, rental properties, and disability compensation that brings in another 4k a month that make up that difference yearly. But after my kids are in grade school im going to switching jobs to come in line with my market value is worth (2 years from now).

So check it out. I went in to the Army without any debt from my undergrad. Used the Tuition Asistance program to get a master in cybersecurity. Now using my GI Bill for an MBA.

My question is that after my MBA ill have between 18-24 months remaining of the benifit. I think I would really like to use it either for culinary classes or for scuba certifications (leaning for scuba right now cause theres enough space remaining to go all the way up ti dive instructor).

Anyway Im curious is anyone has done this before where you split your gi bill between a degree and certifications? What was your expirience like? Did you need to do anything special to maximize the benifit?

For scuba in particular was there anything special that needed to be done to get the gi bill to apply? This would be a for shits and giggles type of certification that could potentially be a second career once my kiddos are grown (I love diving and snorkeling in the ocean).

Anyway thanks in advance for the advice 🍻 mates

I'm going to use an analogy with the left.

It's been well documented that left-leaning spaces often engage in ideological purity testing. In my experience, some of the effects include:

- More rigid messaging and decision-making.

- Spending more time policing allies than persuading opponents.

- Prioritizing cultural issues over economic ones.

- Less willingness to challenge establishment assumptions.

- Difficulty adapting to new media and changing political realities.

Lately, I've started noticing some similar patterns on the right.

The strong emphasis on loyalty to President Trump sometimes feels less like political agreement and more like a test of belonging. At times, it seems like policy and governance take a back seat to personality-driven politics. I also see a lot of messaging focused on the left's most unpopular cultural positions rather than advancing a broader governing vision.

Am I misreading this, or has a form of ideological purity testing begun to develop on the right as well? If not, how would you describe what's happening?

So we operate from the same baseline in conversation I define fianancialization from its teo dictionary definitions:

- The Cambridge Dictionary defines financialization as the process by which financial institutions and markets become more influential over economic policy and economic outcomes.

- The Oxford Reference describes it as the growing dominance of financial actors, financial markets, and financial considerations in economic and social life.

Typically when I think about it its around how financialization encourage short term decision making at the expense of long term investment.

Every democratic candidate running should against this DNC report. Use it as an example of the failing of the old guard.

- Slow getting the report out

- The dude who wrote it last worked on the Kerry 04 election

- Obviously AI was used in it

- And it doesnt mention, Bidens Age, Inflation, or Gaza. As contributing factors.

Basically it comes accross as out of touch. Any person moderate to centrist should run against just the incompetence of it. It would give them anti-establishment creds.

​

Im not really talking about raw political power, because obviously they arent in power. There are other forms of power to tap into however. For example i just finished all of my Congresswomens social media for the year.

Theres only about an hours worth for the entire year, and most of it was on park passes and trump face being on it.....

Shes has only held 2 town halls the entire time shes been elected......

Granted 1 congressperson, but like it was kind of surprising just the lack of engagement with the general public. On one her vids she went through her week and it all meeting with donors and stuff like that. The crazy part is that i live in very blue area so she will probably cruise to election with almost no constituents outreach that I can find at least.

Edit: fixed some spelling and grammar

To the people in the bulwark who are super anxious about platner they should listen to how to he describes his militarys service. Its very powerful and something sorely missing. Honestly speaking as a veteran myself, I wish there was more of an open conversation about the affects of the past 25 years of war has had 2 generations.