Ask a liberal anything

why the fuck would you idiots support horse face?
The bitches only answer is to print more money to pay for the democrats debts.

GOD is figurative word. GOD is energy, source, awareness, infinity ever expanding into new possibilities. God includes everything so you are also part of it. All the religions are teaching about this truth, hidden within words to those who are ready to see. Are you ready?

>youtube.com/watch?v=wM0IKLv7KrE
>youtube.com/watch?v=97FhauH1J58
>youtube.com/watch?v=FSmdSw9eEIA
>youtube.com/watch?v=ZP5HmM0UxQs
>youtube.com/watch?v=FY74AFQl2qQ
>youtube.com/watch?v=Yimor2jRmCA
>youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU
>youtube.com/watch?v=zqrpKUTMXgY
>youtube.com/watch?v=dAc_2tBu0T0
>youtube.com/watch?v=B3GjKTtSRrQ
>youtube.com/watch?v=QKvvaURUSvk

With these you can enter the rabbit hole. This is most important redpill. Redpill of life.

Attached: nikola tesla 2.jpg (720x540, 53K)

Why don't you kys degenerate faggot

OP, you're too slow and indicating you're a retard.

Pic related. those 7 circles are called the seed of life.
One interpretation i saw is that its meant to symbolize the creation week, or symbolize the same as the creation week does in the bible
The center being conciousness, that expands to the circle. The conciousness then moves to the border of the circle where it expands again creating the second circle and so on until you got the seed of life. the 6 days of creation around the 7th one, God, the seed of life or whatever you want to call it.
By connecting the points of intersection you gain the (black) cube, as above mentioned symbolizing the material world and as such Satans rule.

I have to say here that the 6, and all these patterns are commonly seen as a positive symbol as it is the blueprint of creation of life, but its only the material part of this, and according to the Bible the source of temptations, the Satan's, which we should work on overcoming with our spirit.

Attached: seedoflife.png (236x225, 33K)

satan (associated with saturn) meant something like "obstacle". everyone had his own satan. someone who incites him to do bad things, a bad habbit, an addiction, anythinghe should overcome. only later satan became a figure of his own.

6 is the number of man, and his weakness. greed, egoism, egocentrism, all the materialistic desires, and i believe of this plane existence in general (the earth is tilted 23,4 degrees, or if you count from the other direction 66.6 degrees, life, on this planet at least, is made of carbon, the 6th element, with 6 protons, 6 neutrons and 6 electrons. 6 directions in the material realm, north, south, west, east, up and down, 6 sides of the cubes. Think About how molecules and icecrystals form in hexagonal shapes. saturn being the 6th planet with hexagon on its northpole). 666 is going over the top with the materialistic desires, pursuing and desiring only those and making you follow the path of satan.

The black cube of satan is a symbol for this material, 3 dimensional realm, and the time we fear is running out, which will let us die, and which causes us to do harm to others in order to lead a better life ourself. by this the black cube also symbolizes time and death without either we wouldnt have these earthly desires causing us to do evil.
The 666 could also stand for the dimensions of the cube, 6x6x6, entrapping us in the 6, our weakness and temptations.

We should strive to overcome (our) satan, proof we arent easily corrupted wether satan is just a symbol or a real entithy. So while this world isnt evil itself, this realm of existence kind of makes the corruption a lot easier. When people worship satan, they dont worship some deity or enthity. they worship this material world, the materialistic egoistic desires, and themselves.

Attached: cube7.jpg (1610x1304, 629K)

How many dicks did you suck to "win"?

Attached: liberals33.webm (320x180, 2.13M)

>social Darwinist philosophies based on the 'immutable' laws
that shit exists only in US, sadly we are a colony and we had to adopt that shit from the 80thies.

wtf why doesn't this guy get and H1-B

Choose wisely op

Attached: timelines.png (1412x2888, 3.93M)

The World is controlled atleast from the ages of Rome, by Satanic Papacy, zionist Sabbateans & black nobility. They are hiding the truth, knowledge of life & science from previous golden ages, that what was preserved also in Land of Khem, Egypt. After Rome, hidden by (((them))). They are the deceivers that created atleast todays christianity (piso christ) and veiled humanity into darkness. We are again rising in the ages with awareness. It is time to awake and realize what we really are.

>We are eternal piece of life bound to our bodies
>(((they))) keep us in the dark by hiding truth, by this system, by sins, lies and science.
>Ancient bloodlines like Aldobrandini,Breakspear ruling vatican & jesuits
>they claimed people of the earth to their imaginary kingdom through three trust (three crown); 1455, romanus pontifex, 1481, aeterni regis, 1531, convocation.
>Through these three trust, cestui que vie is name of our enslavement. Wich is also 6,6,6 (symbol of material bound) when translated in latin.
>Level of awareness in humanity goes trough cycles and we have much less time to go through this cycle and it's ages than normally, that is why development has been so fast, that is why people are awakening to truth right now, we entered new age that is kicking in

why they create todays concept of Christianity is to keep us certain, small frequency of awareness so we would not rise and realize the truth.
Realize what you are, key to it is within. Body is just material plane that you borrow from earth. Through sins you bound thyself more into it, broke your boundaries. You are piece of life, piece of god that wan't experience bigger part of it. Through material ways it find not that expression. There is truth hidden within religions, within words to those who are ready to see.

Attached: sings.png (1756x2004, 3.81M)

Can you teach me how to suck infinite cock?

I don't particularly care about political parties. The Democrats, being progressive and open, are on the 'right' ( read:inevitable) side of history. Conservatism is a losing philosophy is a world that is changing rapidly. The issue becomes not to conserve indefinitely, but how long to conserve and when to discard. Technological progress is what matters the most, as written by Ted.

Lets talk, i have never been defeated either, and im far rightwinger.

Did you know that "liberal" is a fake word invented by Newspeak semanticist. Did you know that it doesn't mean liberty. You define yourself with a fake word. Doesn't that make you a pseudo-intellectual?

Kek, just read that. I see what timeline you see ahead you.

What is the most conservative viewpoint you have?

>Technological progress is what matters the most, as written by Ted.
I agree, but ask yourself who are the inovators?Acording to datta its mostly whites and jews, open borders will mean destruction of inovation.

Attached: Captureqweqwe.png (873x491, 350K)

Liberals think they have never been defeated, when in reality they ignore evidence and scream racist when they start to lose.

I WIN BECAUSE THE OTHER GUY GAVE UP!!!

I remember when I was 19 and retarded too.
Saged

Attached: iq_by_country.png (1357x800, 25K)

Social Darwinism is a nature sanctioned survival of the fittest philosophy applied as a moral system. It's very prominent in fascism. It's a reality of everyday life that some want to rise above and others want to embrace.

You do understand that not all humans and not all populations are equal right?

A Master-Debater, are you?

So you didn't remotely answer the question. You just lost.

Comon motherfucker lets talk, you wanted a debate you will get one.

>Ask a liberal anything
>I've never been defeated in a debate before
>I don't particularly care about political parties
Oy vey .. good work. Keep telling yourself that.

>human equality will be scientifically disproven through genetic engineering
>social darwinism and racial politics will become quickly outdated

WEW FUCKING LAD

not to mention you're too slow. When you have a conversation with someone and they ask you something, do you just stare at their face for 10 minutes before answering?

Attached: illiterate of the 21st century.jpg (720x540, 64K)

>I've never been defeated in a debate before
because you lie

He probably has shit to do

gee, then don't make an AMA thread. He's even more retarded then.

I don't support open borders. I find that in the near term i hold opinions that are relatively conservative. I'm anti-open borders, have accepted ( but not with absolute dogmatism ) the differences in average IQ between populations, and believe in gender differences as well. However, i don't think the solutions to these 'problems' lies in Nazism or social Darwinism in the long term. In the long term, i don't even see the human race still existing as it does today. I believe my openness to a change so fundamental ultimately makes me a liberal or at least someone with liberal sympathies. I also don't endorse violence or repression to get people 'back into their place'.

>human equality will be scientifically disproven through genetic engineering

I never remotely claimed this.

I will keep telling myself that. Your Nazi philosophy is dead and not coming back.

Attached: 1507595378404.jpg (2456x1632, 553K)

>I never remotely claimed this.
You haven't remotely claimed anything but generalities. Is this why you think you win debates? By never actually saying anything specific and spouting off your own philosophies while ignoring calls for specifics?

What restraints do you place on what you say?

Let's try this again
What US political POLICY (not party) would you change if you could and why. Specifically.

Attached: !!!.png (693x496, 42K)

>I believe my openness to a change so fundamental ultimately makes me a liberal or at least someone with liberal sympathies.
What do you mean by ''change''
>I also don't endorse violence or repression to get people 'back into their place'.
What is the solution to influx of foreign low IQ populations in Europe that are reproducing in masses?They will not go on their own, so what do you sugest on doing?
>b..bu...but muh genetyg engeneryngz n shit
Rapes and murders are happening right now not in 70+ years, they will replace native populations in short period of time like it happened in USa where from 90% white in 1960s your not barely mayority white.

how is the 8th grade?

>I've never been defeated in a debate before
Who did you debate, toddlers?

This, anyone can be defeated in debate.

You're not so very liberal after all. I also reject 90% of the posts here, yet I don't call myself a liberal.
My question to you: what is the basis of your moral system? Why should, for example, compassion rate higher than integrity?

"durrr guys I'm a liberal who has never been proven wrong"

>holds only non-liberal views

pol truly BTFO

He's never been defeated because he never fucking shows up for debates apparent;y

How have they been generalities?

Policy. I suppose limit any immigration except high status and needed persons to the united states. Especially with automation becoming prevalent we just don't need a lot of menial workers here.

>What do you mean by ''change''
I mean the human race is not going to exist in 200 years or so.
>What is the solution to influx of foreign low IQ populations in Europe that are reproducing in masses?
Number one: stop importing people.
Number two: deport criminals
Number three: Let living in a first world nation naturally curb birthrates. (yes, even with welfare birthrates naturally fall)
Number four: relocate refugees back to Syria when the war is over.

>Rapes and murders are happening right now not in 70+ years, they will replace native populations in short period of time like it happened in USa where from 90% white in 1960s your not barely mayority white.

People are here now and are not going to leave. That's the reality. Your country is potentially 'safe'. I don't think you are exactly swimming in refugees. I'm sorry for all the people getting raped and murdered but what solution is there? You can't just genocide or deport large amounts of people, many of whom may be innocent of any crime. The best solution would have been not to have done it in the first place. I think we have enough talent and momentum to achieve gene editing and other promising technologies before everything falls apart.

>Policy. I suppose limit any immigration except high status and needed persons to the united states. Especially with automation becoming prevalent we just don't need a lot of menial workers here.
ok so you're the classical liberal thing, not a leftist "liberal" of today. Misleading thread.

>
People are here now and are not going to leave. That's the reality. Your country is potentially 'safe'. I don't think you are exactly swimming in refugees. I'm sorry for all the people getting raped and murdered but what solution is there? You can't just genocide or deport large amounts of people, many of whom may be innocent of any crime.

You can pursue a policy that encourages emigration

e.g. an open offer to muslims to permanently move to a Muslim country, and get X cash

and if they commit a crime, they will get severely penalized unless they accept self-deporting, and in that case they might also get some cash

Combine this with policies like e.g. serving pork regularly in all public cafeterias and banning the hijab for government employees

I should have probably said i'm liberal by pol standards, since i don't want to genocide people or restrict voting rights for women.

>My question to you: what is the basis of your moral system?

It's a mix. I believe we have to be pragmatic but ultimately have a strong, transcendent and fair ideological core. My moral system is probably just a secularized version of Christianity.

I don't think it's fair or moral to invite people to your country ( not talking about the refugees here, but actual immigrants ) and then impose on them conditions that are meant to make them miserable. You can't use the state as a baton to bash groups you don't like. That sets a dangerous precedent. You can't treat one citizen different from another because of their religion. Again, i'm talking about Muslims who have legally become citizens of their respective countries. Refugees should still be held to a (fair) but perhaps more punitive set of rules ( as in deportation being punishment for a crime ).

>I mean the human race is not going to exist in 200 years or so.
I disagree, thats your personal opinion that is not suported by any evidance at all
>Number one: stop importing people.
Number two: deport criminals
Number three: Let living in a first world nation naturally curb birthrates. (yes, even with welfare birthrates naturally fall)
Number four: relocate refugees back to Syria when the war is over.
None of its going to happen, radical left is pushing for more refugees, what do you want me to do when they will try to take over streets?You want me to sit in my home and hope that papa state will save my race from extinction?These foreigners from Arabia and north africa are invaders that don't care about what state tells them, they are violant, geneticly YES i have proff, read ''western Europe state formation and genetic classification''
>You can't just genocide or deport large amounts of people
Thats where your wrong kiddo.
>I think we have enough talent and momentum to achieve gene editing and other promising technologies before everything falls apart.
Your giving it to much credit, your like those retards in 1980s who thought they will have hovering skateboards and flying cars in 2000s

OP undoubtedly pulled a Charlie Zelenoff here. Undefeated indeed.

>hey guys we all pretty much agree: The Thread

>I don't think it's fair or moral to invite people to your country

Most Africans, Arabs, Muslims etc. have never been invited, at least to my country. Some leftists have wanted them, but it has always been extremely clear to them that a significant part of the population disliked them.

>You can't use the state as a baton to bash groups you don't like.

False statement, and a completely idiotic belief. I don't like the group that is violent criminals trying to punch people, and I can absolutely use the state as a baton to bash them. In fact, it's extremely common and almost universally agreed upon.

Maybe you didn't really mean what you said here, maybe you actually meant it as a straw man, maybe you really tried to straw man "certain immigrants" into "groups you don't like". In that case you wouldn't have intended the completely idiotic statement above.

>That sets a dangerous precedent.

Not doing what I propose is more dangerous than doing it. Doing what I propose is the less dangerous option.

> You can't treat one citizen different from another because of their religion.

Yes, you absolutely can, just like you can treat one person different from another because of their ideology and beliefs.

> disagree, thats your personal opinion that is not suported by any evidance at all

I can't prove it but it seems likely due to the incredible and increasing amount of technological progress each year. Gene editing, AI...these are incredibly important in modern life and i can't imagine where they will be in 200 years. I stand by my conviction that the human race will either be killed or or morph into some incomprehensible form. One of the reasons i oppose this nazi cult of race is that i think the underlying human substrate in not going to make it very far by any avenue. And plus i don't agree with the genocidal and restrictive policies that are needed to create such a place.

>None of its going to happen

I think they're all very reasonable. A center right government could easily implement them when push comes to shove and people start getting angry.

>, what do you want me to do when they will try to take over streets?

This sounds like racial paranoia. Muslims are not going to stage a coup to implement sharia law. Likely they will become more secular as they live in western societies. Anyway, i imagine whites will still be in the majority for quite some time. Or at least long enough to produce some substantive tech. I don't care about groups, i just care about the tech they make and how they implement it.

>Thats where your wrong kiddo.

What do you believe will happen?

>Your giving it to much credit, your like those retards in 1980s who thought they will have hovering skateboards and flying cars in 2000s

This is a fair point. Many people have been wrong in predicting the future. Although we will eventually shift into a transhuman future i can't say exactly when in this century or the next. If Europe falls ( i believe it will just look more like Brazil ) then Asia will carry the torch forward. This technology is the only hope for a peaceful and realistic solution.

>Most Africans, Arabs, Muslims etc. have never been invited, at least to my country. Some leftists have wanted them, but it has always been extremely clear to them that a significant part of the population disliked them.

Show your flag. Many democratic governments, under the will and consent of the people, invited them. If the people really did not want them, the government would reflect this. That's the truth. And don't give me the ' they didn't know'. That's apathetic stupidity. The truth is most people support the government or are simply don't care. That's why the situation is the way it is right now.

>I don't like the group that is violent criminals trying to punch people, and I can absolutely use the state as a baton to bash them.

Except they're not all violent criminals. Some are good people, innocent children. There in lies the rub.

>Not doing what I propose is more dangerous than doing it. Doing what I propose is the less dangerous option.

Living under a fascist dictatorship ( which will be the only type of government to carry out your proposal ) is not a good place to be. It will make the world a more dangerous and cruel place.

>Yes, you absolutely can, just like you can treat one person different from another because of their ideology and beliefs.

What do you propose, a law that attacks or seeks to make life miserable for Muslims? I mean that seriously, by the way. Such 'solutions' always seemed hopelessly unrealistic to me. Here we have freedom of religion.

Left side seems like complete bullshit to be honest. The future will likely appear as that to the right, for better or worse. This is because technology is in many ways anti-freedom.

are you 15 or a shill?

Are you very, very blue pilled and cucked.

Attached: 1514382782346.png (1378x568, 919K)

Aye cuh u ever suk bbc?

Thats because you never had a debate
Us: Hey liberal want to discuss this topic i have this and this fact and like to back it up w x
You:
Thats nice honey but your wrong
AGREEEEEEEEE w ME OR DIE MFUCKR RACIST

What does cum taste like?
Checkmate.

You rather live under a dictatorship that does not have to answer to the people?

>I've never been defeated in a debate before
well, duh. same with every liberal. how can you be wrong if you FEEL right?

I WON!

Attached: 1508884479973.jpg (590x593, 151K)

Peepee poooppoooooo i win not u

Sounds pretty faith-based to me. All forms of technology are tools. How they're used varies from person to person, so the previous guy's "who are the innovators?" question is a very important one, and you're putting your faith in the idea that those people will not be bent on enslaving humanity to their own desires.

Furthermore, there's nothing progressive about democrats.

>im a liberal
>i hold opinions that are relatively conservative
>i at least hold liberal sympathies
Oh, so you're a 'sensible centrist'
Your AI-technocracy of the future will either be 200 IQ GMO Aryans or the borg

>Your Nazi philosophy
The guy made a counter-semitic joke. If you have to resort to calling your opponent a nazi to get headway, maybe you're not as good at this as you think.

>The human race is not going to exist in 200 years or so
And how is this beneficial to humans?