Why left wing people consider themselves as intellectuals ???

[Tibarn]

Most self-proclaimed intellectuals are redundant, uninteresting drones, anyway. 

 

 

Socialists/Communists/Dhimmis need this, Grim Reaper Approved, treatment :

 

Edited March 1, 2019 by Tibarn

[Cricket_2_Death]

22 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Sorry but it is a fact that the bottom 90% of people of western society has less debt, higher wealth and better health in over a dozen western countries than USA. This makes those countries economically better for the overwhelming majority than USA. That is an easily verifiable fact if you wish me to produce numbers. 

Sorry no but sinking a practically unsinkable ship is proof positive of being a BS businessman in my books and books of all people who have no horses in the political race that is USA. The Baniya in India doesn't care one whit if Trump wins or loses, has nothing invested. Same as me. To us, he is a cr@p businessman because he sank what should be an unsinkable ship. No two ways about this, bud. 

 

Sorry. that is nonsense. I can easily say conservatism is a mental disorder, since liberalism is all about social change and we are not banging rocks together because of social and technological change- the former brought forth by liberal folks. 

My claim is very simple and very easily verified and i substantiated it - more educated you are, more likely you are to be liberal. Less educated you are, more likely you are to be conservative. This is also noticed in third world countries, where the overwhelming majority of illiterate people are conservative voters. 

There are plenty of conservatives too who force their gay children to be straight. Equally despicable and both are failures as a parent ( i say this, AS a parent myself). 

Socialism is not communism and we have objective, empiric proof that market capitalist states with a socialized healthcare, education and social services net is objectively better at making most of its citizens well off. USA is a cr@phole compared to Germany and Scandinavia, who are far more socialized, yet not communist because they are still free-market economies. 

Sure. But the conservatives argue to cut it back and yet want to be pro-birthers. This is cruelty towards infants in my books and any conservative who argues that there should be less money for welfare of children of single-moms but are also anti-abortion, are guilty of advocating child cruelty. 

I can and i do. Because as i said, the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of last trimester abortions are due to severe medical complications or rape victims. No place allows late term abortion just because you now chose to, either.

 

Most places that allow abortion, have it happen before the foetus fully develops brain function- a stage they are not medically alive according to most doctors. 

Yes it is. Conservatives try to play victim to liberal media, liberal focus all the time. They, like the hyper-liberals, make their grievances seem real and dismiss other side as victims. you are a good example of that in your posts. 

most feminists i know are not femminazis. If Femminazis are mainstream liberals, then racist KKKs are mainstream conservatives. 

Feminists and feminazis are not the same thing. Just like someone who is simply happy they are white is not the same thing as KKK. 

They are conservative. They identify with conservatives, they vote overwhelmingly republican, they are affiliated with conservative charities, etc. They are the ultra-right and they are ultra-conservatives. You dont get to wish them away anymore than liberals get to wish away the ultra-left commies amongst their midst. 

Nope. They are conservative people with an affliction. You don't define what liberalism is and nowhere in the definition of liberalism is 'gay-loving' a criteria. Priests are not liberal by definition of the word, neither do they classify themselves at. 

You are simply proving my point that conservatives are worse than liberals in owning their baggage. Paedophile priests are conservative baggage. Man up and deal with it. 

Nope. Liberals in Lincoln era were Republicans. Its the liberal republicans who fought your civil war to free the slaves and the conservative democrats who fought to keep slaves. I am not surprised that American education system has failed you, like it has so many there. 

Nope. KKK is affiliated with the Republicans now and have been for 50+ years. You don't get to switcharoo as you see fit against the facts. 

As i said, to you i come across as a liberal. I have stronger family values and far less victim complex than most liberals, which is why they call me conservative. 

I know for young Americans, most centrists come across as liberals because your mainstream liberals in USA are slightly right of center for rest of the western world. You havn't travelled enough or lived around the world enough to know this, but this is a thing. 

Your nation is a bit of 'Saudi Arabia' of the west - the biggest, baddest, with most of everything - power, rich people, poverty, conservatives, etc. 

You barely know me to understand why i hate Islam. Regardless, i don't give a whit how you wish to classify me. If you stick around here long enough, you will see some more liberal ones calling me conservative, as has happened before. 

Vetted has nothing to do with this. Vetting is done for criminal and professional backgrounds. Not what they wanna study or how they wanna bring up their kids. such vetting does not exist. 

I will give you a simple lesson in life - your anecdotal evidence will lose, 100% of time, to research based facts. You are just a nobody, who's seen less than what ? 10,000 people in his whole life ? Your personal experiences mean nothing in terms of over-arching social scenarios. if you think it does, you are either way too young or way too stupid to realize how wrong you are.

As such, you have no basis or credible way to determine who is socialist and who is not. Even if you make a questionnaire out of it, its incredibly easy to hide political affiliations. Look at your own nation's history of witch-hunts for commies in 40s-70s era and how spectacularly it failed to root out most commies. Therefore, you have no basis to conclude which european is a commie socialist arts-degree wannabe and which one is a hard working STEM or trades guy. 

With no qualifying factors, it then becomes a statistical FACT that Africans and Latinos are far more likely to get into STEM/trades than the Europeans. It is also a statistical FACT right now that Latinos are, per capita, represented more in STEM fields than white people in the US ( those that are from the US). So i see your anti-latino stance to be nothing more than anecdotal racism with nothing researched or educated about it. 

It doesn't define them as liberal, because there is no definition of liberal that constitutes 'child molestor'. They are your baggage, champ. Own up to them instead of puss-ing out. It is a fact that most paedophiles are conservative people. 

That is your unsubstantiated opinion, nothing more. Priests are not liberal and prevalence of child molestors in priests make it a conservative problem. All you are demonstrating here, is how conservatives suck at owning their baggage. 

I guess the point on why European democracy is more relevant to America moving forward than American democracy itself, went way over your head. 

You still have done nothing to address my demonstration of its goldilocks scenario. 

I bring them up, because their model of democracy is far more relevant to USA in the next 100 years than the American one is, which is already losing its character and becoming more and more European. 

Democrats were not liberals in 1850s. The Republicans were. I can quote you Abraham Lincoln's speech where he identifies as a liberal, calls the Republican party as a liberal ethos party, etc etc. Or is your education system that cr@p that foreign educated people know more about Yankee history than Yanks ?

 

Nobody said they are Gods. But it is a doctor who declares a person dead for legal purposes, because they are authority on what constitutes living and what constitutes dead. Just like its a mechanic who declares whether your suspension needs fixing or not. 

Sure. But those who expertly study it and know at what point life begins and ends, etc. are more qualified to determine this matter than random people like you or me. Since human life is more important, meritocratic authority on human life is even more important. 

False. Rules of triage makes it very simple. Ideal scenario is baby + mother, any other scenario is mother > baby unless there is EXPLICIT consent from mother (and deemed medically valid. A car-crash mom will most likely be deemed concussed and overruled). You don't know much about how medical procedure works, so don't make claims. 

Most western countries are cleaner, with more culture and better amenities than USA. America can do plenty more by becoming more civilized like rest of the western world. If Germans can be richer than Americans for the bottom 95%, while providing public funded university education, health-care, child care, etc. then they are objectively superior. So are most first world countries. 

I realize you are biassed because you only know America, but as a dual US-Canadian citizen, i chose Canada. because its a better country to live in than USA. 

Canadian healthcare is far superior to the US healthcare in virtually every department outside of cosmetic surgeries, extremely rare high end surgeries ( like spinal re-attachment stuff) and high end chemotherapy. For 99% medical procedures, Canada is equal to or better than USA in my own experience and it doesn't bankrupt a person. It is a million times more civilized and better. 
Nobody dies waiting around in Canada for essential healthcare, not unless they live in middle of nowhere and die during air-lift, something that happens anywhere with low density, such as Alaska. 

Most of these countries are better than USA economically for overwhelming majority of its population. That is a fact. So they are economically superior to the US. 

Third world people, sure. Most first world nation people don't wanna live permanently in the US because its crappier than most first world countries to live in. 

Most americans are in greater debt due to your third world level of pay-as-you-go healthcare services and unregulated mortgage scenarios. Remember your sub-prime mortgage crisis ? Canada was untouched as was most of the western world who are more responsible with their banking and don't play as fast and loose as USA. 

The overwhelming majority of Americans carry greater debt than the overwhelming majority of western world people and people with liberal studies degrees are not even 5% of the population. Sorry but your math doesn't add up. 

A single mom needs to stay by her child more than work. That is why child support exists in the first place. And there are plenty of people who are medically incapable of work, they require support as well. And even if you are a ruthless wannabe slaver who wants slavery and no social services, too bad, you still can't force people to work. 

LOL. Israel has no walls lining its entire border preventing people from coming and going. It has a few walls in Jerusalem and wall around Gaza. Which is not even 40km long. There hasn't been a single wall more than 500km long that has worked, in history of mankind, to deter migration. Your 'wall' will be more than 2500km long. Its in the 0% category of success and as a betting man, i don't bet on sure-losers. 

Sorry, but i will take the wisdom of noted conservative philosophers over you. Buddha as a force of change. So was Christ. So was MLK. These people are worth 100 of you or me in their positive social effect and they, by definition, were liberal people.

 

Its liberalism that drives social change. Its coservatism that resists social change. That is the classic, age-old scenario. Sometimes liberals are wrong and things blow up ( French revolution). Sometimes they are right and get it right (American revolution). Sometimes the conservatives are right, sometimes they are wrong. That is why the push-pull exists. 

Again, i care not for your twist to the simple fact that lesser the education the more likelyhood of being conservative and vice versa with liberalism. Objective, empiric data hows us this, from world over. You don't have to take it on face value, since i already presented articles on it. 

Sorry but the evidence shows us that greater the intellect, more likely they are liberal. Arguing against data won't get you anywhere with a STEM degree holder like me, mate. You can whine and discard data like most uneducated people do when it doesn't align with their views but facts are facts. Already demosntrated. Conservatives in general are less educated. Maybe because more knowledge makes people more aware of social dynamics along with sharpening their intellect. 

Okay here's the deal. It takes too long to multi quote so I will just number my points to your point blocks. At this point I might as well copy and paste responses because I've already addressed most of what you are claiming in previous posts.

 

1) America is the greatest country in the world, comparing it to craphole countries doesn't mean anything. Libtard fails with wealth and debt don't change it.

2) No business is unsinkable or fail proof, it's part of life.

3) Being educated in liberal arts makes you dumber. Liberal and intelligence don't go hand in hand.

4) Raising your kid to be normal is perfectly fine. Only libtards want their kid to be a tranny asexual that identifies as a dog.

5) Socialism/communism both lead you to the same demise.

6) Anti-welfare = get a job like everyone else.

7) A disease ridden slut having an abortion is not comparable to a conservative goddess, it's 100% different

8) Victim and liberal go hand in hand, it's core to the ideology

9) Feminist = feminazi

10) KKK = Demokkkrats

11) Boy loving is a core component of liberalism, whether they are in or out of the closet

11) The switcheroo is fake, watch if you care: www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiprVX4os2Y

12) KKK again, see switcharoo myth

13) You can call yourself a centrist but it's clear what you are

14) Why do you hate Islam - this is literally the only thing I have of interest with you and where we might find common ground

15) Vetting people who they enter a country is a layer of security and insurance

16) There is no hard facts when it comes to a latino outperforming a top tier non-liberal European or Asian in STEM period.

17) All sickness including pedophilia originate from corrupt liberalism and violate conservatism - can't have them together.

18) Europe is crap and is being overrun by refugees who will turn it into a Jihadistan. They are not a model for anything.

19) Slavery and lincoln, see switcharoo myth from above.

20) A doctor's declaration of death is a formality, they aren't God.

21) Anyone that tells you they know the exact second life begins is lying.

22) You admit my point is true - there are cases where the life of the mother and baby is taken into account.

23) America is the best country hands down, liberal thrash drags down the irrelevant rankings but it doesn't impact people like me

24) When it comes to healthcare, there is nothing I can't get in the US that you can in Canada.

25) Craphole countries are not economically superior to America - not sure why you think this. 

26) No 1st world country is even comparable to the US. American exceptionalism trumps all.

27) Liberals making dumb decisions or living outside of their means can't be fixed. Unless we bar them from going to school or buying stuff they can't afford - which I fully support.

28) If you can't force people to work, then people who work shouldn't be forced to pay for them.

29) Technology makes things possible now that weren't in the past. Someone that was ineffective before could become extremely effective today or tomorrow.

30) Liberals are never right, they are idiots that always screw up.

31) Liberalism renders education void. No point in having a degree if you are an idiot who thinks you can be a transexual dog or some crap

32) Again, having a degree doesn't mean you are actually intelligent. Look at how many liberals are produced by colleges now, they will destroy non-commie countries form the inside out.

 

 

 

 

 

[Cricket_2_Death]

17 hours ago, Sachinism said:

I did. And I came up with zilch. But seeing you're stuck on his teet, you could enlighten us

I love how pathetically predictable you are. 'triggered' 'snowflake' 

[Singh bling]

Liberals , leftists consider themselves intellectuals because they deeply study subjects and then very effectively use it for their propaganda. They eliminate 20 people but will.always talk sweet

 

Right wing on the other hand has so many gawaars . They just start chest thumping and talk as if they are going to eliminate millions so even if they end up eliminating 1-2 ,leftist just  make it look like they are doing genocide.

Edited March 1, 2019 by Singh bling

[Ranvir]

It's not a bad thing to be open minded, in fact it is better than being completely close minded. However the danger is that people take advantage of you being open minded and are not liberal themselves.

 

It is just like the non violence preached by the likes of Buddha, it's good in principal and has good motives behind it but it can only

work if everyone believes in it and practices it otherwise you will be taken advantage of by bullies.

 

Liberals often underestimate the threat of extremists of the people they are trying to 'protect'.

[Sachinism]

7 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

Thought so. You also can't list a single achievement. Your only measure of success the is in the unhappiness of others because there is nothing else for you to enjoy. 

 

Sadly you think I'm crying about Trump, it's more pity for folk like you who bought into the fantasy so hard, you no longer have any identity other than red-hat

 

[Moochad]

10 hours ago, Tibarn said:

Most self-proclaimed intellectuals are redundant, uninteresting drones, anyway. 

 

 

Socialists/Communists/Dhimmis need this, Grim Reaper Approved, treatment :

 

So they need to be dramatically shaven? 

[Tibarn]

5 minutes ago, Moochad said:

So they need to be dramatically shaven? 

Yes especially that one guys from NaxalLaundry, Shekri or something. 

[Captain]

I could be wrong in my observations, but in general, i've noticed that too many of these liberal intellectuals tend to be academic intellectuals. Their knowledge comes from their books rather than real life experiences. They live in a bubble in their safe environments in an echo chamber with other fellow liberals. Any dissenting opinion is ridiculed with name calling. The left wing platforms like Facebook, Twitte, Google that are so dead set on censoring right wing opinions particularly in the Western countries proves that they are incapable of accepting opposing points of view and hence they would rather censor them than debate them.

 

IMO it's very rare for a person to be an extreme liberal who's been exposed to all kinds of elements in society. The fact that many of these so called liberals push for peace talks and non-violence etc while being so naive about the opposite elements boggles my mind. Peace works only when both the involved parties want to honour it.

 

[Alam_dar]

2 hours ago, Captain said:

I could be wrong in my observations, but in general, i've noticed that too many of these liberal intellectuals tend to be academic intellectuals. Their knowledge comes from their books rather than real life experiences. They live in a bubble in their safe environments in an echo chamber with other fellow liberals. Any dissenting opinion is ridiculed with name calling. The left wing platforms like Facebook, Twitte, Google that are so dead set on censoring right wing opinions particularly in the Western countries proves that they are incapable of accepting opposing points of view and hence they would rather censor them than debate them.

 

IMO it's very rare for a person to be an extreme liberal who's been exposed to all kinds of elements in society. The fact that many of these so called liberals push for peace talks and non-violence etc while being so naive about the opposite elements boggles my mind. Peace works only when both the involved parties want to honour it.

 

This is the most used argument today against the LW i.e. they don't/cannot REALIZE the threat from the extreme Evils of the extreme right of some groups/religions. 

 

It may be correct, but only to some extent. 

 

Buddha taught non-violence, but there were later Buddhist government who learnt to fight wars. And I am not talking about Ashoka, but there were other Buddhist governments too who fought wars. 

 

Buddhists realised this danger from the EVIL too and thus we see the start of the kung fu from the monks in the Buddhist temples. 

 

It may be that Buddhists lost the wars in the past and over powered by Muslims of central asia in many countries like Afghanistan/Pakistan/Tajikistan etc. But at that time Muslims were a world power and they got success all over in the world and defeated world powers like Iran and Romans of that time. 

 

LW has the capability to also become EXTREME in order to give response to the Muslims. This perception is wrong that LW could never stop the RW Muslims. 

 

 

[Captain]

15 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

 

This is the most used argument today against the LW i.e. they don't/cannot REALIZE the threat from the extreme Evils of the extreme right of some groups/religions. 

 

It may be correct, but only to some extent. 

 

Buddha taught non-violence, but there were later Buddhist government who learnt to fight wars. And I am not talking about Ashoka, but there were other Buddhist governments too who fought wars. 

 

Buddhists realised this danger from the EVIL too and thus we see the start of the kung fu from the monks in the Buddhist temples. 

 

It may be that Buddhists lost the wars in the past and over powered by Muslims of central asia in many countries like Afghanistan/Pakistan/Tajikistan etc. But at that time Muslims were a world power and they got success all over in the world and defeated world powers like Iran and Romans of that time. 

 

LW has the capability to also become EXTREME in order to give response to the Muslims. This perception is wrong that LW could never stop the RW Muslims. 

 

 

Of course LW can defeat Muslims. Extreme LW dictators have a much higher death toll on their hands than RW dictators contrary to popular belief. What China is doing to the Uighurs is an example.

 

The situation with LW in India when it comes to extremist Muslims is quite different than in China. The question is, when will they start fighting back? "Nipping it in the bud" is easier than doing it at a latter stage.

 

We have Pakistan to the left, Bangladesh to the right and another 200 Million among us. How many millions will we lose due to the LW's inability to identify a threat at an early stage?

[Alam_dar]

4 hours ago, Captain said:

Of course LW can defeat Muslims. Extreme LW dictators have a much higher death toll on their hands than RW dictators contrary to popular belief. What China is doing to the Uighurs is an example.

I today's world, LW is socially more attached to humanism as compared to Mao or Stalin. 

 

Quote

The situation with LW in India when it comes to extremist Muslims is quite different than in China. The question is, when will they start fighting back? "Nipping it in the bud" is easier than doing it at a latter stage.

We have Pakistan to the left, Bangladesh to the right and another 200 Million among us. How many millions will we lose due to the LW's inability to identify a threat at an early stage?

Indian LW has already been fighting back. It is a slow movement, but vastly effective. 

It is effective, while LW has the capability to unite all the groups in the country (a main difference with RW, while RW of India could not go beyond it's own religious voter base from one religion). 

 

We have seen it in case of Triple Talaqs.

 

The Muslim women are LW of the Muslim community. 

 

Moderate Muslims of India (including women who started triple Talaq issue)  do trust the LW of India and also the Supreme Court. But they don't trust RW of India and the Police. 

 

Therefore, once when the movement of triple talaq started, then it got huge support from ALL groups in India (including moderate Muslims too).

 

While RW of India terrify the Moderate Muslims and push them towards the extremist Mullah Islam. 

 

===#

 

Moderate Muslims also hate the Mullahs. We are watching this fight between moderate and mullah in Saudi Arabia, and also in Pakistan too, in Egypt too, in Iran too. 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2019 by Alam_dar

[Alam_dar]

Another problem is this that moderate Muslims/other minorities will accept the Secular Values, they may become atheists, but there is no chances of their accepting RW religion. 

 

In Islamic countries, you could see that people automatically accepting atheism. Same in European countries where christians are becoming atheists too. Actually in India too, the younger generation is automatically becoming atheist too. 

 

Thus, moderate Muslims will also go towards atheism and secularism sooner or later. 

 

But RW of India is a hurdle in this process in India. It itself does not have the appeal to attract others to voluntarily accept it's religion. Thus it knows only to use power and sword in name of movements like ghar wapsi. 

 

While we are not so much concerned about using the power. We know the attraction in our ideology, and the future belongs to it sooner or later. 

Edited March 1, 2019 by Alam_dar

[Captain]

13 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Moderate Muslims also hate the Mullahs. We are watching this fight between moderate and mullah in Saudi Arabia, and also in Pakistan too, in Egypt too, in Iran too. 

 

 

I'm extremely sceptical about moderate Muslims. Religions like Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism are usually made up of a huge majority of moderates and a minority of extremists. That isn't the case when it comes to Islam i'm afraid. Moderate Muslims very rarely come out and speak against the extremists of their religion. Perhaps, they are afraid of being attacked but the reason doesn't matter. Bottom line is very rarely do they go up against the extremists.

 

The Football analogy about Muslim moderates goes something like, the suicide bombers/Terrorists are the "Forwards", extremists are the "Mid-fielders" who feed the forwards and the moderates are the "Defenders" who defend the Terrorists and Extremists. 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Another problem is this that moderate Muslims/other minorities will accept the Secular Values, they may become atheists, but there is no chances of their accepting RW religion. 

 

In Islamic countries, you could see that people automatically accepting atheism. Same in European countries where christians are becoming atheists too. Actually in India too, the younger generation is automatically becoming atheist too. 

 

Thus, moderate Muslims will also go towards atheism and secularism sooner or later. 

 

But RW of India is a hurdle in this process in India. It itself does not have the appeal to attract others to voluntarily accept it's religion. Thus it knows only to use power and sword in name of movements like ghar wapsi. 

 

I'm a staunch Atheist myself. Out of all the Religions, Islam is the religion that'll produce the least number of Atheists IMO.

 

The Muslims don't have to accept Hinduism. The suggestion that they have to accept Hinduism is ridiculous. All they need to do is stop trying to spread their religion via deceitful actions and via Jihad.

 

Also, i believe you are exaggerating the extreme RW problem in India. Most of the RW extremism i've seen is only as a response to extremist Islam. You are welcome to disagree with my opinion here. A huge portion of Hinduism is comprised of moderates and if they see the reduction of extremist Islam, i think the extremist RW will become a fringe group and will become isolated.

[Alam_dar]

57 minutes ago, Captain said:

I'm extremely sceptical about moderate Muslims. Religions like Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism are usually made up of a huge majority of moderates and a minority of extremists. That isn't the case when it comes to Islam i'm afraid. Moderate Muslims very rarely come out and speak against the extremists of their religion. Perhaps, they are afraid of being attacked but the reason doesn't matter. Bottom line is very rarely do they go up against the extremists.

 

The Football analogy about Muslim moderates goes something like, the suicide bombers/Terrorists are the "Forwards", extremists are the "Mid-fielders" who feed the forwards and the moderates are the "Defenders" who defend the Terrorists and Extremists. 

 

 

 

I'm a staunch Atheist myself. Out of all the Religions, Islam is the religion that'll produce the least number of Atheists IMO.

Although it is very difficult for moderate Muslims to defeat Mullahs due to the very evil base i.e. Islam, nevertheless, still there are instances where moderate Muslims got the upper hand in the history. For example Turks, or Iranians before revolution, or Algerians etc. They were as secular as RW of India today, if not more. 

 

In today's situation, the extremist Mullahs have unfortunately huge influence and moderate Muslims have been defeated. Nevertheless, positive thing is this that Islam is a religion against the human nature, thus this struggle will continue automatically. Perhaps a new trend is coming where once again mullahs have started to become weaker, as we see in Saudia. 

57 minutes ago, Captain said:

The Muslims don't have to accept Hinduism. The suggestion that they have to accept Hinduism is ridiculous. All they need to do is stop trying to spread their religion via deceitful actions and via Jihad.

I am afraid that is not going to happen in India, even from the side of moderate Muslims. It is due to the reason that RW Hindutva has been pushing them towards extremist Islam, as this seems to them to be the last refuge against the furry of Hindutva. 

57 minutes ago, Captain said:

Also, i believe you are exaggerating the extreme RW problem in India. Most of the RW extremism i've seen is only as a response to extremist Islam. You are welcome to disagree with my opinion here. A huge portion of Hinduism is comprised of moderates and if they see the reduction of extremist Islam, i think the extremist RW will become a fringe group and will become isolated.

I know that Hindu RW is also educated one, but still there are masses who are ignorant, and who are repelling not only moderate Muslims, but also terrifying other minorities too through their fanaticism. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

Okay here's the deal. It takes too long to multi quote so I will just number my points to your point blocks. At this point I might as well copy and paste responses because I've already addressed most of what you are claiming in previous posts.

 

1) America is the greatest country in the world, comparing it to craphole countries doesn't mean anything. Libtard fails with wealth and debt don't change it.

Not comparing it with cr@phole countries. Comparing it to FIRST WORLD NATIONS. America is near the bottom end of the pile in every benchmark thats outside the 'millionaire income category'. Greater % of poor people. Greater % of debt. Lower overall level of education. All these make USA inferior to Canada, Germany, Scandinavian countries, etc etc. Saying its greatest doesn't make it greatest, when facts prove it to be inferior. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

2) No business is unsinkable or fail proof, it's part of life.

Its as close to unsinkable as it gets. An aircraft carrier is not unsinkable either. But if you manage to lose to a fishing skiff, the fault is yours and you are a shitty captain. Same with Trump. Sinking a Casino in vegas = poor businessman. Period. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

3) Being educated in liberal arts makes you dumber. Liberal and intelligence don't go hand in hand.

Sorry facts prove you wrong. BSc is more likely to be liberal than HS grad, MSc than BSc, PhD than MSc, etc. These are science degrees. This is objective proof that more educated you are, the more likely you are to be liberal. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

4) Raising your kid to be normal is perfectly fine. Only libtards want their kid to be a tranny asexual that identifies as a dog.

Only cr@p parents will force a homosexual or transgender kid to be cis-gender and hetero. Fail as parents. Same with lib-tards who force their cis-gender kids to be trans. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

5) Socialism/communism both lead you to the same demise.

False. A certain amount of socialism in a capitalist framework is superior than pure capitalism. Objective proof is present of this. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

6) Anti-welfare = get a job like everyone else.

Single mom's need to be at home with their kids, not working for the first few years. Anti-welfare + pro-birther = anti-children. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

7) A disease ridden slut having an abortion is not comparable to a conservative goddess, it's 100% different

They are comparable if they are the same late term abortion. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

8) Victim and liberal go hand in hand, it's core to the ideology

Same with conservative victim-complex people who whine about the media. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

9) Feminist = feminazi

Nope. Then conservative = KKK

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

10) KKK = Demokkkrats

They WERE democracts. THey now vote Republican because they are conservative. Again, objective proof exists of this. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

11) Boy loving is a core component of liberalism, whether they are in or out of the closet

Prove it. Boy loving = predominantly conservative priests. Its a conservative problem. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

11) The switcheroo is fake, watch if you care: www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiprVX4os2Y

Youtube is not a source. Youtube is anyone speaking any nonsense. Quote an academic source. There is no switcharoo on this. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

12) KKK again, see switcharoo myth

No myth. Abe Lincoln was a liberal and a republican because republicans were the liberals in the 19th century. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

13) You can call yourself a centrist but it's clear what you are

To a conservative i am a liberal, to a liberal i am a conservative. Thats what makes me a centrist. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

14) Why do you hate Islam - this is literally the only thing I have of interest with you and where we might find common ground

Because its a cr@p ideology. Cr@ppiest one there is after the KKK conservative morons. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

15) Vetting people who they enter a country is a layer of security and insurance

Irrelevant. Vetting is done in terms of criminal records, not in terms of what they are - liberals or conservative. So it doesn't affect the topic we are discussing. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

16) There is no hard facts when it comes to a latino outperforming a top tier non-liberal European or Asian in STEM period.

Biassed nonsense. Latino as a group compare to European as a group. Not 'non-liberal European'. That would compare to non-liberal latino. 
Its a fact that Latinos in general are more likely to be in STEM/Trades than Europeans in general. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

17) All sickness including pedophilia originate from corrupt liberalism and violate conservatism - can't have them together.

False. Paedophilia is a conservative christian priest problem predominantly. You are just puss-ing out of your side's problems

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

18) Europe is crap and is being overrun by refugees who will turn it into a Jihadistan. They are not a model for anything.

Doesn't change the fact that American democracy moving forward is becoming more like the European one, which is the natural order. US exceptionalism was US having an exceptional scenario of 'empty continent' syndrome. You have not addressed that and run away from it. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

19) Slavery and lincoln, see switcharoo myth from above.

False. Lincoln was a republican and a liberal for the 19th century. You don't know your own history, bud. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

20) A doctor's declaration of death is a formality, they aren't God.

They are the authority who deciedes if you are dead or alive officially. Just like mechanics are the authority that deciedes if your car needs fixing or not. They get to rule if something is alive or not. That has nothing to do with being God. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

21) Anyone that tells you they know the exact second life begins is lying.

Nobody says when life is starting to the exact second. But the most widely held medical definition of life is presence of brain function, since its the exact opposite criteria for declaring a person dead - lack of brain function. A zygote is not alive by medical terms. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

22) You admit my point is true - there are cases where the life of the mother and baby is taken into account.

Yes. very rare. But in most cases the rules of triage doesn't care if you are conservative or liberal, married or single. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

23) America is the best country hands down, liberal thrash drags down the irrelevant rankings but it doesn't impact people like me

Its crappier than most western countries for most people. That is objective fact. There are more liberal people in rest of the western countries, yet their economic performance for most people is better. That makes it better for most people economically. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

24) When it comes to healthcare, there is nothing I can't get in the US that you can in Canada.

Yes. THat includes a half a million dollar bill. My first choice of citizenship (Canada) is a superior society than second choice (USA) due to the fact that our healthcare does not follow a third world model of pay-as-you-go like the US. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

25) Craphole countries are not economically superior to America - not sure why you think this. 

Most 1st world countries are economically superior to USA because the majority of their people are better off financially than majority of Americans. Its just that simple. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

26) No 1st world country is even comparable to the US. American exceptionalism trumps all.

Thats an empty, baseless claim and proven false by data for median income & debt ranges. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

27) Liberals making dumb decisions or living outside of their means can't be fixed. Unless we bar them from going to school or buying stuff they can't afford - which I fully support.

Your nation is poorer for most people despite having lower % of people identify as liberals than most 1st world nations, because your nation's economic model is more third world than 1st world. America = really rich third world model country. Thats all. Which is why i don't live there. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

28) If you can't force people to work, then people who work shouldn't be forced to pay for them.

People who can't work for valid reasons like disability should be paid for by other citizens with disposable income. Its called social contract and being part of society. If you can't be forced to pay for disabled people's livelihood, then i shouldn't be forced to pay for the military either. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

29) Technology makes things possible now that weren't in the past. Someone that was ineffective before could become extremely effective today or tomorrow.

Nonsense claim that is nonsense for most disabled people. Technology does jack$hit for PTSD for eg. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

30) Liberals are never right, they are idiots that always screw up.

Sorry but the average liberal is more educated than the average conservative. Facts show us this. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

31) Liberalism renders education void. No point in having a degree if you are an idiot who thinks you can be a transexual dog or some crap

Red herring. You are a transsexual if your brain chemistry is of a transsexual. There is medical proof of this. Conservatives, due to their lower education, do not grasp this medical fact. 

19 hours ago, Cricket_2_Death said:

32) Again, having a degree doesn't mean you are actually intelligent. Look at how many liberals are produced by colleges now, they will destroy non-commie countries form the inside out.

There is no objective benchmark of intelligence. I didn't say liberal people tend to be more intelligent, i said liberal people tend to be more educated - in ALL fields, including STEM fields. That is proven already. 

 

[Muloghonto]

10 hours ago, Captain said:

I could be wrong in my observations, but in general, i've noticed that too many of these liberal intellectuals tend to be academic intellectuals. Their knowledge comes from their books rather than real life experiences. They live in a bubble in their safe environments in an echo chamber with other fellow liberals. Any dissenting opinion is ridiculed with name calling. The left wing platforms like Facebook, Twitte, Google that are so dead set on censoring right wing opinions particularly in the Western countries proves that they are incapable of accepting opposing points of view and hence they would rather censor them than debate them.

Mate, the echo-chamber effect is not a liberal or conservative thing, it affects MAJORITY of humans who access the internet. This is an internet communication driven phenomena and there are conservative echo chambers just like liberal ones. 

 

10 hours ago, Captain said:

 

IMO it's very rare for a person to be an extreme liberal who's been exposed to all kinds of elements in society. The fact that many of these so called liberals push for peace talks and non-violence etc while being so naive about the opposite elements boggles my mind. Peace works only when both the involved parties want to honour it.

 

It is also very rare for people to be extremely conservative if they have life experiences, lived and travelled around the world a lot. Life experiences make people more centrist and not go to either extremes. 

[Zero_Unit]

while we are in the subject of university degree, it baffles me how someone thinks that it's a fu*king great idea to spend 40-100k on learning about history, social studies, etc and then flip burgers later on (for most). If you have 100k to blow, buy a god damn house or invest it on something better. 

 

In Canada however, you do as you please. In ontario, if your income is under 50k, university is pratically free. If you're in quebec, you can graduate with a university degree for about 12-15k - regardless of the field - study away your lesbian study degree. Win win.

[Muloghonto]

16 hours ago, Zero_Unit said:

while we are in the subject of university degree, it baffles me how someone thinks that it's a fu*king great idea to spend 40-100k on learning about history, social studies, etc and then flip burgers later on (for most). If you have 100k to blow, buy a god damn house or invest it on something better. 

 

In Canada however, you do as you please. In ontario, if your income is under 50k, university is pratically free. If you're in quebec, you can graduate with a university degree for about 12-15k - regardless of the field - study away your lesbian study degree. Win win.

Is it free in Ontario ? I don't think its free- atleast, it wasnt till a few years ago. If your income is <50K, it just meant OSAP would give you student loans for nearly 100% of your school year expenses. But its still a loan and you end up with 80-100K in loan for your degree if you go the 100% loan way

[Zero_Unit]

16 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Is it free in Ontario ? I don't think its free- atleast, it wasnt till a few years ago. If your income is <50K, it just meant OSAP would give you student loans for nearly 100% of your school year expenses. But its still a loan and you end up with 80-100K in loan for your degree if you go the 100% loan way

Currently am paying aound 500$ from my own pocket while the rest is being funded by government. Since I am living alone for study and was able to provide my income/address. So basically yeah, it's free if your income/family income is under 50k or almost free.

 

Edit: i might have forgot to mention, when I said free, I meant gov gives you loan but it becomes free when the bursary they give with the loan almost matches the loan. So each semester with the loan and bursary (which you don't need to pay back) - only about 500-600 is coming out of my pocket after substracting the bursary. Plus, I have never bought a university book in my life except for two courses (you don't really need it for computer science) so no extra cost.

Edited March 4, 2019 by Zero_Unit