the difference is that in order for them to get what they want and believe (wealth, success, sex, status, etc), they have to completely warp everything about the world in bizarre and evil and destructive ways. because they are inferior and so in order for them to be superior, everything has to be perverted

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5609713&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310893",#48184827)

shitlibs worship science, technology, individualism. because historically, tribalism led to violent horrors, they reject it and go to the opposite extreme. in an effort to be "educated", they over-consume media. in an effort to be "equal", shitlib women act like men. where there was once the bible/societal norms strongly regulating behavior, there is now a worship of being as tolerant as possible. "tolerance" is the new religion. and they apply their new guiding principle, "tolerance" to all behaviors.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5609713&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310893",#48184866)

IMHO: US Liberalism is a tradition, not a religion, and it is a tradition that began in earnest when the Quakers took their crazy religion and left England to settle in the New World to establish a Christian and moral utopia. It's a tradition that was alive in the founding of the US, as much of the justifications for the revolution were moral based. This tradition of hardcore morality continued through the 1800's where the protestant religion splintered into all of these crazy sects (like 7th day evangelical, etc.). These varying sects united against the South and used the issue of chattel slavery as a moral unifying purpose, and through the political process, basically took over the US Federal government, overthrew the original intent of the US Constitution (civil war, 14th amendment), and established themselves as the group that decides policy and the moral order of the US.

Liberalism is not really racial in nature - they don't necessarily hate whites - but their hatred of white Southerners remains as a vestige of their first great rise to power. It's a throw back to the 1860's and 1960's victories that liberals had which increased their power, but there isn't necessarily a KKK style "no whites" rule. For instance, most liberals are white, and most black folks could care less about lib moralizing.

They began shed their ties to Christianity after WWI - maybe had something to do with influx of Jewish people, maybe not - as most western cultures became less religious and traditionalist after the world wars (i.e. the failure and collapse of the traditional European system of government and life in general). In the 1960's, with communism on the march, Liberals shed all ties to Christianity and embraced anti-racism, environmentalism, and feminism as their guiding moral principles.

This is a long post because you can't understand libs unless you understand how they got to where they are. They follow a tradition that is very American, a tradition that has been wholly successful, that was once evangelical Christian, but is entirely based upon moralism and realpolitik. There are no "principles," outside of this idea of moralism progressing through time, revealing itself and its truths as its adherents faithfully carry on (truths that also happen to always seek to consolidate power to force the world to bend to the blinding truth of it's moral righteousness). It's like a stream of water, twisting and turning, continuing through the landscape, always moving forward, getting wider, leading you further into truth and righteousness. It is not consistent, there are no coherent principles, and it is highly dependent upon human leaders taking the lead and showing the way. There is no truth higher than moral truth, and adhering to moral truth is the highest duty imposed on a person, and there is no greater sin than failing to adhere to moral truth.

So:

Your daughter gets killed by immigrants, Libs: we should not use this tragedy to allow the racists to speak.

Women's liberation and women's rights were pushed for decades, but once trannies were deemed a higher class morally, see-you-later women's sports, and it makes moral sense.

Women's rights to do whatever they want is supreme, even if that means supporting legal prostitution, with prostitution being the most base and egregious act of degrading and exploiting women - fine.

Protecting Jewish people was a moral imperative, until Palestinians became the new moral imperative, now it's not so clear.

Probably the best example: abortion is infanticide and anyone who doesn't understand that it's killing an unborn human child is willfully blind. But liberalism defends the right to abortion as an absolute moral imperative, a moral imperative, because the morality of "women can do whatever they want" outweighs "probably wrong to kill your child" - and this weighing of moral issues is done people, based only upon emotional appeals.

TLDR: liberalism is an American tradition that lost its way in the 1960's once it was decoupled from Christianity, and it is based upon the moral whims of the day, not any sort of timeless defining principles.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5609713&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310893",#48184966)