Q was "cultivated" by the few who suggested it to the many as the umbrella for all activities underneath. Only those few who suggested it can define; redefine and deliberately contradict it for all those who consent to believe or not believe in it.
The suggestion of "Q" causes the conflict of reason over wanting vs not wanting Q. You witnessed this conflict of reason about the suggested Q; while both of you ignored that a 3rd party suggested it to you to cause division (reason) among you.
From your perspective...ask yourself if coming together and talking about all the good stuff requires an umbrella, and also why you consented to Q; when /pol/ was already established over a decade before? Why does mankind fall for the same trick of division by suggestion over and over again?
Good comment. We do not need to mention Q in order to discuss these topics. Labels beget labels, and it’s only the content that we need to share in order to plant the seed.
Q does not need defending. Our task is to spread the message.
Still, good on OP for remaining calm. Take these comments into consideration for future interactions.
You did great to remain so calm. A tactical retreat was your best option at that point, and in similar abusive situations. It’s not fun to walk on egg shells, but for ones like him, it’s better to stick to the message in the book’s pages rather than the controversial book cover. Chapter one is a good start.
We do not need to mention Q in order to discuss these topics.
It's the idolatry of suggested information that deceives us into conflict (want vs not want) and gathering under any suggested idol (cult of personality; any symbolism; names; brands etc.) represents a tool for the few to control the consenting many underneath them.
Nature offers sound; those within nature choose to react to perceived sound by shaping it into words; which they suggest to each other as a substitute meaning for what sound means; yet the meaning of all sounds is within the movement used to communicate it; which our senses perceive as inspiration to react to.
The suggested words of others represent affixed information tempting us to consent to it by choosing to want or not want it. Both choices ignore the need to adapt to origin of sound.
Consider the following quote: "Word has no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in commerce."
Labels beget labels
Nature doesn't label any information; it moves all within to communicate inspiration. Every label is suggested by others to our choice of evaluation as want vs not want; true vs false; good vs bad; believing or not believing.
Want represents the temptation to ignore need; and wants corrupt choice to want more; hence suggested labels begetting more suggested labels.
in order to plant the seed.
As form (life) within flow (inception towards death) flow represents the natural order for all the resulting form and form represents the seed for growth within flow.
Q was "cultivated" by the few who suggested it to the many as the umbrella for all activities underneath. Only those few who suggested it can define; redefine and deliberately contradict it for all those who consent to believe or not believe in it.
The suggestion of "Q" causes the conflict of reason over wanting vs not wanting Q. You witnessed this conflict of reason about the suggested Q; while both of you ignored that a 3rd party suggested it to you to cause division (reason) among you.
From your perspective...ask yourself if coming together and talking about all the good stuff requires an umbrella, and also why you consented to Q; when /pol/ was already established over a decade before? Why does mankind fall for the same trick of division by suggestion over and over again?
Good comment. We do not need to mention Q in order to discuss these topics. Labels beget labels, and it’s only the content that we need to share in order to plant the seed.
Q does not need defending. Our task is to spread the message.
Still, good on OP for remaining calm. Take these comments into consideration for future interactions.
You did great to remain so calm. A tactical retreat was your best option at that point, and in similar abusive situations. It’s not fun to walk on egg shells, but for ones like him, it’s better to stick to the message in the book’s pages rather than the controversial book cover. Chapter one is a good start.
It's the idolatry of suggested information that deceives us into conflict (want vs not want) and gathering under any suggested idol (cult of personality; any symbolism; names; brands etc.) represents a tool for the few to control the consenting many underneath them.
Nature offers sound; those within nature choose to react to perceived sound by shaping it into words; which they suggest to each other as a substitute meaning for what sound means; yet the meaning of all sounds is within the movement used to communicate it; which our senses perceive as inspiration to react to.
The suggested words of others represent affixed information tempting us to consent to it by choosing to want or not want it. Both choices ignore the need to adapt to origin of sound.
Consider the following quote: "Word has no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in commerce."
Nature doesn't label any information; it moves all within to communicate inspiration. Every label is suggested by others to our choice of evaluation as want vs not want; true vs false; good vs bad; believing or not believing.
Want represents the temptation to ignore need; and wants corrupt choice to want more; hence suggested labels begetting more suggested labels.
As form (life) within flow (inception towards death) flow represents the natural order for all the resulting form and form represents the seed for growth within flow.