When did you grow out of statism?

When did you grow out of statism?

I was 15, and I realized that the State has literally never done anything right. It is only through the markets that we've been able to advance as a society.

I'm 25 now and I still hold these beliefs.

>growing out of statism
You've got it backwards kid. The markets only exist because the state lets them.

Good luck dealing with China with muhh individualism. Your nothing but a degenerate. Kill yourself.

Rights aren't things that the state graciously grants to you, and can revoke when it finds them inconvenient. Rights are things you enjoy inherently that governments must respect. If there's a conflict, it is the state the must yield. Or be made to yield.

Yes, "rights" includes property rights.

Jeff pls go

Le cookies are ready

How do I look like pic relaged muscle wise but white like myself ?

>be merpeople
>hobo sightings in disney land lead to a small diplomatic fiasco
>israel bombed it, very few survivors, they were big guys

>made 7th shit today on designated town overpass
>news reported an accident on road of 40 car pileup, no one useful was hurt

>whore can't touch me tallywag but never in my life have I seen beevis and butthead
>bane came and slain lame dames for lamp shades

>it's like peotry it fucks up my life

Okay, I need to get some education here. What is statism?

You'll never be zyzz. Jeff plz go.

I think most of us grew out of statism from 14-18, but at 25 you really should be returning back

>markets only exist because the state lets them
That's clearly not the case. Markets would exists whether there is a state or not. You may want to argue that the state is needed to protect the "honesty" of those markets but what you're saying is just wrong. Think about it. I can trade things with you without the need for a state.

you cant unless you have his insertions and genetics but hard work and diet man thats it

JEFF
PLS
GO

I grew back into when I realized all of these fags, trans, cucks, etc cannot handle a "libertarian" society. Maybe in 1000 years when people can control themselves.

We need National Socialism to prevent society from being degenerate. That's just how it is.

>being this naive
holy shit

I want to slit your throat and watch you bleed.

I mean I know its bait but....

>you actually could comprehend the complexities of the world at 15
>you should believe in the exact same things that you did at 15 for the rest of your life

...

first you have to be about 5'6"

then let natural selection take its course and let them die out.

don't let the few bad apples ruin the bunch.

>he believes in social darwinism

>Not being being libertarian nationalist master race.

jeff....pls

>rights

When we realized we're already a country.

>he doesn't want the useless brainwashed rabble to get a taste of reality
Please.

Social darwinism wouldn't lead to a "better" human race. It would just lead to a human race that would be able to exploit each other more and more.
A race of joos as Sup Forums would say.

>state is trash and betrays the people
>stateless society doesn't work in large scale
are we doomed to suffering?

People should be free to do what they want but not free of the consequences. If that's social Darwinism then sign me up. I'm sure you can see the logic in that.

It certainly seems that way

national parks are pretty gud.

the best we can do is keeping the state small enough to drown in a bathtub, as the saying goes

tfw will never play runescape with jeff seid

>I'm sure you can see the logic in that.
I can.
I just don't agree that it would be a good thing for humanity or whatever group of people that believes in that.
Cooperation (with healthy competition) is much more efficient than people stealing from each other. This is the reason we have societies/civilizations/countries in the first place I believe.

HAHAHA That's a gem.

>((Markets))

>Cooperation
Yes, cooperation is key but that's not the same as enabling degeneracy. Which is exactly what a large state does, inevitably.

No

>lolbertarians complaining about degeneracy
wut

how short is that guy?

yesss goy, sell us more of your land

Great arguments there. Really made me think.

Pic is manlet sissy betamale lib

He's 5'11, but the guy talking the picture is 6'8

>Rights aren't things that the state graciously grants to you, and can revoke when it finds them inconvenient
what stops people from violating your rights?

Just because being rich in the first place causes degeneracy.
If you are too busy trying to survive you won't have time trying to cut off your dick to become a girl.
There is no real solution to the problem unless you want to go full Plato's republic/3rd Reich/USSR and indoctrinate your whole population.

literally why would you care about degeneracy? it's just more opportunities for enterprising young leafs like yourself to make a quick shekel

the true redpill is statism while being part of the state

why haven't you gotten involved in real politics yet, user?

NAP, bro. The Chinese will respect muh individual property rights.

Weak straw man. It's degenerate. Think about it.

You're assuming most people are going to be starving. Why?

>You're assuming most people are going to be starving. Why?
Did not but let me rephrase.
If most of your labor has to be spent on life maintaining things such as producing food, building houses, etc. and even some minor comforts like sanitation, electric power, etc. you won't have labor to spend on "degenerate" things. As productivity goes up and a society grows richer it inevitably leads to "degeneracy" because of the excess labor.

I agree but my point is that the measures the states takes during these periods of wealth makes things far worse. It's just amplifies the natural pull towards being degenerate. Which is a natural thing and makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. ie "Why work when Rome will give you free bread and circus?". This attitude makes sense biologically but only in the short term.

Without a state or any other similar entity it's unlikely that that level of wealth would be reached so I suppose we'll never get any practical examples but yes the state providing free food does lead to that outcome except that if it wouldn't I doubt the results would change. It would just delay the outcome.

Your shitty ideology is on the same level as Communism when actually applied to real people then. Let that sink in.

>unlikely
Perhaps. It's pretty unlikely we'll ever find out in our life time. Best we can hope for is something in the middle, imo.