You have one chance to tell me why you're blue-pilled enough to still be a statist

You have one chance to tell me why you're blue-pilled enough to still be a statist.

>1 post by this id.
Into the trash it goes.

Here's your (you)

Nonwhites can't be trusted with freedom

People are dumb

Low IQ detected.

Yeah. Cops.

>average anarchist

>Implying parents own their children

I'm not statist though.

In practice, they do. There's just some restrictions of course.

Because freedom cannot be absolute.
The absolute freedom of one person would mean the complete lack of freedom for someone else.

Muh nigga.

>Implying anarchist means no rules

Not an argument

arbeit macht frei, dummy
dyel??

The blue pill-red pill spectrum is very broad. Full en-red-pill-enment takes you far away from anything worldly. You have to operate within a certain degree of blue-pilledness to be able to partake in the sphere of general sociology, policy, and economics

Neither is "muh niggrs."

That is exactly what it means thought...
Without someone to enforce the rules, the rules don't really exist.

I understand that the blue-pill is necessary to understand the red-pill, but the latter is the ultimate end goal.

But it's true. One needs only to look at South Africa and Zimbabwe to find the answer to "what happens when we start to treat blacks like human beings?" And you're free to look at Latin America to find how quickly Hispanics will pick socialism and welfare over freedom and progress.

Liberty and freedom are white concepts, and if they must be de-prioritized in order to save white nations then so be it. Your hallowed freedom dies with white people.

There's no statism at my house, but my mom enforces the rules. There's no statism at a bar, but if I shout "Fuck the Patriots," there's still the punishment of me getting my ass kicked.

Just look at the South and look what happens when racists run a government.

Neither of those are comparable to a country.

They most certainly are, especially when dealing with colonial America.