>Is it possible to overdose on redpill?
ONE
FUCKING
ARGUMENT
>>74744236
good thing about stef is that i consumed some of his ideas that i found were good, and i became much more libertarian from watching him. so now i consider myself more of "national libertarian" is that makes sense. i believe that within a nation, the freedom of individuals should be maximized as much as possible, but that nations should still exist because they are the only thing stopping a state-singularity of a one world government with absolute power from completely taking over
Guys check out this commercial that is playing up in Cuckland with the Typical Gamer. The Ontario government advertises stealing from the young in such a cute way! Don't forget to thumbs down!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YvylKBMIDcM
,..,...
>>74744626
I think I remember in one of his videos he argues that it would be extremely difficult to conquer a people which were not governed by a single entity because there is no head of command, or something to that effect
Yes, it's called Dark Night of The Soul in the new age/esoteric religion circles.
You'll just have to power through it, buddy.
>>74745035
yeah and he's wrong. the opposite is true. a disparate force is weaker than a concentrated one, militarily. they just conquer one village, then the next, without any resistance. don't take what stefan says as law, since he's wrong about half the time
>>74744236
You are the cancer that is killing /pol/.
Anyone replying to you and not sageing is the cancer that is killing /pol/.
>>74745183
Imagine if everyone is armed. Wouldn't it be an impossible task to conquer an entire continent of armed individuals?
>>74744236
I now know about Jewish blood sacrifice. I also watched a Rabbi defending sucking baby dick after a circumcision.
I think I crossed a certain line.
>>74744236
Not an argument
>>74745258
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_concentration
you don't think the barbarians the romans conquered had spears and axes?
>>74745788
You're talking a foreign force with superior weaponry against people with primitive weapons and no low-latency inter-tribe communication network.
>>74745393
Not an argument
>>74745954
it's not like the romans had machine guns anyways. and you're saying with low latency inter-tribe communication network the "tribes" would unite together to fight off the invaders? why, if the tribes consider each other to not be part of their nation? it's just like when the norse invaded ireland. the tribes ignore each other, in some cases backstab each other and help the invaders for money until a king rises and unites the tribes into a single nation. learn from history
>>74744236
Absolutely
Pick related
Love you CF just let's keep ourselves grounded a little more
>>74746149
If we take America as an example, and imagined that we removed all government, we would not be left with just a bunch of feuding tribes. We trade with people across the continent and socialize with people all over the place. I don't think the lack of a government would result in the lack of a cultural identity and the willingness to band together against a common threat.
>>74746444
The
>>74744236
Well, taking in too much can lead to confusion. However, there is no going back.
>>74746489
all your points are incorrect. you're idealizing "americans" (the name wouldn't exist under your lack of nation concept) as if they're somehow of a greater moral stock than the middle-age irish. if the nashville clan hears the greensboro clan just got annihilated by a first class military (of a 1 world government mind you. imagine how powerful that military is, and how coordinated), they will do all they can to win the favor of those invaders. you are not special, and you will quickly kneel down before your new masters. libertarians like you who want to do away with the concept of nation are useful idiots to globalists
>>74746984
I disagree that the government makes the nation. In this case I would argue that all people who were part of this libertarian society would see themselves as sort of a nation united against those who threatened their society. You seem to think that in a libertarian society we would all recede into our little clans and cut off the rest of the world. I do think there would be a certain amount of cultural separation, I see no reason why alliances wouldn't be formed between people in the case of a threat
>>74747534
Small groups of people think small and have regional concerns. The Boston clan won't be motivates to do anything if the LA clan gets invaded. National identity superceded (or enhances) regional loyalties and motivates actions and concerns on a national level. You want a people with a national identity without a nation, but it won't work. I'm all for libertarinianism, but it needs to be within the nation-state.
>>74745232
stop posting this shit everywhere you fucking autist
>>74747739
I fundamentally disagree. People in the past thought locally because regional news arrived weeks after the fact and you only got it if you read the newspaper. With the internet, people are able to follow regional news as it happens and in the form of video and sound instead of news print.
NOT
AN
ARGUMENT
>>74749278
>>74751234
>>74751318
>>74745035
You need more power to conquer Afghanistan where you need to use brute force to make every village submit compared to a modern liberal democracy where everyone does as the cucks on TV tell them.
>>74745183
oh like any middle eastern country of recent memory, where the US went in and knocked down the regime in 3 weeks while still battling various insurgent/terrorist groups 10 years later
