Things statists say

[Anti Federalist]

Because I am an ass

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Anti FedeRALLLLLLLLISSSSSTTTTT!!!!

 

[tod evans]

"The will of the people"

 

[WM_in_MO]

the police followed procedure.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

"Get in & get out."

 

[kcchiefs6465]

"Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again I’ll throw you off this f—–g balcony."

 

[seyferjm]

"I understand the 2nd Amendment, I hunt"

 

[phill4paul]

"I'm against others getting equal treatment under current laws because I don't want to expand government."

 

[phill4paul]

He keeps me from going all anarchist and shit.

Slutter McGee is like a cool soothing Tucks medicated hemorrhoidal pad on my anarchic soul.

 

[Origanalist]

"Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again I’ll throw you off this f—–g balcony."

But he's a republican!?

 

[Christian Liberty]

"love it or leave it."

"I'm against others getting equal treatment under current laws because I don't want to expand government."

Those debates don't make us statists. That's not fair.

If a certain portion of the population was given $50,000 per year, would you lobby for that same money to be given to everyone? I wouldn't.

 

[Origanalist]

Slutter McGee is like a cool soothing Tucks medicated hemorrhoidal pad on my anarchic soul.

OK, you win.

 

[mczerone]

First 5 are fine. 6 is something that rational people say, not fucking statists. 7 is not statism either, though I do not support punishment for Snowden.



I am all for public roads. Not a fucking statist remark.



This is a fair criticism of many libertarians. Not a statist remark.

Good job on most of em. Just thought I would point out where some of yall are wrong. Because I am an ass that way.

Not being an anarcho fucking capitalist does not = statist.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

"I want the state to exist, but I'm adamantly not a statist"

Cognitive dissonance, much?

 

[Christian Liberty]

First 5 are fine. 6 is something that rational people say, not fucking statists. 7 is not statism either, though I do not support punishment for Snowden.



I am all for public roads. Not a fucking statist remark.



This is a fair criticism of many libertarians. Not a statist remark.

Good job on most of em. Just thought I would point out where some of yall are wrong. Because I am an ass that way.

Not being an anarcho fucking capitalist does not = statist.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

First of all, technically being a statist means you support the existence of the State. Second of all, if someone has a problem with Snowden revealing that the USG is spying on everyone, they are a hyper-statist. Third of all, with regards to the whole "smaller government/anarchy" bit, a lot of people use "anarchy" to mean something that it doesn't mean. IIRC Peter King called Ted Cruz and Mike Lee "Anarchists", whereas they really aren't even close to being broadly libertarian.

I tend to agree that if we're going to use "statist" as a slur we should probably exclude minarchists, constitutionalists, and the like. But technically, by definition, the term is accurate even for some who are very close to the freedom POV.

 

[phill4paul]

"love it or leave it."



Those debates don't make us statists. That's not fair.

If a certain portion of the population was given $50,000 per year, would you lobby for that same money to be given to everyone? I wouldn't.

If one is fine with the benefits afforded them through current law and against benefits for others under current law then one is a statist. A state to protect. A state to prohibit.
Whether or not that applies to a certain individual is up to them to decide.

 

[mczerone]

"Everyone deserves their fair share"

"We need to..."

"Our society has to..."

"They took our jobs!"

"[Place name] has done [action]" - e.g. "China has manipulated the money supply"

 

[Christian Liberty]

If one is fine with the benefits afforded them through current law and against benefits for others under current law then one is a statist. A state to protect. A state to prohibit.
Whether or not that applies to a certain individual is up to them to decide.

What if the individual doesn't want those benefits to exist for anybody, including themselves? And thus opposes expanding said benefits to cover all Americans because that would be moving in the opposite direction he wants to go: eliminating those benefits for all Americans? Is such a person a "statist"?

 

[phill4paul]

What if the individual doesn't want those benefits to exist for anybody, including themselves? And thus opposes expanding said benefits to cover all Americans because that would be moving in the opposite direction he wants to go: eliminating those benefits for all Americans? Is such a person a "statist"?

Ummm.......

If one is fine with the benefits afforded them....

Such an individual would not seek to self affirm that their said beliefs were dictated from on high and keep their benefits by enacting law against those they oppose rather than say that the law and benefits they enjoy should be ended.

 

[cajuncocoa]

any reference to the military "fighting for our freedom"

 

[Origanalist]

any reference to the military "fighting for our freedom"

Close....

Always the favorite of the self congratulatory veteran, "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

 

[cajuncocoa]

Close....

Yes! See, it's like this: I did a search of the thread for the word "freedom" to check if anyone had posted that yet. I do like yours better FWIW.