"Remember that life is made up of loyalty: loyalty to your friends; loyalty to things beautiful and good; loyalty to the country in which you live; loyalty to your King; and above all, for this holds all other loyalties together, loyalty to God."
Queen Mary (of Teck)
Can we have a monarchist book club? We'll vote on which books to read first, but before that we'll nominate, so name whatever monarchist literature (philosophical, poetic, fiction, whatever) you would like to be on the poll, and when I get another thread up in a month or something, I will have all the nominated options on it, and we'll vote (lacking a monarch to decide for us) which work to start with
Here are some of my nominations
De Monarchia, by Dante
Eikon Basilike, by King Charles
Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age, by Father Seraphim Rose
The Henriad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8wI5KCyu44
kys
>>8066999
*kiss*
kys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbQ9wYHeY0c
Monarchists should read Aristotle, the Aquinate and Maurras to be honest.
I'm already a Monarchist.
Preaching to the converted.
>Monarchist book club
>Voting on which books to read
lol, monarchism
essentially fascism for nerds who don't work out
What kind of faggot actually wants to be ruled by an unnacountable product of centuries of incest?
I hate how in America we may not have a monarchy but we've had a controlling aristocracy since the beginning. Fuck "democracy."
>>8067178
>unaccountable
>>8067190
A landed educated elite served Rome for many generations.
The US needs a Censor of the House and a Censor of the Senate
>>8067178
>unaccountable
If they fuck up, you kill them.
As opposed to all those nameless/faceless oligarchs in your beloved democracy; who needn't fear a single realistic consequence for doing far worse than any monarch ever did.
>>8067191
>he's accountable to God!!! lol!!
>just let yourself be abused, peasant, he'll go to hell if he wasn't a just ruler!! xD
To be a monarchist you have to be either:
1. some kind of aristocrat
2. a "man" with such low levels of testosterone he has a fetish for submission to authority
>>8067198
>If they fuck up, you kill them.
lol, yes, that's what many republican revolutionaries did, but thanks for the tip
>monarchism
>>8067178
Better to be unaccountable, than supremely accountable to all the people you owe favors to for getting in power, as well as all the forces of darkness you have to appease to gain more power
>>8067191
Nah, the Pope shouldn't have any more power over the monarch than the monarch should over the Pope.
Did I hear call my name?
>>8067194
Have you read it? It argues for absolute monarchy, sure, but the modernism it uses is the death knell of monarchy
>>8067198
>If they fuck up, you kill them.
As >>8067203
said, that's pretty much how republicanism begun.
Also in "real" democracy, not this parliamentary shit we have now, you could recall your representative, if s/he would stop representing you. That's the whole point of democracy, you know the real democracy, the one that US constitution destroyed.
>>8067208
>Nah, the Pope shouldn't have any more power over the monarch than the monarch should over the Pope.
Nice heresy bro that's the attitude that led to the hell known as the enlightenment.
I'd join this club.
Monarchy is underrated. Ignore the Americans with no sense of tradition who say otherwise. They've lost their cultural identity and so rabidly defend the pretensions of their founders.
Only fucking book you need to read about monarchism.
>>8067196
Education is far more widespread in the US than in Rome. The US doesn't have an aristocracy like Rome did either, and that Roman aristocracy raped and pillaged their own people whenever they had the slightest opportunity.
Have you ever read about how taxes were collected in Rome?
>>8067212
With democracy, there is absolutely nothing to stop your candidates being bought and sold; nor could there ever be.
Whereas monarchy, traditionally, has been superior by virtue of the fact that monarchs value more than money.
>>8067222
Yes, and then the Emperors plunged Rome into constant civil war, when they weren't just being careless tyrants, save for a few good ones.
And that's monarchy in a nutshell: you might get lucky, but probably not.
>>8067223
>there is absolutely nothing to stop your candidates being bought and sold
Yes there is you dolt, it's called recalling your representative. Also even more basing entire system on consensus is another good way to prevent any kind of selling out.
Sure monarchs might value virtue more than money, but tell that to Richard the Lionheart and John Lackland... one used all of his kingdoms money for hist "virtue" the other had to then try and run that kingdom with no money and ended up pretty much destroying the absolute power of the monarch. And in the current political system of UK, sure the Queen might not be bought, but the actual power lies with the parliament, which supposedly can be bought, so it's even worse than pure republican democracy, where at least you have three different representatives that all need to be bought...
>>8067213
No, Dante argues the same in De Monarchia. If the Pope didn't try to lord over monarchs as the Caesar of the world, the Reformation probably wouldn't have happened because it wouldn't have had resentful rulers backing it.
>>8067219
I'm American, I would much prefer Queen Elizabeth rule our country than our current options
>>8067220
"I do not believe in religion, my enlightened intelligence is my church."
>>8066997
Codreanu.
>>8067223
>Whereas monarchy, traditionally, has been superior by virtue of the fact that monarchs value more than money.
lol at how naïve you are
go back to reading Moldberg
>>8067235
>it's called recalling your representative.
For pandering to lobbyists? Good luck with that.
This is only thing that monarchies are good for.
I think you can't count your country as a first world developed country if it isn't a republic.
>>8067236
>If the Pope didn't try to lord over monarchs as the Caesar of the world,
It's his right and duty. Kings must be answerable to a higher authority.
>>8067242
>I think you can't count your country as a first world developed country if it isn't a republic.
Why? In modern "monarchies" the royals are so castrated, they're nothing but celebrities with slightly more prestige.
>>8067242
God rest his soul
>I would rather choose to wear a crown of thorns with my Saviour, than to exchange that of gold, which is due to me, for one of lead, whose embased flexibleness shall be forced to bend and comply to the various and oft contrary dictates of any factions, when instead of reason and public concernments they obtrude nothing but what makes for the interest of parties, and flows from the partialities of private wills and passions. I know no resolutions more worthy a Christian king, than to prefer his conscience before his kingdoms.
>>8067245
Yes, God. Same authority the Pope is answerable to.
>>8067252
The Pope is God's representative on Earth. All authority was handed down to him by Christ Jesus.
>>8067241
As I said, modern parliamentary system isn't perfect, but there are few pretty simple way to make it better, compared to monarchies, especially absolute (which is apparently the one you want) which historically all ended in bloody revolutions.
And yes if recalling the representative would be enacted, the voters could recall their representative if s/he would go against the will of the voters. It's that fucking simple. There's no simple way of enacting this in monarchy, other than either forcing abdication or killing the king, which you know sounds like a argument against monarchy.
>>8067246
Still, you can't call your self a modern developed nation, if you still stick with a frankly retarded notion of some people being "above" others and caring about lineage and shit.
Monarchies are the stuff of the middle ages, and go against modernism.
It's really hilarious how a bunch of Internet nerds convinced themselves they were going to revive a political system nobody wants a century after it lost all credibility.
>>8067256
The Pope is a faggot who nobody respects anymore. Catholicism is dead or dying in every country worth naming.
>>8067256
Kings are God's representative on earth.
Pope did not proclaim Peter to ruler of the earth. He gave him the power to bind and lose (as all Apostles, and thus bishops have), which means to absolve and excommunicate. In 1 Peter 5:1-2, Peter addresses the other presbyters merely as a "fellow presbyters" (presbyter and episkopos were the same office then), not as some higher office.
>>8067258
No, you can't just recall a representative for going against the voters. That doesn't qualify as misconduct.
>>8067266
>It's really hilarious how a bunch of Internet nerds convinced themselves they were going to revive a political system nobody wants a century after it lost all credibility.
Fucking this. It's fucking pathetic. But it's always fun arguing with these retards, because it's so easy to refute them.
>>8067267
How does it feel knowing that your precious Pope is inviting millions of muslims into the heartland of Christianity?
>>8067267
merely as "* fellow presbyter"
>>8067267
Christ is the "King of Kings, Lord of Lords." The Pope is Christ's representative on this Earth. Claiming kings have the same power as the Pope is heresy tantamount to the Anglican schism.
>>8067276
I'm Orthodox :^)
>>8067276
If it causes us to become more devout in our faith, as it seems to be doing to the Poles, etc., then I think it was a stroke of genius. Encourage love and charity but at the same time demonstrate how superior Catholicism is to every other belief system.
>>8067279
Every bishop is Christ's representative on earth. So is every king, but in a different capacity.
>monarchism isn't an ideology
>>8067281
It's no wonder you hold the views you do. Orthodoxy has always been infested with the heresy of Caesaropapism.
>>8067284
lol, the Poles are beating up foreigners in the streets and massively protesting "refugee" presence
Good for them, but hardly christlike.
>>8067269
Why not? Again, I'm not talking about the current system, just as you're not talking about real-life absolute monarchies. I'm talking about "ideal" democracy (which is still easier to enact, than absolute monarchy), in which going against the will of your constituents is a misconduct.
That's the whole point of true, "direct democracy" that the people have direct word in decision making. And again, another necessary part is consensus.
What I'm trying to say is, that Rhode Island constitution of 1647 was pretty much the most perfect political system in the entire history, and we should all strive to enact it again.
>>8067286
>Every bishop is Christ's representative on earth
This is true. They all share in Christ's priesthood, while the Pope inherits the prime title of Pontifex Maximus, the High Priest. Of course the true High Priest is Christ, but that just goes to show the mystery of the primacy of the papacy and how closely connected Christ is with his Church.
Kings are representatives of Christ in the same way every Christian is, I suppose, but they should absolutely be answerable to their religious authority.
>>8067291
It's the same fervor that led to the crusades. Violence can sometimes be justified if the cause is just and no other option will work.
>>8067298
I agree, but I don't think the average Christian does.
>>8067298
So you're basically saying that daesh is the perfect state (just Muslim, instead of Christian).
>>8067308
>are purely defensive.
LEL
You could claim that daesh is also defensive, as it has rose out of the US invasion of Iraq.
Monarchism doesn't require Christianity.
Time to come home, Europeans. Learn the religion of your ancestors.
>>8067311
>true European nationalism is pagan!
You sicken me.
>>8067310
>he fell for the 'the crusades were evil christians oppressing innocent mooslems' meme
>>8067310
yes, I'm sure those Iberians were in the wrong for retaking their country after being invaded
>>8067298
Almost everyone who has ever committed violence has believed that his or her cause was just. There are not really any murderers, just people who decided they were wronged and needed to enact "justice."
>>8067322
Belief and fact are two different things. Tell me you're not arguing for moral relativism.
>>8067292
Direct democracy is impossible on a mass scale, it is only possible in communities or at most small districts. People who aren't doing full time political research can't be informed on every single policy issue and have the time to deliberate each on a national scale, it would take forever to accomplish anything
>>8067295
Christ is the ONLY Pontifex Maximus. Every believer is a pontiff (because that is the word of the universal priesthood, not priest as in "presbyter" or "episkpos"), and Christ is the high pontiff. Apply the title of "high pontiff" to a bishop is blasphemous, and Peter would have absolutely rejected it.
>>8067322
ok bro, I'm sure the Cologne rapists had a sophisticated doctrine of natural law to justify gang-rape, but Europeans nationalists are monsters for reacting with violence
>>8067324
I'm not, but I wonder what objective basis you have for separating facts from beliefs?
>>8067311
Read Guénon closer you little bitch and your made-up fantasy world.
see >>>/pol/74679401 too
and read De Maistre
>>8067325
>Christ is the ONLY Pontifex Maximus.
Yes, and the Pope is Christ's representative on Earth, ergo the Pope is also Pontifex Maximus in his capacity as Christ's representative on Earth. It's intriguing to me that you think the state should have more power than the church, as your view of monarchs seems rather analagous to the Catholic view of the Pope, at least from my admittedly limited comprehension.
>>8067317
Christianity is a pseudo-Jewish abomination. It is not for whites, does not have the interest of whites in mind.
Christ's message was inclusive, and Christianity champions the weak over the strong, losers and outcasts over the virtuous, and teaches white men to value the coloured hordes over his brothers.
>>8067095
>Je parle pas
What a fucking pleb. "Extreme Droite" but doesn't speak proper French, only slang.
>>8067331
The Logos became flesh and dwelt among us.
>>8067327
Don't put words in my mouth. I'm just saying nobody goes to war without believing it justified. This is the reason why the Japanese blew up their own rail depot in Manchuria or the Germans attacked their own border post with soldiers dressed in stolen Polish uniforms. It's important for there to be a cassus belli, no matter how trivial.
If all those muslim rapists were lined up and shot tomorrow I wouldn't shed any tears.
>>8067345
>Pope is Christ's representative on Earth, ergo the Pope is also Pontifex Maximus in his capacity as Christ's representative on Earth.
This is like saying, "Christ is God, therefore the Pope is God in his capacity as representative."
> It's intriguing to me that you think the state should have more power than the church,
I don't, I think they should have different spheres of power. The monarch has no business administrating the Church, and the Church has no business administrating the state, but they should be allies and work to a common spiritual end.
>>8067325
>it would take forever to accomplish anything
Better that, than having no say whatsoever in stuff that will affect you in your daily life.
I mean, how can monarch know everything about everything? Most of the time, the monarch, even the absolute one, has a council. Which means, that the power of the monarch isn't absolute. And since the monarch is giving away part of his power, why should it not be to those chosen by the people, and if go this far, do we even need a monarch in itself? Not really, the people can be as much of a sovereign as the monarch is.
But the real next step is to quote Foucault: We need to behead the king, this has yet to happen in the political theory. And that's my entire point. Yes direct democracy doesn't work on large scale, but that's because we have yet to behead the king. We need to stop thinking about large nation states, and start thinking in terms of small confederacies of organic communities, which work on principle of direct democracy and consensus, both within and without.
>>8067359
>This is like saying, "Christ is God, therefore the Pope is God in his capacity as representative."
This isn't entirely innacurate.
>I don't, I think they should have different spheres of power.
A body cannot have two heads like a monster.
>>8067357
>objective
>fact
>>8067363
>We need to stop thinking about large nation states, and start thinking in terms of small confederacies of organic communities, which work on principle of direct democracy and consensus, both within and without.
One will always be dominant. Nature abhors a vacuum.
>>8067363
>Better that,
No, it would be a freeze of all state functions.
>>8067370
>This isn't entirely innacurate.
I know it expressed the RCC view: http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=386119&language=en
But it is absolutely wrong.
>A body cannot have two heads like a monster.
A medical doctor and a car mechanic are authorities on separate functions, having one tell the other how to do his job is ridiculous. It would be just as ridiculous for the Pope to start telling either of them how to do his job.
>>8067317
>applying 20th century conceptions of nationalism to monarchism
>8067333
>pic realted
Europeans, there's a reason you've left a Semitic religion in record numbers. There's a reason rates of atheism are so high in Europe. That religion doesn't suit you. Learn from your ancestors. Read the sagas and myths of your ancestors. Find some good histories. Learn the old religion that is in your bones.
>>8067389
>A medical doctor and a car mechanic are authorities on separate functions, having one tell the other how to do his job is ridiculous. It would be just as ridiculous for the Pope to start telling either of them how to do his job.
The Pope is as much a temporal ruler as he is a spiritual one. He does head his own city-state, after all. This analogy does not hold.
>>8067404
Germanics destroyed Rome and were just destructive raiders before they converted
>>8067404
You mean all the old sagas about christian kings, explorers and settlers written by christians?
t. Norwegian
>>8067404
That's nice, but your trees are getting angry that you haven't paid them much attention lately. You don't want alfar getting into your house do you? Better go dress up as a woman and worship Freyr by having lots of gay sex, that's sure to get you back in the good graces of the landvaettir.
>>8067408
>He does head his own city-state, after all.
A legacy of the Donation of Pepin. He didn't have this until the Middle Ages (the Donation of Constantine being a forgery).
This sort of thinking is why Dostoevsky said the RCC succumbed to the Third Temptation Satan offered to Christ.
>>8067385
I love this argument. "It's in humans nature to crave power and to subjugate themselves to power". But you know what, the counter argument is as valid: humans also despise power and wish to neuter it.
The point being is, that even in the most egalitarian society, yes there will be difference in "power", but that doesn't mean that what we need is a absolute monarchy. I live in what is from time to time considered the most egalitarian society and I can assure you, that we're pretty effective in remaining egalitarian.
>>8067389
>No, it would be a freeze of all state functions.
You're still thinking with the wrong concepts, like state. And frankly it's kind of strange, given that modern state is not what absolute kings ruled over.
>>8067404
>he fell for paganism maymay
>>8067416
the big guy up in the sky is angry with you because you're on this website, it is haram and you need to leave to go pray in your local house of worship, synagogue, church, mosque, all the same, hurry now, go, worship the god of the sand people
>>8067419
>You're still thinking with the wrong concepts, like state.
There is no other concept to think of if you are talking about cohesive administration of millions
>And frankly it's kind of strange, given that modern state is not what absolute kings ruled over.
What about Byzantium?
>>8067426
>if you are talking about cohesive administration of millions
I'm not.
>>8067418
>This sort of thinking is why Dostoevsky said the RCC succumbed to the Third Temptation Satan offered to Christ.
That's actually an intriguing point. I'll have to think on it.
My point still stands though. Regardless of where it came from, it is extant.
>>8067423
>He forgot to appease the spirit of his computer and it caused him not to be able to capitalize
LOL you left out skim milk instead of whole for your housewights didn't you?
>>8067428
Then you're talking about ethnic strife, as there is no common identity bonding the various peoples together.
>>8067412
Rome did fine without Christianity and actually did worse with it.
http://evoandproud.blogspot.com.au/2009/08/was-christianity-responsible.html?m=1
>>8067435
every second you spend here is an additional day in hell, and every post a week, maybe yahweh will be a bit nice towards you if you genuinely leave for good, sand man
![Kaiserin_Maria_Theresia_%28HRR%29[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/kFxbtQT.jpg "Kaiserin_Maria_Theresia_%28HRR%29[1].jpg")
M'lady.
>>8067444
Easy there, don't sic the horse fucking god on me.
>>8067430
Not as something to use as an argument for Papal authority over his fellow monarchs. This more than anything else got the Reformation going. Were this not the case, it would never have had any patronage from barons or kings.
>>8067440
If pederasty and forcing slaves to kill each other is "fine" from your perspective.
>>8067421
>he fell for judaism-lite maymay
>>8067457
>Were this not the case, it would never have had any patronage from barons or kings.
Barons and kings should have submitted to their rightful authority in Rome, but honestly we're going to go back and forth on that particular point and never come to a consensus.
>>8067457
>if pederasty and forcing slaves to kill each other is "fine" from your perspective
Better than imago dei, aka the nigger is my brother, and other christcuck inanities
>>8067439
While I won't completely deny the possibility of ethnic strife to arise, I would like to just point out, that monarchies were example par-excellance when it comes to inner warfare.
Sure, I know you probably wish for absolute monarchy, which removed the right of warfare from barons, but as I mentioned earlier, most of absolute monarchies ended in bloody revolutions, because the people just couldn't take it any longer, and as even one monarchist pointed out, if you don't like the king, you just execute him, so yeah, I don't think that there's any less violence under monarchy as it would be under direct democracy. I'd wager it might even be less violence, if the decision of waging war would have to be consensual among all the citizens.
>>8067457
>If pederasty and forcing slaves to kill each other is "fine" from your perspective.
Pretty much every culture has had some kind of pederasty, that's whatever. With slaves, that's more a question of 'how much is a human life worth'. Not everyone is born equal, and that's not strictly speaking in terms of when slavery was normal.
Princess Elizabeth the New Martyr
She begged for the communists who assassinated her husband to be pardoned
>Elizabeth spent all the days before the burial in ceaseless prayer. On her husband's tombstone she wrote: 'Father, release them, they know not what they do.'
>After Sergei’s death, Elisabeth wore mourning clothes and became a vegetarian. In 1909, she sold off her magnificent collection of jewels and sold her other luxurious possessions; even her wedding ring was not spared. With the proceeds she opened the Convent of Saints Martha and Mary and became its abbess.
>She soon opened a hospital, a chapel, a pharmacy and an orphanage on its grounds. Elisabeth and her nuns worked tirelessly among the poor and the sick of Moscow. She often visited Moscow’s worst slums and did all she could to help alleviate the suffering of the poor.
>In 1918, Lenin ordered the Cheka to arrest Elisabeth. They then exiled her first to Perm, then to Yekaterinburg, where she spent a few days and was joined by others: the Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich Romanov; Princes Ioann Konstantinovich, Konstantin Konstantinovich, Igor Konstantinovich and Vladimir Pavlovich Paley; Grand Duke Sergei's secretary, Fyodor Remez; and Varvara Yakovleva, a sister from the Grand Duchess's convent. They were all taken to Alapayevsk on 20 May 1918, where they were housed in the Napolnaya School on the outskirts of the town.
>At noon on 17 July, Cheka officer Pyotr Startsev and a few Bolshevik workers came to the school. They took from the prisoners whatever money they had left and announced that they would be transferred that night to the Upper Siniachikhensky factory compound. The Red Army guards were told to leave and Cheka men replaced them. That night the prisoners were awakened and driven in carts on a road leading to the village of Siniachikha, some 18 kilometres (11 miles) from Alapayevsk where there was an abandoned iron mine with a pit 20 metres (66 feet) deep. Here they halted. The Cheka beat all the prisoners before throwing their victims into this pit, Elisabeth being the first. Hand grenades were then hurled down the shaft, but only one victim, Fyodor Remez, died as a result of the grenades.
>According to the personal account of Vasily Ryabov, one of the killers, Elisabeth and the others survived the initial fall into the mine, prompting Ryabov to toss in a grenade after them. Following the explosion, he claimed to have heard Elisabeth and the others singing an Orthodox hymn from the bottom of the shaft.[5] Unnerved, Ryabov threw down a second grenade, but the singing continued. Finally a large quantity of brushwood was shoved into the opening and set alight, upon which Ryabov posted a guard over the site and departed.
cont
>>8067475
I want /pol/ to leave.
>>8067489
I want reddit to go back to /his/ and stay there.
>>8067486
>On 8 October 1918, White Army soldiers discovered the remains of Elisabeth and her companions, still within the shaft where they had been murdered. Despite having lain there for almost three months, the bodies were in relatively good condition. Most were thought to have died slowly from injuries or starvation, rather than the subsequent fire. Elisabeth had died of wounds sustained in her fall into the mine, but before her death had still found strength to bandage the head of the dying Prince Ioann with her wimple.
>Elisabeth was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in 1981, and in 1992 by the Moscow Patriarchate as New Martyr Yelizaveta Fyodorovna. Her principal shrines are the Marfo-Mariinsky Convent she founded in Moscow, and the Saint Mary Magdalene Convent on the Mount of Olives, which she and her husband helped build, and where her relics (along with those of Nun Barbara, her former maid) are enshrined. She is one of the ten 20th-century martyrs from across the world who are depicted in statues above the Great West Door of Westminster Abbey, London, England,[6] and she is also represented in the restored nave screen installed at St Albans Cathedral in April 2015.[7]
>>8067480
>I would like to just point out, that monarchies were example par-excellance when it comes to inner warfare.
This is more a product of the technology and means of communication and production and things like that, than the system itself. When land is so precious and concentrated in a few hands, it makes things work a little differently.
>>8067470
The rightful authority who had to forge the Donation of Constantine to justify his authority?
>>8067500
French Revolution is proof that after they killed the old monarch, they needed a new one.
>>8067486
>Elizabeth begged for the communists who assassinated her husband to be pardoned
Christcucks, everyone. Turn the other cheek amirite!
>>8067475
>it's not gay if you're on top bro
>superior germanic pagan culture bro
>>8067415
Obviously they were written by Christians. I don't think Christians are evil or incapable of writing interesting things. Some of the sagas they wrote are great and have many echoes of old northern European religion and tradition.
>>8067416
>taking what a couple of Christians wrote about European religious practices as fact
you obviously haven't read beyond the "New Age / Religion" section of your book store.
>>8067421
You can stop role-playing as Catholic and Eastern Orthodox, Europeans. It's time to come home to YOUR religion.
>>8067499
>The rightful authority who had to forge the Donation of Constantine to justify his authority?
God would not have allowed it to happen if it was not His will.
>>8067503
Napoleon did nothing wrong.
Napoleon should have won.
>>8067509
I don't think people understand Christianity. You turn the other cheek once to give them a chance to show they were mistaken, if they repeat the offense you murder the shit out of them.
>>8067513
Most of them are about Christians too. The greatest time of the Kingdom of Norway wasn't until after Christianity.
>>8067513
I care about the God who actually exists and runs things, that's my criterion
>>8067513
>you obviously haven't read beyond the "New Age / Religion" section of your book store.
I was a Theodist until my conversion to Catholicism. The concept of Sacral Kingship greatly eased my conversion.
>>8067515
Napoleon was a type of the Antichrist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41W0OHR4l-Y
>>8067521
>Uh, what? God allows all sorts of things to happen that are not his will, that's how we have free will
Alright, I'll admit to grasping at straws with that one. I'm only a very recent convert.
>>8067524
>Pope condemns slavery
>Napoleon brings it back
>Napoleon brags to Muslims about how he crippled the Church
>imprisons Pope and shuffles him around despite his ill health
>Napoleon is captured
>Pope personally asks for him to be spared
>Pope takes in Napoleon's mother to the Vatican after she flees France
Pope was much nobler than Bonaparte
>>8067521
>little
Why were the British so insecure?
>>8067524
>first comment on the video is about illuminati
>>8067496
So how exactly would monarchy, especially absolute monarchy work in the modern age. Even if your OP claim is correct and monarchism is somehow above ideology, the people aren't. If anything you could say we're the most ideologised, than ever before. How does absolute monarchy (which worked on privacy and lack of information from the commons) work in the modern age of instant messaging and stuff, especially where all this modern technology only reinforces the ideological divide.
>>8067503
I meant the Bourbon reconstruction, but yes entire French history from revolution up to Napoleon the III was one big fuck up. And admittedly, I have no idea if there's a better way to become a republic, especially if it's similar to French situation. But that's not to say, that becoming a republic is always this messy. I mean just compare to Austria, or the fall of Austro-Hungary in general.
>>8067517
They were about Christians too. They also contain echoes of the older beliefs.
>The greatest time of the Kingdom of Norway wasn't until after Christianity
That doesn't mean it occurred because of Christianity. I don't think Christianity is a bad thing. It's just not for Europeans. It's a Semitic religion.
>>8067518
>pic related
>>8067519
you probably own a katana
>>8067538
>the pic related
Also, shouldn't this thread be at >>>/his/ and not /lit/, I mean seriously? (or maybe even /pol/. but we all know that would never happen).
>>8067538
>you probably own a katana
No, the only weapons I own are a Morakniv outdoorsman and my S&W Bodyguard .380 ACP. I also have a distaste for Japanese anything.
"Praise be to the well-ordered state; enviable happiness to anyone who knows how to treasure it! How can anyone be so busy wanting to reform the state and have the form of government changed! Of all forms, the monarchical is the best, more than any other it favours and protects the private person's quiet conceits and innocent follies. Only democracy, the most tyrannical form of government, obliges everyone to take a positive part, of which the societies and general assemblies of our time often remind us. Is it tyranny, one person wanting to rule and then let the rest of us be free? No, but it is tyranny that all want to rule, and in the bargain oblige everyone to take part in the government, even the person who most earnestly begs to be spared a part in governing."
>>8067536
>So how exactly would monarchy, especially absolute monarchy work in the modern age. Even if your OP claim is correct and monarchism is somehow above ideology, the people aren't. If anything you could say we're the most ideologised, than ever before. How does absolute monarchy (which worked on privacy and lack of information from the commons) work in the modern age of instant messaging and stuff, especially where all this modern technology only reinforces the ideological divide.
Direct democracy for local issues is not inherently incompatible with monarchy. I imagine it would function similarly to the relation between states such as the Hanseatic league had with the Holy Roman Emperor.
>>8067511
>we're all made in the image of god bro
>>8067539
It's still a ridiculous video, and looking at what else is on that channel I had a bit of a laugh to be honest.
>>8067538
Christianity is for everyone, truth does not belong to an ethnicity.
The problem comes with Catholic universalism and imperial ambition, a church is intrinsically tied to its people and their nation.
>>8067521
>free will
You're dumb even for a tripfag.
>>8067562
I think that happens when you become religious.
Also
>Uh, what?
Wouldn't be surprised if it was a woman.
>>8067552
So wait, you want a constitutional monarchy?
With parliament, or some other form of representation for the people?
I mean sure, but then all of the supposed positives of monarchy, like representatives can be bought, don't apply any more. And only thing that remains as a solid reasoning for it against the republic is tradition. Which I mean, sure I'm extreme republican, but even I "get" why the British (and other nations with constitutional monarchies) decided to keep it. But I think most of other monarchist ITT, especially the tripfag would disagree, they think that monarchy is always better than republic.
>>8067548
new flesh: they're both tyranny! and shitty
the only thing that should dictate a man's actions is virtue and healthy ethics, governments are the product of stupidity
>>8067574
>So wait, you want a constitutional monarchy?
Democracy does not require a constitution. What I'm referring to is, for example, a local vote on where new local roads should be run, or local housing restrictions. This type of democracy does not contradict monarchy at all.
>>8067514
>>8067521
>>8067526
Everything is God's will because God is omnipotent and omniscient. To deny that all is God's will is to deny this. Yet evil things happen, because of our free will. Yet it is still God's will. To deny that is again to deny the nature of God. How then? Because we separate God's active will from his passive will. His active will only wills what is good, but his passive will permits evil through our agency which we call free will.
To put it in other and even more flawed terms, he permits free will, which is good, and we use it for evil, which he passively wills. God sees all and wills all. In him we have our being.
Don't discuss this on an imageboard but read the saints and the good theologians.
>>8067587
I like you. You can come to my house and pray at my shrine.
>>8066997
Hahahaha not only do you shit up /his/ you also shit up /lit/?
You need to be banned forever
>>8067586
>Democracy does not require a constitution.
Yes, and UK doesn't have a constitution, yet is considered constitutional monarchy. It just means that the role of the monarch is very limited.
And yeah I agree it could work. But I'd prefer if the monarch would be elected, for life, during good behaviour. That would be the best compromise between republic and monarchy.
>>8067604
Isn't /his/ tourist central anyway?
>>8067609
>And yeah I agree it could work. But I'd prefer if the monarch would be elected, for life, during good behaviour. That would be the best compromise between republic and monarchy.
Like in the Polish Commonwealth? It did work fairly alright up until the eternal Swede fucked irreversibly fucked them up.
>>8067609
>But I'd prefer if the monarch would be elected, for life, during good behaviour.
Literally the HRE.
>It just means that the role of the monarch is very limited.
Local settling of local issues that do not affect the wider country in no way limits the power of the monarch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83qBRmM00R4
>>8067587
>RCC theology
So people rape because it is God desires rape?
God is omniscient and omnipotent, this doesn't mean he wills everything that happens. He wills everything to exist, but human will and Satan's will are not identical with God's will.Our journey is trying to live in his will instead of contrary to it
>>8067635
ABSOLUTELY BTFO XDXDXDXD
XD
XD
XD
X
DX
D
XD
X
DX
D
Ddddxdxdxxxdxdxxdxdxdxdxddxdxd
>>8067645
you alright there bud?
>>8067626
AFAIK the king in commonwealth was elected for life, without "during good behaviour" clause. But if it did, then damn, I should really read up on it.
>>8067635
>Literally the HRE.
In HRE the prince-electors held the right to elect the emperor, which led to interregnum and one of the biggest "civil war". Also emperor was a title for life, not during good behaviour.
I would also like to pre-emptively say, that yes "during good behaviour" is pretty vague definition, but I imagine something similar to euthynai of ancient Athens, where they could question the conduct of anyone in office.
>>8067536
>How does absolute monarchy (which worked on privacy and lack of information from the commons) work in the modern age of instant messaging and stuff, especially where all this modern technology only reinforces the ideological divide.
It would be much easier, the monarch could see power struggles becoming larger and could quickly address them.
>>8067536
>I meant the Bourbon reconstruction
The same thing would have happened in Russia if it could have, there are plenty of candidates for Czar by one relation or another. It didn't happen because bankers and financiers didn't want a restoration over there, they bankrolled Lenin and Trotsky.
>>8067542
It was intended as as a reading group, not this
>>8067644
The entire post circled around the division between God's active and passive will. A passive will is not desirous. It is passive, it is allowing. To deny that all is God's will is, once again, to deny his omnipotence and omniscience. You cannot get around this unless you make the case I did. Yes, God wills all things, either in the sense that is good and he actively wills it (the salvation of mankind) or that it is evil and he allows it (the fall of mankind). We must believe that this world we live in, is the best we could have, because God works all things for good, including evil.
I will not reply to a third post by your since you don't understand what you're talking about. Thank you for the exchange.
>>8067570
You would be right
https://desustorage.org/his/thread/647827/#651645
>>8067688
>It was intended as as a reading group, not this
Oh shit didn't even notice that part.
Well still, I stand by my recommendation:
Thomas Payne - Common Sense
And I could add:
John Locke - Two Treatsies on Government
John Wise - Vindication of the Government of the New England Churches (aka Democracy is founded in the scripture)
Johnathan Mayhew - A Discuorse Concernig Unlimited Submission
John Adams - A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America
Michel Foucault - Society must be Defended
Michel Foucault - Security, Territory, Population
Michel Foucault - Birth of Biopolitics
Ernst H. Kantorowicz - The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology
>>8067721
> A passive will is not desirous.
Then it is not a will. "Will", as used through the Bible and Patristic literature, involves desire.
>>8067741
This is like recommending Hayek for a Marxist reading group.
>>8067742
I hate saying I won't reply and then doing it, so I'll keep it short: God desires nothing.
>>8067753
Well I think it's always good to know what you're up against, wouldn't you agree? I mean, if you're a monarchist, reading Common Sense will probably fuel you to try and formulate a good counter argument for monarchy against what Payne wrote.
Same with Marxsists and Hayek, they should read him, if for nothing else, so that they could argue against him better.
>>8067770
Actus Purus nonsense.
1 Timothy 2:4
>>8067775
I've read portions of Common Sense, and the problem is that Paine has a much different teleos in mind than I do (probably because he is anti-religion). I see the point of government to order the material to accord with the spiritual, I see this as integral to eudaimonia. Whereas for Paine, the function of government is to better facilitate hedonism.
>>8067800
>Whereas for Paine, the function of government is to better facilitate hedonism.
Kek you are so fucking retarded
Stop talking, stop posting, stop your pedantic use of language to affect authority
>>8067730
Fucking hilarious, thanks for the link. Are you a regular on /his/, and /lit/? I've gone on /his/ a couple of times to lurk but ultimately I stopped because of the amount of utter drivel I read there. Despite everyone seemingly being more on-topic than usual, which I suspect is because most posters there are from reddit, there's just something completely off about the place, again probably because redditors. At least here on /lit/ there can be some genuinely good threads and discussions, and all the shitposting and the funny stuff too. It isn't too often that there's religion threads on here, but I'm always surprised by how many religious people, Christians, show up in them. Or maybe they're all people from /his/. What's going on?
>>8067675
yeh, really good. You, bud?
>>8067816
I'm as alright as I can be, all thing's considered.
>>8067219
>tradition
enjoy your idealised fantasy of the past
>>8067815
Catholic here. I'm from /b/ originally, circa 2007. These days it's all /lit/ /pol/ /g/ and /k/ on the weekends.
>>8067815
There's a bunch of edgy faggots who took up Christianity because they want to be contrarian against what they perceive as cultural Marxist SJW culture domination. They are a massive cancer on /his/. Constantine is one of their leaders and systematically says the dumbest shit with a perpetual posture that they are actually intellectual and know a bunch.
>>8067810
What do you think Locke's famous phrase "Pursuit of happiness" is about?
Paine never substantiates this
>Mankind being originally equals in the order of creation
Equals in what way? Physically? Intellectually? in territory? No, certainly not. And without religion, he can't well appeal to spirituality equality. Men are not equal in any regard save spiritually.
>>8067824
What do you think of the edgy Christposting on 4chan?
>>8067814
>Well then maybe you should read Wise, who claims that democracy is exactly how the early church during Jesus's time has governed itself.
Well he'd be wrong. The Church was governed by Christ, and then by bishops directly afterward.
>>8067840
>1 Timothy 2:12
This is about women being institutional teachers. Episkopos/presbyter was the office of "teacher", teachings were passed down through them and they imparted them to their flock, hence Sacred Tradition. It's not about women being unable to be correct on theological matters.
>>8067840
>I think it needs to increase. I won't be satisfied until the whole of 4chan kneels before its rightful king.
*tips fedora*
>>8067846
>This is about women being institutional teachers. Episkopos/presbyter was the office of "teacher", teachings were passed down through them and they imparted them to their flock, hence Sacred Tradition. It's not about women being unable to be correct on theological matters.
Quiet, men are talking. If you need understanding ask your husband.
>>8066997
you've already made a thread with this retarded dipshit quote you dumb slut
>>8067824
>>8067840
>Catholic
Why?
>>8067826
I love getting into history so you can probably imagine my disappointment when I checked out /his/ for the first time expecting it to be /lit/ but with more focus on history. What a fucking waste.
>>8067859
>Why?
I looked into historical writings and didn't fall for the sola scriptura meme.
>>8067862
I mean why are you religious?
>>8067577
Not understanding irony.
i think you should prove that you are men
post penis selfies with the current data attached to every post otherwise im not sure if you deserve to argue with me or should be silent in the presence of the man
>>8067824
This whole post looks like a sad joke.
>>8067866
Personal experience with something science could not explain made me spiritual. An encounter with the Living God made me a Christian many years later. After that it was simply a matter of discovering the true church, easily found by logical thinking once the presupposition of the Abrahamic God was embraced.
>>8067882
>Personal experience with something science could not explain made me spiritual. An encounter with the Living God made me a Christian many years later.
Please explain.
>>8067896
This isn't /x/...I had no intention of even talking about this here today. But if you insist.
When I was a teenager, my family and I were driving back from a Christmas party at my grandpa's house. On the way home we witnessed a non-corporeal creature.
>>8067882
Kek, the scientism of this post is hilarious. "If it's not scientific it must be spooky voodoo supernatural!"
Most studies of nature are unscientific
>>8067900
>On the way home we witnessed a non-corporeal creature.
Go on.
>>8067900
>this is what christians actually believe
I don't have a fedora image cringy enough to encompass how pathetic this post is
>>8067906
Alright. Are you familiar with so-called "shadow people?" It was essentially one of those, seven feet tall, glowing red eyes. When our headlights hit it, shadow started to smoke off of its body very heavily. It noticed us then, looked at us briefly, and just kind of...disappeared. I'd write it off as mental illness had others not seen it with me.
>>8067930
What country are you from?
And why exactly did this supposed "ghost" make you religious? Why do you think it was "the Living God"?
>>8067937
The US.
I could find no naturalistic explanation for it, so I turned to alternative belief systems for an explanation of something I know for sure I saw.
Christianity came much, much later.
>>8067941
>I could find no naturalistic explanation for it, so I turned to alternative belief systems for an explanation of something I know for sure I saw.
Or maybe you didn't and you're just delusional.
>>8067941
When you say others who were with you also saw it, who are the others? Parents? How old were you at the time?
>>8067946
Mom, her boyfriend, my brother, cousin who was staying with us that week.
I was 17.
>>8066997
could you please make an effort to contain your namefagging and cuckoldry to /his/ thanks
>>8067952
So did everyone just start screaming or what?
kys
>>8067977
No. We just kind of sat there stunned. It wasn't frightening, it was just...wrong. That's really the only word for it. We didn't even discuss it until we got home.
/lit/ - Are you familiar with so-called "shadow people?"
>>8068157
Is it Yu-Gi-Oh that has the shadow realm or am I thinking of something else?
>>8066997
>monarchist book club?
>We'll vote
my sides
>>8067281
The Russian Orthodox church has been under control of KGB/SVR spooks since the 1920s. Their cathedral in Moscow's got a fucking car wash for chrissakes
>>8068233
unless you have a suggestion for whom to crown the king or queen of /lit/
>>8067318
>he fell for muh clash of civilisations meme
Right-wingers feel like they are hot shit for being able to see through shallow pop liberal vision of history. But really they just substitute it for their own, equally naive and self aggrandizing narrative where le glorious white Christian army has always been at war with the evil mahometan hordes.
>>8068240
What an outrageous lie. The USSR tried to set up an "Renovated Church" where bishops could marry and divorce, among numerous other reforms, but it wouldn't take, people wouldn't go. Eventually under pressure from WWII, Stalin let the heavily persecuted Orthodox Church have back all their parishes; the priests who had become part of the "Renovated" system had to do penance to return. After Stalin died, the Church went back to being persecuted.
>>8067198
>If they fuck up, you kill them.
Or, you know. you can vote someone else to rule the country after reasonable time, without Civil war, guillotines or that sort of thing. Like normal, non-edgy, reasonable people.
>>8068233
You do know that monarchs don't micromanage every book club?
>>8068244
I am.
Where's the taxmoney, plebs? I'm not building a prostitute harem on NEET bux.
>>8067223
>monarchs value more than money.
oh, naivety!
>>8067228
I would just add there was no hereditary monarchy in Rome. Emperors were adopted as most promising youth and yet they failed so badly.
>>8067836
Early Christians were literal anarchist hippie communes, rhizomatic autorganisation, free love, sex magick the whole deal y'know.
>>8067228
If you take regression to the mean into consideration, it is more likely that son of a great leader would be worse than average.
>>8068280
>and yet they failed so badly.
The bad ones, yes, the good ones obviously no. In a way I can't help but feel it's a worthwhile compromise. It's kind of like how the Medici funded the Renaissance in Florence. Good rulers could make or break everything.
>>8067245
>>being papist
holy shit, you want a leader of your country to be answerable to some Pole, Argentinian or another nigger?
>>8066997
I nominate Democracy: The God That Failed by Hans-Herman Hoppe
>>8068303
Much like the Alpha ape starts his own lineage by mating with all available high value females, so does the Human Alpha Male. A great dynasty is a self-optimizing vector of alpha traits. All human history since 1789 has been a perversion of the natural order into a beta cuck society.
>>8067284
Do you know that Poland is a literal barbarian shithole? Everyone young who has some sense leaves this country to rot. (Pole here)
>>8068336
What's the standard of living index?
>>8067346
Christianity is a pseudo-Jewish abomination, but the concept of whiteness is too.
A real king must elevate himself above the squabbling tribes and force them to behave.
>>8067295
Do you know that if you respect the authority of the Pope, in few years you will be answerable to some nigger, no white nigger like Obama but real nigga-nigga from Nigeria or Uganda?
>>8068318
Confirmed my theory that 'libertarians' are actually masochistic crypto-fascists who want to get literally cucked and dominated by oligarchs because muh spooks
>>8067308
ISIS, as fighting in currently Muslim land attacked by US (Iraq) is far more defensive than Crusadeswhich attacked lands ruled by Muslim for hundreds of years.
>>8067095
Québec !
>>8068366
Ruled by Muslims, maybe, but the Holy Land was still largely Christian and perceived the Muslims as an occupying force.
>tfw you are a commited monarchist, faultlessly loyal to your lord and the sacred Natural Order
>tfw your Lord wants to exercise his Droit du Seigneur and literally cuck you
>>8068390
They never actually had that right, except in Babylonian epics.
>>8068366
Are you seriously trying to equate modern American interventionist policies with the Crusades in the holy land? The crusades were holy wars started as a reaction to the holy land becoming unsafe for pilgrims and because of an appeal from the byzantines because the muslims had begun to encroach too much on their territory. As >>8068384 said, palestine at that time was still mostly christian. The crusades to the holy land were more like armed pilgrimages with the purpose of securing jerusalem back to christendom. On the other hand ISIS is a group of militant fundamentalists who have taken advantage of the geopolitical instability in their region to enforce their own dogma and to try to build a fundamentalist theocracy from the ashes
>>8067346
>implying that social darwinism has any basis for application in a just society
>implying that some strange abstraction of paganism somehow condones being a fuckwit and a nationalist
>implying that inclusive anti-nationalism and peace is not the will of the One Godhead.
>>8068461
This. Nationalism is Shirk. My only nation is the Ummah
>>8067187
>City States with an electable Oligarch from a center of powerful families
So modern democracies?
>>8068240
>The Russian Orthodox church has been under control of KGB/SVR spooks since the 1920s
i would really enjoy reading about this
and recs?
>>8069886
>i would really enjoy reading
No one actually reads books on this board.
That's the joke.
>>8068240
>The Russian Orthodox church has been under control of KGB/SVR spooks since the 1920s.
Conspiracy theories, nothing more. Spooks come and go, and yet the Church remains. (Anyways, the government spooks in the times of Peter I were much more virulent and clingy, and yet nobody complains.)
>Their cathedral in Moscow's got a fucking car wash for chrissakes
The cathedral is built on land that belongs to a non-profit that is controlled by the city (not to the Church itself!), that plot of land is quite large and has a bunch of other buildings on it as well.
>>8069886
that's bs though, i mean your green text
>>8068300
>Early Christians were literal anarchist hippie communes, rhizomatic autorganisation, free love, sex magick
i was really mad when i found out about all the things they didn't tell me in sunday school
>>8067840
you've been roused and the second it comes to light you try to fall back on a technicality
truly, no clothes
>>8067867
should a common monarchiest opinion in a monarchy thread be taken as irony so lightly? because if it is so, I apologize.
>>8069898
sounded like a solid night of keks, too bad
>>8069899
>free love
apostle paul specifically teaches against it in the 1st corinthians 5 and further
>sex magick
??
>Go to bed when this thread has 30 posts, hopeful of a fruitful discussion when I awake
>I return to see over 200 posts of predictable shitposts from democracy cultists
We'll hang the last king with the bowels of the last priest
I believe in monarchism because it's a big word and it makes me feel unique and smart.
Democracy cultists are such lame conformists.
If too many people start supporting monarchism though I am definitely going to stop.
Why would I support an ideology if not to look different and unique?
What would be the point?
Isn't that what belief systems and opinions are for?
>>8068300
>Early Christians were literal anarchist hippie communes, rhizomatic autorganisation, free love, sex magick the whole deal y'know.
Gnosticism and Christianity are two completely different religious traditions. Protestantism is a new-age fusion of the two, which is why you're so confused; what you're talking about is Gnosticism.
(Christianity is what they have in the Vatican and in Russia.)
>>8067178
>All monarchies are absolute monarchies where the monarchs aren't beholden to any laws, customs, or the fragile consent of their lesser lords and trade guilds.
>There were never any elective monarchies
>The system where everyone knows exactly who makes the real decisions is the less accountable one when compared to the system based around oligarchs using demagogues and manipulable plebeian masses as tools to push their designs, while transferring the responsibility to them for everything bad that happens.
>>8067263
>Monarchies are the stuff of the middle ages, and go against modernism.
Exactly, it is two steps away from becoming ape people, unlike republicanism/democracy, which is just one step away. Modernism is degeneration, a return to monarchy would be a return to good form in governance.
Anyways.
De Maistre's works, all of them really. But Du Pape and Considerations on France are good places to start.
>>8067741
>Kantorowicz mentionned
Well that's fucking nice. The rest of your list is shit tough.
>>8067256
>arguing with the obnoxious orthodox shill
Brother in Christ, please
