Hey, /pol/
To be quick, can anywhere here give me a non biased, simple English definition of monarchism and explain how it works, or at least suggest some reading I can do? Thanks. Pic unrelated.
*Anyone
Not doing your homework for you
Frigg off
Do you mean absolute Monarchism or Constitutional Monarchism
>>68094577
Jesus Christ dude is your mom standing over your shoulder? You can say fuck, man.
>>68094658
Brief descriptions of both, or whichever is more commonly used.
Poor Milo. Queen of the Pic Unrelated.
>>68094517
Faggot. Takes black dick in ass. Pol loves him.
That is ALL.
>>68094713
Milo is my god.
>>68094517
Is this what /pol/ looks like when the tweens aren't memedropping endlessly?
>>68094746
Yeah but a lot more racism desu
>>68094708
Constitutional Monarchy is the one that UK/Aus/Canada, Netherlands, Sweden, Japan, etc use
Basically the Monarch is officially the head of state but they are pretty much just symbolic; a leader of the culture, for people to stand behind. The Monarch's have to sign laws passed by the parliament just like the Presidents do but I've never heard of a Monarch veto'ing a law passed by Parliament, although they do technically hold that power. The Monarch is also technically the Commander in Chief but delegates the power to the Prime Minister and I've never heard of Monarch's defying the order of a Head of Government since WW2. Monarch's also hold "reserve powers" which are like executive orders but they're almost never used (seeing a trend?). Reserve powers haven't been used in the UK since the 1800's but in 1975 the Australian Governor General (Viceroy of the Queen) fired the Prime Minister, put the Opposition Leader in power temporarily, dissolved parliament and called an election because the PM had "Lost the ability to Govern" after his bills kept getting shot down and Government was going to shut down.
tl;dr Monarchs don't do anything and are purely symbolic and cultural unless things reach crises levels in which case they might step in and help.
>>68094517
why don't you just read the wikipedia on monarchism / state forms?
A country is either a monarchy, or a republic.
Monarchism = There is a leader who rules until he/she dies, and then one of his children inherit his/her rule
Absolute Monarchism = The ruler can do whatever the fuck he wants to do. Have an idea for a new law? Just say that's the new rule, and that will be the new rule. This is really rare form today, only Saudi Arabia and some other dindus have it
Constitutional Monarchism = The ruler is the head of state, and leader of the army (at least in theory, in practice of course they listen to the heads of army). The constitution limits his power, and he can only approve or disprove the laws the government makes.
A republic is where the leader(s) are chosen by democratic means, for a set time - usually 4 or 5 years.
Hungary has a PM and a Head of State, but for example the USA has the President, which is the PM and the HoS in one person.
In Hungary, we vote for the party we want to lead the country, but in the US you can vote both for the President, and the Congress (?) and the Senate (?).
>>68095347
this OZ gets it. I forgot to say that in a Contitutional Monarchy, the Ruler's role is just symbolic. They have certain powers in theory, but in practice they don't do jackshit.
>>68094713
OP is a faggot, so the denial was just a ruse to get the free help for his homefag assignment
>>68095347
>>68095762
So since monarchs are essentially just cultural, why so so many neoreactionaries like them? What's the ACTUAL purpose of them, and what makes it better then democracy?
>>68096162
>why so so many neoreactionaries like them? What's the ACTUAL purpose of them, and what makes it better then democracy?
Because Neo-Reactionaries are Nationalistic and Fascist and believe a Monarch would put the interests of the Nation first and prevent Society degenerating to what It has today. Democracy always leads to degeneracy, so they say.
>>68096162
better THAN, not better then, you god damned internet shit speeching moron
>>68096408
But it's only cultural, so why would a monarch fix that? Why not just do away with the useless monarch and elect a parliament?
>>68096639
Fashy goys and monarchists typically want something between modern constitutional monarchies and absolute monarchies, and very nationally minded at that (no federations or unions typically)
>>68094517
UK has a monarch.
She owns castles, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and loads of islands.
Also gets her face on our money. She likes horses.
I had to swear on oath to her when I joined the army. Not an oath to my country; an oath to protect the Queen.
Other than that I don't give a shit.
She's just an old lady and has loads of money.
