If you're not a
>Catholic or Orthodox hardliner
>Monarchist
>Nazi
>Fascist
You're degnerate. Those are the only right-wing groups that are not tainted by Jewry, Freemasonry and Humanism. Everyone else might as well be a cultural marxist.
>>69440054
BRAVO!!!
What if i don't give a fuck and just want a good harvest?
>>69440054
But much of that conflicts with one another, Anon!
>>69440250
Not really. Fascism and NatSoc are proto-Monarchism, Monarchism is in itself Catholic/Orthodox because it's about ruling by God's grace.
>>69440054
>catholic
>kissesfoot.jpg
>>69440368
But the socialist part of nazism is in direct conflict with monarchy. Same with fascism, those two ideologies were always for the "common man".
>>69440054
>christkike
>>69440054
Well, Freemasonry is pro-monarchism, so score there. Not a fan of Catholicism, though. Pelagian teachings are better.
>>69440368
Not always.
>>69440054
yes
ATHEIST !
>>69440632
Monarchy has socialist-like rules of feeding the poor. Noblesse oblige.
>>69442767
>Well, Freemasonry is pro-monarchism, so score there.
lol. Who do you think was behind the French Revolution? The Masons aren't exactly hiding it.
>Not always.
Yes, always.
>>69440054
>tfw non-monarchist, pro-zionist, atheist and Fascist.
what am i?
>>69440250
Catholic church fully supported fascism which fully supported the manlet king of italy and was obviously allied with nazis who were also friendly with catholic and orthodox church
>>69446194
>Who do you think was behind the French Revolution?
Liberals and Jews. Some of whom took over Masonic lodges, and kicked out the loyalists (who had to make their own Grand Lodges to keep out the rebels, which lasts to this day).
>Yes, always.
Monarchy does not have to be about ruling by God's Grace. There's nowhere in the rulebook where that's stated. It just can be that way in some.
>>69447010
Not fascist.
>>69447998
>Liberals and Jews. Some of whom took over Masonic lodges, and kicked out the loyalists (who had to make their own Grand Lodges to keep out the rebels, which lasts to this day).
You have a very weird view of reality. Areyou from a parallel dimension or just schizophrenic?
>Monarchy does not have to be about ruling by God's Grace.
Yes, it does. Otherwise it's not a real monarchy. Call it Königsheil or Mandate of Heaven or whatever you like, it's the prerequisite for being a king.
>>69448441
>Not fascist.
Why not? fascism isn't the same as nazism or neo-monarchism
>>69448441
>You have a very weird view of reality.
Comes from actually studying history, instead of listening solely to the internet.
>Yes, it does. Otherwise it's not a real monarchy.
Okay, that's your rule, but it doesn't extend to real life.
>>69440054
How are Catholicism and Orthodoxy not Jewish?
>Be catholic.
>See pope kissing nigger feet
>Not degenerate.
>>69440054
>Monarchist
>Nazi
Go fek yourself you Masonic puppet.
The noble lines have been dead for a millennia. It's a republic or bust.
>>69440054
>Nazi
>right wing
>fascism
>right wing
You're autistic
>>69449101
You have the descendants of Vald Tepes as your monarchy, my anti-nationalist friend. Republics are for Zionists.
>>69449151
The house of Draculesti has been dead since 1600's
What we have left is Masonic Imported Germanic Idiots.
>>69440054
>catholics
>monarchist
>>69449201
Po-tay-to/po-tah-to, they're still rightful nobles.
Your use of Masonic, Imported, and Germanic, is just weird.
>>69440054
FUCK OFF.
Christianity is the ultimate cuck religion.
Literally every fucking church in this god damn country is supporting getting rid of german identity by importing third world shitskins.
Eventually you learn that jewry and christian nazism are two sides of the same divide and conquer scheme used by the elite.
Raise awareness and become enlightened when you are ready.
>>69449448
>Masonic
They are known for a lot of political buttfuckery around the world and for general non loyalty to the nations they live in.
>Imported
Which means they are not part of our people. They share no past, no genetics, no culture with us. It alienates people for no reason.
>Germanic
Germans are our natural enemies. Showcased by WW1, Backstabbing of Mihai Viteazu, 1848 and our origin story.
Also I didn't mention this yet but they backstabed our people twice in a row. Royal Houses got destroyed for less.
>>69440054
Radical traditsionalist and a monarchist here.
>>69449816
>They are known for
*Accused of
>>69449816
>They share no past, no genetics, no culture with us.
Germans and Romanians aren't that different. Besides, that's a problem of the people not involving themselves.
>Germans are our natural enemies.
You know the Turks still exist, right? Hell, ya'll have many worse enemies than just the Jerries.
>Catholics
>Orthodox
Since when is paganism nondegenerate?
So if I don't believe in fairy tales I'm a degenerate... Seems backward.
>>69449859
Same, who is the traditional monarchy of Estonia though/ who would you support.
>>69441627
So it will be only by freeing ourselves from Christianity that we will free ourselves from Jewish political rule.
>>69449979
>Accused of
With a lot of proof, like the multiple Coup D'etat in Portugal.
>Germans and Romanians aren't that different. Besides, that's a problem of the people not involving themselves.
How can they involved themselves in a hereditary system?
Fuck the Queen and King until they have negligible amount of non Romanian heritage?
>You know the Turks still exist, right? Hell, ya'll have many worse enemies than just the Jerries.
Our current enemies are:
Ukraine, supported by Germany
EU, led by Germany
Islam. imported by Germany
Turks are an annoyance currently, and not an active one.
>>69450549
>With a lot of proof
Lolno. People just attach the word "Mason" to things they don't like.
>How can they involved themselves in a hereditary system?
Support the monarchy and give them reason to be more involved with the people.
>Islam. imported by Germany
>Turks are an annoyance currently, and not an active one.
Is this a joke?
I mean, i concur with the EU, but you're delusional if you think the average kraut is more of a concern than any Turk. Hell, the Albanians are probably worse.
>>69450549
> Our current enemies are:
> Ukraine, supported by the German republic
> EU, led by the German republic
> Islam. imported by the German republic.
I am sure if you ask any German Monarchist they are heavily against Islam. The problem is the left wing and Liberals. Who are the most heavy supporters of the republic as they wish to destroy everything traditional.
>>69440054
>Catholicism
>not tainted by jewry
also this >>69449996
both were inflitrated by Jesuits a long time ago
>>69450795
The Turks and Albanians don't have any quarrels with us nor do they have the capability to fuck with us. Yes you can say they are more horrible people, but they hold no power.
Though people think Turkey is strong military they have to waste a large part of that on Greece and the rest against terrorism and to support their interests in the current Islamic Insurrection in the middle east. They can't do shit and even if they tried that would revoke NATO membership and lead to nations that hate Turkey like Russia and Greece to join our side.
>>69451116
>The Turks and Albanians don't have any quarrels with us nor do they have the capability to fuck with us
Well duh. I wasn't implying they were going to nuke the joint, but neither would Deutschland. The trouble is their influence. At least Germans are white, Christian, and civilised.
>>69451237
Who should I be scared more of?
The power currently in the process of turning my country in a permanent puppet of theirs.
Or the non power incapable to stop a separatist movement?
And it doesn't matter if the power is similar, it's still not us. The whole basis of nationalism is my people and my nation. Not the people similar to mine and their nation, that is how you get EU.
Plus majority Germans are Protestants or Non Religious, they have a very degenerate modern culture and are brainwashed on a daily basis.
I know the argument that is easy to make is that the German Republic is run by malicious people. But there is no sign of real dissent. You could even see that during Stalinist USSR.
I wish the German people got better, and wish no harm upon them. But stay out of our business and we shall do the same.
>>69451620
>The power currently in the process of turning my country in a permanent puppet of theirs.
That's the EU more than just Germany.
>Or the non power incapable to stop a separatist movement?
They don't need to be separatist if they can infiltrate, convert, and sully.
>But stay out of our business and we shall do the same.
Aye, hopefully Brexit gets the ball rolling.
>>69440054
>>Monarchist
>>Nazi
>>Fascist
Incompatible
>>69451620
Protestant ethics is what enabled capitalist societies with effective distribution of resources; Catholics, in contrast, traditionally see accumulation of wealth as "usury", with a value system heavily against it, which is why Communism thrives here in Latin America, as well as a rampant victimist culture.
"Look guys, I'm similar to Jesus or some shit for being piss-poor! Populist politicians, please give me money!"
This kind of shit is even encouraged by leftists, who find in poor people's culture (heavily Catholic) a place to put all of its Romantist bullshit forth, all while disdaining religion in their higher academic circles.
This is what degeneracy is, to be honest.
>>69452509
>Communism thrives
I mean it thrives as an ideology. Where Communism thrives poverty "thrives" as well.
>>69450795
>Lolno. People just attach the word "Mason" to things they don't like.
Mason detected.
No wonder you're so schizo, lol.
>>69452815
>Mason detected.
Oh you're sharp.
>No wonder you're so schizo, lol.
Glad to have given you a reason to stop backing what you say, because i belong to a group you're told not to like.
>>69452509
No they did not.
Capitalism existed before Protestantism across Europe especially in Catholic nations like Venice, Portugal, Genoa, Spain
Also the dogma of being poor is good is kinda what led to Protestantism as most peasants where tiered of paying money to the church and of the churches opulence.
Also the reason the Catholic church has become a puppet is do to Jesuit infiltration and outside control that has led to things like Vatican 2.
>>69452579
Communism thrives in latin america do to foreign influence not do to the Catholic church.
>>69452958
Okay, I'll take what you said for granted...
But I didn't say Communism thrives in Latin America due to the Catholic church's influence, it does because of Catholic values which Communist leaders exploit.
>>69453344
I don't see what they could exploit.
I am an Orthodox not a Catholic, but I would think that our Apostolic brothers also have a doctrine of perfectionism and knowing that one should be mindful of his own sins and not of others.
Or do Catholics forget that we all get our do payment during judgement day and what to sin to stop a sinner or something?
>>69453530
want* god dam it.
>>69440054
>>69452958
>Capitalism existed before Protestantism across Europe especially in Catholic nations like Venice, Portugal, Genoa, Spain
No. Capitalism doesn't exist and never existed, it's a conspiracy theory umbrella Marx invented to put all things he disliked into one category.
>>69450549
>EU, led by Germany
lol
>>69450116
But you believe in all kinds of fairy tales.
>>69450355
Yeah, just look at Germany right now. Or the USSR.
>>69440054
>nazi
>not tainted by Jewry
Z I O N I S M
>>69440054
>Being a Cucktholic
>Being a Monarchcuck
Kill yourself Hans.
>>69455475
How's that democracy working out for you, Suiliman?
>>69455701
Our best dictator was elected democratically, so I can safely say it worked out at least once.
But the Greek Monarchy, disgusting, inbred Danes thinking they know shit...
>>69455795
>But the Greek Monarchy, disgusting, inbred Danes thinking they know shit...
Still better than what you have now. Hell, you could have potentially had Prince Phillip. That's about as good as anyone could hope for.
>>69455939
>Still better
We would be knee-deep in the shitter and our country would've collapsed already
Not better
Inbred retard Danes that we called "kings" were always inept and useless. Nobody wanted them, nobody asked for them, they were forced down our throats by the Great Powers.
>muh degeneracy
>muh religion
>muh kangz
>>69440054
>Catholic hardliner
Wtf is that? Their elected pope is a cuck, their organisation was corrupt since the schizma
>>69456033
>We would be knee-deep in the shitter and our country would've collapsed already
Ah yes, that sounds so very different...
But rather, a monarchy at least has the potential to be better.
>Nobody wanted them, nobody asked for them
That's not really an argument.
>>69440054
>Freemasonry
*tips tin foil*
>>69456191
Well our monarchy was always shit, it was doomed to fail from the start, the kings were literally deposed one by one, their ineptidute cost us two wars and we almost joined the Central Powers due to their shenanigans.
>>69456191
Yes it is an argument. The people must choose how they will be led or they are not free.
So far Monarchy is really the shittiest thing I can think of that people want in EE.
Roman style republic is and will forever remain the best system.
>>69456191
Daily reminder it was the German loving king who lost us Smyrne.
>>69448903
>Christian god is for all purposes Jehovah
>Jews kill Christ because he claims to be part of Jehovah
But yeah, Christianity is basicly Jewish
>implying
>>69456462
and a kike PM
>>69456122
I assume it means pre-Vatican II
Before all the liberalism
>>69456273
Respected academics in all sorts of disciplines have acknowledged the influence of freemasonry. Trotsky dedicates a couple pages of his autobiography to it. Evola and Guenon discuss it at length. Tolstoy wrote about it. Hell, early French film makers and surrealist poets referenced it all the time. Jack Lang and Francois Mitterrand acknowledged its role in the French Revolution.
Read a book cuck
>>69453674
Of course we don't show on the media our black ops. That would be dumb.
>>69456325
>>69456462
Yea, true. But that's like going gay because of two bad dates (i believe the saying goes).
>>69456388
>Yes it is an argument. The people must choose how they will be led or they are not free.
Only if you think freedom matters, and it's not just a concept indoctrinated into people from birth to make them accept all kinds of shit.
>>69456674
>Respected academics in all sorts of disciplines have acknowledged the influence of freemasonry
No they haven't. Or perhaps your definition of "respected academics" is a lot broader.
>>69440054
>monarchist
Haha, that's funny.
>>69456763
>Democracy made us win WW1 + WW2
>Pretty 1st world before muhh denbts
>Doesn't drain as much public money as an inbred moron with a superiority fetish
>If one is retarded enough, he can be voted out
Yeah, no, fuck Monarchy and fuck your Queen while I'm at it.
Kind of agree. American conservatism is pathetic, as is conservatism in general.
You have to go pre-Enlightenment or Romantic style if you want to be a true reactionary.
And at this stage probably the closest you can get to that with the support of a still-existing institution is Orthodoxy.
Catholicism is too corrupt. I acknowledge a lot of Catholics themselves, but the church... nah.
And, yeah, politically, I'd say some kind of new, smarter Fascistic synthesis (and some form of eco-Fascism, definitely) is the way to go, since Monarchy - the best order - is unlikely now.
>>69456763
Bottom line we don't really have a royal family of our own (fuck off Denmark) so this is pointless.
>>69456909
No need to insult Lizzie II
>>69456763
Yes it does matter.
You still gave no real reason for anyone to accept foreign kings. You just made masons look more dumb.
>>69456909
>Democracy made us win WW1 + WW2
It did?
Did you vote the Axis powers into defeat?
>Doesn't drain as much public money
Actually false. Democracy costs quite a bit more, given the amount of extra things you have to pay for. Look at any democratic nation vs any monarchy. You can be certain that the royals are the cheaper side of the deal.
>inbred moron with a superiority fetish
Classic sign of one who doesn't have much of an argument.
>If one is retarded enough, he can be voted out
Only if he's also unpopular, which can apply to good rulers too.
>Yeah, no, fuck Monarchy and fuck your Queen while I'm at it.
Our monarchy has always been better than our Parliaments.
>>69457125
>Bottom line we don't really have a royal family of our own
I don't really see that as a major issue. Never too late to fix things.
>>69457351
>Yes it does matter.
Why?
>You still gave no real reason for anyone to accept foreign kings.
A foreign king is still better than a local democracy. The former only has reason to do well for their nation, where the latter is by nature a populist politicians plutarchy.
>>69456462
Did you mean İzmir?
>>69457579
>Foreign King
>Has reason to do good
Also Democracy is the Tyranny of the masses. I am not arguing for that. I am arguing for a Roman Style republic which is much better than any foreign king.
Also by what right does a king rule?
Most of them have done nothing of note or worth in their life?
What is the difference between a Tyrant with Nepotism and a King?
>>69458024
>Foreign King
>Has reason to do good
Well yea, he has to pass the crown to his heir.
> I am arguing for a Roman Style republic which is much better than any foreign king.
Why do you believe that?
>Also by what right does a king rule?
By consent of the people, like all governments.
>Most of them have done nothing of note or worth in their life?
How so?
>What is the difference between a Tyrant with Nepotism and a King?
The former is destructive and short term. It's not sustainable. They're more akin to a long term politician.
>>69457424
>It did? Did you vote the Axis powers into defeat?
Yes, it elected the madman [pic related] that drove back the Italians and joined the allies, as it should've, while the king was shitting his pants in Egypt.
>Actually false. Democracy costs quite a bit more, given the amount of extra things you have to pay for. Look at any democratic nation vs any monarchy. You can be certain that the royals are the cheaper side of the deal.
Your gay monarchy doesn't count since it's not an actual government, it's only a cultural icon
>Our monarchy has always been better than our Parliaments
I don't give a shit about you, our monarchy didn't work
>Otto of Greece
Deposed and exiled, ruled with an iron fist and completely left the state built by Kapodistrias from the ground up, in tatters, why? Well he wanted a palace, like the special snowflake he is.
>George I of Greece
Assassinated
>Constantine I of Greece
Exiled twice
>Alexander of Greece
Cucked by the Democracy, bitten my a monkey and died
>George II of Greece
Fled Greece during the Greco-Italian War and fucked off to British Egypt
>Paul of Greece
One of the causes of the Greek Civil War, and managed to extend its duration with his ineptitude.
>Constantine II of Greece
Cucked by the Colonels' Regime and CIA, and nobody wanted him back after that.
See... Our monarchy was shit, and it will always remain shit.
>>69458630
>that drove back the Italian
Not much of a feat, bro...
>Your gay monarchy doesn't count since it's not an actual government
Regardless. The British monarchy is different anyway, since it generates hundreds of millions of ££ to the Parliament coffers anyway. But monarchies elsewhere are still a lot cheaper than politicians.
And yea, you really have had a rough run. Maybe Golden Dawn will lead a coup and someone from there will take over to fix things.
>>69458520
> His kid is what is making him to do good
Sure thing
>Why do you believe that?
Because it is the best system as the people who have fought for the nation and are not failures get to vote and can only chose people who have done good for the nation. If you have a retarded king you are stuck with him.
>By consent of the people, like all governments.
Why should they give their consent to a foreign king ruling them?
>How so?
Let's take my country
Michael I did a coup d'etat and later fled. One can argue said coup fucked us in the ass
Carol II fucked over the nation politically and diplomatically
Ferdinand was the only one who achieved something of greatness by creating Greater Romania.
Carol I, all the stuff he has done was actually planed by his government and because of him we joined WW1 to late and god a load of pain for it.
>The former is destructive and short term. It's not sustainable. They're more akin to a long term politician.
You say it's not sustainable but Right of Conquest Monarchies mascaraing behind "Sent by God" BS went on for 2 millennia. Quite long term if you ask me.
>>69458947
They will lead a dictatorship, not a shitty cucked monarchy.
>We literally had less soldiers, weapons and equipment than them, and even if they were italians, they managed to wreck some yugos and northern Africans, and even some Americans during the sicilian campaign, while we fucking destroyed them.
Dictatorships are based
Monarchs are not
>Since it generates hundreds of millions of ££ to the Parliament coffers anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYEKSOBRtM
No
>>69459246
>Sure thing
It's a pretty good incentive when you already have everything else.
>Because it is the best system as the people who have fought for the nation and are not failures get to vote and can only chose people who have done good for the nation.
I'm a big fan of Heinleinism, but it's still not a perfect example of meritocracy, nor would it really work at present.
>If you have a retarded king you are stuck with him.
Only for a while. And a useless king can be far less damaging than a bad democracy.
>Why should they give their consent to a foreign king ruling them?
Why should they give consent to anything? For their own good.
>Let's take my country
So your issue is that they can't all be Alexander? Bit much of an expectation.
>You say it's not sustainable but Right of Conquest Monarchies mascaraing behind "Sent by God" BS went on for 2 millennia. Quite long term if you ask me.
You've missed the point. A despot (which can be any type of government) rules by fear, and is not constructive. They can only achieve a small amount for themselves, and can't pass that same power on. A monarchy benefits a nation with the large support of the populace.
>>69459329
>They will lead a dictatorship
Yea, probably, but a girl can dream.
>We literally had less soldiers, weapons and equipment than them, and even if they were italians, they managed to wreck some yugos and northern Africans, and even some Americans during the sicilian campaign, while we fucking destroyed them.
Dude, Ethiopians with spears and stones pushed them back before the Germans gave support. "You're" not in an exclusive club.
>Dictatorships are based
>Monarchs are not
Lolokay.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYEKSOBRtM
Oh my, from the thumbnail alone i can tell this is going to be completely unbiased and totally accurate...
>>69440054
>hates Jews
>religion literally worships a fucking Jew
You can't make this shit up
>>69440054
>Catholic or Orthodox
Those are religions based on worshipping a jew that got nailed to a piece of wood for defying the roman authorities. You are literally worshipping a jew and saying that those who don't worship said dead heeb are tainted by jewry?
lol
>Monarchist
Yeah no, I have no interest in some inbred warlord's great grandson bossing me around just because.
>Nazi
Oh look, it's the people that discredited nationalism for some 60+ years and counting due to starting a highly destructive war and slaughtering millions upon millions of white people.
Again, no thanks.
>Fascist
This isn't as dumb as the other ones but you would be much better off to call yourself a nationalist or a patriot in public conversations about your ideology.
>>69460818
>get cucked by an overseas king
>it's for your own good!
Jew-tier argument, senpai.
>>69459329
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYEKSOBRtM
Basically
>A child should be able to be head of state because we feels!
Tall poppy faggots are the worst.
>The cost is ~£40m/yr
They have to rely on lies to push their kike bullshit.
http://www.royal.gov.uk/TheRoyalHousehold/Royalfinances/Sourcesoffunding/Overview.aspx
http://royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/insight/just-how-is-the-royal-family-funded-44603
The monarchy brings in £230m/yr, not including "tourism."
>According to the lobby group "Republic"
Lol. They also forget that most of those costs would be there anyway for heritage buildings.
>Crown Estate
Oh good, they can't weasel around thi--
>Muh stolen land, and inheritance tax
Morons don't realise that it's not controlled by them.
>Right to aspire, valuing inherant privilage over actual talent
Because someone born into a job, trained for it for their entire life, would have no talent at it?
>dated, undemocratic system
CURRENT YEAR. And man, those Jews won't shut up about "democracy."
That video gave me cancer.
>>69461609
>Hating on something beneficial just because it's not next door
Didn't your country go to war over a government imposing will on different subjects who didn't want it?
>>69459329
>and even some Americans during the sicilian campaign
This had more to do with the terrain they were defending then any inherent quality of their own. Every time the italians went on the offensive against an enemy with weapons and equipment equivalent to their own or better they wound up losing bad.
>>69461983
>americans loosing to italians in sicily was the terrain
>italians loosing to greek guerrilla in the mountains was because italians are shit at war
ok
>>69460818
>It's a pretty good incentive when you already have everything else.
What was the line? Power corrupts. Especially when it has no repercussions as they can just ditch nation.
>I'm a big fan of Heinleinism, but it's still not a perfect example of meritocracy, nor would it really work at present.
Why wouldn't it work?
>Why should they give consent to anything? For their own good.
>It's for your own good goy, this is why you should accept faggs marying goy
Are you trying to jew me?
Bring arguments.
>So your issue is that they can't all be Alexander? Bit much of an expectation.
My issue is that out of 4 kings two fucked it up and one did nothing. Not really cream of the crop as you make it out to be.
>You've missed the point. A despot (which can be any type of government) rules by fear, and is not constructive. They can only achieve a small amount for themselves, and can't pass that same power on. A monarchy benefits a nation with the large support of the populace.
Except nobody here supports or would support a foreign king. So it would be a Despot.
>>69440054
>Orthodox hardliner
>Monarchist
>Fascist
Yep that's me
>Le Orthodoxy meme
You know nothing of the Orthodox faith apart from memes.
Neo-Reactionaries are in general the most memetastic retards out there, man, if you're spouting that shit unironically, you should just fucking sterilize yourself.
I shudder to think that there are people who take things like Monarchism seriously. It's even more zany than AnCaps, and that's quite an accomplishment.
>>69462381
>y-you guise know nothing about Orthodoxy trust me look at my flag
Fuck off
>>69462204
>Especially when it has no repercussions as they can just ditch nation.
That is a good argument against democracy. Monarchs don't have that option in a realistic sense.
>Why wouldn't it work?
Too many people are idiots who vote for what's popular. In ST, everybody was better educated. To have that system without the education would just result in people serving for a bit, then business as usual.
>Are you trying to jew me?
Just because Jews abuse that line, doesn't make it not applicable. Someone foreign born can still lead a nation well.
>My issue is that out of 4 kings two fucked it up and one did nothing.
Still a minority in the national history. Plus, shitty external circumstances. Much better odds nowadays.
>Except nobody here supports or would support a foreign king.
So get a local one. But if people are that petty, perhaps they need a despot to sort them out.
>>69462381
>I shudder to think that there are people who take things like Monarchism seriously.
Arguments against it?
>>69462181
>americans loosing to italians in sicily was the terrain
Except we didn't lose in sicily mario, your armies got pushed out and our armies along with the british and others were headed up through southern italy when your government threw in the towel and gave up.
>italians loosing to greek guerrilla in the mountains was because italians are shit at war
I didn't say this. I said:
>>Every time the italians went on the offensive against an enemy with weapons and equipment equivalent to their own or better they wound up losing bad.
Your nation's armies didn't just fight in greece genius. Your offensive into british north africa was a hilarious failure as well prompting the germans to intervene on your behalf just like they had to do greece.
Italians have been shit at war since the end of the middle ages.
>>69462256
How can you be a fascist and monarchist?
>>69462675
Italians have been shit at offensive war since the end of the middle ages.
Fixed.
>>69462635
>That is a good argument against democracy. Monarchs don't have that option in a realistic sense.
Carol II feld to Monaco where he wasted the royal houses money
Michael I fled to London to spend time with British Monarchy.
Also i am not arguing for Democracy
>Too many people are idiots who vote for what's popular. In ST, everybody was better educated. To have that system without the education would just result in people serving for a bit, then business as usual.
A roman style republic would have limits on who can vote.
Only people with propriety, above the age of 28 and have finished national conscription and have an IQ over 100 can vote.
And only people over the age of 38, married, served in the military and own propriety can be elected.
Also they will stay in officer for 10-15 years unless a qualified majority in a referendum gets rid of them.
>Just because Jews abuse that line, doesn't make it not applicable. Someone foreign born can still lead a nation well.
Some. Not all, not most but Some. What about the others?
>Still a minority in the national history. Plus, shitty external circumstances. Much better odds nowadays.
Want me to bring up other nations experiences with foreign houses?
>So get a local one. But if people are that petty, perhaps they need a despot to sort them out.
How does one become a noble, as we basically lack those, with the exceptions of a few impoverished nobles in the NE.
>monarchists not tainted by the Jews
Most monarchies literally had a Court Jew. Mayer Rothschild was one
>>69462804
Italy the youngest son of Rome and suffering from an Inferiority Complex because of it.
>>69462798
Why can't you be? A monarchy can still be structured to run as a sort of liberal democracy. I want my monarchy to function as a fascist state. And it's not without precedence. The Iron Guard were fascists that supported the Romanian monarchy.
>Catholicism
>not tainted
Don't think so Gunter
>>69463137
And always bitching on the internet about it too. I mean fuck at least the french have a pretty valid excuse for why the did so poorly in the second world war.
>>69461835
Yes. Our constitutional republic blew the bloated, corrupt British monarchy, quite literally, out of the water.
>>69463056
>Also i am not arguing for Democracy
Well, an elected position is what i meant.
And I'm not defending those chaps, as they kinda proved why a monarch can't flee: it fucks up your country.
>A roman style republic would have limits on who can vote.
We used to have those limits, and they were good. But you either run the risk of blind populism again, or a narrow plutarchy because people will only vote for their own benefits.
>What about the others?
They'll do far less damage than politicians.
>Want me to bring up other nations experiences with foreign houses?
Sure, as long as you bring up EVERY other monarch who wasn't shit. Then we can see which list is longer.
>How does one become a noble
Conquest, usually. Someone needs to take power.
>>69463540
Hah, knew you'd fall for it. I was referring to the Civil War. Plus, it was the French who made the British shrug and say America wasn't worth it compared to India.
Transhumanist post-scarcity with macroanarchism in space and with planetside microgovernments.
Anything else is barbaric and controlled by the elite.
Replicators when?
>>69463604
>We used to have those limits, and they were good. But you either run the risk of blind populism again, or a narrow plutarchy because people will only vote for their own benefits.
Degradation can happen to everything, it's not that valid of an argument.
>>69464230
True, but they were never that good for everyone to begin with. When we had them, it was good for keeping the liberals and unworthy people down, but it also was bad for the good people not of that caste.
>>69464463
If you can't get your own place by 28, you draft dodge and you have an IQ bellow 100, you should not have anything to do with politics.
I would hardly call this a caste, more like common fucking sense.
>>69440054
>Monarchist
>Not degenerate
>>69464620
Oh, i agree, but was referring to the old English and Australian voting restrictions, which meant only landowners could vote. So it wasn't a matter of having your own place, but buying land, which was no small issue for anyone.
Though the draft isn't a great idea. Service should be voluntary, otherwise the one serving is of less value.
>>69464969
A voluntary army is objectively worse than a conscription one.
Did that mean Land as in like a specific amount, or would your own house count?
Here we had a payed amount of money to vote.
>>69447010
A degenerate
>>69464879
>""Enlightenment""
>not degenerate
EQUALITY YAY
UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE YAY
>>69440054
>monarchism
>Yes King Goldstein I'll be your slave and have utmost respect to you, pls have my wife
>semitic religions
>ever
Bring back, Ukko, Odin, Perkunas and Toutatis!
>Fascism/NS
Somewhat agree
>>69448903
The only non degenerate country was the Soviet Union. Destroyed by the traitor Gorbachev who was manipulated by his Jewish advisors.
>>69465130
>A voluntary army is objectively worse than a conscription one.
In a time of defensive war, i'd certainly take the conscripts, but any other time the only people who should be there are the ones who want to be.
>Did that mean Land as in like a specific amount, or would your own house count?
It would mean the parcel of clay itself (not sure of size limits). Which is why large landowners had more say, and could box out smaller ones. That to me is just a bit too Jewish.
>Here we had a payed amount of money to vote.
Huh, that gives me mixed feelings. Like, it shows that you're dedicated enough to spend that, but again favours the merchants.
>>69465448
>Yes King Goldstein I'll be your slave and have utmost respect to you, pls have my wife
Why do people associate such servitude with monarchy? Those customs are similar in any government, but at least the monarch isn't going to be on the take from every banker for a marketing campaign.
>>69463633
>not anarchism on planets under a benevolent galactic empire
>>69465733
>He wants to be confined to madmax planets while spave stations serve as hubs of civilization.
It makes more sense for places where you don't need to build the very ground on which to walk to be hubs of civilization.
>>69465659
>In a time of defensive war, i'd certainly take the conscripts, but any other time the only people who should be there are the ones who want to be.
Nope. One must consider that the army is there to protect, so you always prepare to defend yourself. And having a reserve split on age groups that goes from 20 to 60 in increments of two years is the best advantage one can get.
So a vote per parcel?
That does sound quite silly.
>Huh, that gives me mixed feelings. Like, it shows that you're dedicated enough to spend that, but again favours the merchants.
Also you had to be christian to be a citizen, so it worked fine.
But do to pressure and because our king promised universal vote and land those things eventually went away.
But just because in the past we had something sub optimal doesn't mean we can't upgrade.
>>69445358
>>69449514
>>69440170
Atheism+capitalism=maximum degeneracy
>>69466330
>One must consider that the army is there to protect, so you always prepare to defend yourself.
That's where i would prefer willing participants. A willing soldier is worth at least three conscripts.
>So a vote per parcel? That does sound quite silly.
Yea, i don't remember if it was quite like that, but it was immensely skewed in favour of large landowners over small ones.
>But just because in the past we had something sub optimal doesn't mean we can't upgrade.
Also agreed.
>>69466725
>That's where i would prefer willing participants. A willing soldier is worth at least three conscripts.
No. A volunteer must be trained, that takes time.
A conscript is already trained. You save time. Which is very important. Plus a volunteer is more likely to desert when shit hits the fan.
>>69452371
Nazi and Fascist are compatible.
>>69466884
>A conscript is already trained.
>Plus a volunteer is more likely to desert when shit hits the fan
Do we have words mixed around or something? Because that's kinda the opposite of how things work...
>>69440054
Catholic born and raised.
>>69453674
You sure, Sven?
>catholics
>>69440054
Monarchism for the Winnim
>>69467097
A conscription army works like this:
18 year olds get military training, part of them get to be in the main army, everyone else gets to be a reserve.
You keep doing this for a few decades and all able bodied males in the country are militarily trained with at most requiring a short period of time to re learn stuff.
You don't conscript only during war time, that is a draft not conscription or as the USSR put it, general mobilization.
So in a war if the army is decimated it can resupply from the male population of previous years, going as far back as 60 if necessary, and all trained. Which means you can keep going even after a catastrophic defeat.
Compare that with a volunteer army, which if it suffers such a faith would take months if not a year to go back to effective strength do to training time, or it's useless.
Best example is UK vs Ger during WW1.
Yes the British Army, pound for pound was better, but they where outnumbered and couldn't be reinforced in time.
>>69464879
And this was how the freemasonic France born
>>69452893
>Freemasons are the good guys!
>Btw, I'm one myself :)
OP is right and this thread proves it.
>>69467285
>Protestants
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/10/05/worlds-first-lesbian-bishop-calls-church-remove-crosses-install-muslim-prayer-space/
You souldnt even be allowed to be considered as christians.
Catholics now are shit but we have saved Europe from Islam, Mongols, etc several times (we even fought against the URSS). What about you?
>>69467635
Ah yes, Israeli style. I thought you meant USSR style.
And whilst yes, that's better, i still say it's not as good as pure volunteers, but i didn't mean only those who rock up when shots start getting fired.
But in lieu of other plans, yea, of course I'd go with what you said.
>>69467642
In the GOdF sense, perhaps, but that's not really Masonry to begin with.
>>69467845
It in no way does, and it would take more than you saying, "Yup, i'm right!" for that to be so.
>not being a traditional Lutheran
Why do cathocuck pagans love Syrians?
>>69468062
>It in no way does, and it would take more than you saying, "Yup, i'm right!" for that to be so.
It absolutely does:
>the only people pro-Mason are Masons themselves
>the only people who hate monarchy are commies
>the only people who hate NatSoc and/or fascism are trolls
It's kinda funny how you're here all day, btw. How's the pay? And stop lying so much, it doesn't do you any favors.
>>69468062
Generally only a minority of conscripts see combat outside of real ground war.
It's also a good system to educate the male youth on how to not be massive faggots.
>>69467285
And even now you have pretty based catholic countries as Poland, or Spaniads and Italians fighting with christian minorities against ISIS in Irak.
You can even compare in Germany Bavaria with the rest of the country in cuckeness.
>>69440054
Why would we want a monarchy? They are degenerate. In-breeders who create degenerates. Why roll the genetic dice on leaders? Meritocratic Republic is the only non-degenerate form of government. The best and brightest should rule.
>>69468366
>the only people pro-Mason are Masons themselves
And anyone who has actually studied it.
>the only people who hate monarchy are commies
Pretty much. But i'd broaden it to, "People who can't exploit a monarchy like they can a democratic system."
>the only people who hate NatSoc and/or fascism are trolls
I'd say there it's people who blindly accept the propaganda against them. It's fine to not like the systems, but the haters rarely have reasons beyond their feels.
>It's kinda funny how you're here all day
This thread started after i had dinner... But it's cute that you think the only people who could possibly disagree with you are paid to.
>>69468661
>In-breeders
Why would that happen any more? Arguments against monarchy are as dated as what the republitards claim monarchy is.
And protip: Monarchy is meritocratic, just the other way around.
>>69468863
>And anyone who has actually studied it.
Which is what you, a Mason, says. So it's a lie.
>I'd say there it's people who blindly accept the propaganda against them.
This is /pol/. Nuff said.
>This thread started after i had dinner
6 hours ago, yes. But hey, that means we only have to roll our eyes at you for 2 more hours.
>>69440054
proud fascist here
>>69468863
>But it's cute that you think the only people who could possibly disagree with you are paid to.
Strawman much?
>>69468661
>The best and brightest should rule.
That's what monarchy means. Basically, people used to believe that you basically needed superpowers to become king. If you didn't have them, no kingship for you. An example would be the French belief that the king could heal people by laying on hands like a Paladin in D&D.
>>69467285
People are already trying to get Francis ousted for heresy. The Catholic Church survived worse popes, just think of the Borgias.
>>69469079
>So it's a lie.
Why's that?
>>69469107
>Strawman much?
No different to what you're saying of me.
>>69469130
Well said. But for modern days, it just means that we make them the best and brightest, put them in power, and get rid of the nation splitting popularity contest orchestrated by Jewish media.
>>69469678
>Why's that?
Dude, think. If you can.
>I did nothing wrong
>t. culprit
Get it? No, of course not.
>>69469885
Except that's on the false premise of me being a culprit, and still doesn't explain your concerns.
>>69440054
>if you don't like circle jerking about my preferred failed ideology ur a ghey
What an empowering statement
>>69466196
We are talking postscarcity transhuman anarchism, it wouldn't be anything like kenshiro, more like the borg.
An interplanetary government is necessary to keep the various planets from annihilating each other to harvest raw resources or to farm slaves for computational power or for shit and giggles.
>catholic
>worships jew
>>69440054
I was catholic but after seeing the pope kiss the mudslime's feet I refuse to support the ideology. We've been over run by the left wingers who consider themselves catholic like Chris Matthews. There is a difference between being humble and being a political cock sucking POS which is what pope Francis is.
