So im pretty much a N/S royalist, i know it sound weird, but..uh i believe that France need some kind of kingdom again. What does /pol/ believe? What's your opinion about the kings?
>>71770929
Monarchy is for cucks.
>>71771052
This, desu. Atleast the French King would be a Frog, ours are fucking Germans. But subjecting yourself to the will of another human being based solely upon the conditions of their birth is supremely cucked. You can't be a man and a monarchist at the same time.
>>71771126
What about your old cunt who goes to a stanic hospital ?
>>71770929
>hereditary ruler
In the guillotine it goes
>>71771126
>every figure of note in British history was a cuck
You heard it from Nigel folks
>>71771208
That's the German slut I'm talking about. Can't wait for her to descend into hades so we can get rid off it. No-one likes Charles and William and Harry aren't even his kids.
>>71771399
Cromwell wasn't a cuck.
>>71770929
No one dares after the last one went to guillotine.
Imho its what we should do to all royals and dictators.
>>71771412
But what about commonwealth ?
Does it still benefit to the UK to have some control over countries like canada or australia ?
>>71771565
We can have a culture based Anglo Commonwealth.
>>71771126
You're lucky. Ours are italians and greeks who say they're french.
>>71770929
It's absolutely the only way to return to any semblance of form that would preserve the west. The flaw of democracy is that the majority gets what they want and in several generations their children may want things that undermine the very power they were given.
Historically, no nation that has ever embraced feminism and equal rights has endured. Equal rights implies and assumes that all individuals are equal where as reality says not really. The decline is sure and it is inevitable so long as the dumb spoiled masses get what they want.
>>71771126
Fuck off you paki! A true Briton would respect the BRITISH Queen.
>>71771399
You mean an Abdul.
>>71771126
>But subjecting yourself to the will of another human being based solely upon the conditions of their birth is supremely cucked
Especially so when that person is a leech that does nothing. Hell, the Netherlands is the fucking worst in that regard. A Republic for centuries, then we get a Napoleonic puppet king (ironically, the only ruler in all of Dutch history to get "the Good" as a nickname), then we get "our" first king... who is a fucking retard that lost us Belgium (we traded away fucking South Africa for this shit)... then Willem II, who becomes a constitutional puppet monarch, and we've been sucking the balls of his descendants ever since.
Monarchies only make sense in the medieval era, and the French Revolution happened precisely because of how dated the Ancien Regime was. Napoleon as an enlightened despot was pretty awesome, but how could anyone guarantee that his son would've been equally awesome? Ideally (that is to say, the Coalition doesn't violate the Amiens Treaty) Napoleon would've remained Consul.
>>71771661
That's not my point : If you become a republic, you will loose control over the common wealth since those countries still obey to the queen.
>>71770929
I agree with you, and I think you not only need a royal family again, a firmly nationalist one, but after watching Francis kissing muslim feet I think the Avignon Pope needs reinstating and we can all rally behind him.
>>71771814
>Literally no true Scotsman
For fucks sake, it was a Brit who formulated this logical fallacy. Did you even read the sticky?
>>71771534
Louis XVI was not the last king of France
>>71772028
He was the last "absolute one".
Others monarchies were constitutionnal monarchies aka shit.
>>71771886
You can't call yourself British, if you don't respect the History and Culture of Britain, and that means you must respect the Kings and Queens. Plus, the overwhelming majority of Brits respect the monarchy; only pakis and dindus don't.
That fallacy only works for really small things like discussing whether one ought to put sugar in their porridge.
>>71770929
Why not get an emperor?
>>71771814
Don't you have little girls to groom, Ahmed? Fuck off back to whatever shithole you came from. Monarchists aren't English, they're Germans. Or are you a boy molesting southern fruit?
German saw on English oak.
On English neck a German yoke;
German spoon to English dish,
And England ruled as Germans wish;
Blithe world in England never will be more,
Till England's rid of all the four.
European Unionists OUT
Saxe-Coburg-Gothans OUT
>>71772398
>The Russians should have kept communism because it was part of the history and culture of Russia :^)
This is what you sound like. You even use dindu instead of coon, are you an American or something? These foreign rulers had their own cosmopolitan European culture, anyway. Stupid uneducated Paki cunt.
>>71772235
Some kind of pseudo absolute Monarchy seem good to me. Something with specialized assembly chambers made up of randomly picked experts.
Need a specialized decision ? The relevant people vote it. There's some kind of conflict ? The king has the last say.
>>71770929
You know that the Horst Wessel Lied condemns royalists right beside communists, right?
>>71772398
>You can't call yourself British, if you don't respect the History and Culture of Britain, and that means you must respect the Kings and Queens.
Where do I even begin?
>>71772590
>Something with specialized assembly chambers made up of randomly picked experts
It was already the case : Conseil du Roi which became Conseil d'Etat.
>>71772447
>Be Ahmed
>Call someone else Ahmed
Is this the new meme?
I guess every white Brit is now a paki or a nigger? Just fuck off Abdul.
And, if you're not an abdul, then you're a damned, globalist commie.
>>71770929
Tu preferais une monarchie decadent plutot qu'une republique? Dommage. I know your history and your kings were trash. There are too many depraved faggots here who just love the assreaming.
>>71772730
>Supports the internationalist house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, who should not even rule in Britain and have only ended up in this position because the Jew Israel Abraham Suasso funded Wilem van Oranjes conquest of England to establish a national bank
>Calls other people globalists
Begone ye foreigner, I have no need or want of you.
>>71772705
Just modernize this with the help of computers and you're set. Better people involvement than the current 'democracy'.
Lmao at monarchy bowing to someone because (s)he happened to be pushed from the right twat and this
>muh royal bloodline
is just a byword for ''my dad and my uncle is the same person''
democracy or fuck off
>>71771126
>a brit who isn't a monarcuck
Based
>>71771789
You, my fellow American, belong in Saudi Arabia. Out.
>>71771126
>implying democracy is a superior alternative
Enjoy those rapefugees your women will be voting to take in
>>71772541
Look the statistics speak for themselves.
Only commies, niggers, or pakis hate the monarchy.
>The Russians should have kept communism because it was part of the history and culture of Russia :^)
Communism only took up a small fraction of Russian history and culture. Monarchy has taken up all of ours.
As for 'they're German'. They're not - maybe George II was, but Queen Elizabeth II isn't. She was born in Britain, to British parents, with British cultures and traditions instilled within her. Plus, English people originated from Germany so the House of Saxe-Coburg is like a microcosm of the English Peoples' history.
I bet you hate Alfred the Great because he was ethnically German.
>>71772860
>Thinking it's the Queen that's globalist
She's suppressed by the Globalist funded government, ministers, advisors and banks.
ACTION FRANCAISE !
POUR QUE VIVE LA FRANCE VIVE LE ROI !
>>71773023
>She was born in Britain!
A dog born in a stable is not a horse. English people originated in Denmark, mostly. I think you're a Redditor who doesn't know the difference between Germanic and German. The Franks were Germanic, the Lombards were Germanic, the Dutch are Germanic, but are they Germans? No. Please learn a bit of history before spouting nonsense.
Our history did have monarchy. English monarchy, not foreign monarchy. We've only had this foreign trash for three hundred years, before that we had foreign Scots and before that we had Welsh and French rulers. The last King of England died in 1066. The last English head of state was Oliver Cromwell. Educate yourself, cunt.
>>71772860
>>71772936
Hey look, the Jew is agreeing with your anti-monarchy beliefs - who is really the cucked/globalist one?
Stop being a retard and grow a brain.
![quote-lf-the-attribute-of-popular-government-in-peace-is-virtue-the-attribute-of-popular-government-maximilien-robespierre-110-42-88[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/t9om05W.jpg "quote-lf-the-attribute-of-popular-government-in-peace-is-virtue-the-attribute-of-popular-government-maximilien-robespierre-110-42-88[1].jpg")
>>71772990
You think the Revolutionairies were idiots unaware of the flaws of democracy? In fact, they were the most aware of its flaws. It is today in which democracy has just become a buzzword which is considered good for its own sake. It is only today that the folly of "vox populi vox dei" persists. The Federalist Papers, for example, dedicate multiple chapters to limiting democracy in the American Republic. The French Republic was based on the idea that only virtuous citizens can lead a Republic on the right path, and that virtue must be enforced by the sword if neccessary.
Both Robespierre and Franklin admitted that a Republic without virtuous citizens would be better off as a monarchy.
>>71771052
>monarchy is for cucks
>says the American as he's about to elect a Clinton, again
>>71773164
>!
UNE DEUX LA FRANCE BOUGE!!
>>71773117
"Okay"
>>71772927
The good thing with monarchy is people don't get to fight for muh dick power because you know who will be the head. It also allows for a complete upbringing of the stateperson since birth.
Let's face it. Atm our presidents are useless most of the decisions are taken behind closed doors by the advisers which are common folks with specialized knowledge. You don't need an elected parliament, but those specialized guys which are numerous. Let a portion randomly picked openly express themselves. Back it up with a king lineage to take care of administering the whole process. There goes stability, 'democracy' and a corruption free system.
>>71773294
I bet you would literally and unironically let the prince fuck your wife
>>71773451
Our prince, Karl, is a literal cuckold. His wife slept around and now he's raising two kids that aren't his.
>>71770929
waste of money
>>71773376
>Respects the conservative-traditional values Saudi Arabia have retained
>Does it in order to retain the relations the UK has.
>>71773526
Nice lies
>>71773451
Depends if it was an absolute necessity for the nation and people.
>>71773590
>Nice lies
James Hewitt.
>>71770929
You had that, but you had commies do away with it.
You want it back? Purge the commies/"""socialists""".
I could get behind Monarchy if we could guarantee the ruler would be a benevolent one. Since we can't, I won't.
>>71773333
Certainly seems like the west lacks virtuous citizens. Or at least they are not a significant portion of the population to prevent the islamisation of Europe.
>>71773680
Do you wonder why that bitch Diana got what she deserves?
>>71773771
No they didn't. The French revolutionaries, who were a mix of liberals, nationalists and liberal-nationalists overthrew their monarchy. This was before the advent of communism.
>>71773590
>he admits to being a literal monarcuck
All Monarchists desrve to be killed, but French Monarchists deserve a slow and painful death for also dishonoring their nation.
>>71773836
And all Karl had to do was raise someone else's son. Monarcucks are as pathetic as the King they'll follow.
>>71771814
Merciless Heavenly Father, please purge these filthy republican heathens from this sacred thread. Republicunts need to go to Hell.
>>71773862
> not wanting to resurrect historic kingdom of israel
> disgracing his ancestors
>>71773862
All Jews deserve to be slaughtered for the crimes they've committed to my people, to Europa.
>>71773884
Did he have a child? I don't think so. He just had an affair with her damnedness, Diana.
>>71773980
Thank you. Every Briton here is in support of the Queen, except the Paki who spams shit on this thread.
>>71773980
Why would God listen to you? Monarchists aren't allowed to turn their back on Saxe-Coburg and Gotha because they must hold them in worship at all times, but they're allowed to turn their back on the tabernacle and holy vessel of Our Lord because they put their foreign Queen above God himself.
>>71774073
Are you having a fucking laugh? You don't know that James Hewitt is Harry's father?
>>71773988
Reading the bible proves that Kingdoms were a terrible idea. The only good king was Saul, who was more or less democratically elected and acted like a normal leader.
If you want a king you're a submissive little bitch.
Do you know how much of your ancestors history was resisting royal rule and pushing for more people oriented systems? Literally thousands of years.
Now you're so fucking spoiled in your western liberal democracies that you see feminism of gay people getting married as your biggest fucking problems and want a king to kill people you don't like.
This board is insufferable.
>>71774138
Proof
>>71774158
>Do you know how much of your ancestors history was resisting royal rule and pushing for more people oriented systems? Literally thousands of years.
But, it wasn't.
>>71773835
>Certainly seems like the west lacks virtuous citizens.
Which is why our democracies have devolved into a cycle of self-destruction. This is why Jefferson said that the tree of liberty needs to be regularly watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants, and Robespierre believed his Terror was merely enforcing virtue. And both of them would argue for the same thing in modern France if they were alive: publically execute the traiterous political class, purge high society and expell those whose loyalty to the Republic is questioned (what Americans love to forget when criticizing the French revolution for being "too bloody" is how many loyalist Americans were expelled to Canada and Britain).
>>71773980
>Merciless Heavenly Father
Why are you praying to God? Shouldn't you pray to your monarch like a good little Anglican?
>>71772406
France is not an Empire.
>>71774246
They pushed for a representative democracy. You went for totalitarian to liberal democracy like everywhere else in Europe.
>>71773988
Read the bible, lad. God himself tells the Israelites monarchy is a terrible idea. He only lets them have a king because everyone else has them and the Jews really wanted one.
"So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to leadb us, such as all the other nations have.”
But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”
Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
>>71774203
Go on google.
Look at James Hewitt
Then look at Harry.
>>71774370
>Basing ancestry by looking at people.
Some people don't look like their parents.
>>71770929
I dunno which god the frankish once hailed from, nor your lineage. Only that one of Wilhelm The Conq. (Vilhjalm Ruðajarl, earl of rouen/the cleared forest for farms/settlements)
I wnt my gov to go to hell, and Oslo fucked. This shitrock has been malruled in all modern time... that is since we became independent...
Fuck em all
But I love my King, Fatherland and it's native people.
>>71770929
I'm a direct descendant of Charlemagne. I'll even learn French. Give me the crown, and Kebab will get removed like a motherfucker.
>>71774246
Yes they did. Since Harold Godwinson died. Even before that they pushed for a Viking style folkmoots where they'd pick their own King. And then after that there were the Northerners who fought the Frogs and were harryed for it, Magna Carta, the Peasant Revolts, the English Civil War. Do you know nothing?
>>71774410
Why? Don't you look like yours? Kek.
>>71772974
Nice absolutism argument. So tell me would you agree that women who think there's a rape culture in the west and black people who think there's institutional racism should have more voting power than someone who believes a balanced national budget is the most important issue?
>>71774293
Who cares, Emperor sounds better. You still have some possesions overseas so technically that could qualify as an Empire.
>>71774261
This Dutchman is redpilled on democracy. Tocqueville had similar views about America, about how Congress could easily be bought. Well, since there is neither Terror for them nor virtue in America, that is why things have become so hopelessly fucked.
>>71774261
Damn son. I'd try to continue our dialogue but I need to read more on robespierre. My only knowledge of the French Revolution is all high school memes.
My only thinking is why have a democracy where only the virtuous citizen can vote (sounds more oligarchic now)? Why not just admit that we want a virtuous society, put the most virtuous man in charge, & groom his lineage to continue being the most virtuous. When a new king fails, we execute him, & install a new king
>>71774525
>Anomalies prove it happened the majority of times
Most of the time they were content with the King. They would revolt when he made really terrible decisions. Besides, it's no different now.
>>71774525
>Do you know nothing?
If he knew anything about the world or history he would be a republican.
>>71774836
It widens the pool of candidates.
Democracy only work well if the people strive for liberty, otherwise you might as well have a monarchist
>>71774885
They would revolt when they got the chance. We've been limiting our King's power since we've had them. Kings are thugs, tyrants and thieves. They do not labour, they only steal.
>>71772758
I wonder, you don't have accents on american's keyboard ?
>>71774887
I don't know if it's worth arguing with these people at times. I've been at it for years but they refuse to listen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stm7TwELO5w&list=PL43H78_qIuf_iQ5MBvdUIA0c1P_rYwH4t&index=14
>>71774887
No, I'm more interested in the present than the past. The Monarchy is much better for us now. I really don't care what they did in the past, because those Kings and Queens are dead - but I do understand the importance they played in this nation's history, and it would be disrespectful, evil to destroy the legacy that my ancestor's have built up by destroying the core of Britain. But, I wouldn't expect you to understand respect or appreciation for cultures or peoples - you are a jew, after all.
>>71774998
>And politicians are no different
>Anyone with power is no different
At least with Kings it was easier to hold them accountable and their prosperity relied on the country's prosperity.
>>71774894
Fair point.
Plato's degeneration of the state could apply here. When a president/pm is elected who is less than optimally virtuous, he can start the downward spiral of degeneracy.
One could argue that politicians becoming involved with sjw issues normalises these made-up problems for society & opens the door to the moderate public being swayed into leftist thinking.
>>71775072
I used to have the accents enabled but the international keyboard is a hassle. I'm as American as it gets. If I have any French heritage, it must be from before 1800.
>>71774771
Thanks bruh.
>>71774836
>My only knowledge of the French Revolution is all high school memes.
It's a pretty controversial period and the single most important event in modern Western history. I have to admit I'm not as well read on the subject as I'd like to be.
>My only thinking is why have a democracy where only the virtuous citizen can vote (sounds more oligarchic now)?
Robespierre supported universal suffrage (for men at least), so it wasn't oligarchic. He just wanted to enforce a system of virtue to avoid degeneracy, hence Terror as a sort of wartime/revolution means to enforce it.
>Why not just admit that we want a virtuous society, put the most virtuous man in charge, & groom his lineage to continue being the most virtuous.
>groom his lineage to continue being the most virtuous
If you can figure out a way to make that possible: congratulations, you've just invented the objectively best political system. Kings were groomed from a young age but that never stopped some from becoming crooked or simply incompetent The next best thing (though not perfect) is to trust a virtuous people to elect virtuous leaders.
[spoiler]This is also why I personally believe a Republic functions best in a religiously homogenous society with a pious population. They will in grand lines agree on their ideas of virtue, as well as the need for virtuous leadership. Being conneced through faith also strengthens the national identity. The biggest mistake of the French Republic, after multicultural mass migration of course, was laïcité. France should've remained a Catholic country. Not one where the clergy holds temporal power as in the Ancien Regime, but one where the Catholic faith (preferably pre-Vatican II) still holds sway in the hearts and minds of the people. [/spoiler]
>>71775186
Can't help but cringe at this pathetic limey's reasoning. Sorry lads, you'll never have a monarchy while you still have peasants like this fellow. No one benefits from the monarchy in the UK besides the royal family.
>>71775186
>It's easier to hold them accountable!
No it isn't, they're the supreme sovereign. There's no responsibility. It's not like we snuff out the royal lines after failure. They usually have other people run their personal property for them anyway. Oh, by the way, it's impossible to own land in England. If you "own" property, you're actually a free-holder because the Queen owns all the land. Enjoy being cucked, loser traitor.
>Their prosperity relied on the country's prosperity!
What an absolute joke. While the French economy was collapsing Louis XVI and his rotting ilk were feasting, and his cousin-wife was certainly not cutting her spending. You're all rotten to the core.
>>71770929
my thought on this is, your idea of egalite fraternite liberte, is the greatest idea ever, and for those who longs for a king, i can only think you are children wanting a strong father, and on a bad day i think you should march up to the guillotine. you french guys should be so provd of your revolution. vi va la france, viva la revolucion!
>>71775453
We will. Only the most pathetic boy molesting fruits down south have any respect for Karl the Cuck. Unless he abdicates to William, I think we have a fantastic chance to wash away this plague.
>>71775453
No one benefits from republics except big banks and the elite. You know it's true.
>My reasoning is bad
Elaborate, Amerishit - who hath abandoned morals and righteousness.
>>71775541
>What an absolute joke. While the French economy was collapsing Louis XVI and his rotting ilk were feasting, and his cousin-wife was certainly not cutting her spending. You're all rotten to the core.
And, what happened to them? Thanks for proving my point.
>No it isn't, they're the supreme sovereign. There's no responsibility.
Yes, there is... Treaties and Carters, Protests, Riots, etc. That never works in Republics, but it does for Monarchies.
>>71775276
King's rule based around their feelings. You end up with one SJW King and your entire country goes that way. Kings appoint other men to rule for them most of the time, anyway. So you end up with ministers who champion stupid, made up causes. Kings are just the greatest landholders, cheap labour is good for them. They'll have serfs to work their fields.
>>71774704
The Monarchy had possessions overseas and was not an Empire. There is a big difference between a King and an Emperor. The King receives his legitimacy and his dignity from the top, ie God. The Emperor receives hers by the people. Napoleon just spread the ideas of the Revolution in Europe, so if we want to get rid of the Republic it's not a good idea to take an emperor. For France the choice between these two regime is a big deal.
>>71771052
This
>>71770929
Go fuck yourself traitor
>>71775899
It's different for us.
>>71775945
How could he be a traitor ?
>>71775720
She's all yours after the revolution, mate.
>>71775592
Right on, Knut!
>>71776048
kneeling for a new king is treason
>>71773164
Je vois des mecs d'Action française parfois en sortant de ma prepa. Ils font pitié.
>>71775876
>Except big banks and the elite
But the British monarchy only exists at the behest of the banks. Wilem van Oranje was put in power merely to prop up the bank of England.
>>71776035
>It's different for us.
That's a flaw of the English language (and the French language too): they do not differentiate between colonial possessions and empires. In Dutch the former were referred to as a Rijk (Realm) while the latter is called a Keizerrijk or Kaisserreich in German (Imperial realm). The former are colonies (duh) while the latter is ruled by a ruler who through one form or another claims to be a descendant of the rulers of Rome. Hence Napoleon stating that he is not the heir of Louis XIV, but of Charlemagne (who himself was considered the new West Roman Emperor). Same with the Russian Czar (Czar = Caesar).
So every Western emperor claims lineage to Rome in one way or another. Applying the term "emperor" to non-European rulers is technically wrong because it's then used like a meaningless term to mean "king, but better". Hence the emperors of China and Japan and, indeed, Queen Victoria as Empress of India.
>>71776048
Louis XVI betrayed the country in 1792. Louis XVIII betrayed the country during the Révolution and in 1814. Charles X betrayed the country in 1830. Monarchists are traitors.
>>71776149
You should be proud to burger, saying fuck you to the king is the greatest thing you ever did. i have had time of for sometime now and im reading the writings of your founding fathers and they knew whats what. you fucked up but you know shit about monarchy
>>71776318
And what did William of Orange do with Parliament? He strengthened it.
>>71775186
>all those other times i banged my head against the wall hurt, but I don't care about the past
Also, if you are such a non country that your entire ""culture"" is based around a monarch of a different nationality then you are no better than fucking Belgium or Spain.
>>71776570
Because the King, James II, ran away which was a sign of abdication.
Democracy is crap tho as long as politicians are allowed to lie to get elected.
![859_001[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/3lEoM8t.jpg "859_001[1].jpg")
>>71776537
You forgot Louis-Philippe, who actually came pretty close to being a compromise between monarchy until he went full retard. Then Napoleon III had to pick up the slack and he would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for those meddling Prussians and that chancellor!
>>71776714
Didn't have to strengthen parliament. But, he still did.
>>71776697
>all those other times i banged my head against the wall hurt, but I don't care about the past
Yeah, how about my chuck my body off a building now. One way at looking at the differences between democracy and monarchy is how do you want to kill yourself? But, there are better ways at looking at the differences.
In short, I'm not playing your game, Kike.
>>71777024
>Didn't have to strengthen parliament. But, he still did.
Yes he did. That's how he won his throne. Are you simple?
>>71770929 (OP)
France was great under kings. But I doubt it will come back.
Nous vivons a la fin des temps.
>>71776754
Louis-Philippe was not a real king, he was not a Bourbon nor the King of France. Furthermore he was mediocre and got kicked out of the throne by a Révolution. Napoléon III was an emperor, not a king.
>>71776537
Louis XVI never betrayed the country. He was cornered by the revolutionaries who declared war to the Habsbourg on purpose just to push him to react (his wife is Austrian). That shit ruined all the foreign policy of france.
Louis XVIII negociated the best peace treaty that it was possible to have after the Napoleonic wars.
>>71777310
it was a lot reater after.
>>71776697
Hahahah, that's always a good way to trigger a britbong—compare them to a nation across the channel.
>>71776539
Hats off to you, Knut. I've always admired how Norway always resisted the Danes, the Swedes, and the Germans. You probably didn't do enough rampaging and raping in England. If they had more of your sons, maybe they would have more of a rebel spirt. Cheers.
>>71771126
Lol, pretty much all European royal families are French and German.
>>71777586
Because the other nations had enough sense to kill them off.
>>71777740
>7 out of 10 most successful countries are monarchies
>10 out of 10 least successful countries are republics
>>71777333
>Louis XVI never betrayed the country
>He literally tried to flee the country to join a foreign army
>Louis XVIII negociated the best peace treaty that it was possible to have after the Napoleonic wars.
Talleyrand did this. Louis XVIII was just a traitors who fled France to join our ennemies.
>>71777740
Read the post I was quoting. Most of the royal families outside of France and Germany are French and German.
>>71777453
we usualy have said "you do you" and done our own thing. and thx to you for being the first country to recognice us.
for your pleasure, on the floor of the great mosque in turkey, the vikings put their name and it last to this day. no one should tell us we can make a mark :)
>>71778068
Correlation =/= Causation
Look at the blood that flows through the veins of those people.
>I-It was all the king! Genes don't matter!
>>71777318
>he was not a Bourbon
Bourbon-Orléans are a cadet branch of the Bourbons. He was as much a Bourbon as the Bourbons were Capetians.
>nor the King of France
Which is exactly why he was the last chance of making a non-imperial monarchy work. And he fucked it up.
>>71771749
Isnt the Bourbon family French in origin?
>>71778068
4 out of 5 members of the UN security council are Republics.
>>71771126
>>71771052
Home France is actually a real family, the oldest one of the word, succession of male descendance from Hugues Capet.
All the european family are run by descendant of France foundator.
Only cunts can support Republic.
>>71778188
Yes, look at the genes. Republics are for niggers. And they will vote for gibsmedats every time.
>>71778068
and 10 out of 10 learned from the french. enlightend republic for the win
>>71778322
Niggers naturally gravitate towards monarchy. Many African warlords are Kings in everything but not name.
>>71778322
>Republics are for niggers.
>Res Publica
>Literally an invention of Rome
>Literally the foundation of all of modern politics
>Italian Republics drove innovation through the Renaissance
>"For niggers"
Niggers like eating Chicken too. Guess we should all switch to eating something Niggers don't eat, like hay.
The British Empire grew and was its strongest under a monarchy, it truly is the best system
>>71778511
it also died under a monarchy. and now you are the retard of watern eurpoe
>>71774341
The Jews were ruled by God and they had prophets as judges which was better than a king.
The bible also says to honor the king, also that God sets up and removes kings
>>71778260
>who is Charles de Gaulle
>>71778511
Victoria was perhaps the first purely ceremonial monarch though.
>>71778605
religion can be very practical at times
>>71770929
Would you want a Bonaparte or a Bourbon?
>>71778588
It died as power was taken away from the monarchy and the House of Lords, and transferred to the House of Commons
>>71778689
After Albert died maybe
>>71778476
yes goy you are equal to niggers
also
>unironically posting caesar while criticizing autocracy
>>71770929
Italy Mussolini was not a success.
It takes a providential man. Someone who stands by his talent.
With a monarchy it is the lottery.
In the current situation, we need a general.
https://francais.rt.com/france/19514-generaux-francais-qui-ne-veulent-plus-se-taire
>>71770929
Oh definitely. I think we need a king, not the same kind of monarchies we've been having, the constitutional monarchies. Monarchies should have absolute power, otherwise they get cucked by the media; we've had a queen for over 90 years; we need a king, not a queen. Men are less social-hiveminded; if we had a strong male king, he'd fulfill his role, because he's born into it, naturally; it's a guarantee of national priorities.
>>71771052
Let me guess, you want liberty?
Fucking leftist.
>>71771126
All brits are part German mutts when you go back in time far enough.
>>71779073
>I need a strong alpha male to lead me
You sound like a cuck mate
>>71779073
noone care what canada think. you have had so long time to grow up, but still need mommy. pleace grow up and drop the queen
bring back the Carolingians.
breddy based, in my opinion.
>>71771052
fpbp
/thread
I too think we should have a king. and anyone can challenge him to a fight for the throne, no rules. (It's on live TV ofc) if he makes it to his natural death, he can pass it off to his son or whoever he designates his heir.
>>71779233
>>71778068
The UAE is a monarchy, though.
>>71779357
if you think that is a good idea, try getting to obama.
if you want monarchy for real, just imagine the clintons ruling for the rest of time.
only children wants a king
>>71779548
The clintons couldn't rule for "the rest of time" because by God do monarchs rule. He sets up kings and removes them. They are appointed to govern over the people's affairs.
Romans 13:1
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
>>71779233
Alphas lead other alphas. Imagine if you had a bunch of betas, what would they do? They wouldn't even follow. A good follower is a good alpha.
>>71779548
>just imagine the clintons ruling for the rest of time.
I never realised America already was a monarchy
>>71779548
If Clinton became king under my system, wed have the privilege of witnessing Dwayne Johnson or Shaqille ONeal murdering her on live TV.
You probably have a king, he just has no power.
Pic related, prince of Prussia and would-be emperor of Germany.
>>71779971
that is retarded. god does not set up kings. european history is shows this, but we ( monarchy) last for ever as long as we don't kill them
>>71780475
fuck that was a retarded sentece, sry but im drunk and forign
>>71770929
>wanting a Bourbon king
>not a based Bonaparte Empereur
cuck
>>71771052
I am sorry but Americans should have 0 opinions about a kingdom since they never had one to begin with this is like asking an indian guy to poo in loo but he has never done it.
>>71780591
damn a jap talking about this. you had a living god until "we" beat it out of you. if you tought you where ruled by a god in the 19 centuary, you should fuck of, nothing but love to your people
>>71780840
what are you talking about Jensen? we have a kingdom since like the 9th century? The emperor still goes right now and I doubt they will give up the idea of monarchy, the west can only keep their culture if a monarchy is elected.
>>71780194
> Prince of Prussia.
Prince of a country that no longer exists?
>>71780194
God damn, he really looks like willy
It's creepy
>>71780569
And is half Spanish.
>>71781179
Just like how there are lots of barons, counts and dukes who don't actually rule over "their" territory.
>>71780569
>>71780569
>Bonaparte Empereur
All possible claimants are dead.
>>71781024
yea, but before the bombs, he was a living god. the americans should feel bad for not killing him, I remeber a few years ago he was in norway, we should have done you the favor and embarrassedhim, so you could have seen the stupidity
I strongly advise french republicans ITT to read this short essay by Charles Maurras: https://la-dissidence.org/2014/02/18/charles-maurras-dictateur-et-roi/
>>71780194
Er könnte auch der Prinz meiner Boimuschi sein, uezs.
>>71781481
Yes.
But what I mean is that it is no longer part of Germany, and the Prussian population was deported or even dissolved in the Polish population. The capital itself (Koenigsberg) is now completely Russian.
If he became Emperor of Germany ...
>>71781758
>Maurras
Bon choix mec, as-tu lu aussi Céline?
>>71781758
The French were promised at least one more king by God through the prophecy of various saints.
>>71782660
Desire to know more intensifies. Can you clarify pl0x?
>>71782615
Merci. Évidemment fampai.
>>71783520
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Roman_Emperor
He's said to be French.
