[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/monarchy/ - STOP THINKING LIKE REPUBLICANS

They're just LARPing, right?...right???

Name
Email
Subject
REC
STOP
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload4 per post.


IN CASE 8CHAN IS DOWN: http://txti.es/monarchy FOR NEWS ABOUT WHERE TO REGROUP

File: 9fd2ee1e5f19e14⋯.jpg (41.28 KB,300x419,300:419,Scooby_King_Crown.jpg)

 No.7755

Absolutism only appeals to aesthetics-fags and semi-reformed fascists. It is better than democracy, but worse than the monarchies of the middle ages. It has created a worthless class of nominal aristocrats in France, and forever tarnished the name of aristocracy. It has directly spawned democracy; you couldn't reform a society in the middle ages to be democratic, as the sovereignty wasn't vested in a single entity to begin with.

Absolutism appeals to authoritarians and totalitarians, and to esotericists who imbue the state with spiritual forces. Their views are historically unjustifiable, as absolutist governments were still very liberal for modern standards, but they are still hard to get rid off, as these kinds of people don't care for facts so much as for narratives and aesthetics. We will have a hard time getting rid of people who think that absolutism is just upgraded fascism as long as we fawn over every guy with a silly beard wearing a 19th century military uniform. Let's face it: Monarchs can be mediocre, too. They can be progressive, and they can be heretical. Kaiser Wilhelm II was a zionist and esotericist tool, and to drool over him for the sake of aesthetics is ridiculous. I'd take him over Merkel any day, but "better than Merkel" is not a sign of great quality. And don't get me started on Frederick II, who was most likely gay, and who was definitely influenced by Voltaire.

Society is supposed to be symbiotic and organic, and it was during the middle ages. Not so much during the era of absolutism. Again, absolutist government, in the grand scheme of things, was still a fine form of government. It is also most exemplary of monarchy. However, we should be very careful about advertising it too much. It might be effective for attracting people, but that won't be of much use if half of them end up as buffoons who talk of "liberal ontology" like it means something and cannot think of people as anything other than subjects to a king.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7762

>>7755

Absolutism is cancer, but the structure of monarchies in the middle ages was a response to issues we no longer face regarding how to structure and organize a nation's military forces. It does require some updating.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7767

File: 419296cba34f1c5⋯.jpg (26 KB,350x350,1:1,dd31131323412397_.jpg)

>>7755

>Absolutism only appeals to aesthetics-fags and semi-reformed fascists

Aesthetics are everything.

>appeals to authoritarians and totalitarians

Absolutely.

>Kaiser Wilhelm II was a zionist and esotericist tool

Constitutional monarch.

>We will have a hard time getting rid of people who think that absolutism is just upgraded fascism

<Everything that offends some lolberg sensibilities is fascist

I haven't heard this before.

>And don't get me started on Frederick II

>who was definitely influenced by Voltaire.

Yeah, Frederick was a Voltaire fanboy. The thing about absolutism and Voltaire is that Voltaire was unimpressed with the aristocracy and clergy and only saw the king as getting anything done. Also, because the liberal ontology, they glorified kings who showed how self-interest could benefit a nation. Hobbes was all about this before there was Voltaire and used liberal ontology, aka pre-societal individualism.

>Society is supposed to be symbiotic and organic, and it was during the middle ages. Not so much during the era of absolutism

That's just your opinion, man.

>However, we should be very careful about advertising it too much.

Not my fault some people on this board have a lack of enthusiasm and skill for their own ideal monarchies.

>if half of them end up as buffoons who talk of "liberal ontology" like it means something

NRx/neoabsolutist autism.

>cannot think of people as anything other than subjects to a king.

That's what sovereignty is. Read absolutist theory and Jean Bodin. We were a thing in the 16th century. His book was published in 1576. Late Renaissance.

>>7762

>It does require some updating.

Good luck with this.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7768

>>7755

My biggest beef with absolutism is that a lot of monarchs in the 19th and early 20th century started flirting with marxist and enlightenment ideas to get even more power over their subjects than they already had. When you try to rule with leftist policies, when you abandon your sacred duty to your subjects and you create real tyranny, that's when you get even more extreme tyrants on the left pointing out the problems you caused and taking advantage of the stupidity of the mob to wrestle your power away from you and for themselves, and you might not care after that because you'd be dead, but this creates a horrible cycle of leftists solving leftist problems by creating even more leftist problems, and you get endless revolutions which get progressively worse each time and never seem to make the lives of their citizens better.

I know that the monarch is "sovereign" and bla bla bla, I don't want to hear that I'm advocating for "regicide" or "monarchomachism" or whatever, but I am warning you guys that you should really read between the lines and understand that there are certain unwritten rules which are more powerful than any written rule, and no matter how "sovereign" your monarch is, if he pushes the mob to desperation, if they will have nothing to lose, they will start to plan all kinds of revolutions and democratic reforms whether you like it or not.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7774

File: 3c74f630c2d06ce⋯.jpg (288.78 KB,869x1100,79:100,c56adae610b505c9dc3dfb71f8….jpg)

>>7768

>you create real tyranny

<anything I don't like is tyranny, like anyone else says!

<if you're not setting up an ancap paradise, you're a TYRANT

Hmph.

>I don't want to hear that I'm advocating for "regicide" or "monarchomachism"

>I am warning you guys

Nothing wrong with using monarchist lingo and re-inventing words. Pro-regicide people will be called monarchomachists.

>take advantage of the mob

Aristocrats had their advantages too.

>if they will have nothing to lose, they will start to plan all kinds of revolutions and democratic reforms whether you like it or not.

The Russian Empire and Tsar were the last Christian and absolute monarchy in Europe.

>>7755

People whine about advertising and excessive absolutism on this board, but sometimes I whine about the lolberg brigands. The first /monarchy/ IRL meetup had the friendo in the Mises Institute shirt. The 'about' page links Jordan Peterson in the anti-Egalitarian segment as well as Hayek in Audiovisuals, and there's a pretty large chunk of libertarians on this board. You even had Grace holding a Hans Hermann Hoppe book. If you really, really want to, go ahead and make a 'Stop thinking like absolutists' thread or something. You can participate and make banners. Contribute a bit more PDFs. Just don't look like contrarians and I'm sure it's cool.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7782

>>7774

lol did you even read my post?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7783

File: 6d51728fcf1471d⋯.jpg (51.12 KB,1280x720,16:9,6c646152.jpg)

>>7782

I'm content to say that everyone has a grip with policies these days. Or, even the lack thereof is considered 'tyranny' from them. I'm not sure with what you mean with Marxist ideas and while there were 'Enlightened Despots', surely a portion of people have mixed feelings on those. Like, Frederick the Great? Okay, maybe not ideal for libertarians, but a superstar in history. I cannot review all these 'Enlightened Despots' seriously because it's usually the Russian ones that are controversial like 'Peter the Great' and Catherine. Or a few Bourbon monarchs, but I think this board is always too harsh on the Bourbons… Heck, there are a far share today of monarchs with no less any power that flirt with Marxist ideas and that's a real shame.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7784

File: 5cfff9ef85f03ca⋯.jpg (25.91 KB,435x384,145:128,00888001.jpg)

This thread looks like a half-baked shitpost anyhow.

Your posts can go to O B L I V I O N

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7785

>>7784

I wouldn't be surprised if OP is that /liberty/ anon out to bait me

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7787

>>7784

>I disagree therefore it's a shitpost

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7791

>>7762

Sure, to transport this structure into the 21st century is obviously retarded.

>>7767

>Aesthetics are everything.

Says the animefag.

<Everything that offends some lolberg sensibilities is fascist

>I haven't heard this before.

No, everything that is fascist is fascist. The niggers who keep posting Mussolini getting blown by Greek statues? Obviously fascists.

>Constitutional monarch.

I am aware of that, but I do not think it matters for these purposes. We had mediocre monarchs during the absolutist era, too. Monarchs aren't made of a better clay just because they have more power.

>That's just your opinion, man.

It's the right opinion, yours is the wrong opinion, that's how we're different.

Societies that are not organic cannot be traditional. They are so worried about getting rid of the baggage of the past that they lose everything good, too, and end up constantly reinventing themselves. Look at any modern government. They have all survived like sixteen attempts at social engineering, and you can see what this has done to our morality and spirituality.

What I said amounts to little more than "respect tradition". How a self-described monarch can disagree with that is beyond me. The main difference between an absolutist king and a dictator is that the former has a tradition that constrains and guides him. Legally, they're much the same.

>That's what sovereignty is. Read absolutist theory and Jean Bodin. We were a thing in the 16th century. His book was published in 1576. Late Renaissance.

Not what I mean. I specifically mean reducing the populace to being "subjects". No absolutist ruler ever went this way, but fags on imageboards (or on discord, or on blogs…) often do so. They think of society as one large military parade, with a GDP that you can show off because they are also stuck in the quantitative mindset.

>>7768

A-tier post.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7798

File: 7aa8bc8c2b9600d⋯.png (695.49 KB,1280x721,1280:721,321412518296912579a13.png)

>>7791

>No, everything that is fascist is fascist.

The main point I try to prove with those is that even fascists are sometimes better than disgusting animals stuffing their snout around and squealing for regicide. I don't care for 'anti-authoritarian' values you've got. Honestly, I would be very content if other political opponents arrived on the board. I'm getting tired only having libertarians to poke.

>I am aware of that, but I do not think it matters for these purposes.

Yes, it does matter. You're whining about muh authoritarianism. Anything that doesn't appeal to your staple is 'authoritarian' and it's also 'totalitarian'. Even something as lame as constitutional monarchs offend you.

>Monarchs aren't made of a better clay

They are. They're just superior. Better than anything you've got there.

>Societies that are not organic cannot be traditional

My opinion is nothing is more inorganic and anti-traditionalist than the latest political hyena anarchist going around looking for the latest commune or covenant community to shelter in. Authoritarian values are traditional values. Authority, not anarchy, penetrates all aspects of life. Don't care for how anarchists appropriate the Middle Ages for their ends.

>The main difference between an absolutist king and a dictator is that the former has a tradition that constrains and guides him. Legally, they're much the same.

Oh, here we go. Yes, dictatorships are the force of all evil and only parliamentarians get a scratch on the back. Anarchist values don't matter to an authoritarian like me. All this anarchist stuff like anarchy balls, political compasses, and their dilemma against all authority upsets me.

>I specifically mean reducing the populace to being "subjects"

You sound like an indignant republican. Oh gosh, why aren't I 'citizen' than 'subject'. A sovereign is someone who rules from above, and you're beneath the sovereign power. You are no king. Get over it. I'm sure you'd prefer 'lord' or something else. You are subordinated not only to a monarch, but also in all other places in life.

>They think of society as one large military parade

Now we can't even have nice things like military parades. Anything that offends the anarchist sensibility like something as cool and awesome as a military parade – nope, that's authoritarian. Can't have a parade. Did you know that military parades aren't only a fascist thing? Most monarchists I know love military parades. Only people like YOU will see a military parade and quiver, "Th-this is authoritarian!" This makes me angry. We're not giving up the tradition of military parades because it upsets one anarchist. I would rather have a /monarchy/ of military parades than political compasses and dorks circlejerking about how libertarian the Middle Ages were.

>Sure, to transport this structure into the 21st century is obviously retarded.

What happened to muh tradition? Outdated?

>A-tier post.

You libertarians have your cup of tea, and I'll have my cup of tea.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7801

>>7798

The libertarian does not oppose authority of all types, for he is no rebellious leftist. He opposes unnatural authority, and wishes to restore that authority which presents itself in the natural order (expressed through the market). The monarchical order is closer to the natural order than most, but ultimately it is still a deviation. True authority needs not a monopoly on force to be effective, for the authority is self-evident. To regret coercion is not to reject hierarchy, but to embrace the only proper hierarchy, free of pretenders and distortions. The Patriarch of Moscow and the Dalai Llama both wield considerable authority despite their very limited power. The Prince of the Liechtenstein comes from closer to the ideal than most monarchs, for he is able to hold authority despite failing to tax his subjects. Monarchs are men. Intelligent, educated men, with an upbringing that makes them uniquely suited to ruling compared to others, buy only men nonetheless. If they were truly superior they could not have been overthrown.

And yes, dictators are among the worst types of ruler. Dictators are the epitome of republicanism, riding a wave of popular support and promises for gibs to power. They are the ultimate perversions of the natural order, more democratic than democracies.

You look at 'muh tradition' the wrong way. Traditionalism is not a blind endorsement of old methods because they are old. It is part signaling of in-group preference, part respecting your ancestors, and part learning the things that work from your ancestors. It gives societies inertia to better resist subversive outside ideas. It is not the resisting of change for the sake of resisting. Many parts of feudalism, such as its agrarian focus, would not be beneficial if reintroduced today, regardless of tradition.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7802

>>7755

It is shit tier to care about the philosophy that your government perpetuates. Absolutism is just fine.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7806

>>7783

You're being silly by accepting some bullshit label that democrats invented for you. If feminists bitch and whine about men being rapists, that doesn't mean we have to proudly accept being rapists just to spite a few mentally ill retards, same thing with the whole "tyranny" thing. Monarchs who use leftist tricks and schemes instead of ruling fairly have abandoned their God-given duty to their subjects and have become tyrants, they will eventually be punished with revolution and republic, not because I want it to be that way or anything, but because it's as much of a law as the law of gravity, you can try to ban gravity, you can complain about it all you want, but in the end if you jump off a ten-story building, you'll still break your neck.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7834

File: bb15df7467f8869⋯.png (122.7 KB,798x498,133:83,asd123.png)

Ancaps and Minarchists, aside from neocons, are literally the most annoying ideologues to be in message boards, I swear.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7836

>>7834

>If you don't believe in absolute monarchy then you're an ancap

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7877

I see a lot of squabbling between absolute monarchy peeps and feudal monarchy peeps.

This is a false dichotomy in a way. The monarchy in Russia was very strong

because nobles were always acting like spergs and plotting against their Tsar. The Tsars who acted decisively were immensely popular. The peasants realized that a constitution just was a piece of paper written by oligarchs, they would call for a strong Tsar to tear it up and put the oligarchs in jail.

My favorites are:

Vladimir the Baptiser

Andrei Bogalyubsky

Ivan III

Ivan IV the Terrible (in the older sense of that word)

Alexander II

Nicholas II

Peter and Catherine were lousy, but anyway…

>>7774

That anime broad looks like her arm is broken lel.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7878

>>7836

Absolute monarchy as compared to what? Feudal monarchy? Tribal monarchy?

Constitutional monarchy?

Constitutional monarchy is very shit tier imo.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7885

>>7836

That's not what I said dumbass. This can range from fascism to libertarian socialism to communism to monarchy. Ancaps and neocons are just annoying, full stop. Can't you realize there's more than two ideologies?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7888

>>7755

so you like feudalism op?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7977

>>7888

Meh. The ideal sounds good, but the historical situation was often different. On the one hand, kings had more power in the High Middle Ages than they are sometimes given credit for, but on the other, land ownership seems to have been more common than people seem to think. I'd still call myself a medieval enthusiast, the time had a lot of good to offer, the arts, the general spirit, and in some ways, it was even more libertarian.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7987

>>7977

there is great lecture on medieval roots of free market but it is in polish

do you know polish?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7989

>>7987

Sadly not, I don't know if I ever will but Polish doesn't sound like a bad choice. Can you send me a link or so? That's a topic that would interest me, and if I cannot read it myself, maybe I will in the future. Or if not, I can at least send it to Polefags.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.8007

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>7989

you are a burger arent you?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]