/monarchy/ - STOP THINKING LIKE REPUBLICANS

>>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.

>>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.

>>7774

lol did you even read my post?

>>7784

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

>>7784

>I disagree therefore it's a shitpost

>>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.

>>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.

>>7755

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

>>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.

>>7834

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

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.

>>7836

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

Constitutional monarchy?

Constitutional monarchy is very shit tier imo.

>>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?

>>7755

so you like feudalism op?

>>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.

>>7977

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

do you know polish?

>>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.

>>7989

you are a burger arent you?