Republican democracy is almost as bad as communism

The only good system is Absolute Monarchy.

ok Mr. LARPer

Tempered by an occasional assassination, yes.

Brazil is full of retarded monkey people.

Hi redit.

says Tyrone Andre Abdul from Detroit

I wish I could say that is not true.

If only you knew how bad things really are.

Corruption is the biggest enemy of a state

The best system in monarchy with absolute respect for private property rights. Basically the only function of the government would be the protect these private property rights. Essentially it's monarchist libertarianism.

Republican democracy is indeed garbage and leads to increased taxation, inflation, more wars, redistribution of income and social decay. A public government is shit because it means they can do pretty much anything in the pretense of the "greater good".

If there is a monarchy it is in their interest to allow the citizens to be as free as possible in order to be as productive as possible. With a privately run monarchy, the monarch will be concerned for the long term interest of the nation in order to keep their funds and family wealthy. And there can be no pretense that taxes, for anything other than protection of personal property rights, is anything other than theft.

Soon

And how would this hypothetical benevolent monarch enforce these "private property rights"? Or protect the nation from foreign invasion, for that matter? By dipping into his own private funds to pay for everything from a police force to a robust military? Even if by some miracle he didn't go broke during some crisis, the odds of his successor being equally selfless and benevolent are pretty much nil. Source: history.

The ultimate red pill: democracy is soft communism: read Hoppe, Land, and Evola.

The monarch would still collect taxes for police and military. That's why the monarch wants to respect their private property rights of the citizens, so they can be productive and make as much money as possible for taxation. Also, in this case there is no benefit for the monarch to cause inflation and thus the economy would rely on a currency with a solid value such as gold.

Yeah, it is. Take care of your people.
Your future doesn't seem any better. :(

>333

Landian triples say you are right. Adding: neocameralism is even better because competition between private governments futher incentivizes meritorious governance.

>increased taxation, inflation, more wars, redistribution of income
u wot
source on these, sounds very bullshit considering we are living in the most peaceful era, and the average pleb is wealthier than ever
>inflation is a bad thing
k
>social decay
well that happened in every era of history, i think you re a little delusional about the lifestyle of the older european cultures

monarchy usually turns shit because it's hard to supervise

that leads to excessive bad decisions made one after another by faggots, and also causes massive corruption

for a monarchy to be good it needs too many unstable factors controlled, and it will likely fail

it has an advantage of being a very powerful government that will bloom under the circumstances, but that advantage is also its own curse, because if shit goes downhill it is beyond fucked

>inb4 id
>Shil

>democracy is soft communism

Maybe as Marx envisioned it (worker-run councils ruling the country and industries for temporary periods, with new councils voted in to replace them every so often).

But in practice, no "communist" nation has every actually operated this way. The revolutionaries jealously guarded their power and kept it tightly concentrated in the hands of one or a few. All they really achieved was fascism and oligarchy with a fake leftist wrapper.

I've often found it amusing how a hyper-capitalist society with no checks and balances would be virtually indistinguishable from such communism. Think about it: in communism, industry and government are all run by the same entity and the will of the people is ignored. In hyper-capitalism, the government is primarily run by of captains of industry who act in their own self-interest and institute policies that benefit only a small few. The difference between the two is ultimately negligible.

Absolute?
That's a banker circlejerk

>based Brasil Empire
>people decide to be cucking idiots
>overthrow the monarchy
>become a shit nation in less than a decade
How and why you fucking huemonkies

> see retarded title
> click thread to drop some political redpills
> see 3rd world flag
> hide and exit thread

>communism
>state

Brazilians are a bunch of cucks.

>Brasil
>Anything good

Pick one

>Van der Bellen

And nothing of value was lost

HUE

>monarchy with absolute respect for private property rights
Get a load of this asshole right here

>Implying the people would willingly subjugate themselves
You are one dumb nigger

when monarchs wage war its just for tangible things like land or resources, and they have to consider the lives of their soldiers in a cost-benefit analysis.

wars under republican democracies are more about ideological wars and thus turn into total wars, they are far more deadly than wars under monarchies and military service tends to be mandatory.

World War 1, at the time the deadliest war in history was waged partly to dismantle the concept of monarchies across the world and establish democratic republicanism as the dominant ideology

Is it really so hard to believe? Since people are more productive when they make mutually beneficial deals and contracts with each other (i.e. the government isn't involved), is it to the monarch's interest, in the interest of gaining wealth, to be solely concerned with protecting private property rights. You want productive, morally upright citizens? Then a monarch would stop subsidizing the wastrels and the lowlifes and avoid creating a welfare state

I agree Monarchism is better than Democracy. A Monarchy wouldn't replace their subjects with millions of shitskin 3rd worlders for votes or cheap labour. Their would be less because a Nations best interest is also in the interest of the Monarch.

The tripfag Royalist Monarchist can probably explain it better than I can.

Also with a monarchy, the people know who to blame if the person in power starts being corrupt.

LMAO