>read Animal Farm
>realize people will always be susceptible to manipulation like that, no matter how many times you force them en masse to read the book
>The proper way to understand the book is how to rule people, not to be aware of how you are ruled
>if you aren't a benevolent Napoleon, someone else will be a Napoleon, and may be a malevolent one
Why is Monarchy so rooted in reality, Sup Forums?
Something to do with trees, monkeys, snakes and the hierarchy.
I'm quite interested in monarchy. How is monarchy superior to democracies and republics?
Easy mode: How are monarchies superior to democracies
Hard mode: How are monarchies superior to republics?
>Why is Monarchy so rooted in reality, Sup Forums?
its literally in our genes. Evolution dictates that a person give the best to their kids so that their genes carry on. What better to give to your family line than a whole fucking country.
That being said it lead to a bunch of inbred retards if you don't manage the gene pool.
>muh ancestors
>muh hierarchy
>muh rituals
Nothing more than a cult of boot licking zombies. Man should only bow to God.
>democracies
Firstly, you must realize that the majority of people are born with a default mode of operation -their human instincts and emotions.
It takes education and suppression of these in order to refine yourself.
tl;dr Billions aren't born with Meditations by Marcus Aurelius already implanted in their brains.
This means once you educate yourself, you have become an educated minority. It is then your duty to rule over those who are uneducated relative to you because of natural hiearchy.
You may ask
>But isn't democracy then A-OK?
No, because educated men have better judgement than these uneducated people I spoke of earlier. The latter are easily swayed and influenced, while the former are less so.
Democracies are just tyrannies of the majority who in reality are controlled by who can control the people the best using manipulation. Humans will always be manipulated, because as I said, they are born with a default mode of operation.
>Republics
Men form tribal groups all the time. The elite form secret societies, fraternities, etc. which act as aristocratic factions. They then groom their politicians to pretend to act in the interest of the country when their actual loyalty lies with their faction.
This then falls back onto he who can manipulate the most people. He is then seen as unaccountable because it's the people's fault, never the manipulator's fault.
With a monarch, you have a young man trained since childhood to manipulate and rule, but for one faction - the royal family.
Out of all these secret factions, he's given the loudest voice in the room and can write all talking points for the aristocrats underneath him.
The monarch is also easily held accountable compared to a bureaucracy.
The most redpilled form of rule is a king who must prove himself into battle to become ruler, could you imagine following your king into battle like alexander the great?
monarchy is never being restored no matter how often you jack off over the idea
Yeah, we won't have a monarch, but we'll always have lords and nobles ruling over us and now we have no centralized authority for them to fear.
Again, let me emphasize that last point about how rich people STILL form modern forms of aristocratic ruling families.
Monarchy is superior to all else. Monarchs are raised from birth to lead, their one purpose in life is to love and lead their country and people. No petty squabbling between parties, not lying politicians, just a King/Queen doing what is best because they know what is best.
lol his dad was King before he was
>a king who must prove himself into battle to become ruler, could you imagine following your king into battle like alexander the great?
The decentralization and dispersion of forces in modern warfare means higher leaders do not physically engage in battle. A good general makes a good political authority because they are good managers, not because they lead from the front.
Good cuck goy
Monarchy is a good way to keep the people united regardless ideology in democratic countries. In an authoritarian/totalitarian one party state monarchy wouldn't be necessary but could be kept as tradition.
What I don't like is a king with power. Of course some of them could be wise rulers, but after years of inbreeding you only get retards.
shut the fuck up. the reality is that you have to be ruled by somebody. better a monarch who is publically acknowledged than a bunch of shadowy cabals who will never be held accountable by anyone.
The monarch can also be used as a puppet like any other king of leader. This is a problem of the current system rather than the government type.
*kind
A good King is maybe the best form of government,
But when a wicked king rules the people howl.
And that is the problem with monarchies or dictatorships.
It's that you only choose the first one.
fuck off monarch.
imagine paying taxes for someone to live like a king and not work all day.
yeah but the king was usually mixed in with his posse of the top elites. Well equipped, highly disciplined, battle hardened heavy cavalry of death pubstomping through formations would be a sight to see
Nothing more than a cult of bootlicking zombies.
Men should bow to no one.
Slurpy slurpy cuck boy. Can't stand you foreign cummies drinking monarcuck scum. A Monarch is raised from birth to look after his own interests and the interests of his family, nothing else. We've been cured by foreign lords for many a century, maybe if the King was of blood with the people he ruled over, but not like this. Monarcucks are disgusting, limp wristed, weak willed "people", worse than fucking communists.
Thats why portuguese monarchy was superior, the noble council always had to choose a portuguese king.
>raised from birth to be a spoiled little cunt
Fixed