You have 10 seconds to explain why you don't support monarchism

You have 10 seconds to explain why you don't support monarchism.

Hardmode: without saying Inbred

Prince Harry with a nig.

1776 FUCK YOUR CUNT QUEEN NIGGER

Because fuck them, that’s why.

Last time Tzar's actions caused communism

Do you want to trust your future to a potential racemixed heir?

But I do support monarchism. It's modern monarchies that suck.

Royal families are parasites.

the rich are your enemy brothers...

because by what right do they think they can rule us?

Try to take the Best for the Job, not someone whos just been born into the right family.

>not implying that we choose always the best to do the Job, but it's worth a try

in theory i support monarchism. in practice i dont because every single human is a flawed retard unworthy of the burden of leadership. as humans are now anarchism/libertarianism is the only way forward. civilization was a mistake, we are like toddlers handling a loaded gun. trump having the nuke codes is this nightmare scenario manifest

I think monarchy is better than presidentialism.

Do you think they still take baths together?

>not Jews
Found the rabbi.

Depends on the monarchy.
The Spanish monarchy seems to be good.

>Do nothing to keep the colonies and preserve the Empire
>Scared the shit out of The Green March
>Protect those accused of corruption inside the family

You cannot be more wrong.

Shame on you!

I don't think anyone is entitled to anything on the backs of your parents or name.

Individual action and effort should be the only thing to award merit.

Kings/Queens require kingdoms meaning provinces must align with a king/queen to be a part of it and well if you don't agree you can either kill the family or exault your own king/queen. It will only encourage separation and multiple kingdoms.

I'm talking about the current monarch. Your King seems to be very good.

>having a kang

Shiiiiiiet, no thanks

>It will only encourage separation and multiple kingdoms.
and thats bad, because?

Felipe is as awful as his father, but the one who will inherit the crown (pro tip: not Felipe's daughters) is the effin worst.

Because royal lolis are too much for muh dick.

A man may become King by being a great leader, but that is no guarantee that his grandchildren will be able to do the same.

Pretty sure you have a kang family.

How is he awful? He does his job very well.
And the one who will inherit the throne is his daughter, not Froilan.

>constitutional monarchy with firearms allowed for private ownership
What's wrong with this?

I just don't want Froilan to be king. Spain is fucked up and Froilan as king would be the apocalypse.

Because they grow up spoiled and disconnected with the people. A person should be selected upon merritt to govern a people, not family status.

merit* wtf is a merritt autocorrect?

civil wars are kind of bad

pro tip: you are retarded if you think leonor is not inheriting the crown

Reminder that Liz shits on the dotard

The Spanish succession allows women to inherit.

Have to pay taxes for them to breath and do nothing while most have to work their asses off.

Do I get to be the king? No? Monarchism sounds kind of shitty then.

>one ruler does a stand up job ruling his country
>therefore all his descendants deserve to be in charge
Sounds nice if you're Royalty. But if you're a commoner in a society where there is zero chance of you being in charge, doesn't that make you a cuck?

Look, it goes Charles, Wills, George, Charlotte then Harry.

Hes never gonna be king.

Divine. Right?

Royal families are all related to each other and thus are more loyal to each other than to nations they rule over.
Only way to ensure that monarchy would truly work would be to do something like good roman emperors did and make the king adopt a child and rise it to be his replacement in a controlled envioremtn with no outside influence.

Thankfully Harry and his future mongrels won't be in line to succeed. Catherine may not come from nobility, but at least her heirs with William are fucking White.

Monarchists want Monarchy because they think they're going to get Henry V.

9 times out of ten they get Henry VI or Robert Mugabe.

Catey is also pretty awesome in the middle england sense.

It relies too much on chance. For every Ptolemy or Darius there are 10 useless Hapsburgs, at least.

Divinity is a lie

Mugabe was a poor guy that got elected. He was not a dynastic monarch. Henry VI is not known as an average monarch, but as a pretty bad one.

Most Habsburgs were actually decent (at least the Austrian ones).

The U.K. is a fucking blight on Monarchism. Completely meme-tier while unironically being fully compromised by Jewish bankers.

Not worthy of an ounce of respect, unlike Denmark who has been ruled by the same family since the Viking age

>Not being an anarcho-monarchist
Get on my level peasant.

Are birth defects side effect of divine intervention?

Welfare for the rich

Everything relies on chance, though.
That's just the way the world works.

Yes. Take the case of Canada. Their head of state is Queen Elizabeth. Their prime minister is Justin Trudeau. Is the elected one better than the one that inherited?

>Cartoonish view of Monarchy based on modern monarchies that become parodies because of their irrelevance

they're both so damn cute

Just being born in a certain family doesn't mean you're fit to run a country.

I have great respect for Kate. As I understand it she comes from a long line of respectable, hard-working businessmen and from what I've seen her charity work is focused almost exclusively on schools, nurseries, and military cadet programs as opposed to stupid political bullshit or gibs. She's a far better match for a future King of England than a fucking tawdry Californian liberal whore.

We Americans may not want anything to do with the Monarchy, but it's in our own interest that it continues to be successful and stable.

I'd be happy to support the Infanta. On my lap. Playing bouncy bouncy.

i don't want inbreds to tell me how to live

How good were elections in picking who would run your country the last 16 years?

This.

Democracy is arguably the worst form of pure government. It is the least stable and degenerates to dictatorship very quickly.

Insofar as a Democracy doesn't collapse almost immediately, it is because of Aristocratic / and/or Monarchic elements of the government.

Monarchy = president
Aristocratic = House / Senate / Supreme Court

I support monarchism, but you have to admit that its greatest flaw is the increased risk of foreign entanglement brought on by marriage and more intimate politics between leaders.
I support imperialism whole-heartedly

>claims to be traditionalist
>supports delusional socialist republican dictatorships instead of traditional monarchical power-structure

Niggers.

eat another bluepill cunt

That really isn’t the point I was making. There are historically a lot more mediocre and terrible rulers than there are great ones. This is why the great ones stand out so much. You are not just fighting against random genetic chance (is someone smart enough to rule) but also social chance (is someone of reasonable moral character despite probably being worshipped as god since birth).

The hard-coded division between the noble and commoner classes leads to a disconnect, where the ruling class no longer cares about the good of the nation, because the nation of commoners isn't viewed as their people. That and the intermarriages between nobility of different countries accentuates the gap when they're not even ethnically the same as the people they rule over any more.

Now, I'm NOT arguing for democracy/republicanism/etc here. Because many of the problems I listed above also occur in democracies, to an even worse degree (see: jews controlling everything, de facto ruling class of shabbos goyim dynasties like the Bushes and Clintons, etc). However, I do believe what I listed above are valid concerns, and I don't like how in monarchies, the people tend to just be viewed as subhuman peasants to be used as pawns in the game of chess between the different nobles in and between countries.

IMO the best solution would be to have a hereditary (or ability to adopt) successor for the king/emperor/whatever himself, but that the rest of the government doesn't have a hardline distinction between nobility and commoners. Now, the best people will naturally rise up genetically to make a de facto high caste, but I don't think it should be hard-coded. Except for the king himself. And the king should be able to marry anyone within the nation, with a firm rule of NO MARRYING ANYONE FROM ANOTHER ETHNIC GROUP OR COUNTRY. No bullshit political marriages that result in shit like greeks ruling over england or germans ruling over russia.
Also 2nd amendment so that the people can always rise up if a monarch is being shitty, so he can be replaced by a better one if need be. The ultimate check of power.

tldr: monarchy (and dictatorships, etc) is probably the most stable form of government we know so far, but I do have some minor things I think need to be changed.

Start counting and let me know when you get to infinity.

We need a Shadman version of this duo anf his father

>Shadman

Yeah but why not go with a system that at least has some form of mertiocracy built in as opposed to relying on one family to produce great leadership? Imagine if John DuPont was ruler of America? Insane weirdos holding vast amounts of power is one reason why Europe toiled for so long. The rise of the Italian city state and the competition and meritocracy it brought with it literally drove the renaissance. Same with the warring states of Germany later on. Once Bismark united Germany under 1 ruler it started the downfall of western culture through the destruction, physical, economic and social that arose out of WWI.

M

...

Are elected governments any better? Are the characteristics that lead people to be elected the same that lead to better rulers?
Tell me about Trudeau.

Also, if you look at the new generations of "crown princes and young kings", they look decent. Prince William seems to be a very decent guy.

Where does the monarch draw his authority? From his wealth, how is that anything else than turbo consumerism?

Retired soldier marries actress kek.

Monarchies are powerless right now.
How well is our culture doing?

>A "real" monarchy has never been tried.

>Shadman

>Absolute monarchy doesn't exist

Our culture didn't start going downhill until monarchies started WW1 for no reason.
>Austrian Archduke purposely gets himself killed
>Austria chimps out and pretty much demands Serbia agree to annexation
>Russia backs Serbia
>Wilhelm being a lazy retard says to back Austria unconditionally and then goes on vacation
>Austria refuses to negotiate anything simply laying out its ultimatum
>When Wilhelm reads the ultimatum even he finds it retarded
>Still backs Austria

This is a really bad example as Justin Trudeau is a textbook example of the dangers of inherited political power.

>with ANY other last name Justin would be running a failing hipster coffee shop

Tell me more about how monarchies are to be blamed for what happened in the late 60's or how they can be blamed for the degeneracy that is going right now.

He got elected.

The Divine Right of Kings you pleb. Monarchy is nothing without God. The order of hierarchy is God's system, there can be no greater system of government than a benevolent wise absolute ruler.

If you're not religious then of course you would never believe in monarchy, so you need not reply.

Notice how the top of every crest will feature a cross.

It was the intervention of the US that caused the Treaty of Versailles.

>Europe would've fought itself to a stalemate otherwise.
>Germany wouldn't have unleashed Lenin out of desperation.

Blame Woodrow Wilson if anyone.

I am not a Pagan.

Snobs on welfare. Useless.

You realize countries can have defense pacts and treaties without being monarchies, right?

I do not support Monarchy for the same reason I do not support welfare. Having a group of useless parasites living off of the hard earned money of the tax payer is not constructive. I believe in freedom. I believe in earning titles and positions based on merit, and not blood lines. Most of all I do not like monarchy because 1776.

Source?

harry is illegitimate diane cheated

I do support monarchism. But it's dead, Jews killed it.

>precisely because of his family pedigree. There are better examples you could use that don’t literally help prove the case against your argument.

See:
These prevalence of these cartoonish views of monarchy are great evidence against democracy, ironically.

Who the fuck is the king and why should I follow him? The only one above me is God

He didn't inherit the position. He got it via elections.

>t. Napoleon Bonaparte

The only monarchy I support is God's kingdom. Human are dumb.

British women are disgusting. I don't agree with his decision but I understand it

why the fuck should i? this country was founded in a revolution to get away from (((kings))).