Monarchy is the own way

For 99% of human history 99% of governments have been monarchies. If that doesn't make you realize that monarchy is the natural human government I can't help you

Attached: louis_philippe.jpg (550x380, 232K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=PFb6NU1giRA
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Those institutions only raised to prominence due to economic nature of pre-industrial societies. Industrial societies are always directed by market forces and economy, so the political value of absolutism dissolves into irrelevancy as the value of consumers rise.

Explain Arab monarchies. Saudi Arabians consume just as much as the average american, but they are still absolutist. Why's that?

They never went trough industrialization and their economy is based around single export for the most part. Their institutions as reflected by their legal code and other factors is still very much feudal.

Seems pretty industrial to me. And they are trying to diversify their economy but the monarchy is still strong. Hows that?

Attached: skynews-riyadh-saudi-arabia_4147229.jpg (1096x616, 187K)

Also, majority of Saudi citizens live in poverty, so they are not really consumer based society as Chinese are for example. Even if their average consumption is similar to Americans their individual citizens purchasing power most certainly is not that.

gay

The gdp per capital of Arabia and Greece are about the same, they have purchasing power. Not to mention trade is freer there so goods cost less

Gdp per capita is not indicator of relative purchasing power of capita or even good indicator of economic power within social group. Looking at average wages, their regional purchasing power and society`s trade deficit vs trade surplus would be much more whole indicator.

Also your whole naturalism argument does not realistically apply since most of human history we have been hunter-gatherers living with far more egalitarian societies than those that came following the agricultural revolution.

Do you honestly think a tribal chiefdom is not a form of monarchy?

Im not going to look at the numbers right now, but the saudi monarchy shows no sign of cracking

A historical bully and his gang of thugs declares himself king by will of god.

People still fall for this trick today.

Saudis are facing the exactly same problems as Russia was in 1900`s. Inability to reform, inflexible military apparatus and weak institutions.

Monarchies are all but logical format of government, due to the rabid development of economic,political and social forces in the last 70 years. They are completely unable to adapt to these changes and reforms are too slow(for example movie theaters were still banned in Saudis until beginning of 2017).

Are you saying its a problem for saudi arabia to be conservative? In iran dancing is still technically outlawed. Reform into what? A neoliberal "paradise"?

Yes since they will be unable to diversify their economy unless they lax their economic laws and institutions to such level where they would even be able to compete in modern markets.

this still doesnt discredit their form of government though. There are plenty of republics with non-diverse economies. Most of south america for example

South american countries however have the resource potential for reforming that, they are not completely reliant on food imports.
Also most south-american countries with exception of Venezuela have diverse economies when it comes to exports. World is not going to stop consuming coffee by 2050, but oil? its going to become more irrelevant factor as sand-oil,fracking and other methods are going to increase the production in the west.

Monarchial rule sounds nice and all but as history has shown, for every one good ruler, you have a couple of bad rulers down the line. The uncertainty if the next ruler would be an insane psychopath plus the various power grabbing if the line is cut or the current heir is underage makes up the stability of these kind of government really bad

Electric cars on a large scale are still far off technology, its not going to be a problem any time soon. South America has a diverse economy but is still dirt poor, go figure

Dude all I have to say? Joffrey from Game of Thrones. That's why we don't have monarchies.

Saudis have nothing going for them after they run out of oil or when production on larger scale in Russia nor North America picks up.

Europe also used to be economic backwater of the world in early middle ages, when China was the leading producer of goods. Things change economically but Saudis will forever be limited by their geopolitical situation and lack of natural resources and agricultural land.

>dude why don't we just use the governing system from when literally everyone was a serf farmer that's how we should run the modern world

it's always hilarious to see AMERICANS being pro-monarchy

>t. historically and politically illiterate

Monarchies would work if the retards in power taught their kids how to properly rule

>King Arthur
Checkmate.

pickle rick!!

>Europe also used to be economic backwater of the world in early middle ages, when China was the leading producer of goods
No it wasn't, Asia was wealthier but Europe was second best, hardly a "backwater"

>dude why don't we use the governing system of long dead civilisations where everyone was a serf farmer that's how we should run the modern world
hurr durr

>value of consumers rise
>what is fascism
>what is a two-party democracy
>what is a plutocracy

The drive for centralized power was always there, the only difference was that monarchy was an openly sanctioned and socially beneficial form of it.
All other systems feed off a lie that needs to be sustained and fed to the populace to sustain themselves. Only a monarchy encapsulates an ideological vehicle of self-explanation that can make it work in whatever society you deem fit.

In terms of both economies of scale and economic diversity it was a backwater.

All of those things are far more able of reforming than Absolute monarchies.

Define "reforming". In terms of long-term political stability, monarchies have proven a sustainable mechanism, whereas all past republics and democracies are prone to dramatic reforms and changes following great upheavals.

You fail to recognize that a political system that allows plurality of votes will be overthrown or at least dominated by the strongest party given enough time. The corruption of the system is inevitable and there is no way to reform that away. Monarchy preserves nominal order as the "top" position is permanently occupied and a certain ideological tone is sustained. UK transitioned into a parliamentary democracy with less bloodshed than continental Europe and some of the more successful countries carry on being constitutional monarchies. however, these are prone to all the failings of normal democracies, which is why stronger monarch is required.

>economies of scale
Are you trying to say the era of monarchs granting monopolies didn't have economies of scale?
>economic diversity
Woah, pre-industrial societies are primarily agricultural, who would've thought. This is of course disregarding the fact that the height of European economic power and the free market coincided with the European monarchies still being intact, and also disregarding the fact that both of your criticisms applied to the rest of the world, Asia included (who by the way was also ruled by monarchs)

he seems to be of the dialectical materialism crowd

1

Attached: adamsfreedom.jpg (403x295, 32K)

2

Attached: adamsgovernment.jpg (640x300, 81K)

3

Attached: adamsliberty.jpg (564x423, 30K)

4

Attached: adamsliberty.png (512x384, 197K)

5

Attached: adamspowerbalance.jpg (450x450, 34K)

6

Attached: foundingfathers-vs-obama.jpg (564x669, 80K)

7

Attached: foundingfathersguns.png (652x3055, 2.77M)

Everyone needs to shut the fuck up and read Moldbug.

Traitors in need of a good rope

8

Attached: franklin-vs-obama.jpg (564x661, 69K)

>People have the right

People are sheep! They don't know what do do with their power!. Just look at the electoral turnout and tell me they are doing better than they did when monarchy was in place. Modern system is more corrupt because you do not have a central position responsible before the people but a clique of corrupt elites that style themselves to be new aristocracy and play musical chairs every 4 years.

You cannot have a republic without educated people and you cannot have educated people if you have to educate the masses - and by education I mean spending enough time to be at least cursorily knowledgeable in history, rhetoric, economy and some basic mathematics. that is impossible in modern democracy, ergo modern democracies are a fascade to placate the masses. True republic is impossible without an educated citizen class and true and stable government is impossible without monarchy altogether.

Why is it that americans and britbongs always are absolute retards when it comes to history? Only them spew hollywood inspired historicao falsehoods with that much confidence

>Britbong angry with Founding Fathers

>People are sheep! They don't know what do do with their power!.
You don't understand do you? People were dumbed down significantly years after years. The American people fought during the American Revolution were significantly aware of Bill of Rights than nowadays people. Which is why Founding Fathers said education is the most important to preserve Constitution.

Look at Switzerland. Look at how the people there protect their rights.
Speech related: youtube.com/watch?v=PFb6NU1giRA

Attached: franklineducation.jpg (470x246, 29K)

Lower barrier of entry to post on Sup Forums since it's a website for native English speakers, any idiot can post here so long as they speak English. Other Europeans have to learn English, which requires some amount of mental fortitude.

Switzerland also is really enriched at the moment

Best comment.

Attached: franklineducation2.jpg (564x697, 50K)

>For 99% of human history 99% of governments have been monarchies
Please tell me you don't believe this

Did you not see what I wrote about educated citizens and a republic? I am aware of it perfectly, which is why Switzerland works, as it is a small country with long history of political self-awareness, whereas America is a cultural, overpopulated mutant that degenerated in the short 200 years that it has been around.

Nope. It's the least enriched compared to most European countries. It's also because it's the center of global elites I guess. They don't shit where they eat.

Attached: jeffersoneducation.jpg (640x640, 111K)

'Nature' isn't beautiful, desirable or inevitable, you dumb hippie. We've circumvented what appears natural many times, including monarchy itself.

no it's not you fucking maghrebian subhuman

Tribes aren't governments

But it's not, there is already more than 25% foreigners in their country and that's not counting those who acquired swiss nationality. Granted a lot of them are wealthy sandniggers instead of the buttnaked algerian retards here but you would be wrong if you think switzerland is heaven

You didn't listen to what I said? American people were INTENTIONALLY be dumbed down over the years, by public school deterioration, by endless uneducated immigration, and by not teaching Founding Fathers' Federalist Papers and the importance and reasonings behind the US Constitution.

Talk to the Swiss guy yourself

Attached: Quotefancy-493351-3840x2160.jpg (3840x2160, 1.96M)

Take off your meme flag Slav

The swiss guy is a moron, official stats say that muslims make 5.5% of their pop

>natural
bronze age kings?
also, bonus points for the natural fallacy

Attached: 1521105835581.png (500x534, 54K)

Does it matter whether intentionally or not? It only serves to prove a point about stability of democracy. If you allow the government to shit in your kids brains, don't be surprised you get shit politicians later on.
There is nothing sacred about the constitution or founding fathers or past history as the country was artificially formed on basis of a wilful group of colonial elites hopped up on enlightenment philosophy. It does not have an ethnos or blood to unite it, it does not have the sanctity of tradition to uphold it and it does not have the mentality of self-preservation to govern itself well.

United States is a slave pit and you know who is the slave driver.

Compared to how much does your country have, ahmed?

Attached: washingtonnativism.jpg (1432x733, 867K)

What difference does that make, retard? Yeah they have less muslims than India too, hurray then no problem

Thanks to the faggoty liberal principles of egalitarianism the founding fathers you worship espoused they refuse to record racial data.

It actually does, the Founding Fathers wanted America to be white, except that future generations forgot about it.
And NO System is perfect. Not even US laws if people are corrupted.
It's much different. The less percentage it is, the more chance it can still preserve their heritage and not get outbred in the future. Unlike you France.
Actually pic related

Attached: foundingfathersimmigration2.png (932x1132, 1.8M)

>they wanted it to be white
Not an ethnicity. You can have English, German, French or Polish, but there is no such ethnicity as "American". The only way you could have had that was if early US only kept the English colonial population and only added Protestant English to it for assimilation, but nooo, apparently all mongrels of the world were allowed soon enough.
Stop with your fantasies, US was a delusion that only got away with itself because of the geographical distance from Europe.

Except the fact that France has a higher percentage of muslims doesn't change anything for Switzerland you damn idiot, what I was saying is that Switzerland is not a white man paradise. You retards can't escape the Sup Forums tier mentality and you always believe when someone criticizes a country it's for banter or something

It doesn't matter, they put freedom above tradition and paper above blood. Wanting only white people was already a cucked position compared to Europe, especially because they considered Jews to be white. While we're dropping America founding fathers quotes here's a good one
>"May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in the land continue to merit and enjoy the goodwill of the other inhabitants. While everyone shall sit safely under his own vine and fig-tree and there shall be none to make him afraid."
t. Washington

It's just like Voldemort in Harry Potter, guys.

lmao I too only have tv and movies as my only point of reference for anything.
So bad just like Joffrey

From a darwinian point of view, the long term success of a government actually depends on limiting resources spent on public control as much as possible.

The fewer resources dedicated to policing and controlling, means more resources dedicated to competing and succeeding. A population that is voluntarily in agreement with their government makes that government more competitive than one which must rule with an iron totalitarian fist. For example: Voluntary armies are dramatically more competitive than conscript armies.

The long term evolution of human governments will, for this reason, trend towards liberty and rule-by-assent.

>The long term evolution of human governments will, for this reason, trend towards liberty and rule-by-assent.

>What is China

>For 99% of human history 99% of governments have been monarchies
>for 99% of human history there has been war torture slaughter and genocide
pure coincidence goy, nothing to see here! dark ages werent that bad

Attached: merchant2.png (600x544, 155K)

A superintelligent AI would make a better ruler than a human king.

Attached: singularity1.jpg (2250x858, 402K)

The fact that Rome ruled the world until the Caesars and that the US took a little more than a century to become the superpower makes the republic the ideal system.

>If that doesn't make you realize that monarchy is the natural human government I can't help you
>muh naturalistic fallacy

That is hilariously wrong. The Empire was bigger than the Republic. And both were fucked over by republican reforms.

A failure-in-waiting

Except Rome didn't hit its golden age until emperors took hold and the size of the Empire doubled under the emperors as compared with republic, and imperial times lasted twice as long as the classical republic you keep idolizing. Stop with your burger fantasies about New Rome.

>exist as an autocracy of one kind or another for 5000 years
>failure in waiting

No, Societies aren't organisms, they don't evolve. Humans evolve, whichever society best supports pro-creation is the one that will "win out", liberty is totally irrelevant, most humans don't give a shit about liberty, the only ones that do are white Westerners and we're dying out

>For 99% of human history 99% of governments have been monarchies
Actually they have been tribal governments. Homosapiens have been around for 100-200 thousand years, by your logic this is the natural form of government and the past 3000 years is just an aberration.

What is natural for humans changes as conditions change. Tell me how many successful monarchies are there in societies where wealth is not based primarily off of rents and and land ownership?

Tribes aren't governments but they're still hierachies. Monarchies are just a way to upscale tribes through complex hierachies

Ok keep bashing America if that makes you feel better (pic related)
Are you retarded? My first argument is that Switzerland is still the LEAST cultural enriched than most European countries.
>they put freedom above tradition and paper above blood.
Because they can't stand monarchy and suppression. And their model obviously works, since America was the No. 1 country economically and militarily most of the time ever since American Revolution.

Attached: britain-child-abuse.png (660x949, 878K)

>Monarchies are just a way to upscale tribes through complex hierachies
The same can be said equally well for Republics and other forms of government

I'm not bashing, I'm just saying. I don't understand why you feel the need to be so defensive about them Janusz.

>since America was the No. 1 country economically and militarily most of the time ever since American Revolution.
That's quite incorrect, though. Economically only been a powerhouse since WW2 (started after the oil rush, but was a slow burn). Never been a military one.

Because what you said doesn't really make much sense. If you think of better system than America you should tell us.
>Economically only been a powerhouse since WW2 (started after the oil rush, but was a slow burn).
Wrong. (pic related)
>Never been a military one.
What?

Attached: american-school-of-economics.png (1125x436, 179K)

>Because they can't stand monarchy and suppression. And their model obviously works, since America was the No. 1 country economically and militarily most of the time ever since American Revolution.
lrn history nigger. America was an irrelevance until European power was decimated by WW1 & 2
Yes, they function in the same way as a monarchy except the power is hidden and lied about, it's like Soviet Communism in that sense, in reality humans naturally create hierarchical societies but this goes against what "should be" according to ideological dogma. If we look at the republics of old like the Roman republic we see the same thing, a hereditary aristocracy naturally arises along with a class/caste system. Monarchy is just honest about what it is

>doesn't make much sense
Because your limited worship of stars and stripes renders you mentally unable to comprehend anything other than americana fetish. Take off that meme flag and lets see where you are really from.

>anything better
I already did?

>What?
As in, it's never meant much militarily.

>muh kings were just bullies

pleb. never going to make it.

See pic related >I already did
point me to it

All these different systems ensure that those with the wealth and power dominate the political system. In a capitalist economy wealth is too unstable and in flux for monarchies to function.

How many stable societies are there in history where the people with the money did not have the power.

>Point me to it
If you can't read, then obviously you won't understand what's written, no matter where I point you, Janusz.

Ok then. God Bless the Queen and Mohammed!

Good goyim
just give us all your money and we will just consolidate all power under ourselves.
Also only our family and friends will be able to succeed us.
Shalom

Attached: 1516975549601.jpg (720x960, 59K)

>In a capitalist economy wealth is too unstable and in flux for monarchies to function.
Monarchs tend to be funded by taxes so that's irrelevant.
>Monarchs boot the Jews out time after time
>Republics let them all in
Oy vey support "freedom" goy