Fuck the French Republic

based kill the nobles and rape their wives

Attached: 1403680295199.png (879x749, 930K)

Only immigrants and retard are against the monarchy.

Yes but also
FUCK COMMUNISTS
FUCK SOCIALISTS
FUCK FASCISTS
FUCK SUFFRAGETTES
FUCK MULTICULTURALISTS
FUCK LGBTQAIXYZ+
FUCK YELLOW VESTS
FUCK NIGGERS
FUCK MUSLIMS
FUCK KIKES
BUT MOST OF ALL -and I cannot stress this enough- FUCK GERMANS

Attached: 220d50b8d00bf57d1b7b1bc9c66a4fcac0d51a3c[1].jpg (487x498, 78K)

>only immigrants and retards are against servitude
Galactic brained post

That's based
France is a catholic monarchy

Going from that logic, killing monarchists was perfectly based when France became a republic

FUCK bretons
FUCK occitans
FUCK corsicans
FUCK basque

Attached: Flag_of_France_(XII-XIII).svg.png (1920x1920, 112K)

Found the nigger.

Minority groups only started getting fucked when France became a republic. You really don't know your stuff.
France only began to implement extensive assimilation policies under the Third Republic. Look up "Vergonha".

>One of the most horrific episodes in the French Revolution was the murder of Joseph Foulon de Doué, minister of King Louis XVI's finances, whom the common people considered an enemy. After the storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789, de Doué had the good sense to realize he needed to get out of town. But he was discovered outside of Paris, and peasants made him march barefooted back to the city.

>The humiliating march back to Paris was only the beginning of de Doué's problems. A large mob apprehended the former finance minister and decided to take justice into its own hands. They first set out to lynch de Doué, so they tied a rope around his neck and attached it to a lamppost. But the rope broke, so they tried again, and again, and again - three times the rope broke, since it could not support de Doué's overweight body. Finally, the crowd relented and decided a beheading would have the same result. So they struck off de Doué's head, stuffed his mouth with straw, and displayed his severed head on a pike.

Why straw? Commoners throughout Paris alleged that, when told the poor throughout France were hungry, he responded that they should eat straw. The straw was a final middle finger to a man despised by commoners.

based

>t. negative chinned loser

Poor rants. Get the fuck off my country.

What country? This is the French Republic, and you're a monarcuck. Go live in the Channel Islands or something

Robespierre didn't go far enough

Attached: 1p0rfkillag11.jpg (220x294, 16K)

The country is literally named, shaped by the monarchy. Republic brought nothing but the destruction of the kingdom and the country. During the ancien régime we had hundreds of privileged fucks sleeping on peasants wealth. Under Republic's régime ? Thousands. If you're a real french you're pro monarchy, simple as.

Robbie wisely acknowledged that war with the Austrians was a bad idea: war is something that makes strong regimes stronger and weak (young) regimes weaker. Alas war was unavoidable and desperate times require desperate measures.

>More people becoming wealthy through their own labor is a bad thing
Shoo shoo bootlicker

Attached: 1480035006613.jpg (599x602, 99K)

Except it wasn't the case you dimwit, the republic is an awful jacobin bureaucratic hell and I tell you that under an enlightened monarchy, reforms wouldn't be that much of a pain as it is nowadays.

The monarchy had a really consistent track record of running the economy into the ground, gotta hand that to you

Attached: ob_8b2697_104544-1386693525-honore-daumier-louis.jpg (650x885, 172K)

What should have been

Attached: Angevin_Empire_1190.svg.png (800x545, 157K)

Fuck France, regardless if monarchy or republic

Attached: 1557982059799.png (1000x1000, 181K)

Shall I remind you our current private/public debt ?

My ancestors...

>yes I want to be cucks under a monarch, I hate being represented!

Attached: 1553643994705.jpg (647x831, 110K)

There were a parliament you spastic mutt.

>oh yes I love that half the parilament can only be appointed by the fucking monarch, it's my favorite!

Attached: 1535154438595.png (540x599, 53K)

>Everything would be awesome if we had a really awesome monarch!
Ok, how do you guarantee the monarch is awesome and not shit? Let me put it like this: nobody organized a revolution against Louis XIV for a very good reason.

A parliament that the king consistently veto'd and sabotaged in hopes of letting foreign armies invade and disband them. Much like how the Patriots in the Netherlands were overthrown by a Prussian invasion on the behalf of the Orangists.

What is constitutional monarchy?

three

>having your king be cucked to a piece of paper
no thanks

Lafayette was sent by the crown, french kingdom literally paid for your retarded delegate/great electors system. Go choke on a dry foreskin please.

>Yes, I want a Kenyan to represent me

Attached: President_Barack_Obama.jpg (2687x3356, 1.2M)

The parliament wasn't a legislative body. It was purely judiciary, and while its rulings were considered legal precedents, legislative power was still very much in the hands of the King and his court. Also its members weren't elected, so it represented no one.
How can you call yourself a monarchist and not know this basic fact?

>noooo stop you have to pay our debts even though those debts were owed to the king that we killed!

Based, i always hated that gay shit.

Strawman, you moronic retard if you want to seem bright, act bright.

Real memelord there. How does it feel, no foreskin ? Not a bit dry downhere ?

Parliament would obviously have evolved in the better. Way better that the one we have where simpletons play on the tablet and browse facebook during sessions, not even kidding.

Better that than missing the industrial revolution under Bourbon restoration.

>The kingdom would've been better in a hypothetical alternative timeline in which Louis XVI wasn't grossly incompetent.
Yeah, duh. If the French kings were more competent, managed the country better and tackled corruption then there wouldn't have been a revolution in the first place.

There is no strawman. I just explained why the parliament was non-representative by nature. If you disagree, then explain how a non-democratic, non-elective, judiciary institution represents anyone at all.

>no fuck the French

>Un parlement est, sous l'Ancien Régime dans le royaume de France, une cour de justice d'appel, dite aussi improprement cour souveraine, puis cour supérieure à partir de 1661, qui rend la justice au nom du roi, dans un territoire délimité. Le plus haut degré de juridiction était le Conseil du roi, véritable cour souveraine, qui pouvait soit être saisi par le justiciable, soit se saisir d'office de toutes les causes pendantes devant une juridiction du royaume
fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parlement_(royaume_de_France)
Do you actually think this has anything in common with the modern-day parliament? Please educate yourself, this is worrisome

*snikt*

Attached: image.jpg (408x408, 45K)

No where near the same coal reserve as belgium/rhineland/britain ones. And I don't say that the monarchy was perfect, I assumed that we were aware of the failure when the king has been beheaded on top of the crowd. Though I think that France needs a monarchy or it will disappear, and it's happening right there.

We're talking about something that happened 300 years ago. But ok, if you think that your anachronism is consistant then godspeed.

And you dig more in fellony. Don't reply to me again, the yank implied a non representation of the people, nothing more. I could answer that our current representative democracy is a scam (it really is) and on the same level of fallacy of the old parliament.

Never said so, go suck a dick somewhere else you poof.

Based
The "enlightenment" was a mistake

>And you dig more in fellony. Don't reply to me again, the yank implied a non representation of the people, nothing more. I could answer that our current representative democracy is a scam (it really is) and on the same level of fallacy of the old parliament.
Except you don't even know what the parliament was under the Ancien Régime, you're not qualified to talk about this

>vive la république millénaire oui oui hon hon hon this is democracy hon hon hon

Attached: 64818471.jpg (644x322, 28K)

You literally said "the Ancien Régime's parliament was better because they're not using their phones like in the current one". You think they're the same institution, showing how uneducated you are about the monarchy despite being a self-proclaimed monarchist.
Utterly embarrassing.

You have literally no clue itt, not a single time I list the power of the said parliament. Bullshitting again. You're a rhetorical baby.

You literally compared the Ancien Régime's parliament to the current one just because they share a name, stop embarrassing yourself lol

>You literally said "the Ancien Régime's parliament was better because they're not using their phones like in the current one".
Literally not. You should verify the definition of the word "literally", and learn to not make points out of your imagination, it's fucked up and non consistan.
I don't read the rest because it's probably as mediocre as it is previously.

>Parliament would obviously have evolved in the better. Way better that the one we have where simpletons play on the tablet and browse facebook during sessions, not even kidding.
Embarrassing lmao

Yes I compared them, but I didn't listed their power. That doesn't mean that I've supposedly said anywhere that the parliaments where the same, it was a proof for the mutt aknowledging the presence of a popular authority. Every other claim is up to your fucked up imagination.

[standard honhoning] [lmao/lol]
Bed time for you.

The coal was readily accessible enough to jumpstart a potential industrialization, the issue was political in nature. The nobility wasn't having any potential bourgeois getting a chance of challenging their hegemony again. Look up early attempts at industrialization like Pierre-François Tubeuf.

I don't believe France's survival requires another restoration, quite the contrary actually. I completly fail to see how that would help, care to explain ?

If you actually knew what the old parliament was, you wouldn't have used it as an example because it's the literal opposite of a popular authority. Its members were chosen by the king and parliament offices were hereditary(fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office ).
You're backpedaling so hard lmao~

>The coal was readily accessible enough to jumpstart a potential industrialization, the issue was political in nature
Speculation. I agree on the fact that a political move would've enhanced the industrialization (off topic but it's the same for the naval fleet, the lack of budget in this field gave GB a corridor and we had the potential to outrun them by far) , but not as efficient as brits/german ones, and I suppose that's your standard, I might be wrong.
>I don't believe France's survival requires another restoration, quite the contrary actually. I completly fail to see how that would help, care to explain ?
France more than ever needs a solid representation, a common goal, a big ruler, something that'd resolve partially the "crisis of sense" defined accurately by Drac. You can try to reform as you want, it's the whole machinery which must be uploaded, it's required, we're sinking and mesurettes won't change anything.

I've not even said which parliament at first place. But I see you're taking pleasure out of your entitlement, keep on this way if it's your business eh.

Fuck the French Anything

Thread theme: youtube.com/watch?v=zqzhC8ydk3Q
Fuck both monarchists and republicans. Huguenots were right.

>I've not even said which parliament at first place. But I see you're taking pleasure out of your entitlement, keep on this way if it's your business eh.
Would be a nice argument if there was more than one parliament in the Ancien Régime. Just educate yourself mate, shouldn't be that hard since you seem rather interested in the subject

Reminder that French unitarism is the real cancer. Paris is a cesspit and France should either balkanize or federalize

When I replied to the mutt I did not mentionned ancien régime and I surely know that a pit of knowledge like you knows the restauration very well. Checkmate, republiscum, have a tight sleep.

Fuck any non-french people

What are “French people”?

The mutt obviously wasn't referring to the restoration himself, but alright then. Didn't think you were such a fan of constitutional monarchy considering you were advocating the Ancien Régime here: .

British

So what kicked off the French Revolution in the first place?

Aaahhhhhh, the sweet taste of Victory, thanks to God. Vive le roy.

Budget wasn't the only issue, we also failed hard at building a decent marine tradition, and we had a large disavantage in shipbuilding compared to the brits, mostly due to issues with sourcing suitable wood ressources. That plus a lack of good natural harbours for a large sailing fleet.

Regarding the crisis of sense, I don't see any modern monarchy managing to solve that. We need to go beyond the lack of values conveyed by modern capitalism, but our elites are failures, and there's no contenders to replace them. If any salvation comes, it'll have to raise from the bottom.

Starvation, debt, lack of income due to utterly moronic policies, the nascent bourgeoisie amassing political and economial power, Louis XIV basically disarming the nobility and turning them into socialites, so no one came to rescue Louis XVI.

War of the roses

>Regarding the crisis of sense, I don't see any modern monarchy managing to solve that.
Maybe you're too narrow minded and I don't want to offend you there. A modern king could be different from what we had until then nothing in comparison with netherlands, belgium or the UK. I mean a real ruler, with way more power that the president of the Vth, no more small mandates unable to face the inertia of global market.

>We need to go beyond the lack of values conveyed by modern capitalism, but our elites are failures, and there's no contenders to replace them.
>If any salvation comes, it'll have to raise from the bottom.
Delusional, in every way. Revolutions/hard turnovers never came from the bottom, they were fueled by the bottom, sure, a crowd can only destroy and create chaos.

>the Kingdom of France(843-1792) had no representation!
>w-what about that time(1815-1848) it had to take cues from the revolution and Napoleon's empire and adopt a parliament
Said no monarcuck ever. You've backpedaled to the point where you're not even defending the French monarchy anymore.

Attached: Thinking_Face_Emoji_large.png (480x480, 101K)

*te décapite*
rien de personnel, monseigneur

Status : read

>Aaahhhhhh, the sweet taste of Victory, thanks to the Supreme Being. Vive la République, vive Marianne.

The gall of that one. Damn you must be fun at Uno/monopoly games. Let's be honest, vive la république seems quite hard to say nowadays... vive Marlène "kids must have the right to chose their gender" Schiappa, Emmanuel "there is no french culture" Macron, Christophe "let's party hard while the country is burning" castaner or De Rugy aka homard Thermidor ? What about corruption (Ferrand) ? Benalla ?
This is the power of the République... whoaa...

Robespierre was the greatest man who ever lived.

Brexit means brexit.

Joke's on you, I'm not actually a die-hard republican and my sympathies lean towards Bonapartism:
>au sens large, le bonapartisme vise à établir un État national à exécutif fort et centralisé mais d'essence républicaine et assis sur la consultation régulière du peuple par le biais de plébiscites.
I just dislike royalist kiddies, really.

Still republicanism and secularism, let's be honest, your knowledge on the monarchy is probably bigger than mine I don't deny it. I don't particularly like the guy, but Malraux said it :"21th will be religious, or it won't be anything." I think he was right.

Based immigrants and retards

Republicanism yes, secularism not necessarily. I think that the 1801 concordat was a very good compromise between secularism and a state religion. I also think, despite being irreligious myself, that the slow decline of religion in the west has had disastrous consequences, such as being one of the main factors behind the abysmal birth rates in Europe right now. In France, the republic's ultra-secularism embodied by the 1905 law is most definitely to blame. The concordat would've yielded much, much better results.

I know that if the concordat was applied on the whole territory it would lead to another result, but trust me if I tell you that the parts of France where concordat is still partially applied, the church are either empty or filled with old people, and the people aren't much more interested in making children. I'm afraid it wouldn't change significantly the big picture. And don't fool yourself, republicanism leans towards secularism especially in a multicultural society.

>Joseph Foulon de Doué was 74 at the time
basé

Well, yeah. The decline of religion is caused by the decreasing importance of church institutions, and the only kind of regime where the church can exert power is a monarchy, sure.
I'm guessing the region you're referring to is Alsace. Well, you're right, but the concordat is only partially applied there. It's really just that Alsace isn't under the 1905 law.
Still, the concordat was magnitudes better than the 1905 law because under it, even if the church had lost most of its prerogatives, it still maintained its power of education over the masses thanks to a mix of custom and legislation. And then the 1905 law arrived, prevented this and people became increasingly irreligious.

>Well, yeah. The decline of religion is caused by the decreasing importance of church institutions, and the only kind of regime where the church can exert power is a monarchy, sure.
Are you being ironic here ? I can't figure out. Let's say yes : the church has always been closely related to the monarchy and you know it. It wasn't run like a startup with a religious open space alongside the regalian state, both structures were organically associated and the church had a heavy grip on the nobility. Imagine a church having power over an important administrator under republicanism ?
>I'm guessing the region you're referring to is Alsace. Well, you're right, but the concordat is only partially applied there. It's really just that Alsace isn't under the 1905 law.
I precised, partially.
>Still, the concordat was magnitudes better than the 1905 law because under it, even if the church had lost most of its prerogatives, it still maintained its power of education over the masses thanks to a mix of custom and legislation. And then the 1905 law arrived, prevented this and people became increasingly irreligious
You think that it's only a matter of education/social cohesion ? I don't, and I don't even left my pragmatism in the process.

>Are you being ironic here ?
I wasn't, the church can't have prerogatives in any regime that isn't a monarchy or a theocracy.
>You think that it's only a matter of education/social cohesion ?
I don't, I think it's a matter of church institutions exerting actual power. But state-advocated religious education would have lead to a stagnation instead of the sharp decline we got

Hence my "kiddie royalism" really. I know it's a sacerdoce at this point but the situation is pretty bad and only a big turnover would save the machine. You think it's/ought to be coming from the bottom, I am more pessimistic.

what you poofters on about

Fuck B*rbons
Fuck the r*public

VIVE L'EMPEREUR

Attached: Napoleon.jpg (800x800, 196K)