What's better?

Communism

Can monarchs protect essential rights like a Republican system?

A monarch who truly cares for his people is better than a republican system.

The problem with monarchy is, as long as it's based on a dynasty, you just need a single idiot to fuck everyone up.

>at least I have the constitution
Democracy turned into mob rule. Were in a tech-oligarchy now.

republicanism and the constitution have almost completely destroyed and replaced the american nation. we are a tiny minority in our country compared to the germans, irish, italians, mexicans, and all the other non-americans who dominate here.

More like the Republic turned into a Democracy and then turned into shit

>republic of any kind
at the very least it's better than living in a world where you lick the boots of some inbred old cunt like the britfags do

Attached: 1541624799963.jpg (761x563, 60K)

Yeah but cant we just rewrite the constitution after the collapse to ensure it doesn't happen again?

Democracy has been an illusion for a while now. Don't pretend it's a recent phenomenon. Ever since Eddy Bernays and likely well before that.

>you lick the boots of some inbred old cunt like the britfags do
The Queen has less power than the unelected NRA in the US. Or Israel.

"A Republic, if you can keep it."

Damn Franklin was right

Republics and democracies always turn to shit. Giving the general public power is a bad idea. They're idiots for the most part.

AN IMPERIUM.

AN IMPERIUM OF MAN.

Attached: 1488370386018.jpg (1156x1694, 1.02M)

Are Republics only viable on a small scale?

It should be noted that the Founders didn't want the president or the Senators to be elected by the people.
The American system, as it is today, is a perversion of the original ideas, and not the republic the Framers designed.

The Imperium of Man in 40k is a failed state, and designed as such.

Why does everyone fall for the monarchy meme? Britain has a monarchy and it’s a fucking joke. Why the hell should there be some group of people who live off the public dime, and haven’t proven that they are worthy of their palace and gold?

Shitty monarchs should get overthrown and a new monarchy should be put up with a capable elite guarding it

>Britain has a monarchy and it’s a fucking joke.
The "monarchy" in threads like this refers to a dynastic dictatorship, not to a system where the monarch is a mere ceremonial figurehead.

Only because the emperah was too much of a pussy to obliterate horus.

Attached: 1468743606240.png (1024x768, 255K)

They have their time. My point is that it's time has passed. Look up anacyclosis.

I think he was playing 6D chess in order to become a warp god. Somebody who understands the warp should be a master 6D chess player.

>Britain has a monarchy
>Publicly elected officials
>Monarchy

I'm not even going to bother with this thread desu.

Neither.
Monarchy means there's tax sifting to monarchs that just waste money for being celebrities put in place by the state to have an "image".

A conservative republic doesn't work because it opens up for rigging the republic to change to a democracy that no longer is conservative.

The only solution is an unfaltering libertarian checks and balances oligarchy. But it cannot be done in a world that idolizes idiots and fame over accomplishment, re-releasing and remixing over creativity and originality.

In a world that is majorly overpopulated and majority of those over-populated areas being heavily on the left, the problem at hand is not one that can be solved by mere civil means without mass-swaying. And the means that negate civility are implausible to succeed with or even be able to live down the resentment of, inevitably leading to a few generations later virtue-signaling and victim-culture blooming up for the happenings of the previous generations.
>Nothing shall remain before the scorched ground blossoms, though the blossoming thirsts for what once was, no more of it is or remains and blossoming becomes festering until the festering ends with beauty.

I feel bad for being too lazy to know our democratic origins. If true, they would have created something much more enduring.

Except they are not ceremonial figureheads, Hans. They have an entire military at their disposal to protect them. Anyone who tries to harm princess Markle is dead fucking meat. They are protected by layers of military might while little kids get blown up with nail bombs desu.

Fuck monarchy, and fuck a “dynastic dictatorship.”
>my daddy was king so you must now trust my leadership
That is extremely stupid.

>I think he was playing 6D chess in order to become a warp god. Somebody who understands the warp should be a master 6D chess player.
Would you kindly explain what the fuck you are rambling about?

Would we have fared better under the Articles of Confederation?

Shut up, bong. Your country is a shitshow and no one takes you seriously.

You're such a fucking hypocrite. You give the best case scenario for an oligarchy, but not the other forms. Benevolent emperors? A homogeneous and edcuated nation that really makes a republic shine?

They're not the true lawmakers and decision makers though. England is a shadow of its former self. Its pathetic really.

Attached: 34623476347634.png (250x479, 159K)

>Benevolent emperors?
They're not benevolent when they sift off the work of the population and live in a lap of luxury with no worries.

If you want an educated nation, you first have to figure out how to completely overhaul the infected academia. The only foreseeable way to do that is individual centered education, and that's nigh on impossible to execute in a scenario that would be ripe for cheating to seemingly have accomplishment that is actually done by others. Nepotism will always prevent an altruistic republic from function as desired, and the current political climate wouldn't allow for being any form of homogeneous without drastic forced changes. If you seek that you seek grave loss of life in the current climate. The just ones are not willing to do what is necessary, and the injust ones play with fire to see what happens, trying to deconstruct the power by playing power-games.

As much as I like the idea of a proper republic, I cannot fool myself to being blind to the flaws in the system that would allow for the authoritarian illiberal desires of the opposition to sprout up.

If you have some idea of how to sway that, then you should be in the captain of the ship.

>in the captain of the ship
Referring to "Captain Ali" in case that is not clear

All I can say is that the people are weak. They need a strong leader. Someone to pull them out of the grave they've dig themselves. Most of us here see that and that's Hitler is adored. He was far from perfect, but we need someone like him more than ever. Trump is definitely not it.

No debate on him being a strong leader, but he could not have done it without the backbone if the party. A strong leader is nothing without the foundations that require a strong leader.

I'm sure you're aware, but to underline it, the reason it worked was because the socialist left on it's basis want large governing powers with few leaders, and the right want small strong governing powers but power spread. What the Nationaler Sozialismus movement did, was sway the people first to want the socialist ways of big government, then they put in those "few" position strong leaders, and all those in the lead were strong, resulting in the outcome of country-dominating leadership and powers.

There is no way to pull that off in modern day without first accepting the horrors of socialism and playing with the fire that is gambling on getting strong leaders that are not absolute impostors or mug-magnets.

A Hitler would not work nowadays, it would require a council style rule, where none can have a swaying vote without majority. And how do you get that without sacrificing the rights that are held dear? Without the rights, it's a failure even on it's face.

It's time to awaken, it's waking hour. But the sleeping masses are uncertain to who should be awakened, hence the risk.

Sure it did. Hide and report