Monarchism

I wanna say based, but pic related can trace his ancestry back 1000 years and he seems to be a pretty big faggit

Attached: C2F34CE5-EA22-433A-8360-DD62E6EE9F09.jpg (828x854, 767K)

Holy roman emperor Frederick II was a caliber of man todays system cant create. Raised by the pope, crowned king of Jerusalem, spoke greek latin and arabic, helped invent german. Can slay good men in one on one combat, was the only medieval monarch to write a scientific manuscript, he wrote it on hawk hunting comparing greek arabic and european styles. Only a kings education can make a man like this

Attached: AAB23429-CB28-434A-85BF-AB2CC0C10BC1.jpg (828x1221, 1.03M)

I prefer fascist monarchy like Iron Guard Romania

It's a plutocracy. Quite different.

>(((republic)))
Nah. Fuck your myopia.

feudal monarchy is based, uk,denmark norway or whatever-type monarchy is cuckery

Based, inheritance is the most natural form of succession as the ruler will be more inclined to strengthen the nation because their son will inherit, whilst a politician could cheat the nation because their family will not inherit it

The party leader and monarch have to be the same man for it to work. Romania and Italy too had some faggot kings kissing commie and American ass and selling their country out in WW2 in a pathetic and futile attempt to hold onto power.

Based but only if I'm the Czar

>The party leader and monarch have to be the same man for it to work.

Not necessarily. Iron Guard Romania was quite a particular regime in this regards, with all members pledging loyalty first for the King then second to the Capitan (Corneliu Zelea Codreanu). Moreover, in all of his works, Codreanu clearly mentioned that the monarchical system should be maintained after the war with Michael as King, as that was the only way to achieve long-term stability of the state itself. This was the most ironical thing that happened though - while the Iron Guard was sympathetic towards Michael and wanted him in on the throne no matter what, the dumbfuck betrayed both the Iron Guard and Antonescu thinking that the soviet regime will allow him to preserve his function in the new state.

But yeah, a constitutional fascist monarchy would be the most logical choice ever. Bad monarchs come and go, but the regime offers stability and preservation of national identity within the bulk of the populace. Subversive elements are not allowed to grow, political parties exist but are limited in power, the Prime Minister holds a lot of executive power, and the King acts as the figure head of state with limited constitutional powers. Just make sure the King's kids are raised in a fascistic upbringing and you're good to go.

corrupt as fuck and extremely Jewish

Cringe but redpilled

Feudalism is based. Absolute monarchy is shit. There needs to be competitive warring factions to ensure the monarch is fit.

>living under an eternal ruling class that controls you by birthright
sounds like getting cucked. the irony though. that system never really went away

>helped invent german
Citation needed.

I don't like half of the faggots we choose as a democracy. Why the hell some faggot should rule me only because he was born in royal family?

I thought romania was based until I read about the king. Bummer you guys gave up your guns after the revolution to take down Ceausescu

Based if it's "Even a damned king would be better than these clowns who supposedly run things today."

Cringe if it's "Ackshully MONarchy is the best government because (some shit Hans Hymen Hoppe once said.)"

Romania as a Monarchy was based under our first two kings, Carol I and Ferdinand. After the mantle passed to the third one, Carol II, everything started going to shit, and his son Michael made sure to bury any dreams of a potential monarchical system ever doing something in this country (you just can't betray more than 200.000 of your own soldiers and millions of your own citizens and still have the support of the population in the long-term).

>Bummer you guys gave up your guns after the revolution to take down Ceausescu

I don't really follow you here. Romanians under communism had no guns to begin with, the population was completely disarmed by the communist state, with only the Securitate (Romanian KGB) and the Army being allowed to carry weapons. Moreover, the 89' revolution was not a revolution per say, only a coup against Ceausescu initiated by second and third echelon communist members that wanted power for themselves, with the help of KGB and CIA assets (Ceausescu was the only commie leader that did not accept the concepts of "perestroika" and "glasnost" and refused to initiate elections after the rest of the Iron Curtain countries collapsed).

monarchism is just cringe fascism

Everyone raided armories and guns were out in some people's hands. That should have been the precedent to not have been the strictest country on firearms in all of europe. People wouldn't be as cucked by the U.N. and become the literal dumping ground of europe because people wouldnt be as intimidated to allow it to happen.

Cringe, but most people are too stupid to be taken seriously about political issues, so representative or full direct democracy would never work.
Some sort of idiot-proof democracy should be invented.

Guns were indeed handed to the population (especially in Bucharest) on the 23rd and 24th of December 1989, but most of the weapons that were given out were registered by the Army and thus subsequently most of them were given back to the Army in January and February the next year, when the call back was issued by the Romanian High Command. Only a small percentage of the population actually kept the guns for themselves, it wasn't like what happened in Yugoslavia for example where a high number of people kept the weapons they received during the war.

>That should have been the precedent to not have been the strictest country on firearms in all of europe.

After close to half a century of a brutal communist regime that literally enacted brainwashing tactics as to make the population docile, while close to 2.5 million Romanians were genocided by the soviets and the Romanian communist state, nobody cared anymore after the 89' coup was enacted. They wanted to go on with their lives, live in freedom, emigrate in western nations, experience democracy etc. To this day the average Romanian is heavily against owning weapons or using them, there's literally no gun culture over here to begin with. And with a small crime rate index for urban areas, guns are seen as = violence, not as a way to defend yourself from violence.

The pinnacle of cringe

Depends on the king. If you have a thoughtful, intelligent, compassionate yet stern king then you can go extremely far, further than any democracy can ever go. The problem lies in the inevitability of war over succession or incompetent offspring taking the throne which leads to war over succession ultimately.

Governing humanity is a catch 22.

Based
Democracy: the ruler and the ruled are the same, impossible.

Good in theory assuming all your rulers are badass but when it comes to inhereted monarchies it becomes shit because eventually a dumbass is going to take the throne and ruin everything. Some kind of elective Enlightened Despotism would be ideal if there is a way to consistently guarantee that only the most intelligent and virtuous are elected.

If there is a way to elect the best, then sure, however the a great part in inheritance is that the monarch will be more inclined to strengthen the nation because their child will inherit, whilst an elected monarch need only serve and then his dynasty is done with it, so he can simply steal from the nation, this is why, historically, hereditary monarchies have been far more successful than elective monarchies and a lot more stabile as there is less infighting between nobles.

"Natural Kings" are the best protection against the jew.
Look at what happened to europe 100years after the fall of the last kings. It is bein overrun by niggers, sandniggers, gegenaracy jewish propaganda. CUTTING OFF THE PENISES OF CHILDREN IS CONSIDERED NORMAL!!!!

Attached: chabad.jpg (1024x678, 102K)

>t. cia shill doesn't understand any sort of politics except bombing brown people

>pakistan flying a republican flag
why