Whats best in your opinion? democracy or absolute monarchy? or something else entirely?

Anything is better than democracy.

Soviet Russia > Russian Empire > Russian Federation

Attached: Stalin_Full_Image.jpg (555x831, 571K)

Constitutional monarchy is hands down the best form of government. And I don't mean "constitutional" like the modern UK but rather like the German Empire. King/Kaiser is responsible for executive, Parliament is responsible for legislative. Gives a good balance and very strong, long lasting states.

Ancap

CumSoc

Attached: 1561283367933.jpg (615x615, 39K)

Libertarian Nationalist capitalism.

If you aren't here to work, have a family and make this country better, you can fuck off, no rights to foreigners to enter into politics and only native males vote who have kids.

Patriarchy is the best, am I right?

GaySoc

Attached: socialism is still socalism.jpg (1024x512, 182K)

>long lasting states
German Empire fell apart in 50 years. Absolutist states are the only ones that last.

>Revolution happens
>The revolution's charismatic and skilled leader becomes the new monarch
Or you can do the whole "reinstate old bloodline" thing that many people like to do.

cringe desu

Attached: D-MuSEPWsAYwyol.jpg (817x540, 39K)

A coup is how monarchies are reinstated. Every monarchy has always been founded by military leadership, never a democratic action or people's uprising.

How much of a retard was nicholas 2? Why would he blindly accept to abdicate instead of manning up and try to give the people something of what they wanted? Did he really simply thought so highly of himself that he was not willing to concede anything to the plebs and the "liberals" and would rather abdicate and see his country turn into a communist shithole and his family murdered? Man the fuck up you're supposed to be a fucking king. Disgusting. Russianbros help me understand.

It's interesting you chose the best example on why monarchy doesn't work as your OP.

Single-party ultra-nationalist dictatorship.

The dictator is decided by an "upper-house" of party elites. The dictator rules until death, and a new dictator is decided. The "upper-house" can vote to retire the dictator if he is found to be of ill health, or is found with reasonable evidence to have committed treason.

A "constitution" is made that mandates the state to protect the genetic purity, cultural integrity, and well-being of the nation's population; and this mandate can never be changed.

The "lower house" consists mostly of small township districts, and are voted on by the public. They have to be at least 25-year-old married males with children, and they must own a homestead. "Lower house" members who prove themselves loyal to the nation and party can become eligible for nomination to the "upper house", which is decided upon by the "upper house" itself.

Attached: 1529977658428.jpg (500x700, 41K)

"nicholas II was an incompetent leader" is a kike meme.
bitchute.com/video/XabVBNdZkINy/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Schiff

Attached: Ch3_Image07.jpg (250x380, 23K)

AnCap with segregation.

Natsoc is pretty cringe

Attached: 1549559557408.jpg (1250x1250, 259K)

if a single guy can fund a bunch of gooks into beating your gigantic empire in a war, you are in incompetent leader

This.

I'm ok with anything as long as there is no ability to print money

Traditional Monarchy

Attached: Dom miguel.jpg (248x357, 15K)

Natsoc is gay. So is libertarianism and your boomer memes.

>talks about absolute monarchy
>posts a guy who was puppet of British
The only absolute monarchy were British Empire or other empires who had full control before British took them over. French got absolute monarchy before they started working for British. Habsburgs were better. Then it begs the question if they really had absolute power or they were just puppets for bankers.

What do you mean? You want a gold standard!?

Attached: is-this-bait-19269060.png (500x410, 20K)

If only you knew how bad Russia became, Nicolas.

I know about jewish interference and scheming at this time, Trotsky himself was a jew. This is irrelevant to the decision of Nicholas to abdicate, he should have manned up and tried to work out a solution for his country instead of simply giving up and allowing the soviets to take over. Because of his cowardice/laziness his country turned to a shithole and his whole family got murdered.

Nope.

Attached: Alexander_I_of_Russia_by_G.Dawe_(1826,_Peterhof)_crop.jpg (548x729, 103K)

Russian Empire was allowed to be destroyed because they were rising to be the third major world power in a bipolar world. This threatened Germany and the British/French alliance.

Who's that Albanian in your picture?

Attached: 1568206340954.png (1300x1080, 803K)

I would like to have smart people to rule over the world mixed with a little democracy, because otherwise the population wouldnt be engaged in fixing the worlds problems at all. Many sovereign states who manage themselves, and then a few hyper smart people who manage the world. That would be good.

Soviet Russia was a puppet of western banks.

Monarchy, no question about it

Attached: 58651-004-DE30C9AC.jpg (348x450, 33K)

When Russia is too big to control themselves, then you know they fuck it up, since nobody else could ever conquer them because they are too big.

his country didn't turn into a shithole. it turned into one of two global superpowers.

he was a terrible fucking leader. he abdicated because his people hated his guts. the average life expectancy was 30 under him. under the bolsheviks it was 68. even current russia doesn't have the comparable living standards of the USSR.

Libertarianism is libertarianism. Its built on the same lies that liberty is the highest good. One side believes that liberty creates good people, and the other believes that we need good people to sustain liberty. Time to move on.

A republic with an immigration act stating whites only, and the leaders catagorising blacks as sub human. Basically 18th century America before Cathocuck migration subverted it.

universal order

Attached: universal order.jpg (400x400, 23K)

Doesn't he look like Adolf Hitler in his eyes? I think it's unmistakable.

Attached: TRINITY___Grandparents+Romanovs.png (539x670, 446K)

Trotsky wasn't a Soviet and he didn't made tsar abdicate power.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_Revolution
>leading to the overthrow of the Tsar
>was replaced by a Russian Provisional Government under Prince Georgy Lvov

There were many different revolutionaries who wanted tsar gone, but then some of them get rewarded positions in Soviet Union, even if they weren't liked, so later they were disposed of.

That or crypto. Anything that would work and wouldn't give anybody the power to lend wealth from the future.

not past 52. that was the breakaway point when the soviets under Stalin kicked the jews out once and for all. the jews had already decided they were going with the US anyway, but all the major accomplishments of the USSR happened after that. Israel did play a major role in the dissolution of the USSR, and Gorbachev himself was heavily influenced by them.

The USSR was unnatural and thats why it collapsed. The USSR was the equivalent of a McDonalds and Wal-Mart in the middle of Afghanistan.

And of Juden.

>The usual crap brought by (((Bolshevik))) sissies
Yeah, but they sacrificed 70 million ethnic Russians before they achieved that.

Is that why you stop founding revolutions when Jews didn't get power?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Schiff
>Schiff's stance changed upon the Bolshevik seizure of power
>Schiff's gripe against Russia had been its anti-Semitism. At home Schiff had never shown any sympathy for socialism, not even the milder Morris Hillquit variety. Schiff had declared victory for his purposes in Russia after the tsar was toppled in March 1917 and Alexander Kerensky, representing the new provisional government, had declared Jews to be equal citizens. In addition to repeated public statements of support, he used both his personal wealth and the resources of Kuhn Loeb to float large loans to Kerensky's regime. When Lenin and Trotsky seized power for themselves in November 1917, Schiff immediately rejected them, cut off further loans, started funding anti-Bolshevist groups, and even demanded that the Bolsheviks pay back some of the money he'd loaned Kerensky. Schiff also joined a British-backed effort to appeal to fellow Jews in Russia to continue the fight against Germany.

Some revolutionaries were Jews, but Lenin wasn't.

Reminder that the Jews successfully destroyed France during the revolution, destroyed Russia during theirs and currently make an enormous concerted effort to muttify the remaining European royal families.

Why? Because royalty at it's root is European, the idea of the ubermensch manifested in a single leading family who provides a blood-bond between people and their land, history, culture. It's no secret that the royal families of France and Russia were unimaginably tortured after their dethroning.

In almost every society that’s ever existed, usually 80% of the population doesn’t give a shit who’s ruling, so long as they get their daily bread and their families are kept relatively safe.
Only like 10% of people are revolutionaries, and the other 10% are the opposition who wish to see the status quo preserved.
So democracy or absolute monarchy, it doesn’t matter, really. People have always valued stability over ideals, no matter what democratic, communist, fascist, or monarchist propaganda tells you.
It’s a battle of the 20% to promise stability, and gather the manpower of, the 80%.

He didn't kick the Jews out of his regime though.

complete bullshit. even to this day people in places like belarus and moldova live like the USSR never ceased. it was, ironically enough, way more resiliant than the USA.

Gold standard is not as good as you think.

Attached: D9h6mt8UcAAuOT5.jpg (750x720, 158K)

Part 2

Attached: D9hfO8uXoAAY6iV.jpg (749x929, 194K)

every jew who didn't move to Israel following ww2 was probably legit. They're not really a monolithic entity.

>the average life expectancy was 30 under him. under the bolsheviks it was 68. even current russia doesn't have the comparable living standards of the USSR.
Yes, these are totally believable statistics produced by Stalin's henchmen. Tell me more trufax.

There is no native printing money and no gold standard. You have stocks that control global price in New York, that's why you don't need gold, you create value out of thin air. Hollywood first gets money, then they employ people, so they can't run out of money. Socialism first employed, then you worked yourself up in society, then maybe you could run a company if people gave you permission in your collective. Of course the king was also slave to banks, they gave them money, especially before WW1 when they were indebted to Jews.

the rise in life expectancy, access to medicine, housing, etc, from imperial russia to soviet russia is not really disputed by any historian. it wasn't produced by stalin. the communists launched massive industrialization projects and programs to help the poor. that's kinda why people like ayn rand and solzhenitsyn hated them.

Attached: 1561935960318.jpg (640x709, 63K)

Enlightened Despotism.

Frederick the Great, Catherine the Great, Alexander the Great, Napoleonic Era. Bureaucracy is the tool of a strong leader, not the structural framework for escaping responsibility for personal enrichment at the expense of society. Democracy is the single most efficient system at allowing individuals to enrich themselves at public expense and then disappear into the private sector, benefiting from the changes they made to law and administration.

If you put a single person in charge, and charge them with 100% accountability and control, it's easy to blame them for everything, because if something goes wrong, it's because of something the leader did, rather than some temporary figure in a bureaucracy that forever escapes accountability.

Monarchy. You won't always get a leader, but sometimes you will.

Democracy inherently favors liars and cheats and a majority of the electorate are ill-informed and easily manipulated.

The USA exports sin and degeneracy, thats about as natural as shit. What I mean about the USSR being unnatural is that there was a lot of movement of people and destruction of local culture for the sake of social engineering. It didnt work. Moldova and Belarus are fake countries too, like Ukraine or Belgium. Their identity is traced to the USSR because it was created by the USSR (or at least the modern identity was).

Democracy but only white men can vote.

Democracy but only men over 6 feet that are fucking shredded can vote.

Vote for what? Why would i vote for people? That's not democracy. Voting for decisions is democracy.

Russian empire collapsed because their society was modeled on a crude model of Byzantine Rome in a time of technological acceleration changing society at a speed the Tsarist institutions were unable to keep up with.

Also Nicholas II obeyed the boyar noble class of his peers and not the ministers and jews and even fucking Rasputin begging him to stay out of WW1 and start distributing Siberian land to peasants because if he didn't he was going to die.

You retards do know that the British King and Russian Tsar were practically twins, right?

Still, there were hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Soviet Union. And Stalin was a crypto-kike, while most of his cabinet were unironical Ashkenazis.

>Why yes, these are stats produced by (((Stalin's))) weasels, how did you know?

That's right but it's the first jewish name that comes to mind from the time. I don't care about the jewish angle anyways. Would you disagree that Nicholas still could have found a way forward if only he had the balls to do it? Not too long before that his predecessor Alexander ended serfdom but still he was murdered regardless. Monarchy is destined to fail, people will always end up rebelling. The best system is the one where people don't even know what to rebel against.

They disposed of Rasputin too.

It is Portuguese King, Dom Miguel of Bragança

Based and uberpilled.

>And Stalin was a crypto-kike
only absolute retards believe this. even Lenin wasn't really a jew, he was half jewish half eurasian.

Democracy is an absolute sham.

Attached: 1567002964624.jpg (960x960, 96K)

Everytime I hear about those Serbs, I fucking hate them more. I have the same feeling towards those Czechs. Anyways, Russia was advancing quite rapidly, but the nation was so massive, and the Tsar allowed for too much regional autonomy for there to be an efficient transformation like the one that happend under the Soviets. Nicholas II was correct in his instinct to become a more authoritarian leader, it probably would have saved him.

Yeah, but things were different back then.

anything but democracy

Minarchic libertarianism

Jews are religious group, not a race. There were no Jews in Soviet Union for long, some who wished to stay Jewish moved to Israel, others were forced to accept atheism. Zionism was strongly punished, including circumcision.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast
>The Jewish Autonomous Oblast
>Religion in Jewish Autonomous Oblast as of 2012
>Judaism 1%

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Zionism
>Zionist activists in the USSR studied Hebrew (illegal in the USSR), held clandestine religious ceremonies (circumcision was illegal)

Soviet Union was a nationalistic country segregated by ethnic groups, not religion. Jewish thing was a quick solution, they migrated to USA, Germany, Israel, others became atheists. That's why USA and Germany and so on have religious problem of circumcision and other sacrificial religious nonsense like Greater Israel, all bible stories, nothing to do with history.

I so badly want to a chauvinist, but this country is so fucking gay.

America will never accept it. We can only pray our parent nations rediscover the old wsys

>The Emancipation Reform of 1861 in Russia, also known as the Emancipation Edict of Russia, was the first and most important of liberal reforms passed during the reign (1855–1881) of Emperor Alexander II of Russia. The reform effectively abolished serfdom throughout the Russian Empire.

>The 1861 Emancipation Manifesto proclaimed the emancipation of the serfs on private estates and of the domestic (household) serfs. By this edict more than 23 million people received their liberty. Serfs gained the full rights of free citizens, including rights to marry without having to gain consent, to own property and to own a business. The Manifesto prescribed that peasants would be able to buy the land from the landlords. Household serfs were the least affected: they gained only their freedom and no land.

>In Georgia the emancipation took place later, in 1864, and on much better terms for the nobles than in Russia.

>The assassination of Tsar Alexander II of Russia took place on March 13, 1881, in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Alexander was killed while traveling to Mikhailovsky Manège in a closed carriage after one assassin threw a bomb which damaged the carriage, prompting Alexander to dismount, at which point a second assassin threw a bomb that landed at the Tsar's feet.

>Alexander II had previously survived several attempts on his life. The assassination is popularly considered to be one of the most successful actions by the Russian Nihilist movement of the 19th century.

Why did "the people" who just got freed from slavery murder him?

Attached: Attentat_mortal_Alexander_II_(1881).jpg (800x531, 182K)

Fascism

Doesn't this just prove that people don't deserve freedom?

The good Old days are a myth lad, you'd be living in abject poverty working a coal mine in Bavaria and subsisting off cabbage soup with your 4 malnourished kids as a single father after you wife died in childbirth.

Attached: 1567919495957.jpg (302x301, 17K)

Nicholas II was probably the most autocratic leader on Earth except for, ironically, Stalin. It turns out in times of rapid social upheaval that bestowing all executive power in a pampered aristo was not in fact a good idea.

Putting all executive power in a psychopathic murderer with eidetic memory and willing to work 16 hours days micromanaging every last purge it tuns out was more effective though.

Attached: I.V.-Stalin.-1936[1].jpg (500x759, 90K)

Fascism is similar to monarchy where 1 man rules the country, only this time for real, since Mussolini cut ties with others, while kings had banking ties. Mussolini was a Socialist in this sense that he wasn't suppressing farmers with huge taxes and didn't fuck any woman he wanted like royals, people had certain ownership, wasn't all in hands of Mussolini.

AI dictatorship

Attached: racist AIs.jpg (1520x1121, 318K)

Actually there is some evidence that his 'abdication' was forged. He simple lost control of the situation due to treachery in his own family sadly.

Heil Tsar Nick!

Attached: nicholas-ii-21032713-1-402.jpg (300x300, 13K)

>even Lenin wasn't really a jew, he was half jewish half eurasian.
So, a Jew?

And Stalin was indeed a crypto-kike, through his father.

Because they were animals that needed to be put down. Russia was in civil war since its 1861 but the Tsars never realized it.

Communism is best system of governance.

So...

"And then things got worse."