Monarchist Discussion Thread II: The Crown will Rise Again!

[Firaxin]

A society that values intelligence and knowledge isn't hellish

Look, I ADORE it, but that could be politicized.
Even with a 80 IQ requirement that could be politicized as rating people lower than 80.

I’d be in favor of it if it accurately measured intelligence, knowledge, and experience.

I love intellect and talent, it's one of my core values, and one of the foundations of my beliefs is meritocracy, I believe a lot in intellect and talent, but that means you can oppress people with a lower iq than those who vote. That's a evil system that should be rebelled against, overthrown, and the leaders imprisoned.
EDIT: If it ever happened. Just like one should rebel against fascism, or the like. But I'm not encouraging violence.

Those who are truly intelligent would not oppress the stupid without valid reason, and would likely push for their education instead.

[Camelone]

Why not a corporatist system where people only vote in areas they have experience and expertise in?

No no no.
That's a authoritarian dystopia on par with naziism,.

I beg your pardon what? How is that bad for people to vote on what they know and can freely move from job to job? It is no where close to Nazism that calls for the extermination of a race and sterilization of the unfit.

I mean I can understand being opposed to it based on economic arguments but it is not an evil system, its an economic and social organization system based on the teachings of Pope Leo the 13th in the early 1880's but has split up into different schools of thought since then.

[Salus Maior]

Because that's far more stable than electoral monarchies.

"Stability." The calling card of the totalitarian.

It's not totalitarian if there's a constitution that clearly lines out what powers each part of the government has.

[Camelone]

"Stability." The calling card of the totalitarian.

It's not totalitarian if there's a constitution that clearly lines out what powers each part of the government has.

That reminds me wasn't stability the whole reason the US Constitution was written?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

It's not totalitarian if there's a constitution that clearly lines out what powers each part of the government has.

That reminds me wasn't stability the whole reason the US Constitution was written?

The U.S constitution was written to establish the U.S.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

"Stability." The calling card of the totalitarian.

It's not totalitarian if there's a constitution that clearly lines out what powers each part of the government has.

What I'm getting at, is that "stability" can't be used to justify authoritarianism.

[Camelone]

That reminds me wasn't stability the whole reason the US Constitution was written?

The U.S constitution was written to establish the U.S.

Yes and stabilize an unstable situation that America found itself in. The Articles of Confederation led to an unstable union, because well it was a confederacy, so a new government had to be established that was more stable.

[Salus Maior]

It's not totalitarian if there's a constitution that clearly lines out what powers each part of the government has.

What I'm getting at, is that "stability" can't be used to justify authoritarianism.

I'm not an Absolutist if that's what you're getting at.

Although I am more authoritarian than you, which isn't hard really considering you're a libertarian.

[Torrocca]

Monarchy is dangerous and spooky, no more Monarchs pls

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

What I'm getting at, is that "stability" can't be used to justify authoritarianism.

I'm not an Absolutist if that's what you're getting at.

Although I am more authoritarian than you, which isn't hard really considering you're a libertarian.

What I'm getting at, is that "because muh stability" isn't an argument.

[Camelone]

Monarchy is dangerous and spooky, no more Monarchs pls

What a magnificent argument. Do you actually have an argument or are you trolling us?

[Camelone]

I'm not an Absolutist if that's what you're getting at.

Although I am more authoritarian than you, which isn't hard really considering you're a libertarian.

What I'm getting at, is that "because muh stability" isn't an argument.

Is there a limit to democracy and republics in your mind or can the people voting do no wrong?

[Torrocca]

Monarchy is dangerous and spooky, no more Monarchs pls

What a magnificent argument. Do you actually have an argument or are you trolling us?

Uh

Uhhh

I have this French guillotine, if that counts toward anything.

Regardless Monarchy's pretty dangerous and spooky, so we shouldn't have it. No hierarchies is the best system hands-down.

[Torrocca]

Uh

Uhhh

I have this French guillotine, if that counts toward anything.

Regardless Monarchy's pretty dangerous and spooky, so we shouldn't have it. No hierarchies is the best system hands-down.

So you're an Anarchist or Communist?

Anarcho-Communist with a good hint of Anarcho-Pacifism. Preferably an unlabeled Anarchist, though. :^)

[Kubra]

What I'm getting at, is that "because muh stability" isn't an argument.

Is there a limit to democracy and republics in your mind or can the people voting do no wrong?

A democratic wrong lasts as long as a term or two, if democracy remains
an autocratic wrong breeds very interesting jaws. Decades long work, I assure you.

[Torrocca]

Is there a limit to democracy and republics in your mind or can the people voting do no wrong?

A democratic wrong lasts as long as a term or two, if democracy remains
an autocratic wrong breeds very interesting jaws. Decades long work, I assure you.

Yeah, a wrong done in any democratic system can easily be righted through the democratic process.

A wrong done in an autocratic one *cough*Monarchies*cough* is dangerous because that shit can span generations.

[Camelone]

What a magnificent argument. Do you actually have an argument or are you trolling us?

Uh

Uhhh

I have this French guillotine, if that counts toward anything.

Regardless Monarchy's pretty dangerous and spooky, so we shouldn't have it. No hierarchies is the best system hands-down.

You an anarchist?

I beg your pardon what? How is that bad for people to vote on what they know and can freely move from job to job? It is no where close to Nazism that calls for the extermination of a race and sterilization of the unfit.

I mean I can understand being opposed to it based on economic arguments but it is not an evil system, its an economic and social organization system based on the teachings of Pope Leo the 13th in the early 1880's but has split up into different schools of thought since then.

Replace master race with master class.
It's deeply immoral because it robs people of a voice and robs people of liberty. It's deeply rooted in luciferian ideology.

Uh the farmer has the same vote as the banker they just dictate how their own field will operate so that no idiot bureaucrat or career politician has power over them. Everyone has a voice in what they know and there is nothing saying no one can't voice an opinion they just can't vote... also luciferian ideology? Are you saying that because it was developed by a Pope or just because? I don't think you are fully understanding it, I mean there are legitimate objections to the system its not perfect but this is not one of them.

[Torrocca]

Uh

Uhhh

I have this French guillotine, if that counts toward anything.

Regardless Monarchy's pretty dangerous and spooky, so we shouldn't have it. No hierarchies is the best system hands-down.

You an anarchist?

More or less. I don't submit to any authority*, crowns or otherwise. :^)

*Except for that of my parents of course <3 Oh and maybe my lover in bed :^)

[Camelone]

A democratic wrong lasts as long as a term or two, if democracy remains
an autocratic wrong breeds very interesting jaws. Decades long work, I assure you.

Yeah, a wrong done in any democratic system can easily be righted through the democratic process.

A wrong done in an autocratic one *cough*Monarchies*cough* is dangerous because that shit can span generations.

Jim Crow would like a word with you.

[Provincial America]

My question to the frequenters and monarchs of this thread, what do you believed is better

Absolute monarchism
Or
Constitutional monarchism

Which do you support and why do you think them superior to the other?

[Torrocca]

Yeah, a wrong done in any democratic system can easily be righted through the democratic process.

A wrong done in an autocratic one *cough*Monarchies*cough* is dangerous because that shit can span generations.

Jim Crow would like a word with you.

>TFW it was righted through the democratic process that included valid constitutional acts that lay out such a democratic system

[Camelone]

My question to the frequenters and monarchs of this thread, what do you believed is better

Absolute monarchism
Or
Constitutional monarchism

Which do you support and why do you think them superior to the other?

I'll answer this quickly hang on.

Jim Crow would like a word with you.

>TFW it was righted through the democratic process that included valid constitutional acts that lay out such a democratic system

Yes after generations of injustice just like you accused monarchies of perpetuating injustices for generations.

[Kubra]

My question to the frequenters and monarchs of this thread, what do you believed is better

Absolute monarchism
Or
Constitutional monarchism

Which do you support and why do you think them superior to the other?

I'll answer this quickly hang on.

>TFW it was righted through the democratic process that included valid constitutional acts that lay out such a democratic system

Yes after generations of injustice just like you accused monarchies of perpetuating injustices for generations.

Jim Crow was in force for less than a century. Habsburg mismanagement of Europe was an affair worth centuries.

[Torrocca]

>TFW it was righted through the democratic process that included valid constitutional acts that lay out such a democratic system

Yes after generations of injustice just like you accused monarchies of perpetuating injustices for generations.

It was still less of an issue than the couple thousands of years worth of injustice of various monarchs and emperors across Eurasia. :^)

[Camelone]

My question to the frequenters and monarchs of this thread, what do you believed is better

Absolute monarchism
Or
Constitutional monarchism

Which do you support and why do you think them superior to the other?

I'm more along the lines of a constitutional monarchism because one an absolute monarch is just a monarch who is limited by either tradition or other influences in their realm, no monarch has ever come close to the absolute power that the dictators of the 20th century had they always had someone they had to listen to or worry about. Constitutional monarchy gives a reliable and consistent way for the government to operate erasing a large bit of worry of what will happen with the ascension of the new monarch and it also lays out specifically what each branch of government is to do and not to do, preventing drastic power grabs. A constitutional monarchy with a strong monarch, the presence of a merit based nobility (like the French Empire), a guiding church, and the presence of a corporatist senate of experts would be my ideal monarchy. Though all this is for naught if there is not a strong civic religion, a proper succession system that weeds out bad heirs, a way to remove insane or criminal monarchs, and the rule of law is paramount.