I like being able to speak my mind and own any gun I like. but the constitution really is a piece of paper meme that americans pride themselves with too much. Is it logical to support an absolute monarchy with as good or better guns and speech rights as the american concept? or is that just wishful thinking?
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
>absolute monarchy
Who would the monarch be? I can't think of any family worthy of the power.
Who would the monarch be? I can't think of any family worthy of the power.
Also
>absolute monarchy
>as good or better guns and speech rights as the american concept
Pick one.
That is indeed wishful thinking. A monarchy with rights is by definition a constitutional monarchy.
>absolute monarchy
>as good or better guns and speech rights as the american concept
Pick one.
That is indeed wishful thinking. A monarchy with rights is by definition a constitutional monarchy.
>>326952
>ruling family of the alternative system
Point taken, but what family would it be? That's kind of important.
>is there any proof for this
That's the literal definition of it.
>ruling family of the alternative system
Point taken, but what family would it be? That's kind of important.
>is there any proof for this
That's the literal definition of it.
>>326956
even in the days of feudalism there were certain rights given on economic grounds. your idea that rights didnt exist before the constitution is autistic
even in the days of feudalism there were certain rights given on economic grounds. your idea that rights didnt exist before the constitution is autistic
>>326957
Yeah, but in an absolute monarchy the king can still just do whatever he wants to anyone he wants. That's what absolute power means.
And no, those rights weren't really a thing until the Magna Carta.
Yeah, but in an absolute monarchy the king can still just do whatever he wants to anyone he wants. That's what absolute power means.
And no, those rights weren't really a thing until the Magna Carta.
File (): FA7CF519CAA6787C168DFD6BD58C0E5A-15881.jpg (15.5 KB, 549x240, 2113113.jpeg)
File (): 6BBA3B884B29529062DF5E5EB112E82F-66570.png (65.0 KB, 625x626, 1538420816914.png)
What a fucking way to slip past to bait Anons into supporting the NWO 'messiah'.
>constitution really is a piece of paper
>monarch really is a dude out of touch
>a person can still just do whatever he wants to anyone he wants
>If they don't control rights who does?
Three guesses.
>constitution really is a piece of paper
>monarch really is a dude out of touch
>a person can still just do whatever he wants to anyone he wants
>If they don't control rights who does?
Three guesses.
>>326962
You still haven't explained what family would be given absolute power and why they deserve it.
You still haven't explained what family would be given absolute power and why they deserve it.
>>326963
not an argument. even if there is no worthy family doesnt mean that cant change in the future. its not an argument against the support for monarchy
not an argument. even if there is no worthy family doesnt mean that cant change in the future. its not an argument against the support for monarchy
File (): 5B59EF6EF370A0BAA38E1002376D4F3D-55757.jpg (54.5 KB, 640x480, 1538836967457.jpg)
>>326965
No, that very much is an argument. You can't even begin the transition to monarchy if you don't know who the royal family would be.
A counter argument would be that no such family exists.
>>326968
Preferably a Führer backed by strong nationalism and high political efficacy among citizens in maintaining the pride of the nation state.
No, that very much is an argument. You can't even begin the transition to monarchy if you don't know who the royal family would be.
A counter argument would be that no such family exists.
>>326968
Preferably a Führer backed by strong nationalism and high political efficacy among citizens in maintaining the pride of the nation state.
>>326969
>Preferably a Führer backed by...
And of course with citizens with enough weaponry to remove it if turns out is kiked.
>Preferably a Führer backed by...
And of course with citizens with enough weaponry to remove it if turns out is kiked.
File (): 7076D85B04C548E50FC67EE29A86750D-214323.png (209.3 KB, 975x503, d898h3r-f78c6d1c-3328-426d-ba2b-daad870569a5.png)
>>326975
obviously not, if that were the case why would I not be bending the knee to jeff bezos or elon musk? that would be retarded
obviously not, if that were the case why would I not be bending the knee to jeff bezos or elon musk? that would be retarded
>>326976
Then it must be a lot more complicated than that.
Most wealthy families are educated by virtue of being able to afford education. What religious standards make a family royal?
Then it must be a lot more complicated than that.
Most wealthy families are educated by virtue of being able to afford education. What religious standards make a family royal?
>>326977
most wealthy families earn their wealth because they are higher IQ and education plays a smaller role. and youre asking me a vague question. obviously they should share the same religious values as me, or close enough
most wealthy families earn their wealth because they are higher IQ and education plays a smaller role. and youre asking me a vague question. obviously they should share the same religious values as me, or close enough
>>326979
>most wealthy families earn their wealth
This is bullshit. Have you never even heard of Jews?
Do you think that Bezos got where he did by playing it fair? That there wasn't any cockmongering, embezzlement or market-supprrssing in the process?
>obviously they should share the same religious values as me
How would you guarantee that in a monarchy?
>most wealthy families earn their wealth
This is bullshit. Have you never even heard of Jews?
Do you think that Bezos got where he did by playing it fair? That there wasn't any cockmongering, embezzlement or market-supprrssing in the process?
>obviously they should share the same religious values as me
How would you guarantee that in a monarchy?
>>326981
youre talking about marginal things here. yes jews cheated their way in the system, that doesnt suddenly nullify the main effect of IQ and wealth income
>How would you guarantee that in a monarchy?
I wouldnt
youre talking about marginal things here. yes jews cheated their way in the system, that doesnt suddenly nullify the main effect of IQ and wealth income
>How would you guarantee that in a monarchy?
I wouldnt
>>326982
>I wouldnt
Then what is to keep the family from changing or becoming corrupt/impotent as so many others did in the past?
>that doesnt suddenly nullify the main effect of IQ and wealth income
By that logic, a simple IQ test would be sufficient.
I do not consider people with more wealth than me to be smarter or more morally righteous than me, nor would I recognize any such family as my king for only those circumstances.
>I wouldnt
Then what is to keep the family from changing or becoming corrupt/impotent as so many others did in the past?
>that doesnt suddenly nullify the main effect of IQ and wealth income
By that logic, a simple IQ test would be sufficient.
I do not consider people with more wealth than me to be smarter or more morally righteous than me, nor would I recognize any such family as my king for only those circumstances.
>>326983
when we intepret the data, the correlation of IQ and wealth doesnt necessitate that those who are richer than you are automatically smarter than you. Its just a general trend that has predictive value
when we intepret the data, the correlation of IQ and wealth doesnt necessitate that those who are richer than you are automatically smarter than you. Its just a general trend that has predictive value
>>326985
because IQ is not an end goal, it is a proxy measurement. no one is saying that IQ means everything
because IQ is not an end goal, it is a proxy measurement. no one is saying that IQ means everything
I'll guess I'll say what I always say about why monarchy is the best form. The truth is that hierachy is the natural order of things. There has never been and will never be a system of equals. Someone always have more influence and power than another.
Freedom doesn't exist and will never exist. The same thing with rights. That's why democracy is a disguised dictaorship. The point with it is to make people belive they have influence and freedom and to make them fight amonst each other over politics instead of joining together to be able to exert pressure on the elites to keep them in check.
So why is monarchy better if democracy also is just a dictatorship? Because of what I mentioned above with the unification of people against the elites but also for other related reasons. The point is that when a system is clearly corrupt, people don't rely on it nor do they think that the law is just. In my opinion, this is one of the most important things: Morality should be seprate from the law. They are not the same thing and one should never buy into the idea that they are.
Freedom doesn't exist and will never exist. The same thing with rights. That's why democracy is a disguised dictaorship. The point with it is to make people belive they have influence and freedom and to make them fight amonst each other over politics instead of joining together to be able to exert pressure on the elites to keep them in check.
So why is monarchy better if democracy also is just a dictatorship? Because of what I mentioned above with the unification of people against the elites but also for other related reasons. The point is that when a system is clearly corrupt, people don't rely on it nor do they think that the law is just. In my opinion, this is one of the most important things: Morality should be seprate from the law. They are not the same thing and one should never buy into the idea that they are.
>>326987
political change and influence depends on wealth. in a free market whites do better than most groups in accumulating wealth
political change and influence depends on wealth. in a free market whites do better than most groups in accumulating wealth
>>326989
>free market whites do better than most groups in accumulating wealth
So do Jews. Do you want a Jew as your king?
>free market whites do better than most groups in accumulating wealth
So do Jews. Do you want a Jew as your king?
>>326990
Jews have to rely on things like usury, credit and fractional reserve banking to get as wealthy as they are. its not a fair comparison
Jews have to rely on things like usury, credit and fractional reserve banking to get as wealthy as they are. its not a fair comparison
>>326993
we werent talking about billionaires, we were talking about IQ and wealth in general. youre shifting the posts
we werent talking about billionaires, we were talking about IQ and wealth in general. youre shifting the posts
>>326990
Not really, they largely depend on the state interfering on their behalf to be as succesful as they are. And in a society with respect for each man's authority over his property encoded in law, whites would be free to exclude Jews from their community altogether. Further, rather than fractional reserve kikery being protected, it would be discouraged or outright forbidden.
Not really, they largely depend on the state interfering on their behalf to be as succesful as they are. And in a society with respect for each man's authority over his property encoded in law, whites would be free to exclude Jews from their community altogether. Further, rather than fractional reserve kikery being protected, it would be discouraged or outright forbidden.
>>326994
Okay, so if billionaires aren't the wealthy people you'd pick from, then who would it be?
What class would you pick you be absolute monarchs?
Think of a family, any family, that you think the rest of us should simp for for the rest of history.
>>326995
They are still just a class of people who managed to succeed in a monetary system that is already irreparably pozzed. The current elite's success cannot be measured in absence of the kiked system, so wealth is no real measure of success, let alone worthiness to rule.
Okay, so if billionaires aren't the wealthy people you'd pick from, then who would it be?
What class would you pick you be absolute monarchs?
Think of a family, any family, that you think the rest of us should simp for for the rest of history.
>>326995
They are still just a class of people who managed to succeed in a monetary system that is already irreparably pozzed. The current elite's success cannot be measured in absence of the kiked system, so wealth is no real measure of success, let alone worthiness to rule.
File (): 7D94D0BF815843D6A57C9CB67F790E05-67440.png (65.9 KB, 1175x707, Box.png)
File (): 97B61FD71CDAC2A07BD0A7BC32066EFB-566231.png (553.0 KB, 2037x2500, 446371.png)
>>326988
The only thing that exists is what we believe exists and the lasting effects of that belief within and in others.
>>326947
Personal responsibility.
But people want the burden off of them, so they delegate.
Then that delegate gets something in return, an imaginary obligation from the unburdened people.
So in imaginary land the delegate asks kindly or roughly that those unburdened to do or think something or be something.
They are willing as the perceived burden is too much alone.
>>326994
Explain wealth.
Leaders need one thing, others to commit to action.
The biological and all natural pressures for success honed what people are (more or less with regard for variation) to become a false macro organism for survival.
But success doesn't drive that, selective pressures do and that includes shear dumb luck.
If a thing exists then it can be altered. Parasites and malicious hostiles will break down and consume the imaginary macro organism for their own purpose.
Symbiotic relationships in all permutations do occur. Even in the death(s) of either.
Who or what makes those macro imaginary organisms. People do.
People pretending to be that imaginary thing and people pretending to be other people.
That's how it is.
A monarchy doesn't solve the follies. None of it does. Various imaginary systems can encourage (by means of people pretending) people to do something.
People solve things. That's the bottom line.
A monarchy is just a representative a delegate.
Any leader against all odds needs these five things.
Luck
Wisdom
Morality (CARE)
Inner excellence
Outer excellence
Other traits can be useful.
Simply put leaders of the good variety anti-steal. They give.
Leader of the evil persuasion steal. They take.
The difference is the means and the ends.
It's everything in aggregate. The whole thing.
There is no mitigating luck, just when and where the lasting luck starts and ends. Because people make and break luck.
The only thing that exists is what we believe exists and the lasting effects of that belief within and in others.
>>326947
Personal responsibility.
But people want the burden off of them, so they delegate.
Then that delegate gets something in return, an imaginary obligation from the unburdened people.
So in imaginary land the delegate asks kindly or roughly that those unburdened to do or think something or be something.
They are willing as the perceived burden is too much alone.
>>326994
Explain wealth.
Leaders need one thing, others to commit to action.
The biological and all natural pressures for success honed what people are (more or less with regard for variation) to become a false macro organism for survival.
But success doesn't drive that, selective pressures do and that includes shear dumb luck.
If a thing exists then it can be altered. Parasites and malicious hostiles will break down and consume the imaginary macro organism for their own purpose.
Symbiotic relationships in all permutations do occur. Even in the death(s) of either.
Who or what makes those macro imaginary organisms. People do.
People pretending to be that imaginary thing and people pretending to be other people.
That's how it is.
A monarchy doesn't solve the follies. None of it does. Various imaginary systems can encourage (by means of people pretending) people to do something.
People solve things. That's the bottom line.
A monarchy is just a representative a delegate.
Any leader against all odds needs these five things.
Luck
Wisdom
Morality (CARE)
Inner excellence
Outer excellence
Other traits can be useful.
Simply put leaders of the good variety anti-steal. They give.
Leader of the evil persuasion steal. They take.
The difference is the means and the ends.
It's everything in aggregate. The whole thing.
There is no mitigating luck, just when and where the lasting luck starts and ends. Because people make and break luck.
File (): F4939D6D56AB988F1BD4BC2A408D622D-16309.jpg (15.9 KB, 250x250, sgs456y.jpg)
>>327000
>The current elite's success cannot be measured in absence of the kiked system, so wealth is no real measure of success, let alone worthiness to rule.
Checked and This!
Wiser words never have been written.
>The current elite's success cannot be measured in absence of the kiked system, so wealth is no real measure of success, let alone worthiness to rule.
Checked and This!
Wiser words never have been written.
>>326947
it is as good yes op. you are not wrong, and I am not even a monarchist. the thing though that tyranny shows you is that it reminds the average person that rights are things that dont fucking exist. The document in question you posted is not a document that gaurentees us rights. its a document that gives the government the right to rule us in correspondance to it. In other words it's like a permission slip, and the moment they abuse it we are supposed to come down on them like the hammer of god. this never happened of course.
I'm a degenerate myself so I understand the feeling of fear of authority, as well as contempt for those npcs who happily get jabbed and eat the bugs, but the reality is very few people will ever risk their lives for such a thing. At some level people have to accept that they are cattle or enact their freedom with violence. I think a lot of us like to pretend we're violent but in reality we are more apt to run away. We want to be on the defensive. we want to build a bunker and let the enemy wash it in blood as they try to take it, but aren't much for throwing our own bodies into their woodchipper.
In that respect the moment that became the truth is the moment that papers meaning died. But there are people here and there that are still rich enough to build bunkers and tell the government to piss off. It's on their shoulders with gratitude that I have any life and rights at all.
it is as good yes op. you are not wrong, and I am not even a monarchist. the thing though that tyranny shows you is that it reminds the average person that rights are things that dont fucking exist. The document in question you posted is not a document that gaurentees us rights. its a document that gives the government the right to rule us in correspondance to it. In other words it's like a permission slip, and the moment they abuse it we are supposed to come down on them like the hammer of god. this never happened of course.
I'm a degenerate myself so I understand the feeling of fear of authority, as well as contempt for those npcs who happily get jabbed and eat the bugs, but the reality is very few people will ever risk their lives for such a thing. At some level people have to accept that they are cattle or enact their freedom with violence. I think a lot of us like to pretend we're violent but in reality we are more apt to run away. We want to be on the defensive. we want to build a bunker and let the enemy wash it in blood as they try to take it, but aren't much for throwing our own bodies into their woodchipper.
In that respect the moment that became the truth is the moment that papers meaning died. But there are people here and there that are still rich enough to build bunkers and tell the government to piss off. It's on their shoulders with gratitude that I have any life and rights at all.
41 replies | 9 files | 8 UUIDs | Archived