All urls found in this thread:
a bloo bloo why did you kill murderers
justifying the murder of children
needing to justify spilling royal blood
oh, that's what it is, you're upset about the boy. so everyone else could die? does death become less sad once one passes age of consent?
it's better to let more people die fighting wars to reinstate the royal family than to kill a couple of kids, even though more kids would die from a war, because I put more value on the lives of people whose names I know than on the lives of poeple in general.
Imperialist oppressors, tyrants, autocrats.
I think Nikolaus was rather a tragic figure, but I can understand why the Bolsheviks killed his family considering how feudalism works.
the children could have been spared, retard
I feel bad, but the aftermath of the French Revolution showed you cant show mercy ever or these porkers will come back with a vengeance. It's your neck or theirs that is going to hang. Anastasia gonna get garrotted by my hands.
I don't get why Holla Forums prefers current bourgeois democracy to a constitutional monarchy where the King has real power. Both are capitalist, but, what is America if not the perfect example of a country where the bourgeois are allowed to run wild, unchecked by a King or by direct democracy?
Please read Engels and you will find your awnser
i don't get why you think bourgeois democracy is fundamentally different from monarchy, in both cases there's aristocracy, in some cases literal, look at the kennedys.
Which thing by Engels?
Am I the only one who thinks Putin likes to think of himself as the physical embodiment Tsarist Russia?
Because a King with secure power isn't necessarily aligned with the bourgeoisie. In, say, the US, all politicians are strictly aligned with the bourgeoisie. Public "opinion" is in fact created by bourgeois foundations and think tanks, and disseminated by bourgeois media. Political candidates are all selected by bourgeois donors. All legislation is paid for by bourgeois donors. The only goal of the bourgeois is to squeeze as much profit out of us as possible.
On the other hand, if the King has real, secure power, in principle, he really could not give a shit about bourgeois interests. Obviously, he needs to make sure that enough tax dollars are collected to keep the State apparatus funded, but beyond that, he isn't interested in profit maximization for its own sake.
To be clear, both systems here are capitalist, and will eventually be done away with. The difference is that if the King has secure power, and the final say on laws, the King can reject the more odious provisions of the bourgeoisie, or prevent the gains of organized labor from being rolled back, like has happened in the US.
Dear Spaniards, what the fuck us this?
On the other hand, if the King has real, secure power, in principle, he really could not give a shit about bourgeois interests.
then why did this never ever happen in 5000 years of recorded history?
btw even if by some miracle he doesn't have the interests of the bourg at heart, he still has the interests of aristocracy. why should we go back in history when we can go forward?
how does monarchy work
I for one refuse to bow to some rich inbred buffoon just because he has a fancy crown but hey thats just me
he still has the interests of aristocracy. why should we go back in history when we can go forward?
All I'm suggesting is that a constitutional monarchy might be "less bad capitalism" than, say, what currently exists in the US. Such a system would, of course, eventually be overthrown.
The interest of the king is to stay in power. The interest of the bourgeoisie is to stay in power (maintain private property ownership via State protection, mostly) and to extract surplus value. The King reinforces the former, but he doesn't necessarily care about maximizing surplus value extraction.
It's not that different from being ruled over by a President. The difference is that the President has to answer to the bourgeoisie if he is to win re-election.
be maid for the royal family
get caught up in execution
realize you haven't been hit
shout "Praise God!"
soldiers hear you
get shot to death
W E W
So many fake communists in this thread! The 1917 revolution was a tragedy for the working people of the Tsar's palace!
The guy they wanted to put into the throne (Carlos Hugo de Borbón-Parma) was socialistic I think. Also I readed somewhere (I don't remember where) that he admired Mao.
In fact, this made the party to split, and there was violence between the leftist part and the reactionary one, leaving 2 dead from the leftist side.
Also, the thing about "autogestionary socialism" is due to that the revolts agains the goverment where mostly in Catalonia and in the Basque country because the goverment wanted to end the autonomies of that regions, things that the Carlists candidates didn't want to do.
Tbh it's cruel to kill a kid before he got a chance to fuck
Those two behind Aleander qt 7/10
we don't know he didn't, idk much about russian nobility but french nobility slept around as early as 12
The kid was a hemophiliac. He almost died after lightly bumping his leg on a boat. Sex would have killed him.
I mean Nicholas lol
You call yourself a royal, that your blood is blue.
Yet when I shoot your blood is red, is this proof you are no higher then I?