Monarchy Thread

im not saying he is a just tsar or im electing him, but he serves the same function as a tsar so it proves it is indeed possible

This is good

Whats your point? I wasn't saying he is ideal or even good as a leader for Russia. I would have the Monarchy restored with the coronation performed by the Russian Orthodox Church as the National Church.

Of course, people always seem to think that a return to Monarchy would be a return to feudalism. That's obviously false.

There are plenty of "politically correct" movements that push for this sort of decentralized economic system so at least I can work for that openly.

Society is more stable with an established aristocracy. However, the best argument for it is that if you have people voting, the political class realises that it can give other people's money away for votes, and if that fails then you can import a new lower class that votes the way you want it. The way that the United States was set up, it was never made to last, and only one-hundred or so years after the Constitution was written, the vote has already become universalised (ie. allowed for women to vote).

What "democratic" countries now have is an ochlocracy and not a democracy.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

Would there be any way for a movement to take advantage of that and kick them out legitimately?

So let me get this straight:

You monarchy fags believe that monarchy would offer protection against the jews despite the jews ALREADY having defeated it in the past?

What about the fact that democracies get overrun by jews despite the people having inherently more control about their own destiny? How is a single person gonna be less corrupt? How are his children gonna be less corrupt? What about the fact that the great monarchs had sold out to the jews hundreds of years before monarchy was first under attack?

Honestly, you niggers are worse than ancaps and commies combined.
You and christians pretending like a resurgence of tradionalist values is somehow making their crypto-kike bullshit less of a fucking incoherent, cucked mess are my biggest annoyance with the "alt-right".

In a nation where there is no monarchy, how do you establish one? France and Russia have distant relatives that could take the throne but what about Germany, Poland, America etc?

Germany has a monarchy, Germany has many monarchies, you could elect one but most monarchies are made mostly by merit. A guy like Hitler could have established a monarchy the same way napoleon did.

So let me get this straight:

You national socialist fags believe that national socialism woud offer protection against jews despite the jews ALREADY having defeated it in the past?

We don't have democracy we have a failed democracy which is an ochlocracy. All systems can fail but imo Monarchy is the best.

The problem that must be addressed is balancing decentralization and centralization in a nation. I think that this is better addressed through economics and can be applied to all systems. Jews usually subvert nations through banking, multinational corporations etc. so I don't think it is necessarily a change in the system of government that is needed to address the JQ

Don't diss communism/socialism. The socialist system of the monasteries was very important in the preservation of European culture. It just happens to be a system that doesn't work on a large scale.

So like William the bastard?

What are you babbling about? The jews only ever infiltrated the British monarchy. The Russian monarchy was based through and through. Also there was no grand conspiracy and Jewish plans that destroyed the European empire they did it to themselves. Jews might of profited from it but they didn't do it.

kind of

Do you think the British monarchy would ever uncuck Britain?

Hitler could have restored the Kaiser and acted more as a Bismark type figure. There was still respect for the Kaiser among the officer class pic related

Does anyone have the post about how all of these alt-right types aren't actually traditionalists?

But he didn't, he pissed off a lot of the old-guard in the Wehrmacht, even enough to try to replace him near the end

What do people think of the idea of Davidic Kingship?

Davidic kingship is one not limited to mere biological descent from King David, but one of covenantal kingship in which God anoints and consecrates the king and queen as His servants who carry out and bear with His grace the burden of the “great service” of governing His people. Davidic kingship, by necessity, is a royal lineage or authority which resides only with the people of Israel, that is, the Christian Orthodox Church.

Because the Church alone, in heaven and on earth, is the full dwelling place and abode of the Holy Spirit, which blesses and consecrates all things and raises up the human race to the heavenly, in the Church alone rests the ability and authority to bless and consecrate kings and queens to God’s service. This is why, from the first Christian Roman emperors of the fourth century (on through the later Eastern Roman or Byzantine emperors) to the ancient kings and queens of England and France, to the Orthodox emperors and empresses of Russia, Christian kingdoms uniformly understood their monarchs and consorts to be first and foremost God’s anointed servants, endowed by the Church at their coronations with the charism or grace of the Church’s blessing of their “great service”. The Church always understood monarchs’ lives—however grave their individual shortcomings or crimes might be—to have been solemnly consecrated to the Lord’s service from their coronation and anointing, and dedicated to the defense, good ordering, and stewardship of His people.

It goes without saying that, as all presidential republics or parliamentary democracies see authority as primarily coming up temporarily to elected rulers from the people of the nation themselves and not down from God upon divinely anointed and consecrated king and queens, no elected system can theoretically or practically embody, manifest, or make real the solemn and covenantal three-way relationship that exists between God, a crowned and anointed monarch, and his or her people.
Excerpts from: pravoslavie.ru/81926.html

Teach me some Greek.

Ahahah. Ivan, get out. I mean it.

I was just pointing out one of the ways that a powerful statesman can interact with a Monarch.

nope

just going by the few things I've read. I don't care much about democracy, failed ot otherwise

The Jews were restricted to the Pale. Thats why they worked externally such as Jacob Schiff funding Japan and Anton Simonovich funding Rasputin and helping him infiltrate the Royal court.

If you want to communicate in the English speaking world, you'll have to use the same language. Nobody will understand your Russian language and cyrilic characters, Ivan.

All systems fail for many reasons. To simplify the problem is the fact that these systems are held in cultures that are corrupted.
To be more specific: the younger generations are made ignorant, knowledge is frowned upon, degenarate behaviour is promoted (slowly through years; not all at once), and hope is destroyed for those who live lives that are good in nature. These societies breed lies and are based on lies.
Great societies are the ones that promote education and truth at all costs. These societies shame those who live in lives by explaining it to people why their actions corrupt. People only get their shit together when people excommunicate them. When this shaming and excommunication of the sinful ended (slowly as people grew accustomed to ignorance and lack of care for the world), the world began to accept sinful behavior in until it grew out of control as it was destined to when it infiltrates these societies (this is the reason for the fall).

People must be shamed and lead towards the right path with the use of truth! Those who disregard the truth as a whole will inevitably fall, even if they are truthful in some subjects. If everyone in the US was legally required to do basic research for a whole week, everything would stop the following week and order will be restored. But they continue to promote lies and degrade themselves and those around them, destroying intellect and truth everywhere they go. Truth requires hard work and dedication that not many are willing to make the sacrifices so they willingly choose to live in lies.

This is how you parent and treat women btw. You keep them in check or else they grow greedy and bitchy simply because they were allowed to do so, with no consequences. A lack of consequences (shaming and excommunication from society) leads to corruption by default, whether it takes 10-100 years is irrelevant. A lack of truth in society will kill it. This is why jews promote degenerate behavior (movies, music, art, etc…) all growing and forming to its destined form (sin in its purest in the long term as it was allowed to grow).

That's it… Any society that denies truth will inevitably perish. Those who do nothing to stop this (such as telling people the truth), will watch it happen. If you refuse to tell the truth about the jews and the system and all of its sins because "it will make you look like a bigot/racist/sexist", you are indirectly contributing to the death of a society. This has been happening for so long and it is the reason they silent you. You cannot fix the problem by denying the problem. This goes for trumpfags who believe they are "playing the game" in order to advance. This will never happen because the problems that cause these symptoms are not discussed and brought to light so therefore the problem will continue. You cannot fight an enemy if you don't know who your enemy is. This is why satan has many faces. He knows people won't work together and divides them but all groups work towards the same goal: destabilization and corruption by allowing this sinful behavior to continue to rule over them (because they simply denied and refused to bring it out to the public).

You can't fight what you can't see… It is that simple… That's the reason they keep you all heavily sedated with the symptoms of the problem. You'll never solve the problem if you put all your energy fighting the symptoms.

Thank you anyhow.

The United States was formed by breaking away from a monarchy, so the obvious step to take would be to return and demand a prince-tier peerage, who would then establish his courts of dukes, barons, etc. from the local population. If the United States separates again, the prince becomes the king of this country, contrariwise, he stays part of the British monarchy.

Monarchies need aristocracies, this is half of the benefit. A governorship like the Thirteen Colonies had before wouldn't do for such a purpose.

Im a burger

Its not my fault you Burgers dumbed down your own language. At least the Soviets had the excuse of being completely dominated by the Jews but where is your excuse?

Yep, you have read Fr Seraphim Rose's book?

oodegr.co/english/filosofia/nihilism_root_modern_age.htm

dude wat?

Good-bye, Ivan and Yuri. You are filtered now.

Im from southern Utah near kanab where they use to shoot all the old cowboy movies. The Brits have always been overly friendly to the jews.

Order is built on a foundation of Truth. It was a notion quite well developed by the Greek philosophers in the concept of Logos and the Chinese sages in the idea of the Tao.

Even in reading the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius one gets this sense from his Stoic ideas of God and Nature.

Trips.

Bump.

Do you know St Tamara the Great, Queen of Georgia? She was an excellent Monarch and held back the Muslims for a long time.

antiochian.org/node/18296

I filtered you because you're a silly person. I need fewer silly people in my life, user. Do be a good sport about it.

Here is a link to a pdf with many of the great Christian Kings and Queens of the East and the West: orthodoxinfo.com/general/pious-kings-and-right-believing-queens-fr-james-thornton.pdf

ok good goy

...

The Shah of Iran would have made Iran 10 times greater than it is today vid related

Neoreactionary monarchist reporting in.

Slavery soon.
Monarchy soon.
Absolute Roman Catholic SSPX imperialism soon.

Crusades soon.

WE SHALL TAKE BACK CONSTANTINOPLE, ANTIOCH AND JERUSALEM FROM THE JEWS AND MOSLEM HORDES

DEUS VULT

Uh, guys…

Why? Again, as I said above, we need something closer to what Stolypin's reforms would have led to which is the proprietary state. I don't think you have been reading all the Papal encyclicals you filthy heretic :)

yeah nah, not going to happen.

That's degenerate papist stuff… Not in my U.S.A.

And that's fine since it's European day time now and we don't have any invested interest in how your huwyte melting pot will save itself. It won't be the best system possible nor will it be your beloved natsoc, since American mind has no capacity for those two. You'll need a lot of luck to save youselves.

Very interesting pic. I'm not particularly familiar with Evola's work.

bump

bump

Your "argument" is just as bad. You know who also toppled you right?

Oh wait, it was a shitpost. Anyway:
Seems like one was more stable than the other :^)

This. This is why all these modern "civic" bullshit wont work and never even existed.
Even Stefan Moneyjew is a dirty fucking liar.
youtube.com/watch?v=xw78QZF3chg

Yeah, one lasted for centuries and the other barely made it to a decade.

Restoring the monarchy sure worked great in Spain after Franco died, right?

Ask a Roman Catholic, I don't know and don't care.

monarchy got fucked up in europe when the monarchs became mongrelized and disconnected from their nation's people

they started to trade titles like fucking pokemon cards

monarchy is fine, but you have to have a system in place to ensure the monarch is of pure stock and is a member of his people's ethnic group- and you need safeguards in case the prince is a cucked faggot (thiss one is pretty simple, just get the military and other elites to install someone better on the throne - but this has to be accepted as a valid route to take, a cucked monarch is bad fucking news)

Any sort of cucked government is bad news. We just don't see the problems that would have arisen with NS because it didn't last long enough!

To be fair they also brought the foreign hordes against the Russian Monarchy. The Crimean War, Russo-Japanese War, World War 1 - all exploited by revolutionary Jews to attempt to destroy Russia. The third time they succeeded.

But then again (and here is where I risk sounding like the "real communism has never been tried" crowd) fascism hasn't really been attempted that many times. What other examples of fascists at war have we had, Spain?

monarchy wasn't the problem there, it was the cancerous career politicians

franco should've done a better job ensuring his succession got handled better

Fascism, Monarchy and Christianity don't have to be mutually exculsive. Corneliu Zelea Codreanu and his Legion are an example of how they actually work together very well.

Most people here, however, would rather look to Hitlers model with its "esoteric" jumbled up "paganism" as the ideal example.

USSR lasted around 70 years. not a single century.

pic was unrelated. I meant that Monarchy had lasted for centuries and NS barely made a decade

a lot of people have the opinion that the spirit of fascism goes beyond merely political or economic structures, and that is a worldview more than anything
which is why Hitler, Mussolini, Mosley, Codreanu, Franco, Primo de Rivera, Pavelic, Salgado, Rockwell etc all were fascists but had different ways of implementing their vision

NatSoc cannot be copy pasted into any other country because NatSoc is German, and a product of interwar Germany
yet all right wingers and traditionalists can learn much from Hitler's movement

like this user said, they're not necessarily mutually exclusive, many fascists view their ideology as a 20th/21st century echo of a worldview that is observable throughout European history

Get out of here with that entryist racket. Neoreaction is ultra-leftist. The maint tenet of NRx is the fungibility of man in the service of capital. They invented the idea of the Cathedral to obscure their masters.

NRx is controlled opposition (which is why it's getting so much media attention).

Neoreactionaries are more leftist than communists.

Five months ago I wouldn't have agreed, but all rightist left NRx throughout the last year because fucktards such as Land were too unbearable to be around. Just traditionalist is a fine label.

Heck, the most prominent member of the movement is a self-admitted Marxist. That should tell you enough.

I honestly don't remember anything about NRx. I read one or two of Mencius Moldbug's essays ages ago and that pic just happened to be in my Monarchy folder

Exactly my point. Land is so far on the left SJWs are Cato the Younger by comparison.

Moldbug washed his hands off the thing, so he's largely irrelevant to NRx now.

What economic model do they propose? I thought it was some sort of corporatism.

Talking about Italy,letting the king live,was one of the greatest mistakes ever made in all of our history.Worse than the fucked up Unification.

The more journalists,and historian i'm reading,the more fucked up shit goes out.You can't really grasp how big the betrayal and treason behind Mussolini was.It's so fucked up i was fucking crying yesterday.

When i finished with the materials i'll translate it and post on Holla Forums.

"Free market" capitalism. They quote libertardians frequently.

I didn't realize they were that pleb haha

I don't know a whole lot about Mussolini era Italy but I remember reading about how the mafia in Sicily and Southern Italy, as well as their members in the US, colluded with the US govt and the US military to basically fuck over Mussolini and sneak US troops and spies into the country and arm rebels in the south

they betrayed their countrymen all because Mussolini had fucked with their organized crime rackets

Interestingly, Chris-chan has aristocratic blood.

sonichu.com/cwcki/Anne_Boleyn

I would argue that ethnic nationalism was effective at organizing and mobilizing the German people into a cohesive nation.

The noble houses would go to war each other over land and technicalities while the fascists recognized that its better to support your neighbors in their similar political struggles than it is to go to war over noble claims.

In Imperial Japan, the oldest hereditary monarchy in the world, there were different factions, the Kōdōha and the Tōseiha that disputed how best to run the military and what kind of civilian government should exist.

It's very difficult to align all these forces together which is why people idolize Hitler so much. He represented the soldier, the native son, the artist, the party leader, the spiritual leader, and the emperor all rolled up into one.

How interesting it is that Franco outlived the rest of his contemporaries.

Monarchy is best, NEETsocs need not apply.

Catholicism outruled slavery in the 16th century.

wasn't she just some slut that Henry VIII wanted to bang (so he had to divorce his wife over it and start the CofE lel), and then got beheaded once Henry realized he fucked up and she was shit

Bismarck was 10 times the statesman that Hitler was. Why not look to him as an example of German unification?

fuck slavery

no shitskins allowed to step on european soil
I don't care if they're in chains or whatever, I don't want even one of them escaping and raping a pure European girl

it's just not worth it, use machines or other farm equipment ffs

I smell your disgusting burger breath through my keyboard. European slaves were not black.

Why would you want to keep white slaves though? They are your racial brothers.

Yes but the "Weston" in "Christian Weston Chandler" is from Richard Weston 1st Earl of Portland.

What i can say for now is:
-Mussolini was ill,he was found ill and bad treated by a german doctor after the rescue.Considering how much the industrial wanted him and the fascism gone so they could do their shady shit and treaty,he was probably bad treated in the hope that he could not notice how fucked up the war was going.For a fact,after being treated by the germans,he seemed better and the effort of the RSI dramatically went better
-For this he never,to understand how bad Mussolini's health was,he never substituted the generals after the first defeats in the war
-The myth of the italian coward soldier: there were mutinies in the marine and the other corps.The soldiers were tired of getting shit thrown at them and wanted to fight,but both the generals and the admirals didn't want,made every kind of effort to block the soldiers.Explains why under the Germans,they fought far better and Rommel noted this.
-The myth of lack of resource: after the german arrived in Italy,they found out tons of materials.I'm saying really fucking tons of shit.Never used,never made known,obscured to everyone.
-We knew about the T-34 tank since the 1934.The fascist command,held by Badoglio,constantly said that our shit little tank of 3.5 tons was enough,when the french,the german and the Russian had far more bigger tanks.
-From the 1939 we had three prototypes of Radar.They entered in production with 50 units.Admiral Iachino,motherfucking filthy son of a bitch,said we didn't need it.
-Invented the Z1018 in 1939,this bombardier had a velocity of 500+km/h(speed higher than many fighter),load of 2000kg of bombs.The command for 4 fucking years retarded its use by continuing trying to find shit to delay the construction
-The bombardment of the Caproni's factories,where the fighter Reggiano Re.2005 (600+ km/h,900km/h in dive( was being build as the 1940 IIRC.Far better than the FIAT ones,of which the factories were never bombed.Guess who hold the FIAT

This is only a start.

Being a monarchist in America is the worst, it doesn't seem like anyone even wants to consider royal ambition.

Who knows what the future holds. If the USA Balkanises all bets are off and anything could happen

Bismarck got everything right.An Alliance with Russia would have stopped English hegemony there.
Why the Kaiser fired him?

Far off in the future fam. It'll be a monarchy before anyone recognizes it as such. You won't live to see it.

Probably as this user says

In some states certain families will secure power with time and in two hundred years you'll have kangz.

The Kaiser was a very flawed man due to his stunted arm. He always felt he had something to prove and he made bad decisions. Bismarck also thought that he would be able to control and dominate the young Kaiser and Wilhelm II didn't take kindly to that idea.

There was a lot of bad luck that the Jews capitalized on to strike at the best moment for destroying the Old Order.

you god damn kike

that's more like it

who fucked up in that family such that it led to fucking Chris-chan jesus christ that's quite a fall

We could rejoin the United Kingdom.

interesting stuff

as you said it would be awesome if we could have a thread about this at some point

thanks

It hurts; I guess I'll just have to go visit the homelands to witness imperial majesty.

Let's see them get an actual monarch first.

If anybody is interested in a theological defense of Monarchy this is a good start:
oodegr.co/english/filosofia/nihilism_root_modern_age.htm

The Queen of England?

Trust me, it's worse here in Canada.

I signed up to the local monarchist league without any expectation of it being uncucked, but I thought it would be a bastion of morality and tradition and at least ripe for right-wing subversion.

Boy was I wrong.

It's basically all boomers who circlejerk about how the monarchy "unites people of all backgrounds in Canada" and "don't you know the founding fathers of America were racist slave owners?". They see Her Majesty as some sort of progressive leftist paragon of universalism and shit like that. It's honest disgusting.

What's worse is that they're even more cucked than our Cuckservative party because they have this idea that they have to be non-partisan in order to appeal to everyone. To an extent, I get it - they want to avoid the political divide of monarchism vs republicanism is countries like Australia where it's a polarising issue, but this basically means that the movement itself is practically devoid of substance and thus nobody actually joins it except geezers secretly longing for the old days (though they won't say it outright, and will continue virtue signalling to the grave).

What we need is a right-wing, traditionalist monarchist organisation. It can be separate and let the monarchist league stay cucked, but with the rise of the right it's evident that politics has dynamism and vitality, and that a movement needs to be more than just a social club.

Anyone else had similar experiences?

Such a pity.May the time come we will revert all of this.

There are many books,interviews,and other that i have to watch and then translate.I'll do my best but fuck if isn't heart wrenching materials.

I don't know if it is translated,but there is a really nice a treaty about monarchy made by Dante,"De Monarchia".

To me the Cathedral seems more like a Synagogue.

The fact that she didn't personally direct a contingent of special forces to cleanse any of the child sex slavery rings festering in the nation disqualifies her as well as the rest of that bloodline.

Remember I'm an American Monarchist, I respect the Will to Rule more than bloodline investiture.

A leader should be chosen by merit, not by inheritence. Monarchy, as witnessed by history, was heavily infiltrated by kikes and aristocracy very quickly became isolated from the people and distanced from reality. Great Britain is the best example.
After the inevitable fall of Monarchy caused by its internal corruption and infiltration of foreign culture distorters, the door is open for the mob rule, a Democracy which is even worse.

The best and most natural order imo is authoriatiran meritocracy. Besides, you will need meritocracy to start a Monarchy anyway, unless you want to give power to the current kike infested aristocracy and elites that serve only their own interests.

How do you have a monarchy chosen by merit instead of inheritance?

You can't, I just stated that you need meritocracy to start a Monarchy, it's how aristocracy was born.

No, traditionalist systems of nobility worked for tens of thousands of years. Hierarchical conventions in Europe were only corrupted because the priestly and noble castes were genocided by encroaching Cuckstians. The oligarchical elements of society were so heavily infiltrated because anyone not willing to allow the infiltration was killed and replaced with a rabbi or rabbi-selected ruler.

Monarchy is a continual meritocracy in which competition between virtuous nobles assures that the fitness to rule is concentrated upward. The resources which are available for the most meritorious by their own virtue and the rewards of their virtue to indoctrinate their children as capable rulers are the basis for the function of hierarchy. Stable circumstances cause similar results. Repetition bears fruit; time is cyclical.

Except when it doesn't. North Korea has had hereditary rule for three generations and it's been worse every time. Or think of the royal inbreeding that resulted in rules that were retarded and manipulated by regents.

*rulers

North Korea continues to get worse because communists took over the country and nothing has changed since then. Hereditary rule is functioning normally there. Having bad leaders and stable conditions means another generation of bad leaders. Hierarchy is a trend, it isn't infallible. It's the best we can do, not perfection.

Every way we find to measure the value of upbringing shows that it is second only to genetics in determining a person's fate. It is these two principles which make civilization possible at all. The meritorious of this generation are the most likely to produce the meritorious of the next generation. Moving the average of merit upward in one generation is likely to produce a stabilization at the new average in the following generation.

That's a pretty big statement. Depends on what you mean by the word 'worked' because there were a lot of instances where the ruling elite was violently replaced by another, which usually happened because of how
spoiled and isolated aristocracy became from its people. There is little chance descendants of a leader will always be the best to rule, which is why it's obviously best for the ruler to be chosen by merit.
The only problem is how to implement such meritocratic system. This is was one of the few things on which many Fascists and National Socialists had different opinions.

True, and also funny because considering the posts of many Monarchists together with the OP ITT they all seem to be Christian. I wouldn't say it was just because of kikes and Christians though, there were plenty retarded and corrupted Monarchist rulers before Semitic religions became relevant. Ancient Greece and China have a lot of examples.

Also, I don't think descendants of a leader are necessarily unfit to rule, what I'm saying is that they should earn the right to rule and other people, who proved themselves to be capable, should be able to challenge them.

There is no white race. The Romans held German and Greek slaves for example. Europe consists of many races, as a burger mongrel you just cannot understand that.
Slavs for instance are the niggers of Europe. Some muslims (Persians for example) are better in my book than Slavs.

Bismark was old. The Kaiser simply retired him.

The stupidity of burgers is endless. I have not advocated for slavery at all, also not for black slavery. I simply stated that European slaves were not niggers, they were from other European people's. This was the common practice until Catholicism abolished slavery in the course of the first millenium.

When Rome became a monarchy again the had to deal with a similar problem. The title rex and kingdom were considered barbarian and hostile. So they simply invented a new title, imperator. If the US ever became a monarchy something similar would happen.

More likely the US will break apart though, good riddance.

Then found it. Why not just make a start?

In Europe monarchist and legitimist societies are pro EU in general. Never joined them though, I'm a pleb.
But I do not think that the old dynasties have any legitimacy any more. Still monarchism is superior, there has to evolve a new elite, an aristocratic caste though.

Hello kike servant. No thanks.

The european nobility is itself at fault for its downfall. Decadence and a fall from Christianity have proceeded from the 18th century on.

Yeah it's really bizarre to suggest that the best way to implement meritocracy is through inheritance. Usually it's the opposite.

This fucking nigger.

That's how it's supposed to work. Bloodline loyalty only ever went as far as a bloodline was able to maintain its worthiness. Kings are tribalist overlords representing the ideals of a race. Their propensity to rule is measured in their ability to inspire the confidence of those around them. A king's sword is only as powerful as how many others unsheathe theirs following his example. Producing strong offspring is a duty of the strong, and rejecting weak offspring is a duty which must be met by everyone.

That's rich, coming from a Christian. Wouldn't you rather have a system that gives power to a leader who has proven to be the most capable to lead his people?

It's the Kingdom of Heaven, not a democracy of clouds, you kike.

It's a Semitic fairy tale, not a European tradition.

No. Meritocracies are a code word for assholes and scripelous people jewing and lying themselves to power. A chosen king can be good on the other hand, in a meritocracy a merciful leader is impossible because he would simply be removed.

I am completely pure "white", because here there are only white people. Slavs are the niggers of Europe though, I do not care how pale their skin is, it is meaningless.

HAHAHAHAHHA my SIDES

Which is why gospels were written in Greek, two of the four evangelists non jews. Kill yourself mongrel.

Slavs are niggers of Europe in the same way Germans were barbarians of the Roman Empire. You're gonna see some great shit from them eventually. Not that slavs haven't done a lot already, especially for science.

And the roman alliance with Germans and Germanic immigration has turned out really well for them. Ooops!

I'm not advocating for migration. Just objecting at calling pretty competent people, second only to western Europeans and maybe Persians "niggers" a bit misguided.

you are wrong about that. you are thinking of nepotism when materialism was valued, not of nepotism when traditions and culture was valued. the latter makes the employee work even harder because he does not want to disappoint. Look at family companies,, where it went from father to son. The traditions and culture of that company continued and the employees were always valued. While if you look at another company, the culture is usually lost with changes in government. monarchies lasted 1000 years in Western Europe and it saw unprecedented technological and cultural advancement, America lasted less then 100 years same for Fascism. Thv first leader in fascism might love his people, but already after the first there's a big chance he will just be some corrupt guy with no thought to the nation.

It's funny how this board realizes there are differences between races but won't realize that there are differences between families and that IQ is 75% nature.

I'm not a burger and I'm not denying white slavery existed

it was clear that i was saying whites *should* not be kept as slaves

That's the difference here. For Colonials Slavs are surely perfectly fine people. But if you live among the creme de la creme you have to be more picky.
The same way Americans object beaners, although they are better than nigger I object Slavs.
In fact they are the major reason for me advocating to leave the EU.

I agree, but why are you going against the idea of a system where someone who has proven to be a capable ruler is able to challenge a descendant of the previous one?
We both agree this was already ocurring naturally, but resulted in civil wars for not being compatible with the system.

I'm not talking about Democracy.

I don't think you understand what Meritocracy means. It is a measurement of one's deeds, not words.

How exactly can merciful leader be easily removed? Being merciful doesn't imply being weak, one can be merciful to his people and cruel to his enemies at the same time. You're just pulling shit from your ass from this point.

I don't have the time or money for this kind of stuff. Founding a new organisation would be basically a full-time job.

This is genuinely triggering. Do you have any idea why this is the case?

For countries that don't have a clear claimant to their throne, I agree. However, creating a new monarchy is notoriously difficult and will take centuries before the incentives of hereditary rule kick in. Plus, many monarchies (not really the Commonwealth one though or those of the Nordic countries) are still seen as symbols of tradition and guarantors of stability. Georgia's restorationist movement, for example, is apparently really popular and is seen as a manifestation of national identity and ethnic consciousness.

Which country, user?

To me a big problem is that comfortable and ordered life doesn't correlate to material wealth nor creation. For example, south European soul (Italy) created many works that can be considered the pinnacle of western man. Baroque architecture, renaissance sculpture, debt jewery (kek), while simultaneously never pushing the boundaries of power or technology. On the other hand anglo soul pushed imperialism, technology and utter economic jewishness, while in the realm of spiritual and creation they've been left in the dust by "inferior" southerners.

I'm all for the myth of "my nation is the specialest" but I'm not for the degradation of various peoples. Or I may be mellow because of modernity. In either case, I wanted to put out my observations.

I do not care for your sweet talk white washing the catastrophe that is meritocracy. There is not a single example where it worked, most notably the blood bath that was the French Revolution and Napoleon.

By cruel competitors. How can an honest one be removed? By thieves and liars. This only leads to bs concurrence for its own sake and is easily subvertable.

How? Let's sa you know some like minded people and you go every second wednesday each month drinking beer together, that's already good enough.

I could only speculate. European aristocracy was in general always pan european and not nationalistic, the caste was more important than the people. Also because they often do not even share ethnicity. The British Queen is German and the Spanish King is French for example.

It's difficult, sure.

Albania ;^) Mr FBI

That's not a meritocracy, which requires competition. That's just hoping for the best that smart fathers don't ever breed idiot sons.

What does that have to do with the fact that Jesus was a Semite and preached a form of theistic communism in the Yahwehist tradition as subversion against other Semites and Roman authority? Or that the cult was then directed by Saul to further its usefulness as a tool for converting gentiles to a system of subservience? After all, it was on the order of such cult leaders that those who refused to betray the traditions of Europe were executed and replaced with sycophants who would allow Semites to come to power in their courts.

There is no room for a Semitic tradition in the hearts of Europeans.

That happens naturally because the capable ruler attains the backing of more of the volk. Having a monarchy does not mean ruling out changes in rulership based on meritocratic grounds. The Chinese call it by that Mandate of Heaven term. You're fit to rule into someone else takes your head off. Monarchy is simply the acknowledgement of the supremacy of the most meritorious as well as the propensity for the strong to beget strength in the new generation.

I don't really care about arguing for or against meritocracy, because anyone fit for the throne is going to sweep those interested in merit off their feet as the route to ascension in the first place. If no such individual emerges, it's just pointless to discuss.

It seems obvious that he was advocating hereditary rule here. Caste systems are an interesting subject. I wonder how good a radical caste system would work irl

No, user. He was God. God doesn't have ethnicity no matter the shell he's born into.
His body was Galilean. We don't know if they were even Semites. Do I need to remind you back in the day those were white lands?

Which part of Catholic, Orthodox and general Protestant Churches condemn communism you don't understand?

Which was completely revamped from following the rigid rules to act in the spirit of rules.

Which is why Jesus let himself be crucified by Roman law?
"Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's"
You're utterly wrong.

Every vile word from your post so far has been wrong. I don't want to derail the thread and I'll just say this once: go fuck yourself, kike. I'm done with you.

About hereditary succession, the problem is simple and easy to resolve:

Every Monarchy started off due to meritocracy, but many decay after. What people don't understand is that the Merit was achieved by the Man, and his Wife is usually some noble nobody.
Then, people like to believe that their Children are reincarnations of their Father, completely forgetting that they have 50% of their heritage from the Mother.
So, to fix it, the King's only would need to choose Smart wives, or Strong-Willed, whatever. Just don't go banging the Pretty Idiot, the Beautiful Crazy, the Hot Naive or marrying some other Bland daughter of a Rich/Powerful somebody.

Of course there are other factors, but this is incredibly neglected.

Do you have any more of this? Books, videos?

Semitic fairy tale. He was a mortal Semite and nothing more.
Indo-Europeans had disappeared from Canaan thousands of years before. The monotheistic tradition of Israel is itself a rebellion against the polytheistic religion which had united the region under the small IE ruling caste. It's the same as the situation in India where the IE group was too small to maintain a presence in perpetuity and the natives reverted to their own ways.

Which part of all of those cults advocating for reconciliation with Zionists as well as white genocide through immigration don't you understand?

Thanks for admitting defeat. You forgot to sage and announce report/filter, christcuck.

Like the daughters of other kings?

daily reminder to filter pagans and fedora tippers, they are enemies.

Yep, the people pushing for an ethnically pure spirituality are enemies. That would be because christcucks don't care about making Europe European, they only care about making it Cuckstian. Daily reminder that all Cuckstians are race traitors who worship a foreigner and a foreign tradition which includes the murder of Europeans and the destruction of our heritage.

Christcucks do not fight for the white race, they do not fight for white countries, and they do not fight for you. They fight for a Semite. They have chosen foreign blood and foreign soil as their guides.

Just imagine that the first lines of Kings appeared in neighbouring Countries.
The first generation of Princes and Princess would already be damaged by bad Mothers - this have consequences throughout the lineage.
But just imagine if one King managed to have a Great Wife from the start - him marrying his children to the children of other Monarchs who didn't have the same luck would poison his well.

This is a real matter, as it affects EVERYBODY, from every family, Royal, Noble or Plebeian.
Just why do you think Family Businesses die? As the Emir of the UAE said:
My Grandfather rode Camels, my Father rode Carriages, I ride a Mercedes and my Son a Ferrari - but I fear that my grandchildren will ride Camels once again

This pseudo-quotation applies for a different context, but its idea is the same for everybody: Smartness, readiness, will - this all got diluted trough generations.
And that's a lesson every King should carry in his mind.

Daily reminder that the American revolution was a liberal, freemason-organized overreaction.

Meritocracy sounds great in theory, but as there's no objective way to measure merit, such systems inevitably dissolve in cronyism. Monarchism is a better solution that, while imperfect, acknowledges the hereditary nature of most traits.

Yeah but he seems to think hereditary rule is "meritocratic." Maybe he's using an unorthodox definition of the term, though.

go to bed, varg

u s0 qt m80 Varg :3

that's fate mate. We cannot change the nature of things, we simply can arrange ourselves with it. Even rome fell.

you just outed yourself kike.

SJWs are white too. Commies are white too. checkm8

and most of these ebul bagans are traditionalist/nationalist whites.

meme harder faggot, you just want to fuck horses

Monarcies are inherently shit. Having a system where people who did jack shit can inherit power and privilege creates a cucked elite. I don't mind monarchies where we elect a new monarch with absolute power.

Only MEN who own land AND have service in the military should be allowed to vote. And inherited titles of any sort should exist. One needs to earn ones title.

lol haven't heard this shit before. i thought pagans fucked sheep lel. anyway
christcucks want to fuck refugees :^)

Because in almost all European monarchies the royal household is strictly forbidden to utter anything in political matters. And if it's not in law forbidden they know that if they oppose the will of the parliament they'll loose their position and fast. So they do and say whatever is the most neutral thing to say that does not go against the parliament.

No monarch would honestly support the EU but they're forced to play the role if they intend to keep their shit and titles.

In monarchies there are no legitimist societies because they are monarchies. I was talking about France, Italy, Austria and the others.

Nice liberal propaganda

Kill yourself.

Hello Holla Forums

...

What is the monarchist stance on sexual morality?

Is fornication (sex outside marriage) in any form permissible?

More than anything else in practical moral terms, this seems to have royally fucked our society.

Pretty much this.

I'd be alright with monarchy in the future so long as I am the one that is crowned king.

Reminder that being a monarchist is LARPing.

not if you literally live in a country that still has the monarchy

one of these days people are gonna realize how shit modern democracy is

Only if you're a burgerclap

Complete nonsense. It is a malevolent oligarchy. Democracy is just a cover for the permanent elite to give an illusion of choice.

Reminder that using LARPing as an insult marks you as a shitposter trying to dissuade others from taking action.

When someone whines that you are LARPing, know that you are on the right course.

Daily reminder that a monarchy is the only legitimate form of Government.

No, it is LARPing everywhere in the Western world. The monarchs lost the divine right because they were weak, cowardly, traitorous faggots who sold out to international capital. Not fit to rule. That is what hereditary rule gets you, weak faggots. We need to go back to the true monarchy, based upon martial valor, not the degenerated hereditary version.

Pic related is your monarchy, faggot.

Monarchists don't take action. They write blogs that nobody reads and make cat images.

Or you really are LARPing and are just a delusional cunt.

...

And the leader of the internet monarchosphere is literally a cuckold, as exposed recently.

...

The west is cannot be saved, liberalism has corrupted everything.

Everything is lost.

...

There is no way to restore it.

And hereditary monarchy is not divine anyway. Non-hereditary monarchy is. Hereditary monarchy is a degenerated form.

Except there fucking is. Just do it.

It can be saved. You just can't be a retard who believes in nonsense like monarchy or christcuckoldry. Those kinds of people are just dead weight who will need to be killed.

Incorrect. Who would be the monarch? Some homosexual descendent of some older homosexual monarch? Who will crown them? Fake Pope Francis?

It is LARPing, pure and simple. We need fascism, and all the old monarchs need to be killed as the traitors they are.

I assume you mean (((They))) as the twats in NRX. Hey, good job playing right into (((their))) poisoning of the well.

And what distinguishes your call for fascism from LARPing? You're doing nothing but writing about it on the internet. THAT is how we know that any charge of LARPing is just shitposting meant to dissuade action.

Me.

Because fascists exist in real life, have real organizations, real parties, and so on. Monarchists only exist on tumblr.

You don't know what I do.

Daily reminder that Oswald Mosley literally did nothing wrong with his model of Democratic Fascism.

And yet you know what every monarchist does or doesn't do. There is no clearing away the hypocrisy of charging others with LARPing. It is shitposting meant to dissuade the efforts of others. That's the reason why christcucks wheel it out to belittle those that strive for cultural purity.

Not available in my country

I know they don't do anything in real life. Where are the monarchist groups? I can point to dozens of fascist groups. Where are the monarchists then? Sucking Jesus wafers from fake Pope Francis's fake second Vatican church?

And how the fuck are you talking about divine monarchy when you aren't even a Christian? This is the height of all LARPing.

Confused you with the other faggots. My mistake.

Jews defeated monarchy, too, dumbass. And with much less of a fight (considering the monarchs were all traitors who begged for the Jew's filthy money).

You mean how the Christian monarch had him thrown in prison and assassinated then handed the nation over to guys who wiped out their organization and then proceeded to hand the nation over to communists?

Throne and Altar is the only way tbh.

This time the slaves will not be Black. SJWs will be enslaved and work the fields of the new nobility's estates.

And almost every monarchy with a living heir has some form of claimant movement, let alone the places where monarchies still exist in power. The entire UK, barring the foreigners, is a monarchist group. I've already stated what I think of their monarch, but you get the picture. Your disputation of monarchist activity in the world is nothing more than the ignorance of someone that doesn't go looking for monarchist elements in the first place.

The fight was about the same. The National Socialists were destroyed by the combined efforts of race traitors bowing to Zionism, and the original noble castes of Europe were murdered during the spread of Cuckstianity. The replacement of old bloodlines with Church appointed officials is the root of monarchs willing to sell out their countrymen to cooperate with Jews.

Kakistocracy is more accurate.

SJWs are simply too rebellious to trust with slavery. #DOTR for them. Only solution.

Yet meritocracy is needed for aristocracy to be made, calling a natural struggle for power a catastrophe is foolish and it shows how little you know. Meritocracy is always needed as a basis or at least as a foundation for any Authoritarian system, including Monarchy.

There are plenty of examples all throughout history, many leaders in Europe were chosen by merit.

Napoleon is actually a great example and so was the 3rd Reich. The whole Capitalist and Communist world was needed to destroy the latter. French Revolution has nothing to do with meritocracy, it was caused by egalitarian movement made and led by kikes.

You have a strong point here and I'm forced to somewhat agree although it didn't happen so smoothly in practice because usually a descendant of a ruler didn't want to have his right to lead challenged. But you could find such flaws in every system I guess.

This, talking about Monarchy is pointless at least until we purge kikes and traitors from our countries and new hierarchy is established with capable leaders that love their country and people.

Fascism and National Socialism have proven to be effective ideologies for establishing order in chaos caused by kikes and purging them together with the traitors of our people.

Fuck off cunt. Russia has its own history separate from Europe. It was modernizing but it was "nigger" Westerners that fucked it up by sending all their Marxist shit into Russia.

That gladdens my heart as Queen Tamar the Great is one of my favourite Monarchs.

My idea of economics is built around Byzantism, Distributism and Permaculture. Look into those things if you want to know more.

tbh I don't know what pagans are talking about. Even things like stoicism or Western pantheons can be adopted by other races. Spirituality isn't about race unless it is in a very crude and unphilosophical form.

In my case its the Orthodox Christian stance which says that sex outside of marriage is a sin.

My country has a Monarch.

As Codreanu said, “I reject republicanism. At the head of races, above the elite, there is Monarchy. Not all monarchs have been good. Monarchy, however, has always been good. The individual monarch must not be confused with the institution of Monarchy, the conclusions drawn from this would be false. There can be bad priests, but this does not mean that we can draw the conclusion that the Church must be ended and God stoned to death. There are certainly weak or bad monarchs, but we cannot renounce Monarchy. The race has a line of life. A monarch is great and good, when he stays on this line; he is petty and bad, to the extent that he moves away from this racial line of life or he opposes it. There are many lines by which a monarch can be tempted. He must set them all aside and follow the line of the race. Here is the law of Monarchy.”

Right, thats why they had to work at subverting them for hundreds of years.

This, to some extent. A Monarchist should also work for a better economic system, a return to traditional religion in some form (Stoicism, Christianity etc.) as well as working with Fascists.

"Democracy" is just a mask for plutocracy.

The upshot of Hitler’s visit to Rome had been to discredit monarchies in his eyes for all time. To his intimates, he had in earlier years hinted that he would one day retire and pass supreme command to a contender of royal blood. He would then live his last years as a pensioner in Munich, Regensburg, or Linz, dictating the third volume of his memoirs to Fräulein Johanna Wolf, the more elderly of his secretaries. He had in fact discussed with the late President Hindenburg his plan to restore a Hohenzollern to the throne – not so much the Crown Prince, Friedrich Wilhelm, as one of the prince’s sons instead. What Hitler had seen in Rome however put all thought of that out of his head. On his return to Berlin, he had Göring contact the former Social Democrat leaders like Carl Severing, Gustav Noske, Otto Braun, and PaulLöbe and increase their pensions – in recognition of their having dispensed with the monarchy. Nonetheless, he sent routine birthday greetings on May 6 to Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm. The prince replied with congratulations for Hitler’s contribution to peace in Europe. Hitler dourly remarked to Wiedemann, ‘I’m not here to ensure peace in Europe; I’m here to make Germany great again. If that can be done peacefully, well and good. If not, we’ll have to do it differently.’

Later, Wiedemann subsequently testified, Hitler petulantly announced to Mussolini: ‘I’m going home, I didn’t come to see the King, but you, my friend!’ He returned to Berlin on May 10 with mixed impressions. His worst fears of Italy’s military worth were confirmed. In German eyes the Duce’s most modern weaponry, proudly paraded in Rome, was already obsolete. Hitler was aghast at Mussolini’s ignorance of military technology – he would be at the mercy of his generals, he said, and they had sworn their allegiance to the king.

You could just like, open a book, you know.

MEME MAGIC STRIKES AGAIN

Why would Hitler do that? He loathed reactionary, monarchist types. And Wilhelm II in particular.

Perhaps if Hitler had been less aggressive in trying to make Germany great again he wouldn't have given the Jews an easy excuse for having the "Allies" declare war on him.

Also the statement from Hitler suggests that Germany was great once before ie. under Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm I.

As another poster said, he would have had less resistance from the officer class if he had restored the Monarchy. If you aren't a reactionary are you a progressive?

I haven't decided between them yet. The Byzantine system was effectively non-hereditary in the NS sense as Emperors were often assassinated by the most powerful and cunning generals but hereditary Monarchy also worked for a long time.

He had too much of a heart to stand by while poles murdered Germans in occupied Prussia.

Yes, but then the monarchy would have been restored. Not worth it!

If you aren't a communist are you a libertarian?

The main problem with hereditary monarchy is inbreeding, hence how the British royal family's gene pool is so fucked up.

When they figured out that inbreeding causes offspring to come true to type, they thought that had struck gold and found the secret for eternal life. As it turns many of them doomed themselves and some many only survived because they used surrogates.

So you see, every system of government suffers from the the flaws of individuals. All systems can be corrupted over time.

Why, because you say so?

Clearly Holla Forums tends to be reactionary and not progressive or cuckservative (centre right) so I found it strange that you would use "reactionary" as an insult.

Adoption can help strengthen Royal families. Marcus Aurelius is a great example of this.

Bump for Aristocracy

Bow down to your monarchs, peasants.

Its like you shills don't even try anymore

The only "traitors" will be you. Executed by the globalist pedophile monarchs that you worship and give absolute power to.

He has jet black hair.

Aristocracy is just inbred.

His action freed up one blonde royal bitch of a potentially limited supply for a man with a lighter hair colour.

No one should begrudge his choice, as he's a raven haired shit stain. Perfect couple.

Now, if his kid marries a blonde or redhead, then we can all share some outrage.

The Monarchy is flawed when it is separate from the True Church. Degeneracy has infiltrated all areas of life.

KILL

YOURSELF

YOU

FUCKING

JEW BOUGHT

(((JESUS))) INSPIRED

INBRED

FUCKING TRAITORS!

archive.org/stream/GottfriedFederManifestoForTheAbolitionOfInterestSlavery1919/Gottfried Feder - Manifesto for the Abolition of Interest-Slavery (1919)_djvu.txt

How dare you use Nietzche you fucking faggot traitor to your race and Nation!? Fucking Monarchs were all bought by Jews since they began, put in power by the anti-Aryan anti-Superman bastardization of our race called Christianity!
Monarchies were the death of the hero and the beginning of peasant slavery

Kill yourself you fucking scum!

Then GTFO with your monarchy. They killed our soul and made us slaves.

"Competition is a sin."
t. Chaim D. Sheckelsteinfeller

Where do you think master and slave morality comes from m80?

Russia was fine with its Monarchy. Jews couldn't enter the Russian interior and it was only their power in the West that allowed them to attack and destroy Russia.

This fucking moron has no idea what he's talking about
what a fucking idiot
Gotta love the baseless superiority complex of Euroshit faggots who seem to think they're "pure" while Americans are all mongrels, despite the fact that european borders have been shifting literally constantly for thousands of years, all the while mass-rapes and migrations have been occurring. The majority of your national identities aren't even "legitimate" by your logic, since they are composed by multiple ethnic groups. "Italy" is not made up of a single homogeneous ethnicity, just like Britain is not a single ethnic group. You faggots are in absolutely no place to claim "purity".
Get a load of this fucking kike. Slavs have contributed massively to European civilisation. You're probably a self-hating nigger yourself trying to bring down actual whites to your level.

Who are all politically worthless and cannot accomplish anything.

Kill yourself christcuck

Before he was assassinated by reactionary monarchists and his nation was destroyed by the same.

Hitler, as always, was right. Reactionaries are shit and need to be killed.

That poster is just a worthless Cathlocuck. D&C and Centralization of power is in their cucked nature.

Why do people meme "God Emperor Trump"? Because its a recognition of the need of people for a Monarch and religion.

Would you accept a Stoic Emperor such as Marcus Aurelius?

What pagan options are there?

If you are an atheist consider Nietzsche's perspective.

He also would have doomed Germany to perpetual obsolescence and cuckoldry to foreign powers. The officer class was a joke and most of them should have been killed and replaced with SA.

I want a führer, who is a true monarch in the original sense.

Not some Jew-approved Christcuck degenerate inbred from some obsolete traitorous royal family that should have been killed off ages ago.

Yeah, No.

Hitler wanted to restore the Russian monarchy you pleb

Jews love Christians, dumbass.

So you take the culmination of centuries of Jewish plotting as the best example of Monarchy and ignore the hundreds or even thousands of years where it worked fine? We all know the problem lies with the Jews and not the system.

Why? He could have been a second "Iron Chancellor"! Instead he decided to destroy everything in a blaze of glory.

So you are a monarchist! Who would succeed the Fuhrer? It would either be hereditary or some elective process. If it was simply the strongest and most cunning who took the position is would be similar to the later Byzantine situation.

As for religion, what do you suggest? Some form of paganism or the "life-affirming" pseudo-religion of Nietzsche, Spengler and the like?

No he didn't.

Jews killed Jesus and talk in their talmud about how he's boiling in a pot of excrement for all of eternity

I'm not even Christian, but you're spouting bullshit

The kikes love christians so much, that they made circles instead of crosses when asked to sign papers. kikel = kreisel = circle.

Who cares? What Hitler wanted was relevant in his situation and not in our time. Our movements should not be anachronistic.

I don't support monarchy because of the matter of legitimacy and the complications inherent to hereditary systems.

The legitimacy of a ruler should be based on their ability and competency to rule, not the fact that they were born to the right family.

True, but the Jews were only a problem because the institution of monarchy had degenerated. It is meant to be the best of the warrior class. Instead it became home to effete decadent poofs.

You mean he decided to take the one chance to make Germany a great world power. German monarchy would be content being cucked by Jews and Communists like every other monarchy had.

As far as a führer is a monarch, sure.

National socialism.

Who cares? Christians from the middle ages are not the same thing as 21st century Christians. Today, Christianity is beloved by kikes because Christians are the best of all goyim.

The job of the monarch is not to rule, but to govern. Big difference.
He only needs to weigh his options and approve or disapprove plans that are presented to him. He is the decider, that's why being good and just is a more important quality in a monarch than sheer ability. He oversees an entire country of people with different abilities and skillsets. The role of the King in society is a lot more limited and narrow than most people realize.

Not all Monarchies are hereditary Monarchies. If you could read to the end of a paragraph you would understand this already.

True, but all systems degenerate. I believe that Monarchy takes the longest time to do so especially when future Monarchs are raised in a strong National Church/Religion that is uncucked.

And this won't be corrupted easily? The race-based "life-affirming religion" of National Socialism is very obscure and not codified in any way. It would just result in countless sects with slightly different and bizarre "esoteric" beliefs.

Most "christianity" isn't Christianity. According to the Nicene Creed there is One Church and that Church is the Orthodox Church which is clear if you study history. Orthodox Christianity is VERY redpilled and there are loads of anti-zionist, anti-jewish leaders in it. They are all against degeneracy and the NWO as well.

The orthodox church is probably the most corrupt religious institution in the world the Russian patriarch owns a yacht and fucks hookers in saunas.

Orthodox is the best by far, but is still pretty cucked. The Russian church supports rapefugees and is run by KGB agents. The American branch is already libshits that threaten to spread their pollution to the rest as Americans can only do.

Not true because it would be upheld by the state.

A lot of the Patriarchs are infiltrators but they don't have powers equivalent to the Pope in Roman Catholicism. The Church is very decentralized so even if it comes down to one Babushka praying alone in the middle of Siberia with correct doctrine she would be considered the last of the Church. This is basically what happened with the Old Believer sects.

Probably the OCA/Metropolia? They are not as good as ROCOR branch of the Moscow Patriarchate. Fr Seraphim Rose was American and incredibly based. Because he had an inclination to homosexuality he decided to become a monk when he converted because he obviously couldn't marry.

There is no real codified religion of National Socialism though. There were a wide variety of beliefs under its wings and if you include Fascism you have the possibility of almost any religious belief.

Haha, your Orthodox hero was literally a faggot. Christcuckoldry, not even once.

Why kill people who have homosexual tendencies when they can simply not engage in those acts. Many "homosexuals" have been intelligent and capable men. We simply shouldn't allow their degeneracy, thats all.

I'm not really sure I understand what point you are trying to make?

Because they are subhuman. If I were homosexual, I would kill myself. So by the golden rule, I support killing homos.

Doesn't make them less subhuman.

Your lack of white altruism clearly marks you as subhuman so you should be executed. People who don't break the law shouldn't be killed.

Does someone want to explain the black muslim on the left, probably an emissary.

Seeing as this was a coronation banquet you're probably correct that the black muslim is an emissary/diplomat of some sort.

White altruism is a dumb meme. Nobody every described whites as overly altruistic before the mid 20th century. Whites have a tendency towards virtue signalling, not altruism.

Christcuckoldry once again showing its uselessness. Many people will need to die in the near future. Many of them "innocent." Christcucks are too soft to do what is necessary.

And homos, if they are at all noble, should voluntarily present themselves for extermination. As I said, I would kill myself if I were homo, so I am not asking anything of them I would not do myself.

They already do. They have no children and their genes die with them.

I'm talking about law in an established decent white society not the fucking nightmare world we live in now and the apocalyptic near future. Homosexuals should be sent to the monasteries where they can be productive.

A homosexual can be produced by two straight parents.

We learned from the Nacht der langen Messer, it won't happen again.

"He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster."

Monarchy lasted centuries because the people was suppressed.

Also, jews permitted it because jews were mainly concentrated in eastern Europe and monarchies mainly didn't interfere with their way to make money.

Russian monarchy did not enable jewish usury, which is why they did all they could to subvert it (and succeeded) when they found themselves under its law.

Monarchy is the success of people's apathy. Governing our nation, taking decisions for the common good and actively protecting the future of our people and our children is too difficult ; let a "chosen" someone decide for us.

And what if he's not a good monarch ? What if he does notwhat's best for his people ? Do we wait until he dies ? Or do we assassinate him like niggers ?

Monarchy thrives with an uneducated, easily-suppressed people. Such people aren't nationalists. They are starving, they are afraid, they have no choice. They don't fight for each other, they don't see their people as their most precious belonging, they won't reach the stars.

National socialism brought, in a few years, the laughing stock of the western world to become the most advanced civilization on Earth. It lasted barely a decade because it is the most efficient against jewish usury, deception and subversion, so the jews were all in like never in history. It thrives with a well-educated, noble people of übermensch who have a strong sense of efficiency and abnegation.

There's simply no match.

No, they should volunteer for euthenasia.

What are you talking about? Under the Kaisers it was the cultural jewel of Europe, Hitler resurrected a corpse without vigor, a shadow of its former self.

Nice assertions but they are all false. Were people in the Byzantine Empire "suppressed" and "apathetic". The fear of the freedom that would result from Stolypin's reforms was one of the things that allowed the revolutionaries to manipulate them. We must also not confuse technological progress with the efficiency of certain political and economic systems as this is mere correlation and not causation.

There would have been no German state without Bismarck and this goes to show that fine government can work under a Monarchy and there are many other examples.

You assert that Monarchs do not care for their people but they clearly cared more than any populist president or democratic "leader".

THIS

Complete nonsense. The vitality of the German in WWII exceeded tenfold that of the German in WWI. National socialism brought Germany to its peak.

Why? Because advances in technology made blitzkrieg possible?

And Kaisers sold Germany out to bourgeois and Jewish masters.

No, it had nothing to do with that. The soldiers themselves were ten times the men because they had something to fight for.

Yes goy, nevermind that so much of the last hundred years technological progress were made because of Nazi Germany scientific discoveries. It was only luck.

Nice strawman. Just because a monarch would be (hypothetically) better than king nigger doesn't make monarchy the best political system.

Reading comprehension isn't your strongest suit, is it Shlomo?

99% of the time in history a monarch has been content to sit on his ass while his nation is cucked and his power stolen by merchants and kikes.

That's insulting to the brave soldiers of WW1. Regardless of whether they had an empire under Kaiser Wilhelm II or Hitler, in the heart of soldiers, there was always a greater cause to fight for and that is simply their families and fatherland.

Perhaps that is the case and personally I believe that Fascism and Traditionalism must work together to restore the Old Order. The focus must be on the restoration of the Old Order and Traditional life and not on modernist "experiments" that wish to transform humanity and destroy the Divine spark within us.

Fuck off nigger. Science has progressed in every system. Albert Kikestein produced the A-bomb for America so it is obvious that science, race and government are mostly seperate issues.

citation needed

I said
You said
Because between the two, there wasn't anything ?

Since you like to speak about history with nonsensical assertions, let me pull one for you : A monarchy would not have made what NS made for Germany in such a little time.

Some people seem to have forgotten that Hitler was one of those soldiers himself. He clearly did not lack drive and believed that the German soldiers of WWI were betrayed.

You royalists should go to bed or start drinking. You are not yet tailored for political and historical debate.

Yes, it most likely would have taken a more stable and slow approach that didn't end in West Germany being raped by American niggers and East Germany being raped by the Red Army.

Nazi's best work was Weimar policy, and it kept trains running on time.

Hitler on the other hand tend to be a bit to meddlesome in the affairs of industry leading to a few bad investments, leaving all the best tech to be reaped by the U.S. Fence sitting pays.

He also had one of the worst command structures in history.

His tanks couldn't field Europe fast enough at the Normandy landing, Stalin was always a lost cause so he was pushed into that and struck perfectly.

But land wars in Russia along with those thin stretched lines- terrible.

And of course he fucked up the deployment of a new jet interceptor because he wanted a bomber, so it took a year to deploy.

He spent so much on the useless V1's while shitty slaves contributed nothing to the V2's overall design, leading to a lot of trial and error.

And lastly, he was obsessed with pointlessly huge tanks by the end that could never be used or fielded.

Too bad those gentile scientists didn't develop the A-bomb for Uncle Hitler

Your view of divine spark comes from a degenerate christcuck vantage point. It is not our view. Fascism creates the tradition by destroying the degenerate remnants of the old.

Of course, it would have been corrupted by jews from the very beginning, and nothing would have prevented communism from invading Europe by the 50s.

He had to strike first. Russia was about to invade Europe.

Yes, because slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians with one bomb is so nationalistic. Go be a nigger somewhere else.

Slow approach would not have worked. Germany needed to attain autarky or they would be btfo by America and Russia.

Yes, just as they were betrayed in WWII by degenerate reactionary faggots.

Don't make me post Hitler's epic rant on neopagans.

It can also come from Stoicism as in Marcus Aurelius's Meditations or any number of worldviews.

Where have I heard this before? Thats right, all the degenerates in the Modernist movement.

BTFO for doing what? It was NS that resulted in it being BTFO and its best people killed.

Cool speculation but we'll never know because Hitler lost to the Jews and destroyed the remnants of Germany.

*JewSSR
Russia stopped existing in 1917.

For not being a superpower. The geopolitical situation at the time was such that USA and Soviets were destined to become superpowers and leave everyone else behind. Germany would not have been able to compete, and would have become de facto bitch of either USA or Soviets.

I honestly don't think there was any way to stop the Jewish dominance of Europe that we have now. The assault on the Old Order and its remnants was too well prepared, it was a perfect storm.

While I'll admit that there were reactionaries opposed to Hitler, there were others that fought and died for Germany. Reactionaries weren't Hitler's downfall, neither were they the ones to takeover Germany after the end of WW2.

Those reactionaries that value family life and society as you do.
I wouldn't say they're as animalistic compared to revolutionary communists or others.

No, degenerates in modernism want the exact opposite, to destroy all remaining good in the world (and their tool for this often being christcuckoldry). Fascism, on the contrary, prunes the dead branches such as Semitic christcuckold religion of Jew worship so that the tree can grow stronger.

Way to spot a shill.

Unless your name is Corneliu Zelea Codreanu or Francisco Franco

It is the truth. All major Christian churches support rapefugees and the Islamic invasion of Europe. Even Jesus's mom cucked her husband. It is a pure cuckold's religion.

Lets not derail with a pointless "debate" that will lead to nothing. Monarchy and Aristocracy existed in Pagan nations as well and was supported by Atheistic thinkers

Killed by Christians.

Franco was not a fascist. He was a reactionary and a traitor who sold his nation out to the Jewish IMF. Nice try.

Well, yes, monarchy is good. But in the future it will have nothing to do with "the old order." That will all be gone, killed by fascism.

Can we stick to topic without devolving into pointless shilling?

...

What will Fascism put in its place? There is no evidence that NS wouldn't have degenerated just like any other political system, especially when it lacks any sort of real metaphysical foundation for the state.

I agree. Less D/C shilling.

Most of these monarchies weren't killed by fascism or national socialism. There was a larger share of communists, radicals, and internationalists that killed monarchies.

Traditional Christianity was also largely killed (for the majority of people) by those same communists, radicals and internationalists. Lets face the facts and admit that we can find examples of degeneracy among all groups, Neo-Nazis, Christians, Pagans etc.

It is hard to say being so short lived. Being based on racial health and having the SS would automatically make it better than anything that came before or after. A true eugenic program would bring the next stage of civilization, comparable to advancement from the stone age.

You don't understand metaphysics or the state. Anything must necessarily have a metaphysical foundation just by virtue of existing. Even communism.

Transhumanism is trash. If our race is the centre of your philosophy and worldview by what measure can you improve it?

Eugenics is not transhumanism, you bozo. Eugenics is application of artificial selection is absence of sufficient environmental natural selection due to civilization.

Increasing frequency of desirable traits and decreasing frequency of undesirable traits.

But isn't the entire point of a monarchy that you don't worry about stuff like that? If you want to propose programs and policies, then you always have democracy.

I thought the point of a monarchy was that even if individual monarchs might be bad the institution was good since the monarch is invested in his kingdom and lineage, whereas in democracy (and even totalitarian regimes that came from democracy), you must worry about what is popular and not what is right.

At least that's the usual line I hear on it. The problem is that everyone has their own idea of what is right, so how exactly can you avoid democracy in the first place? If we keep deposing the king everytime he doesn't have the right policies then why not just have democracy and do it more peacefully?

Polite sage.

we got a live one, boys

What constitutes as desirable and undesirable? Who decides what is which?

Who decides what the desirable traits are and what the undesirable traits are? The whole thing is bullshit and outside of degeneracy a nation and race functions perfectly fine without obsessive bureaucratic interference.

There are many different forms of Monarchy and Monarchical government and it is really dependent on the situation of a nation as to which form functions best. Democracy functions poorly because long-term policies are effectively non-existent.

Also, the balance of centralization and decentralization can be maintained under both a republic and a monarchy, for me that is a seperate issue to the main point.

you're no less utopian than a champagne socialist

I am from the USA, so we have no national development, only national decline. We have no traditions of note.

Now we can conclude without error that you are a leftard shill. KYS please.

The Constitution.

Matey, you have as much or more tradition than my country which is Australia. I'm assuming that like here, your National history is obscured in favour of the multicult "you have no culture" narrative.

It is easy to decide. Intelligence is better than stupidity, strength is better than weakness, moral fiber is better than moral failure, and so on.

Unlike Christcucks, our goal is not to merely "function perfectly fine." It is to perfect the man of the nation and reach for something better. Judeo-Christcucks are content to live cowardly lives until Jesus shows up and takes them to new Jerusalem with their kike brethren.

A joke.

Thomas Jefferson was a faggot.

Kill yourself, edgelord.

Except, it's not easy to decide.
Should we start mixing with asians because intelligence is good?
Should we breed with strong or tall niggers because they are stronger/taller than some whites?
Should we start tailoring people genetically to preform certain tasks?

What good and bad traits are is completely subjective, you must admit.

I'm pretty sure genetics isn't that simple m8, even if you completely ban normal relations between men and women and relegate human reproduction to the lab its going to be pretty hard to engineer "better" humans.

And once again, what is "moral fibre" and who decides. If we have an idea of "moral fibre why not work towards that by each person working to perfect themselves?

So you have absolutely no worthwhile traditions in the USA and no history worth being proud of. Seems a tad pessimistic lad and I don't think transplanting 1930s German culture into the America of today is a realistic goal.

WEW

Anyone else noticed all the hate for Americans lately?

I smell kikery afoot.

C'mon dude this shill tactic has been around forever.
has become so overused that it's become a meme by now. However now they are switching to more advanced stuff like trying to use historical disputes to fuel conflict between whites.

It is a joke. The 14th amendment rid the Constitution of any merit it may have once had.

yeah mate, old pic which I thought was something else

I don't really give a shit about what it is outside of the context of the revolutionaries and anarchists who used it

This is why after the great twitter bullycide your faggot following dropped by 80%

Yeah, I guess they moved on from the ">x white" thing, now it's just been using WW2 to spark arguments

WEW you need to read some Nietzsche stat

Why? What benefit will it bring me?

Nietzche is a pozzed modernist. His works are practically worthless and useful only to historians.

Lol, didn't even notice that guy posted NRx memes.

It really is.
No. Asians are not intelligent.
No. Whites are the tallest and strongest.

There would be easy ways to decide based on the values of the society. Those who best match the ideal will become the racial elite and the goal for the rest.

Not really. You just raise the average. All people would have the intelligence of the most intelligent whites today and so on.

Correct. The only tradition in America is race mixing.

Nihilism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Nihilist" redirects here. For other uses, see Nihilism (disambiguation) and Nihilist (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
Certainty
Approximation Belief Certainty Doubt Determinism Fallibilism Fatalism Hypothesis Justification Nihilism Truth Scientific theory Skepticism Solipsism Theory Truth Uncertainty
Related concepts and fundamentals:

Agnosticism Epistemology Probability
v t e

Nihilism (/ˈnaɪ.ᵻlɪzəm/ or /ˈniː.ᵻlɪzəm/; from the Latin nihil, nothing) is a philosophical doctrine that suggests the lack of belief in one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life. Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism, which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.[1] Moral nihilists assert that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived. Nihilism can also take epistemological, ontological, or metaphysical forms, meaning respectively that, in some aspect, knowledge is not possible, or that reality does not actually exist.

The term is sometimes used in association with anomie to explain the general mood of despair at a perceived pointlessness of existence that one may develop upon realising there are no necessary norms, rules, or laws.[2] Movements such as Futurism and deconstruction,[3] among others, have been identified by commentators[4] as "nihilistic".

Nihilism is also a characteristic that has been ascribed to time periods: for example, Jean Baudrillard and others have called postmodernity a nihilistic epoch,[5] and some Christian theologians and figures of religious authority have asserted that postmodernity[6] and many aspects of modernity[3] represent a rejection of theism, and that such rejection of their theistic doctrine entails nihilism.

There you go lad, now everyone in this thread knows everything they need to know about nihilism.

c'mon guys, I mistakenly posted an old image that was in my Monarchy folder for some reason plox nobully

Because Nihilism is not what anarchists think it is.

Real untermensch feel up in here

I'm חot even gonna bother reading that shitty copy+paste

Ubermensch is a nihilistic concept out of which nothing good will ever come out.

Ah yes, now we're all waiting to here what your special snowflake version of Nihilism is and how it differs from the mainstream definitions.

Are you going to enlighten us or is it too much effort for a patrician like you?

Lol, no.

Christianity is a nihilistic concept because it posits that life itself is meaningless, just a waiting room before you get to Jewish heaven.

*to hear

WEW

Jesus Christ user… There exist some posts that defy reason so much there's no hope for men who wrote then. You really need to rethink your life.

That is Christianity. Your life is a mistake, a result of the fall and sin. It is just a pointless waste until you can get to heaven and eat matzo balls with Rabbi Jesus.

That might be the case if everyone makes it to heaven. Spoilers: They don't.

Wait, (((This guy))) was a Jew?

fuck off faggot, I have no special band of Nihilism, Kikepedia will never be a valid source on anything, and if you try to understand Nihilism by reading a fucking wikipedia article instead of biting your tongue and actually reading material by the guy who created it, then you should consider suicide.

I'm not here to spoon-feed you.

Not really.

It's more like, your life is to please God and kind of a trial to see if you're getting into Jewish heaven or not.

...

No, it is the case regardless.

You don't seem to understand. My life is divinely given. But, because we live in a flawed world utopia is never possible. As such, we need to endure and grapple and fight (very viking, European) with the world to keep Truth alive as long as possible. Why have Europeans conquered the world? For this very reason, to spread the Truth and to give your best even in the face of certain failure.

I've read Nietzsche you posturing faggot, I just happen to not agree with him

Yes, really.

This life is not pleasing to God. It is fallen and sinful. Of course, this itself leads to many questions, like why God created anything not pleasing, etc.

No, you're retarded.

YOUR LIFE, is meant to be devoted to God. That's what I meant by "your life".

You're supposed to avoid the sin to show your devotion to a higher meaning.

ok

That has nothing to do with Christianity. What you just said predates Christianity and Rabbi Jesus by centuries.

But it is metaphysically flawed. Everything that has some existence is true because it is the case. There is no need to keep truth alive, since truth is all there is.

If everything is truth then nothing is truth

You're literally apropriating Christian culture, tumblr style. What I said is Christianity and is what drove European man to greatness for almost two thousand years. But since you're illiterate in basic philosophical and Christian concepts, it's easier to yell kike on a stick and blame it for everything wrong in the age of atheism? Sure, fam. Keep doing so. But I ain't debating with your stupidity anymore.

Christianity is not a higher meaning. It is a bribe with a promise of eternal pleasure in Jesus's synagogue. It is just a misplaced hedonism, deferring your pleasure until after death. It is still just as degenerate and selfish as some junkie shooting up heroin.

I don't see why that one is so difficult. We already decide this every time we say that homosexual is degenerate, for example.

Even distinguishing that one race is superior requires you to say that one has better traits, so all race based nationalism already has to decide this.

I don't see what the problem is.

No. I can't find a anything at all about keeping truth alive in the Bible. But I can find similar in European philosophy and paganism predating Christianity, which Christians stole to give their religion at least the appearance of intellectual depth.

What?

No fool, Christianity is life-affirming! It explains that all Creation is a gift, and confirms that man was created to rule over it. We Christians marvel at the beauty of God's Earth and the Universe, and are thankful for the life we have been given.

Joy is a mark of the Christian life! You may hate Christianity, but don't tell me you haven't ever seen how happy most members of devout church congregations are? This is regardless of whether it's evangelical Protestant, traditional Catholic, or something else. The Flanders family embodies a true stereotype. Whereas supposedly "life-affirming" nihilists are almost never happy with their lives, or at least try their very hardest not to look glad. You say we aren't life-affirming, but whether ordinary peasant-worker life, or extraordinary pursuits like exploration, art, or science, fervent Christians follow those walks of life with fervor. Commonly, at school or work, heathens and atheists, many admirers of Nietzsche, belittle and jeer Christians cheerfully going about their work – and that is because they don't themselves find life joyful, because they are anti-life.

Speaking of gladness, this is a monarchy thread, and we're off topic. Well almost, because I think monarchy, with its princes and princesses, castles and balls, as well as duty and duels, is deeply life-affirming, the most life-affirming sort of regime. But for you wayward user, I highly recommend the classic novel Pollyanna, which has much more to teach about joy than Nietzsche or his more immoderate disciples.

Ok, you have a point, that's true. Giving Bible to the masses was Luther's greatest mistake.

Nice mental gymnastics. Pathetic.

No, if everything is truth, then everything is truth. You probably just confuse statements with truth. Statements are only true in their capacity as statements, but not in relation to anything else.

looks like you fell for Israel (((Zangwill)))'s shitty melting pot meme

Face it, American Whites are a nation with their own history and traditions, albeit being eroded as we speak. The solution is to restore what people remember fondly from previous generations, not make up some random larping bullshit to replace it like neo-"""""""""paganism""""""""".

Don't bother interacting with c577dd

He is a pessimistic retard who believes that everything is meaningless. How can you have a meaningful conversation with one such as him?

You could show me where I am wrong. There is nothing like that in the Bible. It is your own addition from outside.

No, that would be Christians. I know life has meaning, and it doesn't lie in your Jewish afterlife fantasies.

The Bible isn't the entirety of Christian Tradition. Thats a bad protestant meme.

Christianity is influenced by Stoicism and Platonism as well as the experience of the Church Fathers. Seeing as we interpret history from a Theocentric Christian perspective that shouldn't be too surprising.

Rather than starting with the Bible, you should start with great Christian philosophers before moving to Catholic and Orthodox politics. Then you need to learn some history and then you'll be ready to read the Bible. It's not teen literature. Bible and especially the new testament is a work of infinite complexity. There's a reason it's so important for the entire world. You up for it?

Yeah, obviously. Everything good about Christianity predated it and exists apart from the Bible. And everything bad about Christianity comes directly from the Bible. So why be Christian if it is just a second-rate ripoff of philosophy?

Extraneous sources who patch their own meaning into the bible where it cannot provide itself.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything? They had Roman slaves too, does that mean that Romans and Romans weren't the same race?

Which part of eternal sacrifice repeated every week on Mass that removed the need for ritual killings and civilized the psyche of European man do you find a second rate ripoff?

You sound like a nigger.

I don't believe that it is. The incarnation of God as man marked the final unification of revelatory theology with intuitive theology/philosophy. It provides us an understanding of Truth that we cannot intuit as we cannot conceive of God because he is beyong our ability to understand. The theology of the Triadic Monad is important if we wish to understand the workings of Grace and the way to return to the likeness of God and therefore be in harmony with His image within us.

The Soviet Union struck its own people harder than Hitler ever did.

European man did not follow Jewish law and had no need for Jewish sacrifices, numbskull. And European man was civilized before the first Jew crawled out of the desert with his book of stolen myths.

Not at all what I said.

To be honest I have been thinking of converting. I am only aggressively opposing it here to see if I can talk myself out of doing it.

Olympian sacrifices were perfectly civilized affairs where the people got a lovely barbeque and the Gods got the bones. Chthonic sacrifices were different but that because you're going to be sharing a table with Hades soon enough so no need to rush it.

Would not have guessed that m8. Don't get discouraged by the "denominational" squabbling.

I can recommend some good books and online resources from an Orthodox perspective if you'd like that. There is actually some pretty based stuff going on in the USA especially in the Church arts.

Arabs are civilized. Chinks too. Both are obviously inferior to white peoples. Thus you're actually saying

Sounds awfully close to Tabula Rasa

Christianity removed the need for sacrifices all together, which is an impressive achievement. One repeating infinite and timless sacrifice every week without actual life lost is a great thing.
We can have fun without sacrifice.

Sure.

Right, sorry, I forgot the CCCP had no relationship whatsoever to the Russian Empire.

Books:

The Early Church by Henry Chadwick

The Orthodox Church by Fr Kallistos Ware

The Orthodox Way by Fr Kallsitos Ware

Christ the Eternal Tao by Hieromonk Damascene Christensen (good intro to how philosophy and theology work together in the Christian worldveiw)

Online stuff:

orthodoxinfo.com/

orthodoxwiki.org/Main_Page

orthodoxprayer.org/index.html

myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/prayerbook/main.htm

trueorthodoxy.org/sitemap.shtml

That isn't what he's saying. He's saying that Europeans don't need an external culture to create something unique and awe inspiring. While Greeks did basically take their alphabet from the Phoenicians that doesn't mean that their entire societal structure was taken.

And the point about sacrifices doesn't really matter. Personally I favor the holy BBQ, but that's just me.

There is a relationship but Holy Russia and the Soviet Union are not the same thing. Holy Russia and the White Russians were persecuted by the Soviets

I forgot the Orthodox Arts Journal which is based in the US and has some interesting articles on how American culture and Orthodoxy have mixed:

orthodoxartsjournal.org/

pic related

Could have fooled me. Seems more like they were another inferior race to have been taught civilizing ideals by Indo-European migrant conquerors like the Egyptians, Chinese, Dravidians, and American Indians.

But yeah, Europeans were perfect without Cuckstianity. After all, civilization itself originated with our ancestors 30-40 thousand years ago. Semites were still nomadic goat fuckers when they were conquered by Indo-Europeans ~9000 years ago. The "monotheistic" tribes of Israel only became monotheistic after the end of IE rule in Canaan, as polytheism is system natural to Europeans and imposed on vassal cultures. These can be seen in every other culture that was colonized by IE groups, Egypt and India being the best examples.

There isn't a lick of truth in the Bible except for tidbits held over from IE hegemony (the flood narrative being the most obvious example). The Cuckstian tradition holds no more truth than can be found from European philosophers wanking off about the nature of the divine. Jesus was a mortal Semite with no significance. Cuckstianity itself is a meaningless collection of fables, well except for the part where Cuckstianity is responsible for the genocide of the original priestly and noble castes of Europe, the destruction of the original cultural heritage of Europe, the admittance of Jews into Europe by Church selected nobility, and the beginning of liberalization.

Cuckstian is disgusting and it is truly laughable that anyone claiming to be redpilled would have any love for it. The only truth about Cuckstianity is how truly damaging it has been to Europe.

The weak deserve to be enslaved. And the weak will always be enslaved.

If Christianity enslaved the Pagans, that is only because they were weak and deserved it. If you do not respect power, you are not a rightist.

>>>Holla Forums

Hey look at that, he's perfectly embraced the Semitic ideal. Don't forget the actual purveyors of the slave trade of foreigners. And perhaps remember that slaves is the term the mainstream applies to the classes that were second class citizens because our ancestors once had a sense of who should and should not be allowed certain things in our communities. But what the Semitic ideal embracing christcuck talks about is malicious domination. Sociopathic tendencies can be learned and following a religion from a sociopathic race seems a poor way to live and a terrible way to burden your countrymen.

Jews won WWII, guess you think that might makes right there too?

Fuck off with your mythology, shill.

The archaeology doesn't lie. There are multiple "antediluvian" sites around the world, and colonization sites of Europeans in nearly every civilization to arise in antiquity.

This is the biggest load of bullshit that I've ever heard. Can I have a source that shows that our "white ancestors" started civilization 40000 years ago?

But who is the One with the most power? Perhaps we should follow Him and His teachings.

Can Pagans explain how they aren't cucked when all I ever her from Pagans is how they are "reclaiming the divine feminine" etc.

patheos.com/blogs/allergicpagan/2016/05/11/christianity-as-the-modern-pagan-scapegoat/

So Communism should be respected? Or kikes who won WW2? Bowing your head to a foreign Semitic religion and philosophy is what being weak means.

imo what we call "communism" is a combination of many different ideas not all of which are bad. Atheism, materialism and the belief in equality of outcome is bad. A centralized socialist form of economics can work in the right context which is in the monasteries where people have voluntarily given up owing property in order to achieve their spiritual aims and become perfect.

*owning

/thread

Evidently not as some Monarchies were meritocratic and all systems of government have been infiltrated by kikes

Pick one, faggot.
They didn't win.

They won but it was a pyrrhic victory for them.

When we mentally picture Byzantinism we see before us as if… the austere, clear plan of a spacious and capacious structure. We know, for example, that in politics it means autocracy. In religion, it means Christianity with distinct features, which distinguish it from Western churches, from heresies and schisms. In the area of ethics we know that the Byzantine ideal does not have that elevated and in many instances highly exaggerated notion of terrestrial human individual introduced into history by German feudalism. We know the inclination of the Byzantine ethical ideal to be disappointed in all that is of this world, in happiness, in the constancy of our own purity, in our capacity here, below, to attain complete moral perfection. We know that Byzantinism (as Christianity in general) rejects all hope of the universal well-being of nations; it is the strongest antithesis of the idea of well-being of nations; it is the strongest antithesis of the idea of humanity in the sense of universal worldly equality, universal worldly freedom, universal worldly perfectibility, and universal contentment.

— Konstantin Leontiev, 'Byzantism and Slavdom' (1875)

Christianity may have organized and controlled the masses into stability, but along with it, it destroyed the European spirit.
The current subversion of Europe wouldn't be possible without thousands of years of Christianity crushing the spirit of people, to the point of Ethnomasochism for the sake of an Intrinsic Fear, imprinted in this culture of Shaming the Great and Elevating the Pitiful.

The original meaning of the word "Humble" meant Someone Without Virtues, a Weak person. This word also originated the word "Humiliated" - the worse you could be called in Ancient Rome, because that meant you were a sub-human without Virtues.

So, what the Christians did? They elevated "Humility" to their highest value.
Look up what the Virtues were for the Romans, and what the Christians did with it.

Do you advocate a return to Roman values? Perhaps via Stoicism?

...

I advocate for a Philosophical Religion, based on the Contrast between Virtues and Vices.
We don't need Christianity's lore for that, and would be best creating another one.
Actually, one thing that distinguishes Christianity from the other Semitic Religions is that it took the Roman Doctrines of Virtues and Vices for it (it, unfortunately, corrupted it) in the same manner that it appropriated Pagan Festivals for the sake of Converting Pagans.
This doesn't mean Arrogance at all, as it would be based on the millennial teachings of Great people, not some manufactured product of our modern minds - but at the same time, it wouldn't be a self-degrading experience of letting all of those ancients leading us, as if we know nothing, and their words are supreme.

So basically Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics?

Memetic mutation of the word you're talking about is true, but you're implying Europeans became pussies. Between conquering the whole Earth besides three countries and crusades, you're full of shit. What you're seeing now is your average decadence after the fall of a big civilization. For example, you'll find same things in 10th century Persia which was at the time Mohammedan. Unless you're going to argue and prove following Mohammed's faith makes you weak and pussified, you've got no argument.

Stocism works very well with Christianity. It's a good philosophy.

Spengler fan?

imo Monarchy belongs more to a cultures youth and has degenerated into what we have now. I still think there is a chance for a revival based in Russia although the chance of this happening becomes slimmer and slimmer every passing year.

No, actually it would be an admixture between Cicero's temper and Cato the Elder's iron fist.
But not any of that either, I'm thinking on something fresh and new.

The Crusades were not the great things you think they were. Sure, the first ones expelled the Islamic Invaders - but do not forget that the Islamic Invaders were allowed to fuck up with the Europeans before that, and a gigantic dose of distress were needed to mobilize the "Christian Kings".
In the end, "Crusades", or, "Expelling the Invader" would happen with or without Christianity.
To exemplify that, we can analise the late Crusades, which were, YES, VERY CHRISTIAN.

The Great Explorations were motivated by a Renaissance Spirit of the Old Values of Greeks and Romans. We can see the Church's Cuckenning role in this process too, with Missions trying to convert natives instead of whipping them out.>>6519407

Under a Monarchy? Marcus Aurelius is one of my favorite Philosopher-Kings.

Russia is in a slow process of implementing what they call "The Great Eurasian Project".
One thing I fear about them is Putin's (and the Country as a whole, institutionally) having very close ties with Jews and Israel - but again, this could be all a play, we'll never know, and do best to be alert and sceptical.

This site, "Executive Intelligence Review" has a Journal. I find it to be the best source regarding Geopolitics available today, with writers from all over the world writing for it in an Intellectual High Level.
All of their Journals are free, but the "Current and Newest" editions are only free after another one, newer, is released - But you can read, like, 50% of it for free.

The Current edition talks about "Putin's 'Greater Eurasia Project'".
larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2016/eirv43n26-20160624/index.html

In the Volume 19, Number 1 of 1992, they discuss A LOT about Sergei Witte and the Imperial Russia's reforms of the early 20th Century, in the "Nicholas Era".
larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1992/eirv19n01-19920103/index.html

Interesting. Who was Lyndon LaRouche? I vaguely recall something about him being semi-controversial American who believed some strange things about the British Monarchy but I don't remember much about him.

Pretty much.

There's a case to be made for legitimate monarchy in eastern Europe. Regarding western Europe, maybe in a few places eventually; US, England, Scandinavian countries, Austria. But it won't be the same. It'll be an imitation that won't achieve full glory.

Just like Persia revived itself under the influence of Europe in the 16th century, there's a case to be made for Europe going on, unlike what Spengler said. It's state will be in question.

And I'd like to point that the infinite space of, well, space is something that may regenerate the western soul for a final resurgence of culture in its full glory.

Crusades didn't happen earlier because Europe at the time was politically disjointed and infighting. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but one idea had to prevail before everyone united, just like with Greek states over a millennia before. There's also the technological element etc.

In a way. I'd argue the late middle ages were the pinnacle of nondegenerate western culture as exemplified by gothic architecture. It is afterwards that the explosion happened.

Explosions happen only after the ingredients are gathered and culture nurtured by earlier time; late middle ages in this case. I have no problem with later pagan aestetics. Indeed, I think baroque Italian sculpture of mythical themes is the pinnacle of western sculpture. Still, it shows the first signs of degradation of European life from spiritual into purely rational by divorcing with the church in search of knowledge separate.

Christian inner faith and pagan romanticizing of external world as exemplified by Catholic rationalism is the very core of western man.
No wonder that with Protestant's divorce of the two and much more recent subversion in Catholic Church things have gone south. But I have no doubts that the Church will pull through. As for protestant lands, you're in a mess, spiritually broken. And you may try going the pagan way, but that won't bring break the greatness. Your soul will still be half empty.

So why even have a monarch?
And what gives him legitimacy? Why should he as an individual be any more fit to govern than anyone else simply due to his blood?

I mean sure,there isn't one leader,beside Iran,who isn't.
But i really doubt it's the same jews behind America.Or,they could be,which it means good ol Jacob isn't willing to go to war with Russia and is preparing to leave the petrodollar die and infiltrate BRICS in the hope Russia/China will take the mantel to defend Israel.
Still,if Russia is in this position of power now,it's because Putin prevented the acquisition,with Rothschild money,of what would become Gazprom.Oligarchs are the cancer left by Yeltsin for him,can't really jail all of them.
And Eurasia will pretty much revert the power structure:Germany and Russia will gain the most obviously.But France,Italy,England will make serious gain.
I was reading an article about a possible connection:
-Central Europe = specialized techs and specialists
-Russia = resources
-China = general techs for the mass

I'm very fond of Monarchies, but a Dictatorship like what happened in Rome, where the Emperor appointed its Successor, is also great.
I'm often pondering in my mind which one would be best and I don't have the answer for it .

I still have to think about a system of State Money Creation, based on the basis that Money is Credit.
The closest I got from a "perfect system" is if the State monopolized every form of Banking and Money Lending, and the only currency to be "Credit Cards".
I'm reading a lot about Friedrich Lists's ideas, and although I really get what he meant, the best Implementation is still giving me a headache.

It seems that he's a very intelligent man, and politically frustrated. I honestly don't know anything more about him, as I've discovered his Journal first, not him.

I agree with you that the Middle Ages were somewhat nice - lots of prosperity, birth rates, etc.
But with everything good, there was also bad things, and they were mostly the product of the Church - considering the fact that Monarchies alone could have done what the Middle Ages had of Good, and the Church role's was a "bad extra".

What I'm concerned will happen is that Russia will not break free from cultural pseudomorphosis due to the powerful degenerating influence of the West and the Jews. In such a case there may not be any sort of cultural growth in the near future.

All this has already been covered in this thread.

I don't know anything about Friedrich List. I've been mostly looking into Distributism, Permaculture and the economics of the Byzantine Empire recently and I'm currently going with something like this:

I found this series on Byzantine Economics to be a fascinating read: voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com/2013/01/23/the-economy-of-byzantium-state-intervention-and-voluntary-exchange-part-one-agriculture/

Two things make me believe it will.

First, Ukraine backfired as much as it could. The coup there gave Putin an excuse to expel westaboos from his inner circle. He's pursuing traditional Russian propaganda and memes to innoculate youth from western memes. Orthodox Church is playing a big role in that, too. Lists are being made for western and Russian sides so when it comes to a violent clash, innocents don't get caught in the purge (an actual quote from some big deal security guy I've forgotten the name of).

With how things are going between Turkey and Europe and Russia, I believe in Greek Saint Paisios' prophecy about Russian reconquering of Constantinopole.

Read "Web of Debt, by Ellen Brown"
This is really, really, a must read.
Here's a pdf:
8ch.net/pdfs/res/3.html#364

Friedrich List is not the creator, but the greater organizer of the teachings of what become known as "The American System" of economics - The Same Benjamin Franklin, Nicholas II and Hitler implemented in their countries.

I'll have a read of it. imo many of our problems could be fixed with more decentralization (perhaps under an Aristocracy?) and a focus on regional scale economics.

The problem with todays globalist system and things like the internet etc. is that they don't run on a human level and thus they effectively make decent Traditional life impossible (or very very difficult).

Yes, as an Orthodox Christian I am familiar with most of this and still have hope. It is just the level of corruption all throughout the world that is rather saddening.

Did you ever think that maybe Holla Forums is not of great concern to Jews?

They probably have dozens of strategies to deal with this place. It would be easy enough to make the website unusable, but they don't do this. Like they would let faggots post all day if progress was being made to stop them.

Really makes you think.

You see Bismarck is the antithesis of a monarchy. He was a great man but he got into power because the king (Wilhelm of Prussia) was a weak willed and weak minded fool. The only reason Germany was unified is Bismarck, all kings and princes did was sit on their asses. Also after 1890 Kaiser Wilhelm II forced him to retire, because he wanted to chase colonial ambitions. He destroyed everything Bismarck built and got Germany diplomatically isolated in 20 years. gg no re

Even if a king was good there is no guarantee that his heir will also be good.

There is another problem with monarchy. To support the monarch, it needs an aristocracy. The problem with aristocracy is that in the long run it leads to inbreeding. See pic related. If you thunk that my example was extreme consider the rulers of Europe during WWI. The British royal family, the German Kaiser, The Austro-Hungarian Kaiser and the Tsar of Russia were all blood related, and many of them had hereditary diseases.

The only way a monarchy can be good if power cannot be inherited. But then it isn't monarchy but a benevolent dictatorship.

then you should have no problem summing it up briefly

Ask the Christians in Israel that