Reminder that monarchy is the oldest form of government for a reason. While there can be outlier bad monarchs, monarchy overall provided for very stable government that prioritizes human dignity and personal responsibility. A monarch must ensure his kingdom lasts for his descendants, it’s his interest to ensure the wellbeing of his subjects. Unlike elected politicians who self select for for a certain type or person, a monarch is trained from a young age. They understand duty and their responsibility, knowing they had no choice. Notice how after the two world wars most monarchies were abolished - primarily at the insistence of American and French governments? It’s also interesting how Franco insisted on restoring the Spanish monarchy after he died.
Monarchism
Let the seething commence.
Every other form of government is so gay and dishonest. Democracy is the stupidest gayest shit ever
So I'm guessing Canada would stick with the one they technically already have.
I personally would like some sort of reform on the Royal Family here, don't realy like what we have.
But what about the US, Would you make your own or rejoin the Union?
Dead ideologies need not apply
Also wouldn't the Queen of England Technically be Queen of Russia and Germany.
Do they still have lines to thier thrones?
Constitutional monarchies are a waste of time. Only absolute monarchies can provide worthwhile QoL for its subjects.
Monarchies are great for like the first generation or two and then like every 6th generation after that; terrible the rest of the time.
It's all rosy until the gigachad king dies and the country is led by an 8 year old.
very true, and also a monarchy ensures that the country has a solid vision and path for what they're aiming to achieve. with modern politics, different political parties are constantly playing tug-of-war, and essentially creating a political stalemate by wasting time and voting against each other. a king says, and it gets done.
plus, people LIKE kings. "for king and country" has been a very powerful motivator for bravery and heroism for ages in human history. people like trusting in a king, people like the heraldry and nobility that goes along with it. just look at england, the royal family is still a HUGE deal even to this day, people love the queen and the monarchs.
>Reminder that monarchy is the oldest form of government for a reason.
Because normies are stupid and only negroids cared to master occultism enough to guarantee infinite gibsmedats and control over others using it.
>Also wouldn't the Queen of England Technically be Queen of Russia and Germany.
No.
>Do they still have lines to thier thrones?
Yes, at least in Germany. Idk what's the situation in russia. Heard they had a hard time after the russian revolution.
That's evey ruler for life though, if you believe that the same can happen to National Socialism
Checked and blessed and Grace-chan pilled
Well the 3 cousins, I don't know about the current German line, who would be ruler?
But Russia, they did have a hard time, I think it's Elizabeth who would be in line to inherited
At this point that would count fascism and American style republics. Monarchies of all types are alive and well.
The house of Windsor isn’t perfect. I’d like the queen to have more power, similar to what they have in like in Liechtenstein. The prince there has quite strong real powers but is very measured in using them. I’m not opposed to absolute monarchy either.
They have living heirs to their thrones. Germany has a clear heir (as do many of the smaller pre-unification houses). Russia is a bit harder.
Exactly user. The king of Jordan still leads troops into combat to this day. The best monarchs see themselves as a servant of their people. Americans like to think that kings and queens live an easy life, but that’s so far from the truth.
>Monarchy is an ideology
Why are americans so dumb?
Leaf you dumb fuck you are a monarchy
This guy is ready and waiting for the Germans to accept him again. The French have 2-3 different houses they can choose from.
I know retard. I’d like the crown to have more control in my country though.
It is. You're ideological position is that 1. There should be rulers, 2. That the rulers power is absolute, and 3. The ruler should come from 1 family.
Oh ok. As long as you know.
>the crown
>more control
Kek. They have more control than you realize
>Reminder that monarchy is the oldest form of government for a reason.
it's not, monarchist death cult is satanic bullshit
>a monarchy ensures that the country has a solid vision and path for what they're aiming to achieve
England hasn't done anything great since it became a democracy.
I found this, don't know how accurate it is.
When Nicholas II was killed, all his offspring died too. But Nicholas had three brothers, Alexander, George and Michael, and two sisters, Xenia and Olga. Alexander died as an infant. George died without any children, and Michael had one child, also George, but this George died aged 20 after a car crash. Now Xenia fled Russia after the Revolution, and had seven children, and Olga ended up living as a farmer, first in Denmark and eventually in Canada. She had two children. Olga’s children wouldn’t count because, under Romanov rules, their father was a “commoner”. Also under Romanov House Rules, succesion was via the “eldest son” route, and only went through the female line if there were no legitimate male candidates. So Xenia’s kids would struggle too. Several people claimed to be the “head” of the Romanov family, Csar Nicholas’s cousin Kirill was one, (as they shared the same grandfather, Alexander II), followed by his son Vladimir, and currently by his only child, Maria. Maria is still alive and well, (as at November 2018) born and raised in Madrid, and has one son, George. If the female line IS considered, Xenia’s grandson Andrew, would be right in the thick of things too, but the Romanov Family Association doesn’t recognise any “claim to the throne”.
they never did anything great, unless you call being enslaved by Rome great
maybe hiring a dickless wonder who couldn't get it deep enough in any woman to sire a male child was great? just like a Muslim that guy how many wives did he murder in his search for a male child? 6?
There are recorded monarchies as far back as we keep records. Before that chieftains we’re effectively the first kings. The Greeks experimented with democracy and had some really weird results.
gunpowder ruined the monarchies of old, it allowed the king to consolidate too much power and allow absolutism to come into being, before the invention of gunpowder the kingdoms and empires were very decentralized with stading armies being a things not seen since the times of the roman empire, armies where landed which means if the king got to upity and started increasing taxes or ruling like a modern day dictator the nobles of the realm would unite to crush him, with post gunpowder armies the king could crush any oposition easily with a standing army, we cannot truly return to having monarchies without making them nearly completely decentralized
>It’s also interesting how Franco insisted on restoring the Spanish monarchy after he died.
And that demonstrates why modern monarchy is retarded and wouldn't change anything. Monarchs aren't obliged to any ideology or form of rule, they are not ideologues. When Franco restored the monarchy, the king immediately turned Spain into the degenerate shithole the Republicans died for in the Civil War. What makes monarchists think that any king in a Western country wouldn't be the same?