Why is northern Europe and immune to enlightenment? They still have kings. At least spain tried. Even China and Korea got rid of royalty and never looked back.
Because the northern european monarchs never fucked up their countries so royally as to be deposed.
>>18580471Yes they did. They killed a Charles.
The royalty writ themselves into powerless wealth. It would save money in the long term to put them to the barrel, but in the short term they provide additional income through tourism.
Europeans really just like the appearance of having strong centralized leadership despite ostensibly telling the rest of the world how much they love bureaucracy, Europeans are simply hypocrites who lack self-awareness
>>18580478If they love bureaucracy, why didnt they emulate China?
>>18580447They're mostly vestigial, they stay in place primarily by irrelevance, they'll be reduced to wealthy private citizens (unless they do something stupid) next time there's a major political movement holding principles their status isn't compatible with, china had gommies + anti manchu nationalism and korea had the japanese
>>18580481Look up what the word "ostensibly" means
Europeans are an enslaved people. Similar to how a child can't bear to become a man, Europeans cannot bear to be given the full responsibility of managing themselves so they always keep a King ready to fall back on. They are cucks. They pretend to have democracy but can you truly be a democracy if you aren't a fucking republic?
>>18580447Their kings don't do anything except serve as ambassadors, charity workers and mascots and are generally liked by the people. Northern Europe had a very amicable transition from monarchism to parliamentary democracy, so there was no real reason to get rid of their monarchs through violent revolution.
>>18580616>no real reason to get rid of their monarchs through violent revolution.A king being alive is reason enough to overthrow him and chop off his head.
>A king being alive is reason enough to overthrow him and chop off his head.How come "people" who talk like this are usually willing slaves to corporations and also shills for socialist dictatorships?
>>18580654>dictatorshipsSo a king in all but name? Cut of his head too faggot. Youre a slave.
>>18580665How come "people" who talk like this are usually willing slaves to corporations and also shills for socialist dictatorships?
>>18580670>seething so hard and ego completely shattered he resorts to pretending to be a botkek. i accept your concession
>>18580677>seething so hard it responds to me again even though i'm talking about it and have no actual intention of discussing with it
>>18580636Why?
>>18580814Because if there is a King there will be monarchists. The reason the French republics got overthrown were because of that. Had they wiped out the Bourbons then they wouldnt suffer a restoration. Ignoring the Bonaparte fiasco that is.
>>18580825Do you think there is a serious threat of Scandinavia reverting to absolutist monarchies, to the point where it warrants the execution of these families? If yes, what do you base that assessment on?
>>18580830I base this assessment on reddit and female hormone injections.
>>18580830I base this assessment on the election of hitler, emperorfying napoleon, etc. RBMK reactors dont explode
>>18580851>>18581534>anon has strong opinions on a topic but folds like a house of cards the moment he is asked to justify themMany such cases.
