Any other Monarchists in the chat?Fascism is a modernist dogma, which masquerades as being anti enlightenment, but in reality supports modernity over tradition. Populism over Aristocracy. Materialism over God. A leader derives his right to rule from transcendental divine truths, not from a mandate of the masses.
I'm not generally one for putting down traditions but frankly I consider it embarrassing that anyone ever accepted some warlord declaring>God said I get to be kingand still more embarrassing that people today defend this antique bullshit.
>>526103600I am the Lord Jesus Christ and I bestow the divine right of kings on the first negro male to make national headlines stabbing someone this year 2026.
>>526103600Fascism was a necessity resulted from monarchy's inability to resist communism.
>>526103600I am in favor of eugenic monarchy. We select the most eugenic specimen and place him as king.
>>526103600OP is incredibly based. Fuck the enlightenment.
Anything which uses presumptive words like the enlightenment, progressive, has to be suspected of deliberate bamboozlement. Soft soaping. Flannel.
>>526103600>modernity over traditionMonarchy only exists because Roman Empire was destroyed>Populism over Aristocracybased>Materialism over GodIf God wants one person to be superior to everyone else combined, I do not want such God
>>526104032In reality Mussolini did not have a terminal case of bolshevism le bad like Hitler did. He was the first to recognize the Soviet Union as a state. In fact it was the monarchs who waged the first (untold) war against the Soviet Union, "the allied intervention in the Russian civil war"Mussolini understood perfectly well that while he was not a bolshevik, someone who is Russian has every right to be one and it is none of his concern.
>>526103962In Germanic tradition right to rule comes from the divine blood there is a full book written on this if you are interested, fuck i can't find itAH NEVERMIND I HAVE ITKINGSHIP AND LAW IN THE MIDDLE AGESI. The DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS and the RIGHTOF!b:SISTANCE in the,early MIDDLE AGESII. LAW and CONSTITUTION in the MIDDLE AGESStudies byFRITZ KERNProfessor in the UnivBr!>dy of BonnTranslated with an Introduction6y S. B. C HRIMESLecturer in the Unzversdy ofGlasgowBASIL BLACKWELLOXFORDI 9 3 9Prlntf'd In Gn-at Britain for BASIL BLACKWELL 61 MOTT LTD.by theSHAKEIPEAKII HEAD PREIS LTD. in the City 01 DillardIn my very summarised explanation there are two types of rules1 Germanic kingship in which your family is chosen by god to rule and this right to rule is inherited in blood, the king is ABOVE the law and has special privileges2 Mediterranean Republics, in truth i should say GREEK but you get my point, in this case you basically have a council, a senate, whatever you call it and these people have status to each other in matters of law as EQUALS except in moments of crisis in which a DICTATOR might be appointed to solve it
>>526104763Yes, this is the core of Germanic race. The Germanic man is the happiest when there is an absolute ruler above him who he must obey. The Germanic man loves the ruler above anyone else even his own family and himself. As such, the Germanic man is not an individualist, but neither is he a collectivist, because the collective too, is worthless compared to the glory of the ruler.This is in contrast with the Anglo-Saxon who is an individualist, and the Slav, who is a collectivist.
>>526103600>the king opens borders and lets niggers in>you do a violent armed uprising because there's no voting scamIt's a double edged sword
I don't think that humans can be trusted to have power over other humans. Monarchy, oligarchy, democracy are all doomed to be corrupted and fail.
>>526105136If you are a Germanic man, you cannot go against the monarch ever, for any reason. Doing so means going against God himself.Even if the monarch is not Christian, even if he is an Atheist or a muslim, you do not have the right to remove him, because God appointed him.If the monarch is bad, this is because everyone else except him is bad, it is the God's way of punishing the nation when their faith wanes. So if the monarch imports niggers, that is the white people's fault for not believing in God hard enough.
>>526104996>>526105369The origin of this mingling of hereditary right with electiveright is lost in the darkness of primitive times. It seems toderive from old religious beliefs no less than from soundpolitical insight. For a special virtue, a mysterious" mannaJ> was inherent in the lord of a primitive people, at Both features, the power of the" folk" to elect or acclaim their king.and the restrictIon of their choice to members of the royal line alreadyappear in the terse brevity of Tacitus'ssentence. Gum. 7: II re-ges ex Dobilitate (duces ex vlrtute) sumunt." The phrase" ex nobilitate " does notmean" from among the nobles," but" in virtue of nobility," i.e, out ofthe noblest stock.I Cf. GrammaJzcus de dzfferentiis (Brunner, Zeitscht-. j. Rechtsgesch., Gef'm.Abe. xviii (1884), 228 sq.): .. inter regem et regalem hoc interest, quodreglUs puer est regahs, rex qui regit regnum!'THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS14magic which brought him close to God, as a priest, a hero, oreven as a divine being. But the Germanic peoples normallyattached this inviolable sanctity not to a single lord but tohis whole kindred; it was an inheritable commodity. Thekin might trace its genealogical tree back to the gods, ormight be qualified only by ancestral merit and divine graceto reign on a plane partly human and partly superhuman;but the special claim to lordship possessed by the noblestkin among the folk always rested upon some distinctiveinner virtue-a virtue which could be seen in the beamingeye of a prince of royal blood. It was the virtues of theirblood that lifted the sons of Woden,6 the Astings, the Amals,and so on, out of the ranks of the folk, though withoutbestowing upon any individual prince a right to the throneindependent of popular will. The family's possession of thethrone was as inviolable as the right of any individual princeto succeed to it was insecure.
>>526104660bro the black shirts had constant violent fights in the streets with communists when the movement was still in its infancy.Mussolini was kicked out of a socialist journal because of how he criticized the aspect of communism that differentiate it from fascism. He started a movement in 1919 called italian fascis of war, its manifesto being about "putting up a front against two new dangers: the resistance to innovation of the right and the destructiveness of the left"
>>526105613Yes but he did that in his own country. Therefore he had no globalist ambitions for a one world government that would eradicate bolshevism anywhere and everywhere
>>526104996Ok, then explain why the Polacken allowed millions of Jews in their land, when they are such genetically collectivists as you claim. Because Jews clearly work against the collective.
>>526105573
>>526103600>Talks about Monarchs as chosen by God>Shows a Monarch that was deposed by the people.If God chose them, why does He let them get overthrown by stupid peasants?
>>526105784They gave them the chance and by the time they realized, Poland was gone anyway. Then the pale of settlement happened.
>>526105784>JewsIn case you haven't noticed all jews are Germanics, real Israelites were exterminated by Hadrian which is why there is not a single white Israelite that is even close to being a descendant of real ancient Israelites
>>526105894I've seen monarchists on /pol/ argue that basically as king you have a divine right to rule only so long as you can remain in power, so if you're deposed then that's proof that God has removed your right, whereas a failed revolution is proof that it remains intact.
>>526106240The idea that Jews are not Israelites is interesting, but it completely breaks the 109 counter and suddenly Hadrian is not based anymore. Nah, it is better if we keep believing that Jews and Israelite are the same thing
Calling yourself a God is the ultimate flex.
>>526106299That is retarded and basically a democracy. In true Germanic ideology, the monarch is always infallible and if he falls it is because Satan has won the battle against God (Satan can win battles against God, but he cannot win the war, so the return to monarchy is inevitable)
>>526104996>the Slav, who is a collectivistRead about Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth and show me a single collectivist from that time.It was a country of lolberts until the bitter end.Centuries later, commies still couldn't get any real foothold in post- Versailles Treaty Poland
>>526106348>suddenly Hadrian is not based anymoreExcuse me? He literally permanently solved the revolting brown people in the middle east question as a true REX IMPERATOR should https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G45MdN-j2k&list=RD6G45MdN-j2k&start_radio=1Anyways, this is the moment i have to reveal the truth to you. I hold a personal grudge against Germanics for invading into Europe, they are slavic mongrels and should be deported back to Siberia where they came from along with any of their cousins.
Sort of. Whenever we have toyed with the alternatives it has ended terribly. Getting rid of absolute monarchy brought us Cromwell. When we got rid of Cromwell we had constitutional monarchy, which eventually led to democracy. Now that democracy was about as obvious of a mistake as it gets; whatever replaces that will, eventually, be some form of feudalism. It would have been better if we had stuck with feudalism. But no Pope. Popery is fake and gay
>>526106496Germanics are not Slavs
>>526103600the freemason kike fears the buddhist monarchist
>>526106474Being libertarian and collectivist is strangely and paradoxically not at odds. You can believe in free markets because you believe that this will make the collective stronger and benefit the collective the most.
>>526106576>Germanics are not slav>Both came from Siberia into Europe>Both are retarded mongolian mutts The only difference between the two groups is the timing of their invasions but they are basically the same thing, why do you think both have blonde hair, blue eyes, etc? They are basically the same people separated by a couple centuries of different genetic development.Anyways, fuck all of them, deport all white people back to Siberia
>>526106726No, Germans did not originate in Siberia; their ancient ancestors came from Northern Europe (Scandinavia/Denmark/Northern Germany) and mixed with Neolithic farmers, but many Germans later migrated to Siberia, particularly in the 18th-20th centuries seeking land, and were forcibly deported there by the Soviets during WWII, creating a distinct Siberian German population
>>526106299The concept of divine right was the final nail to the coffin of European monarchies. At some point aristocrats believed they can rule without popular support. What could be a grave mistake in a monarchy limited to a single country, was an absolute disaster in multi national empires.Today we see the same mechanism with European oligarchs and Brussels. It's going to happen again, the only question is how violent it's going to be.
>>526106809>Northern Europe (Scandinavia/Denmark/Northern GermanyThis is true but where did those tribes originate?ALL OF THEM WERE MOVING WESTWARD FOR CENTURIES, THEY DID NOT ORIGINATE IN GERMANY OR NORTHERN EUROPE, THEY ARE MONGOL MUTT INVADERSThink about the Franks, the tribe from which France takes its name or the Angles from which the name for England comes from. NONE OF THEM ORIGINATED IN FRANCE OR ENGLAND, they migrated there after centuries and overrun the local population and seized power
>>526103600>Monarchist in 2026Dude, it's alright we lost
>>526103600>I want to be ruled by an inbred dipshit because I god i dont actually believe inDumb
>>526103962Spoken like someone God hasn't told he can be King. God save HRE Eduard Habsburg
>>526103962So you are saying that you are for the traditions, but for the peasant and commoner traditions
>>526106536>But no Pope. Popery is fake and gayFive centuries later, Anglo is still butthurt about that church tax to stop the muslim invasion at Mediterranean Sea. I hope the sight of your mehmets in the streets cheers you up.
>>526107460What I'm saying is that I'm generally not hostile towards traditions that don't harm anyone. IDK and I guess IDC if that's the same distinction as you're making.
>>526107241When you compare them to democracy, in the democracy it's the special interests that actually reign supreme. People with no interest in the country, whose sole interest is sucking the nation dry. At least when a monarch considers a nation his property, he will act for the interests of the nation, rather than letting kikes take decisions for their own interests separate from the nation's.
>>526106989Ice Age
>>526107890GO BACK TO SIBERIA YOU BLONDE HAIRED BLUE EYED FREAK, WE DON'T WANT YOUR KIND HERE.THIS IS MED BVLL AREA ONLY
>>526107652A rancher considers his cattle his property but if you could talk to his herd then I bet most would disagree with the notion that he's acting for their best interests.
>>526108112Democracy is the cattle thinking it's ruling itself while another ranch's owner pays for the cattle advertisements and funds the cattle parties
>>526108607Don't mistake an attack on monarchy for a defense of democracy nor an attack on democracy for a defense of monarchy.
>>526108607But that is representative democracy. What is your argument against referendums?
>>526105369Germans just can't go against authority. Its not quirk of political organisation, but quirk of their race.
>>526108818The point is that the person in power will follow his monetary interests. The interests of an elected politician are the funding they receive from jews. That's their first worry that stands in front of everything else.Of course a monarch can also receive money and become indebted to jews, which is the whole reason monarchies fell.
