How can you be so anti-democratic?
Monarchists, explain yourselves
Landon Reyes
Other urls found in this thread:
Wyatt Roberts
Democracy is inefficient and unstable. There's more reasons it's bad, of course, but a lot of other reasons cause instability and inefficiency, such as voting and elected officials.
Voting is retarded because the masses cannot be trusted to reliably pick their leaders. Elections are just a glorified popularity contest that are an absolute waste. Why? Because it, along with voting, ensures that elected officials will see getting elected again as a priority. Rather than fixing the country, they will make short-term decisions that do not truly improve the long-term health and prosperity of the nation. Presidents and prime ministers get into office, and then after snagging their personal gains leave. Napoleon III remodeled Paris and built parks and invested in a lot of long term projects such as railroads systems, which could never happen if France was a republic. Democratic leaders would bicker to much to actually get shit done and every end of one leader's term risks being a completely unstable 180 in policy.
Democratic leaders are also not accountable to their actions. Monarchs are one person, and the head of the government. As a result the people know who is making the decisions and can justly put the blame on him for being a shitty leader. In a democracy to take down corruption you need to mow down pretty much all the representatives. My state of Illinois is a good example of this. For the longest time representatives have been nothing but corrupt, and the governor never does anything about it except keep optimistic fools hopeful by pretty much saying "uh yeah I'm working on it lmao."
This isn't even taking into account leaders not being able to make changes when Congress or Parliament can cuck them out of decisions, such as when Napoleon III wanted to expand the army for national defense, but the parliament wouldn't let him for their selfish autistic reasons. Later, during the Franco-Prussian war, France could have really used an expanded army.
Anthony Stewart
democracy is for faggots
monarchy is for based whites
Eli Thompson
How would a monarchy work in real life?
All modern monarchies have democratic institutions. How would you abolish them without triggering a reactionary uprising?
Adam Hill
>All modern monarchies have democratic institutions
saudi arabia doesnt
Julian Nelson
Just cut the head off the snake and get rid of all the "democracy makers" (AKA plutocratic oligarchs) and reveal the lie for what it is.
Samuel Mitchell
Monarchies are also more stable than a republic since there are no 180s in policy every 4-8 years when a new president comes in and the people will always know who is next in line to become king. And speaking of Kings, they are trained from birth from their father and his loyal advisors to ensure greatness for the nation. The monarchy is entwined with the history and culture of the nation in many countries, and they can inspire nationalism and a sense of unity between the people of a country, and thus to take monarchies away is like destroying a country's culture. It is not wrong to say that deposing a monarch is like taking the father away from a family, as his people is his children.
Also consider the fact that very often people who win the lottery go bankrupt and end up poor again. Meanwhile rich people are rich and stay rich largely because they know how to manage their money. In other words they were taught how to deal with their money, while those who won the lottery were not. Similarly a monarch is taught how to manage a nation and ensure its prosperity starting from a young age while republican leaders come into office like lottery winners.
Abolish them in a similar way that parliaments limited the power of monarchs, eventually the parliament will hold very little power.
Jason Cooper
just rename switch the word "president" with "king" and "federal" with royal.
Done, you're now an elective monarchy
Gavin Wood
>elective monarchy
absolute monarchy ftw
Daniel Gutierrez
>Abolish them in a similar way that parliaments limited the power of monarchs
Slowly?
What if normal people feel miffed about the lack of representation?
Henry Thomas
>elective monarchy
yeah that worked out really well for Poland
Jason Wilson
Elected monarchs were the norm for thousands of years. The inherited monarchy is a relatively new phenomenon.
Brandon Morgan
There would be a pretty big group that supports a monarchy with more power if this were to happen in the first place. The best/easiest way a monarch would be seen as great by the people is if the king were to rule really long and well, like Augustus.
>elective monarchy
cringe
Adrian Bell
democracy is a lie
the masses are always plebs this will never change
random medieval serf had better quality of life than modern milenial faggot
you know who rules and you know who fucks up and when that happen you can always storm the palace and behead the monarch. Democracy goves you a sea of faceless names that are partially somehow at blame
at least monarchs have their lands and their wealth linked together
bill gates on the other hand owns fuck all to nobody
Aaron Hughes
Even if such a plurality of monarchists existed, which they don't in America, it would take a string of great monarchs to get this to work.
Also, John Adams was not a monarchist
Dominic Bailey
>you can always storm the palace and behead the monarch
have you guys never shot a president before?
Nicholas Lee
“Democracy” doesn’t exist
Jackson James
Obligatory chart
Wyatt Taylor
be your own monarch, stop looking for someone to lead you.
Andrew Lee
>even if such a plurality of monarchists existed
Obviously in most countries there's not that many who want the monarch to have full power, but societies and views change. Nobody 30 years before ww2 would have predicted the rise of national socialism and communism.
>which they don't in America
True, but an American Caesar can always come when something like a great depression hits, whether it be 20 or 100 years from now.
>it would take a string of great monarchs
Not really, it's more likely one or two is needed. There were some in the Roman Empire who wanted the republic back but because Augustus ruled long and well all people remembered from the Republican era was civil war.
>John Adams was not a monarchist
It can be inferred that he would be more sympathetic to monarchism than other founding fathers, but a man who is supposed to be a big republican speaking of the flaws of the people choosing how the country works is part of the point of the quote.
Ethan Thomas
I would die for them
Kevin Bailey
how can i be monarch of romania while im stuck in israel?
Julian Cox
you can't.
your desire to rule makes you unfit to lead.
Mason Morris
okay
romania was still much better off a monarchy
Julian Miller
Monarchists present a solution for a problem they don't understand. They blame democracy but forget the problem is representative "democracy".
We don't have the Athenian democracy where citizens vote and decide everything (from wars to taxes, laws and so on). The system you see in most of the "democratic world" just allows the population to have the illusion they can decide who will get a check and powers to control a small part of the government.
Nolan Rivera
>pilpul
ok joomer
Levi Morgan
im not a jew
Matthew Jackson
Do you feel you have any representation now?
Liam Ortiz
hey come to
if you want to speak with some Romania faggots just like you
Noah Roberts
>Nobody 30 years before ww2 would have predicted the rise of national socialism and communism.
True, however National Socialism and communism are very post enlightenment ideologies. Even if they wouldn't want to admit it.
Who did Hitler appeal to for every decision? The German *people*. Who did Stalin appeal to for every decision? The *workers* (ie the "people")
NS and communism are not actually reactionary ideologies historically but part of two European progressions in political development after the French Revolution; Nationalism and Socialism.
> an American Caesar can always come when something like a great depression hits,
He almost certainly will not be a monarchist. Adopting the title of king would make him an easy target for counter-revolutionaries.
No. I am open to monarchy. However, I do not believe that it is a viable ideology.
I'd like to see it work though. But I'm not going to put on blinders and pretend that people don't feel very strongly that there needs to be citizen involvement in politics.
John Allen
whenever i post on Yas Forums i get banned for some reason
also just noticed the flag says moldavia and not moldova
Benjamin Collins
That's not how it works, you can't simply become a great men just like that, not everyone was born a Caesar dude