Are you a monarchist?

>>128176576
God save the queen.

>>128176576
http://www.strawpoll.me/13097531

>>128176576
only cucks are willing to submit to a monarchy

>>128177032
Oh no, the swedish monarchy poster is back

File: Capture.jpg (30KB, 810x317px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 810x317px

>>128176576

>>128176576
Only if I get to 1) be King and 2) conquer other kingdoms and rape their princesses

>>128176576
No, Teutonic system was superior to monarchy

File: A (3).png (892KB, 620x930px) Image search: [Google]

892KB, 620x930px

Absolutely. My countries system revolves around the Crown, thus the role its self is neccersary, and I'm content with Queen Elizabeth II.

>>128176576
Why not? As long as they don't have power.

>>128176576

A truly benevolent autocracy is the greatest form of Government. The problem is they're a lot like that successful form of communism.

It simply doesn't exist and it never will.

>>128176576
I'm mixed, as a monarchy is usually better than a republic, but than you might get stuck with a shitty monarch, and you can't simply vote em out.

>>128177032
You have a king, Abdul.

No, I will not be a serf slurping on royal cum.
t. Freedom loving amerifat

>>128176576
Yes, Monarchy fits with the natural hierarchy descending from GOD

>>128176576
monarchs are uber cucks

>>128176576
>http://www.strawpoll.me/13097490
wow i can't believe half of /pol/ is retarded

>>128176576
Yes. It's better to have a well known family to represent the sovereignty of your country than some random cuck that changes every few years.
Everyone knows Elizabeth II
Few know Mattarella

>>128179219
What right did you not have (bar some taxes that you probably pay more of now) under the rule of a monarchy that you have now?

>>128177500
totally agree. I don't even vote.

I find it weird people live lives where their subsistence is "job" and "government". If you can't start a farm, support yourself, what are you but a parasite.

File: 24534654774.gif (79KB, 247x270px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 247x270px

I don't believe our country should have a monarch but if another nation wishes to have one, then they should be able to. However, I feel a monarch should respect the rights of men.

File: King_Carl_XVI_Gustaf_at_National_Day_2009_Cropped.png (983KB, 594x792px) Image search: [Google]

983KB, 594x792px

>>128178683
För Sverige, I tiden.

>>128177500
Good goy, YOUR vote matters in democracy!

The difference is that in monarchy, you know who is your ruler. In democracy, you can only guess who it is, and most people in democracies live in illusion that they are ruled by no one or the elected officials.

>>128182363
You can hold a leader accountable too. The years following the Glorious Revolution in Britain were the frameworks for a successful monarchy.

>>128176576
>http://www.strawpoll.me/13097490
Yes is winning, literally proving that pol will support anything as long as it's something no sane person would do, proving that nothing they support can be taken seriously.

>>128183019
The majority of people in Britain are monarchists to varying degrees. Countries with monarchies are probably similar also.

>>128176576
Yes, but unfortunately Americans are brainwashed from a young age against monarchy and we don't have any royal lines to lead a movement. I don't think we should rejoin the bong monarchy before my countrymen reflexively jump on me about that.

File: Carl_XVI_Gustaf_03_500x415.jpg (55KB, 500x415px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x415px

>>128177750
You don't have a based hat king
I can understand why you are jealous

File: 1493126582572.png (17KB, 861x758px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 861x758px

>>128176576

Libertarian Monarchism ethno-city-state

>>128183019
>The thing that humans have done everywhere for thousands of years is something no sane person would do

File: A (49).jpg (78KB, 547x700px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 547x700px

>>128183880
Embarrassing.

File: Carl_XVI_Gustaf-viking.jpg (28KB, 350x254px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 350x254px

>>128184066
Who? Our king?

File: burger monarch.png (153KB, 314x358px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 314x358px

>>128182747
You mean holding a puppet accountable? Sure, we can sever their head or impeach them, but that doesn't change the rulers.

>>128183019
Humanity has ever since early stages of civilization been a monarchy (or variation) 99% of the time. Only in the last 200 mad years things have changed. Life and systems have grown so complex they are beyond anyones understanding, yet we think a sub 100 IQ girl in her twenties is eligible to vote. Even literal retards have as much political weight in the voting booths as the wisest man on Earth. Tell me who is crazy; he who supports the mad system because he's a slave to social trends of his time, or a madman who can transcends the silly opinions of his sheepish contemporaries and realizes that a truly accountable leader is needed.

>>128177305
http://www.strawpoll.me/13097828

Only good thing about a monarchy is it's easy to know who you have to kill to get a new government.

>>128184237
No, I am pro-monarchy in every form. I mean, under a monarchy, you can hold your king/queen accountable. No monarchy in the worldwide is as deeply embedded into the legal framework of a country than the British monarchy.

monarchy is the ultimate redpill

It's cheaper than a pesidencialist republic.

>>128184579
For whatever reason I got mentally stumbled there and didn't read your short post to the end. I also don't know about the glorious revolution.

I'm more in favour of absolute monarchy, a monarchy where the leader is truly in charge, with no excuses restricting him or her.

>>128186028
The overthrow of King James which led to the Bill of Rights 1689. Though the monarchy was constitutional, and with the Act of Settlement 1701 the monarchy was distanced more from parliament, it was a perfect match which allowed the disposal of a tyrant monarch but equally allowed them to hold parliament accountable. Obviously this isn't so now and parliament reign free though the Queen holds powers in theory.

>>128187216
God sets up kings and takes them away. To insert this power in a restrictive constitution to the people is lightly bad.

>>128187838
The Bill of Rights is not law like a Constitution.
Written constitutions cover legal frameworks and processes, this was simply a Bill of Rights and some further explanation of those rights. These are absolutely just to cover some.

"The fifth and last auxiliary right of the subject, that I shall at present mention, is that of having arms for their defence, suitable to their condition and degree, and such as are allowed by law. Which is also declared by the same statute I W. & M. st.2. c.2. and is indeed a public allowance, under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression."
- Bill of Rights 1689

No foreigner ("no Person born out of the Kingdoms of England Scotland or Ireland or the Dominions thereunto belonging"), even if naturalised or made a denizen (unless born of English parents), can be a Privy Councillor or a member of either House of Parliament, or hold "any Office or Place of Trust, either Civill or Military, or to have any Grant of Lands, Tenements or Hereditaments from the Crown, to himself or to any other or others in Trust for him."
- Act of Settlement 1701

"it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal;"
- Bill of Rights 1689

>>128187838
This is also English common law. We've lost quite a bit.

File: charles1.gif (14KB, 305x200px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 305x200px

no

File: charles-ii-of-spain.jpg (14KB, 448x312px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 448x312px

>>128182363
>huey theare ie'm yoor naew supremeam ruler, obey mae becausae traditions says so durrrrrr *drools*

>>128188535
>The Bill of Rights is not law like a Constitution.
it doesn't matter what you call it, a bill, an act, a constitution it's all the same: legal writing to - in your example - give power over the king to the people in legal forms.

As I mentioned God sets up and takes away kings, to put that in the hands of the people is lightly bad.

File: A (46).jpg (48KB, 525x380px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 525x380px

>>128190874
Well then, I respectfully disagree.

God save the queen.

>>128176576
ABSOLUTE MONARCHY WHEN?