Democracy is for Cucks while Monarchy is for Alpha-Males

>>139975722
>t. cuck

>>139975806
Back to the cuck shed, Democratic Beta

I'm well aware of this fact

I seriously agree with this sentiment.

Feudalism is a far greater way of organising society. A retainer has his estate and say 50 peasants on it, he knows them all it's a community. His son will inherit the estate; therefore in order to ensure his son has a good future, he has to make sure the estate has a future. Unhappy peasants rise up and attack estate owners or resent them, keep them happy. Doesn't have to get votes, doesn't need to make stupid promises.

>>139975722
You fat oaf, I live as a "subject" and its still as shit as regular government nigger cucks.
>Butttt you live under constitutional monarchy
Nigger this is Gommunizzzzm never tried yet for real XDDD tier faggotry

Why do you want to be dominated, cast aside at will by a strong man (monarch) ???

Haha literally gay

>pro tip
Fucking reddit nigger

>>139977527
Nigger you live in New China so shut your ass, shit keeps falling out that thing you call a mouth.

You commie tier fags never imagine being on the bottom of these shite tried, miserably failed systems.

I hope a rabid chink nigger hybrid rapes you till death is your sole wish.

File: 1454119747401.jpg (35KB, 407x568px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 407x568px

Rule by qualification > rule by blood.

>>139975722
You're wrong because democracy doesnt exists. History shows that when ethnic nobility is removed (or doesnt exists from the beginning) (((banks))) always come to power.

>>139978347
Even if Reich would have won the war, it most likely would have collapsed after Hitler's death - too much was dependent on his person, and there was nobody to replace him.

>>139978737
Having nobody at the time does not mean that such system would not find somebody equally or more qualified to rule during Hitler's final years.

>>139978869
like someone who was being prepared to rule since his childhood?

>>139975722
Agreed

>>139979123
Not exactly. Although that could certainly be done, it'd be much easier to simply find the better adults.
Hell, many of the top nazi officials had very high IQ to start with.

>>139978737
Nope

>>139978869
This is not even about rule. Most of people dont understand that most important role of monarchic dynasty is basically an anchor of power that governs the state. In any system power will eventually be concentrated in hands of rather small group, this is how social dynamics of homo sapiens work, no other way. Only thing you can influence is whose hands can it be - bloodline of your own race that seen clearly to all whom they rule and directly dependent on wellbeing of their state, or some jewish banking families which you dont know, which have incomparably more power than "democratically" elected "governments" and which will never suffer any responsibility for what they do. Latter came to full power in modern world and started to destroying it only after they managed to eliminate monarchies.

>>139979348
Its better to have the skills going from father to son rather than hoping someone capable will show up. You can also make sure the heir is not a low IQ subhuman very easily.

>>139975722
Monarchy is literally wishing to be a king's subject.... Wishing to be ordered around by an all powerful leader.

It's the apex of femboy cuckery.

A Democratic Republic is for alphas who aspire to be the leader of a pack. You can use your god given charisma to rise to power and lead as you were born to do.

>>139975722
I have analyzed your argument and I find that it is most sound and coherent, good sir.

>>139980067
Right. Power will not fall at the hands of non-whites & jews in the nazi system because those are either deported or given a lot less rights than native whites.


>>139980132
You can also make sure that the whole nation does not have low IQ subhumans. Which is what eugenics does in Hitler's system.
If you make the common child a bright child you lose the need for one special bright and royal child.

>>139975722

>dying in a senseless war for your KANG

in your own name cuck.

>>139980733
I don't deny that autocracy can be viable alternative to monarchy, but it's still much less stable because heir to power is not clearly determined and lots of various shit (dangerous infighting in high ranks in particular) can happen.

>being a king's cuck
there it's refuted

>>139981126
As if monarchy doesn't have a very long history of internal power struggles and upsets.
Come on anon, any and all systems suffer from it.

>>139975722
Any man that wants to live under a monarchy is a complete sub cuck

>>139975722
>Self-governance in a minimally involved government is for cucks
>Giving vaguely limited power to a single individual due to birth is for alpha-males
No. We ridicule cuckolds because they let other men fuck their wives, so why shouldn't we ridicule monarchists for letting other men rule their destinies?
>Inb4 "B-BUT REPUBLICS HAVE REPRESENTATIVES!111ELEVENTYONE!!"
If you don't like that, there's always the Swiss model of semi-direct democracy (notice that Switzerland is also the only country in Western Europe not cucked to oblivion). That being said, the representatives in a democracy are just that: representatives. They derive their power from the electorate and at least in theory do not lord over them with impunity.

>>139981452
Can you tell what's the difference between living under monarchy and living under jewish banking dynasty owning the Fed which has power over your "democratic" government?

and what did it get the Alpha males? choking on gas while ensnared on barbed wire?

>>139981871
>Can you tell what's the difference between living under monarchy and living under jewish banking dynasty

Are you implying that there's no difference?.... And simultaneously advocating monarchy?

Anon, I....

>>139982151
There is, actually. Cant remember any monarch swarming his country with niggers (anglo bank puppets doesnt count).

>>139977527
But feudalism is basically socialism. You give the jew lord 80% of your yield and then u get to live on ramen and suck dick on the side to afford luxuries such as internet. You are the ultimate cuck

>>139978347
In a democracy, your leader is *necessarily* a demagogue who must appeal to the negative aspect of humanity to gain voter support.

In a monarchy, it's all up to chance, which means we have the potential to have a good king. And if a king is a bad king, then we have a regency.

A princely government that is still limited in its power by a constitution and representative assembly would be the best kind of government.

>>139981871
>Asking an american why kings are bad
Lmao

>>139983159
Not even all of the Founding Fathers were republicans, some of them wanted to establish a new American monarchy. The primary goal was simply removing British imperial power.

>>139982098
What did (((democracy))) get the alpha males? Sitting back while they're women and children are raped and murdered in their own country?

>>139983045
A representative assembly that limits power is too similar to democracy.

>>139982151
you dont deserve to use that flag

>>139981851
if you view statism as such a sleight upon your manhood why arent you an anarchist? or is it that democracy gives you the illusion of choice that you feel such a big boy riding in the front seat

>>139982098
ah yes, not like three decades later the same thing occurred but with 10x as many casualties perpetrated by two shithole countries that had just abolished their monarchies and supplanted it with the most genocidal regimes known to man