I view Monarchy and Democracy as private property vs public property.

Aydin brings up a central monarch, but I don't think she talked about barons or other lords

so it could very well be that she's talking about just Monarchy. but even then that doesn't gel with the part in her vision where people exist in small communities of free people.

that's not how that works

There will ceartainly be people who'll be granted titles, but those can be taken away. And frankly the only thing in feudalism I don't like is the freedom of movement.

and with the way the US economy works, primarily with an abnormally mobile workforce, you just couldn't get that sort of system to work without collapsing our whole economic system and starting over from a primarily agriculture-based economy

>Implying if there were to be a new system the old one would stay as it is.

well I don't think they consciously realize the radical change that would have to happen by the way they were talking about it.

I think only the normies believe that it can be achieve without much trouble although it could be as they said "They are becoming further right wing"

They are still new to this.

Although @AydinPaladin I hope you stoped calling it Anarcho-monarchy. I swear to my finger.

The path from normie, to actual thinking human is a long one, frought with peril and dead ends.

Anarcho-Monarchy? fucking what?

also, I didn't even realize she was in this discord. some mod I am

"Anarcho-Monarchy" Lol so just a normal monarchy?

depending on your definition of what a "normal" monarchy is

The best goverment ever.

>Die of plauge
>Executed for 'witchcraft'
>Taxed to living in mud huts

>Not knowing we are taxed more today.

>Die bc an atom bomb.

>Die in the name of "Freedom"

>NSA watching you fap

>Child drag queens

>Wars are becoming more barbaric

because Atom bombs would be so much better in the hands of a monarch, I'm sure.

imagine Wilhelm II with an A-bomb

Bc a monarch looking to get more land would destroy that same land

Not really interested in a debate about it atm, but I am interested in by what measure we are considered taxed more.

Willy sure tried his hardest to destroy a good part of French land he wanted to take

Also, if before anyone tries bringing up prima noctis. That was a bigger myth than smallpox blankets.

and he could have easily nuked London. capital of a nation he did not care for and who's supremacy on the waves threatened his dreams of Weltpolitik

Is it a philosophical war in his mind or an actual territorial war?

a war for the very existence of the Kaiserreich. to Wilhelm, Britain was almost as evil as France

Mate there is your answer.

and he had no interest in occupying the British Isles as far as I know. if he had the ability to crush them and remove them from the war, I do not believe he would have hesitated

When the US got in WWI it became a war of ideology Republic vs Monarchy, when it started as a territorial war.

of course the French and British were quick to reframe the public image along similar lines

I will not say there have never been bad kings such as King Louis X but they are far better than Wodrow Wilson for example.

we can trade good examples and bad as much as we want. one of the problems with American politics is that we've given the chief executive to much power. We've made his office more like that of a king's as time has gone on. the difference between a bad president and a bad king is that there are more people to get in the way of a bad president's decision.

I disagree, given than a King had to beg money for his wars while a president doesn't; a King can be controlled if they are unruly, mad, or bloodthirsty more often than a president than names his delusions as "The will of the people"; Kings are able too do much more good given that it is in his benefit to increase the current wealth and future wealth of his state; A president only thinks of the now.

keep in mind that it was not the republics that declared war first in WWI

Of course

it took the US until 1917 to join

But it ceartainly took a bitter turn when it got in, especially when it came to Germany.

of course it did. all that fresh material bolstering Germany's enemies. some 2 million fresh troops sent to the Western front. it's no wonder the civilian government and the military (the Kaiser himself having fled to neutral Holland) agreed to the armistice.

I was talking about the treaty of versailles.

oh, you mean WIlson's 14 points that the French pissed on?

You know what I'm trying to get, don't be coy.

what are you getting at?

What happened after WWI

Germany's economic collapse caused in large part by the reparations, a brief revolutionary period (not in that order), the dissarmament of germany, the eventual rise of the Nazis, what is your point?

Had Germany stayed as it was before WWI had that happened?

are you trying to suggest that they wouldn't be disarmed under the Kaiserreich?

Had Monarchy stayed in power had that happend?

yes. why wouldn't it have? at any rate, the Monarch himself decided to abdicate.

U sure?

they didn't have much choice in the matter. sure, they could have told the allied powers to fuck themselves and continue prosecuting the war, but with the introduction of America and the revolts they were already dealing with, they would have risked going down the same path as Russia.

And then they became degenerates and then natsocs.

well we really have to ask ourselves which is worse, a united German-Russian Communist bloc or what we ended up getting instead.

Neither really are good.

but at least the Soviets and the Nazis expended a ton of their energy kicking the shit out of each other instead of focusing their attention elsewhere.

and let's not forget who funded Lenin's return to Russia from exile.

Who?

Germany

A country is not a person my dude

what good is a king if he does not take responsibility for his country's actions?

No, I'm saying name the person.

I just want to make sure you know.

I can't seem to find a specific person in the history book I have to hand. the most I get is a vague referrence to "German authorities"

Oh well.

Apparently according to historian Richard Pipes, who sources official documentation, the German foreign secretary, Richard von Kühlmann was either the man who came up with the idea or at the very least signed off on it. Additionally, the Germans, according to Eduard Bernstein, continued to send gold to the Bolsheviks between 1917 and 1918. As much as 50million deutsche marks.

I can't seem to find the number, but I'll take your word for it.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-poland/israel-and-poland-clash-over-proposed-holocaust-law-idUSKBN1FH0S3

meanwhile Turkey is still extorting money from the EU in return for not releasing some 3.5 million refugees into Europe

oy vey

Use Archive.is @Dinosorcerer

Doesn't everyone use adblock anyhow?

Don't give them clicks @Dinosorcerer

We(Polish people) are very pissed of

It is Missclick

Umm.. what does that say?

It was talk with Polish anarchomonarchist, but I sent it accidentally

She told me How country steals money from people and how much

Polish politics is a big mess to be honest

But do you feel it's more stable than the rest of Europe? Do you see economic and social growth besides that?

I think that Poland is quite stable

Exception is Switzerland in Western Europe

Also

Spain is very unstable

You think Switzerland is more stable? What do you think they're doing right? And what should Poland implement in your opinion?

Change the health care system for example one person have wait for medical operation for 13 years

13 years?! What?!

Yes

It’s record but it is real

What type of operation?

Denture in knee

Endoprosthesis

It is caused by limits in national health fund