any secession would start the end of Pax Americana

which is good

any instability is good

and benefits our cause

i'm not calling for creating instability

simply saying that it benefits us

Honestly, I support Texas seceding now too, before they become 40+ solid democrat electoral votes

You mean East California?

My point is, a right wing White secession would never fly unless it is a reaction to a far larger event of Leftist Che Guevara type secession. We will always be judged at a different standard.

We aren't talking about a right wing white secession though...it's the left that wants to break apart the country (most literally now).

But we could benefit from their folly.

I think that, should there be civil war, the government will not be on our side. It would most likely be after we become a minority and are politically powerless, and be a reaction to outright land seizures or a reparations tax or some sort

yes

that's why you start learning a foreign language now

which one though? GermanoArabic?

any really

Swedistanese?

Eh. Civil War sounds a bit much for me. Barring some extreme event. Likely could end in some form of apartheid.

russian, chinese, castilliano

by chinese Imean mandarin

Leftist areas like California leaving now could usher in decades of right wing rule, hopefully slowing down immigration and buying time for identitarianism to grow

@Sam Anderson But the apartheid would be against whites at that point. Think Benny's "browning of America"...

It wouldn't be apartheid because they want and need to be around us to have civilization

true

It could be wealth based. Regardless of one's political leanings, nobody wants to live in an 80% Latino or Black area

anti-white laws at the very least. gibs for the many, not for the few at that point

I don't forsee any particular "War" gents.

Just a steady decline into dysfunction.

ala Brazil

yeah 😦

Brazilian racial dynamics are interesting.

whites will simply keep getting used to the worsening America until we are politically powerless

Indo European bed time

yeah, i need to hit the sheets as well.

At this point, I see two main possibilities. One is a dissolution of the United States. The other is steadily becoming Brazil

And yeah old school WN types have been race war fantacizing for decades. Not gonna happen in such a clean cut manner like you read in your fiction books bud.

all you MD/VA peeps need to stop being bums and get sleep too!

it will suck

Yeah, that's the most likely outcome, but they were speaking of secession, so I was expressing that the U.S. isn't just going to split apart with no backlash.

a civil war will suck, very bad

but

if we stick together

we'll be much better off than the lemmings

or antifa

You would know

@TMatthews I see us becoming Brazil sadly.

Even Brazil has a secessionist movement in the wealthier, more conservative, mostly white South

Rip

@Kingfish exactly, I started one already

@YourFundamentalTheorum f

F

I refuse to accept becoming Brazil

¡Jose Antonio, Presente!

I was literally typing that lol

PRESENTE!

PRESENTE!

this is nice to see

*blocks your Falangist revolution*

wasn't Franco a cuckservative monarchist?

he had the chance to make spain great again

but no, he had to put a B*urbon on the throne

I've not heard the phrase cuckservative monarchist yet

Anything is possible in stage 9 clown world

@Deleted User i'm refering to the conservatives that one famous failed painter refered to

the old elite

who wanted everything to be like the old ways

I understand

Franco incorporated elements of Spanish political tradition. This is normal for fascists. Mussolini technically kept the monarchy in Italy too. Mosley wanted to retain the British Parliament. Spain didn't really go downhill until his successor decided to make it a democracy and socialists took over

Franco is what we should all strive to be

He was also staunchly pro-Catholic. Ideology always has to fit the population. I like Franco, but his particular style and stances don't fit America. I still think that we can and should reclaim the founding fathers as identitarian figures

Franco has been described as a “conservative authoritarian” but I think reactionary suffices

Restoring the monarchy was a poor choice, though.

Franco was def not a fascist of any kind

>Restoring the Monarchy was a poor choice

>Monarchy
>Can be bad

*slaps European history book on table*

Swaziland is an absolute monarchy

OOF

Yes, when the monarch quickly installs a democratic liberal regime.

*states what sovereign right is*

Swaziland is the only country in Africa to recognize Taiwan as the true China

@Reinhard Wolff he should have put a Habsburg monarch, or a hohenzollern if he was desperate

Actually its the Kingdom of Eswatini now bigots

There’s more AIDS per capita in that country than people

Swaziland?

Yes

Literally over 1/4th of the population

Just looked up the aids and came across a cool site

Yeah that one

I personally blame the Spanish high command and people for allowing that to happen tbh

Highest percentage in the world

notice that figure only says adult @ophiuchus

Meanwhile

After fighting a war that cost your country 1/4th of it's population you would think they would understand but alas peasants will be peasants

Idk why it says n/a

Monarchies are problematic for the same reasons democracies are.

Monarchy-One weakling ruins everything
Democracy-Degenerate Plebians ruin everything

>thinking monarchy is one man ruling

Mixed system, for the win.

I still support having a constitutional republic, but I think we need a test to vote

Actually figuring from population data the US has an HIV prevalence of 0.337734111145226%

Rounding is big gay

It can be unbiased. Name all 50 states. Name at least half the presidents. Etc

@Tyler0317 I mostly agree with that. As I believe you want a monarch at the top with a democratic base that will take care of the smaller forms of government.

Monarchies are arguably much easier to fix @Tyler0317

assassinations and nailing to a tree used to do the trick

Any monarchy with real power wouldn't fly today (especially not in America) because nobody believes in divine right and it therefore lacks a claim to legitimacy

(NOT ENDORSING VIOLENCE)

lmao is that isreal in the bottom right

Rate of HIV in Swaziland vs the US is 80.5:1

If One were required be a property owner/tax payer/military veteran
to vote.

Problem solved

@TMatthews They'll believe in divine right once the church has major power within the state

I know a hyper leftists girl who thinks there should be a test to vote

oy vey

>Isreal
>Europe

Baffling to me how that’s controversial

@Jawa That ship has sailed, my bro

I'm sorry, but monarchy is dumb. Sure, personality traits are heritable, but there's way too much variation to guarantee that the king's son is going to be fit for leadership. Might as well roll a dice.

@Jacob are you obsessed with EU4?

If you can’t pick out what state you live in on a map you don’t get to decide how your country is governed

@Jawa No they won't. Churches don't even preach that today. If you're suggesting mandatory religious indoctrination plus a monarchy, you're going against literally everything that is American

@Jacob do you propose a democratic leadership then? because then we will just run into the same problems we have today

It's not about heribility it's about grooming from a young age. A leader that is groomed from the age of 12 will be better than a leader that puts their own advantages first with various forms of political pork and other forms of lobbying.

uhhh how does EUIV come into this?

>rolling the dice

>random params of successors

Democracy with a severely restricted franchise

@ophiuchus woof, prime ground for a socialist revolution

@TMatthews Mate I hate to break it to you but if a nations identity is based on "no king" than it has nothing to build upon. America is more than just an anti-monarchy state.

You can't guarantee that the monarch will be good. If education worked like that, then civnats could make everyone a constitution loving, law abiding, tax paying, republican

No, democracy. Constitutional Republic.

You can't however you have a elective primenougure where the king chooses the best successor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_government
My current preference.

@YourFundamentalTheorum lol isn't Sweden a monarchy? Ya dude I'd take democracy over "just give it to the king's doing", even if democracy isn't ideal

sweden isn't an absolute monarchy

it's a (((constitutional))) monarchy

where the king is a literal puppet

How did it end up that way?

Peasants

I'm not aware if there's a single legitimate monarchy left

@Jawa Not just "no kings" but literally the entirety of US history comes from an origin that was fighting monarchy then crafting a balanced republic (the longest enduring one in history)

the tl;dr peasants and feudalism

Sweden was an absolute monarchy for a long time

Even if you from from a young age, there's a lot of variables in how kids turn out

I agree, but I don't think those are good grounds for giving the power to the uneducated masses

*Gustavus Adolphus, libera et imperaaa*

and lemmings

Neither of my parents intended for me to be a white identitarian yet here I am

ever read the dialogue with Meno?

In the modern age, monarchy cannot exist like it once did. It's probably the second worst political ideology behind anarchism

Plato talks about htis issue

My take isn’t that there is a universal “best” form of government. Some are better than others, generally speaking, but the validity and utility of a particular style of governance are often dependent upon a number of factors: historical, cultural, religious, racial, etc.

Monarchy gets points for longevity, though.

@TMatthews While I agree the possibility of a monarchy in the U.S. is lower due to the culture we are brought up in as stated earlier there defiantly is not anything contradictory behind American Identity and monarchy. It is possible for a country to go against past aggressions and find the best possible outcome.

I would trust a bunch of peasants to sort it out together over "muh kings son"

@Jawa Implying that monarchy is the best possible outcome lmao

@Jacob i woudln't

sorry

@TMatthews Depending on the situation it can be

most humans are stupid

@Reinhard Wolff haven’t seen that picture in a while

All forms of government are good for a niche situation

@TMatthews I agree it can't exist in this modernity, but I wouldn't say it was bad for the time.

@ophiuchus I remember, too

Leadership of the best. Is what we ought to strive for.

How we choose to define the criteria for "best", I'm open to ideas.

To install traditionalism I would argue Monarchy or Fascism is the way to go

@Jawa this

or maybe a mix

fascism for 20 years and then a moanrchy

or smthing

The Netherlands during the early 1900's has the ideal government for most people I would state

Most humans are stupid, but the average is a better bet than betting on one guy to turn out well

I would read into it tbh

No fascist govt is going to give up control after any amount of time... <:really:453005408064241674>

@Tyler0317 people with more cows are better than people with less cows

Inevitably, you will end up with king retard

@Jawa you have a link to read about the netherlands?

@Tyler0317 I'll look for one

@Jacob people actually turn out to be more stupid when they are in a group than alone

First step is mandatory boot camp for all high school graduates(including the job specific training after basic)

the group iq is the lowest iq in the group divided by 2

okay now sure us some proof of that

@Sacramento 100% agreed

@Tyler0317 Cant find one that significantly describes it to the extent I would like to provide

@Jacob i'll dm something to you

@Jacob I don't really have a dog in the fight, but to counter your retard son king, kings have been getting couped and assassinated since kings existed.

and again,
>implying monarchy is rule of one man

>inb4 (((goldstein)))

@Tyler0317 Basically it's a constitutional monarchy with a lot of restrictions on the monarch that allows for both authority and democracy to be achieved.

@Deleted User True, but that takes away the main benefit monarchy can offer, which is the stability o a long time ruler

@YourFundamentalTheorum I there's a rule about archiving all links

@Sacramento woof forgot that one

@Jawa roger

http://archive.is/zMdLn

bam

Monarchy today would be largely the rule of the king's advisers and an even less accountable bureaucracy than we have today

Even a good king can't supervise everything

well it's still better than an international clique supervising everything

(((Kings advisers)))

the biggest problem today is probably lack of accountability

Historically, monarchs have often fallen in debt to (((international financiers))) of their wars, but democracy hardly proved any more immune to subversion so I won't press that point too hard

monarchs are also a much better rallying point than a democracy

people would rather die for a monarch

than a president

who will be gone in 4 years

*8...

i'm talking about kamala harris here

@YourFundamentalTheorum I think people would rather die for "the republic" than "the monarch"

@YourFundamentalTheorum I disagree completely. People would rather die for their nation and their people, not for some random royal family. Perhaps that's different where the monarchy has been in place for centuries, but not here

@Sacramento idk I would not die for any republic

but that's me

@Deleted User I'm not implying that. Retardo president would be pretty bad, even though presidents aren't dictators.

And couping and assassinating isn't something good to depend on.

@YourFundamentalTheorum Then what would you die for?

@Sacramento God and Tsar

I would die for my people, not a system of government per se. That said, if the race issue was settled and we somehow had a monarchy, I'd try to tear it down because that is not what I want for my people

I'd die for Trump Kahn tbh

@Jacob when in the case of monarchy though, my point is it's exponentially easier to accomplish than any other governance

Gentlemen, it's 1:20 AM here in TN.

Thank you all for the stimulating conversation.

🛏

@TMatthews Your people and your governing body are supposed to be synonymous. Maybe not these days, but that's how I meant it

Everyone knows who Donald Trump is, most conservatives could barely explain the concept of "The Republic"

Go with what you know

@Sacramento Government by and for the people is something to die for, on the understanding that "the people" means just us whites, and that it cannot be completely democratic

I like elections. I dislike universal suffrage

whoever mentioned lack of responsibility, it was caused by the republic. The republic disseminates responsibility from representative to representative. Meanwhile an absolute monarch is responsible for everything, absolutely everything to God.

@YourFundamentalTheorum That was a really good quote, but the problems I mentioned still stand.

Also, there are others ways of resolving the problem of dumb masses than monarchy.

@Jacob htere is no fool proof way, so I as a religious person would put my trust in God and adovcate for the only God-approved form of govt in the Bible.

to put it simply.

Just because they're responsible for it doesn't mean monarchs automatically will get the best results, especially if there's nothing to punish poor performance

well

I'm not particularly religious, so that won't do much for me

Same

North Korea is pretty much a monarchy. Total rule, hereditary role, etc. And this is in modern times.

i'm a juche nationalist

jk

Ok, this is an epic idea

ffs not that again

>candace owens

Imagine if my dad was a monarch. He'd be pretty disappointed in how the monarchy turned out.

I've noticed that monarchists tend to be ultra-religious (usually Catholic) and yearning for the good old days before the Reformation when everything was orderly and theocratic. Not an attack. Just an observation. As a godless agnostic myself, I can't say that I relate

I loved it when I made her meet patrick little.

Based

@TMatthews imo monarchy and hierarchy in general is the natural order. But you can have your own opinion

Based MAGA deplorable 😎

even the old germanic and particularly slavic tribes had a leader or a "knyaz"

Real <@&488531212437159936> hours, who up?

h-howdy

the only real slavic republics were (((merchant))) republics

Huh?

I still have the role F

i'm talking about the likes of Novgorod