Message from @tinfoilhatman
Discord ID: 546518238876401677
suffering for a specific group of people is still suffering.
suffering is suffering no matter if someone "deserved" it
It fixed all the problems created by that group and ideologies associated with that group, but again it didn’t force everyone to suffer, which monarchism did do
monarchism didnt cause everyone go suffer that's a very broad statement.
GG @tinfoilhatman, you just advanced to level 1!
to*
So then when did people flourish under monarchism
and it fixed problems by causing force labor among innocent peoples.
towards the early 1900s and late 1800s.
Me and you both know that isnt monarchism, it was damn near democracy
No not really.
More like monarchism with democratic aspects.
Yes, with all the parliament in such
Exactly
Not true monarchism
again monarchism with democratic aspects.
still monarchism at its core
Then in that case, name one monarchy before the 1700’s that saw a flourishing population
I would have to say the HRE would be flourishing.
as well as Poland Lithuania
the byzantine empire could count
the Roman empire too
The HRE, well in that case I stand corrected, but France is definitely not a contender for flourishing peoples
GG @Deleted User, you just advanced to level 2!
depends more or less
maybe for the low low class but middle class flourished.
As for the Roman, that was not Monarchism
to an extent
Not by a long shot
it went back and forth
It was ruled by a senate and emperor, neither of which is monarchism, the emperor would always consult the senate for political decisions
had monarchist ideals
but doesnt matter debating this considering the HRE is flourishing.
The HRE definitely did flourish, i cant and wont deny that
I won't deny that germany did flourish during the 1940s
but only at the cost of individualism freedom and the cost of innocent lives
In the end, neither of the ideologies exist in their truest form anymore
with all that I wouldnt say it was a great place to live.
Unless you were aryan
well even then