Message from @Valet the Clown
Discord ID: 434776231590887435
As usual, we hit empty areas https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/984997554164125696
I just really hope this doesn't become an annual event
You should have all listen to me when I said Democracy had failed
right. because an autocratic government is so much better
it's not like that shit fell flat on its face in WWI and hasn't stopped being BTFO'd since
>Implying the medievals were like that lmao
what was the 30 years war?
the people in medieval times also didn't have to deal with nuclear weapons
A war between catholics and prots which later devolved into a war of succession
The founding fathers didn't have AR-15 as well but I that is irrelevant
it's not really irrelevant. AR-15s don't give you the ability to eliminate life on the planet
the system of monarchies was probably the best system for its time.
but times change
Democracy isn't the opposite of autocracy, it's often the path to it
Times have changed for the worse
what makes you say that?
The divorce rates, the boom and bust cycle, moral relativism, high time preference
Liechtenstein
yeah. it's called a constitutional monarchy
autocrats tend not to like constitutions
Kings had laws before them, they were still subject to it
examples?
perhaps to a higher entity like the church, or to a more powerful kingdom, but not to their own people
@Valet the Clown and all those things you mentioned are a product of post-modernism, not necessarily democracy.
culture is up stream of politics, my dude.
@Dinosorcerer The salic law
ah. yes, the defining negative trait of monarchies
succession
proof positive that you can only reliably count on autocrats to provide for two things: their own status and the status of their children
also Frankish succession worked much differently than the way we think of it today and led to extended infighting amongst a king's sons whenever he died
Charlemagne attempted to remedy this, but was unsuccessful
@Oliver Starley has Russia done anything in response yet like they said they would?
Monarchies in the middle ages were not autocrats, kings were usually recognized authorities, and I rather have a very controled succession with future minded people instead of demagogues. And it is the modern not post modern when all of this happened
@H8KU of course not. They'd be nuts to retaliate
@Valet the Clown not in the case of the Franks they weren't. Charlemagne made his son, Louis the pious swear not to kill, maim, or exile his brothers (and rivals to the throne) Louis did all three after Charlemagne's death. frankish successions were notoriously bloody affairs
Yeah, and later with the Capets it became more civil
not much more civil.