[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / dempart / doomer / leftpol / mde / polmeta / tingles / vg ]

/monarchy/ - Past, Present, and Future

Monarchy news and discussion

Catalog   Archive

Winner of the 68rd Attention-Hungry Games
/d/ - Home of Headswap and Detachable Girl Threads

January 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Subject *
Comment *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 4 per post.

The King is dead! Long live the King!

File: 1425421801505.jpg (39.4 KB, 512x338, 256:169, bloodywhitebaron2.jpg)


Welcome to /monarchy/. I'm editing this top post in order to condense things. This is now the only sticky and a general meta thread. There has been no change in BO, I'm just trying to clean things up a bit more. I may delete out posts in this thread just because I would like keeping the >>1 post for tradition's sake.

Rules: https://8ch.net/monarchy/charter.html

About/Links: https://8ch.net/monarchy/about.html

More specifically, if there is a new BO or volunteer of /monarchy/, it's announced here. If there is a change to the rules, it is promulgated here. This is also a thread I'll use to be a little less aloof and talk about minor and meta stuff: general feedback, complaining about troll threads, accepting submissions for flags, banners, moderation, and rules, etc.. A court, if you will.

23 posts and 10 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at


File: 9fcd5983c1af9ed⋯.png (3.54 KB, 1350x16, 675:8, board directy.PNG)

File: 1427485651686.png (15.9 KB, 318x323, 318:323, ungern.png)


Can we get a Monarchist reading list?

I'll start with some:
Dante's De Monarchia
De Maistre's The Generative Principle of Political Constitutions
Filmer's Patriarcha
Kuehnelt-Leddihn's Liberty or Equality
76 posts and 29 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



>Dante's De Monarchia

why did he suggest that humans strive for unity?

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.


Contribute music, preferably monarchy-related.

Marches, songs, and contemporary music.

WebM, mp4, and Youtube.

Music inspires.

347 posts and 341 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 31764a8182b4ef9⋯.mp4 (4.78 MB, 640x360, 16:9, Marcha de Revista de S.M e….mp4)

File: 0e3d7941faaa6f5⋯.mp4 (8.23 MB, 640x360, 16:9, Marcha de Cádiz.mp4)


File: efb85bb02304cc2⋯.mp4 (6.39 MB, 640x360, 16:9, La Vuelta de los Voluntari….mp4)

File: e69ae47e2d5f9ca⋯.mp4 (4.49 MB, 640x360, 16:9, Guerra al Yankee.mp4)


YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.


File: 731c8d8ad559077⋯.mp4 (7.1 MB, 640x360, 16:9, ¡Ya hemos Pasa'o!.mp4)


File: aa93a861199ebd2⋯.mp4 (1.21 MB, 640x360, 16:9, oliver-cromwell-buried-n-d….mp4)

File: 5f3d1fd75f6b78a⋯.jpg (21.59 KB, 272x350, 136:175, 114976-004-7BEF5156.jpg)


There are many electoral monarchists showing their vices and making communists blush with their talk of guillotines and beheading monarchs. This is a shameful state for a monarchist to be in, electoral or hereditary, but that won't be the topic of this thread. Rather than discuss people with a vendetta against monarchy (whether it is absolute or plain hereditary; mostly narrows to hereditary), I'll have to be an apologist for hereditary monarchy. This is because these people basically come down to a hatred of primogeniture succession. For the reason of centralizing land and favoring the eldest son unequally over the other sons.


Monarchists who favor hereditary principle and yet still like primogeniture have to wrestle with two extremes. There is the aristocrat-lover, ultra-individualist who hates nations and nationalism in favor of micro-states and divided up counties/prince-electors, and then there is the nationalist who wants the big national state with democratic anti-primogeniture sentiments. This comes down to the age-old struggle between monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. The monarchies of the WW1 period in Central Europe reached a middle ground between nationalism and royalty. There were two German states, but an encompassing pride for nation regardless. This might upset nationalists who favor complete unification while seeing multi-ethnic peoples together in hereditary empires. Hereditary empires unified people thanks to primogeniture (without electoral succession) thanks to gavelkind succession becoming less practical. Centralization organically grew as land became more indivisible because the eldest son inherited land and the land remained tied and incorporated more and more people on said land rather than constantly unifying and splitting it up again.

The electoral monarchies were strongly hereditary monarchies and those that weren't would later become hereditary with the rise of primogeniture. I don't think the electoral process of aristocrats would avoid centralization, despite primogeniture bringing people under a fold. Usually centralization and decentralization are a rising tide and happen regardless, especially when empires grow larger and larger; but this doesn't mean they have to be overbearing on liberty. An anon pointed out that the Russian Empire, despite centralizing with the Romanov dynasty, sPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

2 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 962f6f328f0b347⋯.jpg (91.05 KB, 1024x512, 2:1, DWQZV6BU0AAOecx.jpg)

"Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes." – Benjamin Franklin, in a letter to Jean-Baptiste Leroy, 1789

Aristocrats and parliaments, elected head of states, they consider to be tax watchdogs that will keep taxation relaxed. I doubt it. While you could point to outrageous examples of dynasties with high taxation, like Qin Dynasty, which embraced legalism, you can also notice other dynasties with lower taxes. Take notice of this quote:

"The Chinese people have only family and clan solidarity; they do not have national spirit…they are just a heap of loose sand…Other men are the carving knife and serving dish; we are the fish and the meat." - Sun Yat-sen describing Qing Dyasty and how decentralized it was. If Qing Dynasty isn't good enough, Ming Dynasty was pretty hereditary and they were laissez faire.

Hereditary monarchies don't have to be so strongly centralized. Most monarchists want a dynasty to last as long as possible (seen as a good thing), an aristocracy that respects kings, and some kind of prevailing order. While, on the flip side, people could argue that centralization is better than decentralization. I might as well say it there could be a middle ground.


File: 737518f1f33fa5f⋯.jpg (31.18 KB, 635x452, 635:452, 8482-004-7D9CC6B2-17.59.37.jpg)


If you want better laws, you should first think about what moral influences are behind those laws before extolling them. The imperial dynasties embracing Confucianism usually had lower taxes. The imperial dynasties embracing legalism typically were stricter and had stronger laws.


File: bce23fd0ad4aa44⋯.png (32.49 KB, 1181x239, 1181:239, primogeniture.png)

>from succession thread (because why not)

<Male-preferred primogeniture makes the most sense to me, as long as there is some legal mechanism to allow for disinheriting the crown prince if he is not of sound body or mind. Things like tanistry, partible inheritance, and the Rota system encourage civil war and the gradual disintegration of the realm. Primogeniture allows for an indisputable heir to the throne to be (hopefully) produced either before the reign of the king or early on in it. This allows them time to be trained extensively in the duties they will one day fulfill, and also minimizes the chance of needing a regency council to run the kingdom because the king died while his heir was a child.

>Should children under morganitic marriages be recognized for purposes of inheritance or succession?

<I see no reason why not, especially if the marriage would be particularly eugenic. Introducing a bit of genetic diversity to the noble gene pool is not a bad idea, and marrying commoners who have no claim to anything might be safer for the realm than marrying into a family from a rival kingdom that will be able to make a legitimate claim to your throne in a few generations.

>Should children under cousin-marriages be recognized for purposes of inheritance or succession?

<That's a tough one. Cousins are usually genetically distinct enough to avoid most of the risk that comes with incest. However, falling into a Hapsburg situation where successive generations are continually marrying their cousins will eventually lead to a bad situation, even if the political benefits of keeping certain lands and titles in the family are undeniable. The best approach would probably be one where cousin marriage is legal but socially stigmatized, and any children not of sound body and mind are disqualified from the succession.



>any children not of sound body and mind are disqualified from the succession.

By whom? The primary issue I see with giving a power like this to some outside body, is that the outside body will abuse their power to declare royalty mentally unsound in order to gain more power for themselves.



>By whom? The primary issue I see with giving a power like this to some outside body, is that the outside body will abuse their power to declare royalty mentally unsound in order to gain more power for themselves.

Hm, the dynastic succession normally would go to the monarch if things were sound. The monarch could secure his succession. If not, the royal house. If not the royal house, the privy council. If not the privy council, clergy and parliament could assist. I think the body is enough to secure itself. It is a tough call.

File: eb9640dec8cdb32⋯.jpg (1.18 MB, 2189x1989, 2189:1989, rsz_52e7dc35103c575d43bb44….jpg)


Promoting this reading list for monarchists.

This is for any newcomers and readers.

>what else may this thread be for?

Passing other infographs, but really it's just to promote the latest edition.

21 posts and 10 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Hobbes’ Leviathan is not worth reading unless you read it with the knowledge that it’s very bad. It’s a scandalous book that monarchists/authoritarians will read thinking its “based” without realizing that it is not only a formative book on liberalism but also entirely filled to the brim with materialism and near-atheism. Don’t read Hobbes unless you’re a student being forced to read him.



>It’s a scandalous book

In the world today, books and doctrines are far more atheistic than the works of Hobbes. If someone wants to call Hobbes out for being excessively liberal, I want to know that person. That person must be very hardcore.

>not only a formative book on liberalism

To be fair on Hobbes, his purpose was to come out as an apologist and refute the critics of his time. Look at all the things spoken of the Long Parliament and Hobbes' concern with classical political theory. His target audience was the earlier liberals of his day. All he did was turn the tables. Yes, this did enable and develop the ideals of social contract theory. I still don't think any monarchist should negate learning about it. We're all a little bit liberal these days anyways.

<however, Hobbes is egalitarian and modernist

This is true and untrue for different reasons. Yes, Hobbes does start off with people motivated under self-interest and passion. He condemns egalitarianism as a "state of conflict". What makes Hobbes' work modern is his revision of classical political theory. In order to understand Hobbes' Leviathan, it is important to know the context of his time (The English Civil War & his ideological opponents) and Aristotle's Politics.

>formative book

I'll agree that there are a few disappointing things in the book. But there are a few good things in the book also. Hobbes was very erudite and knew the classics. Many valuable political insights remain hinged while other political treatises would discard these. A few points of view from Hobbes aren't bad for a monarchist to read into. Hobbes himself was a monarchist and a tutor for King Charles II.

> It’s a scandalous book that monarchists/authoritarians

Authoritarian is another spooky revisionist term meant to scare you. Don't use it. But I will agree that a monarchist should be aware of social contract theory and how much they agree or disagree with it. The only offense about Hobbes' writing is it demands stronger centralization (which will disturb those who like Post too long. Click here to view the full text.



It's not like Capitalism or even Capital are permanent. I do believe that we have gained all that can be gained from socialism through the Internet and software piracy.



Thoughts are a non-scarce good (my having your thought does not exclude you having the same thought), so socialism does make sense there.



As the other guy says, thoughts and intellectual property aren't scarce, and thus not legally property, so filesharing wouldn't be criminal in ancapistan.

File: 175422504d429fc⋯.jpg (35.07 KB, 280x349, 280:349, 0acc6188.jpg)


Remember that the political animals are all breeds of ideological charlatan. If they subscribe to an ideology, they are a political animal; a political animal is somebody who chooses to be other than man; he chooses to become an partisan or idealist. They see everything through the lenses of their -ism and think highly of plain things. Political animals destroy each other, lavishing to take any mantle of authority. They are dogs in the mud, trampling over each other.

Don't become a political animal. Think of authority, not anarchism. Think of people for who they actually are, not what they "should" be or what party. Be loyal to someone and not an ideal. Don't aspire for power and control, but become somebody of action and authority. Find strength, not slander of opponents. Think of honor, not false chants of liberty; because liberty is honorable and before people are truly free they must become responsible first. Before anybody has any liberty, they must find duty, or else they seek to have liberty without any responsibility – that is a demagogue's tyranny.

113 posts and 61 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: d410eeddf9035bf⋯.jpg (74.25 KB, 501x722, 501:722, Merchant-of-Venice.jpg)

The quality of mercy is not strained.

It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven

Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:

It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.

'Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes

The thronèd monarch better than his crown.

His scepter shows the force of temporal power,

The attribute to awe and majesty

Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;

But mercy is above this sceptered sway.

It is enthronèd in the hearts of kings;

It is an attribute to God Himself;

And earthly power doth then show likest God's

When mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew,

Though justice be thy plea, consider this:

That in the course of justice none of us

Should see salvation. We do pray for mercy,

And that same prayer doth teach us all to render

The deeds of mercy. I have spoke thus much

To mitigate the justice of thy plea,

Which, if thou follow, this strict court of Venice

Must needs give sentence 'gainst the merchant




political thought is based on one's biology



<virgin anime posting


<chad art posting


File: 1239dfae5897906⋯.gif (368.31 KB, 800x600, 4:3, WEB-anti-semitism.gif)

REPUBLICAN HOUR(Theodore Roosevelt Foreward/to Herman Bernstein)


To all who are working to make the world safe for democracy and for durable, righteous peace, this volume sincerely dedicated.


My dear Mr. Bernstein,

I congratulate you on the noteworthy service you have rendered by the discovery and publication of these letters. They illuminate, with a glare like a flashlight, the dark places of diplomacy of despots; they show what diplomacy in autocratic nations really is, and what it has done and sought to do, right up to the present time. The whole world ought now to understand that the despotism of Germany was one of plot and intrigue no less than ruthless brutality and barbarism, and that with a cynically complete absence of all sense of international morality and good faith sought to bend to its purpose of evil the poor feeble puppet who at the moment embodied the despotism of Russia. These letters should be made familiar to all civilized peoples.

They show the folly of the men who would have us believe that any permanent escape from anarchy in Russia can come from the re-establishment of the autocracy, which was itself the primes cause of that anarchy—for the governmental condition was so intolerable that they put a premium on the production of lawless violence in the ranks of the lovers of liberty and justice and fair play to all.

They show, furthermore, the wicked folly of all who would now treat with the German despotism for a negotiated peace, a peace without victory, a peace into which the wrong-doer and the wronged would enter on equal terms. This war was made by the militaristic and capitalistic autocracy of Germany, and it was acquiesced in and even promoted by the German socialistic party, which thereby proved itself traitorous to the workingmen and farmers of the world. With these documents before them, no Americans who hereafter directly or indirectly support the Prussianized Germany of the Hohenzollerns can claim to stand in good faitPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 58c050b5d6c4261⋯.jpg (110.54 KB, 460x519, 460:519, 460x519.jpg)

There are certain things you should never do.

The story of Abraham and Isaac demonstrates compliance with God, but also the truth that nobody should have to sacrifice their own family. If a monarch asks anyone to do anything unnatural and cruel, they have no obligation to do it. With monarchs ruling by the grace of God, then it is also understood in the same instance.

File: 7c70caba7d62727⋯.jpg (72.19 KB, 512x606, 256:303, 13490341.jpg)


Absolute Monarchy is not tyranny

>“I must tell you that the liberty and freedom [of the people] consists in having of Government, those laws by which their life and their goods may be most their own. It is not for having share in Government, Sir, that is nothing pertaining to them. A subject and a sovereign are clean different things. If I would have given way to an arbitrary way, for to have all laws changed according to the Power of the Sword, I needed not to have come here, and therefore I tell you…that I am the martyr of the people”

<The true monarch, like many who have gone to their martyrdom for this principle, fight for their absolute power (or divine right if you like) not out of personal ambition but because in so doing they are fighting for the absolute right of every one of their people to all that is justly their own.

<It could, perhaps, more simply stated this way: in such a system everyone has absolute power over all that is legitimately their own. Just as the monarch cannot simply take life, limb or property from his nobles or people at his whim, because they have absolute right to it, neither can the people, at their whim take the Crown or royal authority from the monarch.

Monarchy starts with a good premise for liberty and laws and fairness. It is unequal; the monarch inherits his authority and status as a king and it represents the highest reproduction of these values. A crown has no words, no articles, and no doctrine; but the crown represents something stronger. In Bossuet's properties of royalty, monarchs are subject to reason and will have consequences for their actions. A monarch could shoot himself and have consequences for it. There is no business making up hypothetical horror stories of a monarch becoming a tyrant at whim. This is a republican myth that asserts all monarchies are tyrannical and all republics are libertarian.The political reality wouldn't allow for it for monarchies, and the structure and legitimacy of monarchy is necessary. The absolute power of kings is necessary for their organic capacities.

TL;DR: Monarchy and authority aren't necePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

44 posts and 31 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 19fdacdc666c859⋯.jpg (560.17 KB, 700x6826, 350:3413, 0be7b7a05023bfd4116acbb714….jpg)

File: 0fc114a2578cac5⋯.png (186.45 KB, 1788x853, 1788:853, 1.png)

File: 79e97e01a39f540⋯.png (235.04 KB, 1800x372, 150:31, 2.png)


Hopefully these will help.



Thanks, but I'm already familiar with Aquinas' arguments. They are good arguments, logically sound, but ultimately they are arguments in favor of a first cause generally, not God specifically.



God comes to the picture when you realize more about yourself. What does it mean for the Source of all being to reflect self-awareness and the fullness of experience?



/monarchy/'s favorite clip.



>What does it mean for the Source of all being to reflect self-awareness and the fullness of experience?

You're going to have to tell me, because I'm not quite sure what you mean by that.

File: a8eb9a61e88ccdd⋯.jpg (120.85 KB, 503x494, 503:494, Ecclesiastes.jpg)


Bring in the most iconic pictures.

Let's have a content dump for all images we cherish.

126 posts and 157 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: fa6c2c2c725e4bd⋯.jpg (210.23 KB, 831x1200, 277:400, DWNS4LhUMAASnn0.jpg)


File: 980012c060c8464⋯.jpg (138.24 KB, 957x960, 319:320, DW-CRzSVwAILkCO.jpg)


File: e6fcfbfe79701c8⋯.jpg (111.36 KB, 670x1024, 335:512, DXuqoTiVwAAJ7Ij.jpg)


File: 55842582c5ea070⋯.jpg (227.71 KB, 1066x852, 533:426, DHwflhbVwAAksuG.jpg)

File: 63f9731770151ef⋯.jpg (109.09 KB, 1024x683, 1024:683, DQe4O8QUMAAOd15.jpg large.jpg)

File: b11a7f610ac1a57⋯.jpg (124.82 KB, 660x734, 330:367, DMh1H41VwAAVTsp.jpg large.jpg)


File: 3b64ceaaf769d61⋯.jpg (40 KB, 468x557, 468:557, Princess Victoria Regina.jpg)


V-Chan has always been the wisest of women.

File: cb26c567925b732⋯.jpg (61.89 KB, 768x450, 128:75, 36290120806.jpg)


Hear yee, hear yee, the Homestead belongs to Peasants. Post banter and do whatever you want in the Homestead. It is the place for peasant dialogues, peasant banter, and peasant media. The Homestead is the place of free reign and unbridled peasantry.

Aristocrats are welcome to sit and laugh at peasant LARPing. Even talk with peasants, but this is the peasants' turf.

41 posts and 46 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 2782697188aaffe⋯.mp4 (5.48 MB, 640x360, 16:9, Kaiser_Wilhelm_ii's_addres….mp4)



Wh're is the Dresden emoticon?


File: e97cd372fd1d91a⋯.mp4 (8.71 MB, 640x360, 16:9, Sir Arthur 'Bomber' Harris….mp4)


Oh you


File: d16be913aa82d71⋯.mp4 (1.55 MB, 480x320, 3:2, 伪满洲国成立时溥仪的讲话.mp4)



He appreciated the perfection of a well sculpted body, liberals love to equate appreciation with lust

File: e98e88cc3b74436⋯.jpg (94.07 KB, 535x600, 107:120, Check em.jpg)


Neo-pagans are materialists at heart.

5 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.






Materialism leads to egoism and individualism which in turn lead to the dissolution of civilization.

Source: modern day politics



read hoppe



What the fuck is a materialist? It could be literally anything to anyone.



hoppe is a nigger

File: 987f476e9d61565⋯.jpg (42.58 KB, 960x327, 320:109, korwaxD.jpg)


who is your favourite monarchist?

mine- picrel

9 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Hi /leftypol/


File: 0e1dcafa008a786⋯.png (43.06 KB, 227x188, 227:188, Fuu laughing.png)





File: d1d00fa953fa2df⋯.jpg (465.59 KB, 1280x978, 640:489, c074d3f3d77d9090dd0406fb98….jpg)

Jose Maria Gutierrez de Estrada


File: ef48a05f4835b9d⋯.jpg (98.99 KB, 640x425, 128:85, DPII.jpg)


File: 2816ee390760cf3⋯.jpg (68.86 KB, 284x347, 284:347, 221016006.jpg)

Prince Rupert and his dog

charging into battle.

Dashing cavaliers.

File: 1875514af49ef92⋯.jpg (112.14 KB, 562x792, 281:396, aaa86787ca8bfbe60cced53b8f….jpg)


This is a no-anime zone. Post high-quality aesthetic paintings and quotes of historical or fictitious kings and monarchists. Bonus points for realistic depictions of medieval (or fantasy) knights.

41 posts and 102 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: d967003fc16b1b0⋯.jpg (187.86 KB, 1200x600, 2:1, YfEboR0.jpg)



even giving birth is not natural any more



German facial hair is based. Fact.


File: a2de54c41da5e00⋯.jpg (84.6 KB, 773x555, 773:555, Dx2rKZxXQAA0KuK.jpg)


File: 81295d97811764a⋯.jpg (112.67 KB, 457x446, 457:446, 1417934115329.jpg)

File: 855075265ac9e8c⋯.jpg (25.21 KB, 300x369, 100:123, 1f50bfef2b8295b0234baa3692….jpg)


The ultimate affront to all ideologies is being an imperialist.

They all hate the legacy of empires.

This is not the imperialism of colonial empire, but the long-spanning imperial domain of ancient civilizations and the imperial domain of holy ranks and great emperors. Emperors were once a strong symbol.

Monarchies are not only afraid of going extinct. Empires are. True empires. I am not referencing "pseudo-empire" and those who point to Zionist hegemony or the current state of the Commonwealth. What the nationalists refer to "globalism" is not the imperialism I love. The glory of imperialism could be as national and local as it is powerful. Emperor is the rank above king. It is the ultimate status.

Before anyone whines about colonialism, I'm going to point out that an anti-imperialist is basically an anti-monarchist. Look no further the 20th century and the most prestigious monarchies were empires. The British Empire. The Austro-Hungarian Empire. The German Empire. The Russian Empire. The Brazilian Empire & 2nd Mexican Empire. The whole basket of great imperial regimes. The only Emperor left in this world is in Japan.

2 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.



But the question wasn't about Rome's legacy, it was about Rome itself. I can also appreciate Rome's legacy, but as an example of a monarchy it's not a very good one.


File: 35d81bc9527f920⋯.jpg (154.23 KB, 1100x611, 1100:611, a031231234s.jpg)


>as an example of a monarchy it's not a very good one

These monarchies bear the name resembling Rome. We are talking centuries of imperial rule and influential figures like in the OP, Emp Constantine the Great. Sure, you could debate whether throughout those centuries whether they were an effective monarchy. Maybe the administration wasn't very good, but the military accomplishments and Roman engineering are a marvel. Nearly everything is crushed under the weight of time.

>It was quite literally the birthplace of the republic; a central tenet of their cultural myth is the casting out of Tarquin and permanently ending the kingly rule of Rome.

That's not why I care about Rome. If anything, monarchists have been discontent with republicans bringing up the legacy of the Roman Republic. However, many of us are Medievalists and opening up that chapter in history doesn't begin without Rome. There are many Western monarchical traditions and attitudes originating with Rome.


>> I'm going to point out that an anti-imperialist is basically an anti-monarchist.

first of all, fuck you filthy peasant, if this is how you have to make your point, chances are your point is invalid.

secondly, i 'll have to point out that an empire doesn't belong to an emperor like a kingdom belongs to a king;

>> Emperor is the rank above king.

>> The German Empire.

The Germans had a kaiser, aka chosen one. this kaiser was chosen by the princes(kings in their own countries/provinces) this is why emperors are supposedly above kings. in the 19th century this system had been replacement by a monarchy in Germany.

(i m not aware of any other emperor being "above" kings, though iirc the Polish had a similar system but called it the nobility choosing the king)

An empire is bigger then it's nation-state, aka it has colonies that it exploits for it's (economic) benefits.

the British kept having a king despite ruling an empire.

so did the french(although they thought it healthier if they chopped off his head)

(the Austrians also had a kaiser, chances are this had to do with them speaking german, i have my doubts about this empire's greatness, but i do accept their monarch being called an emperor, because he was trying to rule multiple racially-different nation-states)

>> Look no further

also fuck you

>> The only Emperor left in this world is in Japan.

probably because he was one of the first to cede his power.

The only empire left in the world is the USA, btw, they don't have colonies but they have clear satelite-states(or proxies to sound modern)

sorry about going all linguistics, btw, but yeah, you should 've made a thread about the difference between an empire/emperor and a kingdom/king first.

and yes, imperialist is an "affront" emperor is Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: d9d8bc9e2c82af2⋯.jpg (61.74 KB, 1200x544, 75:34, DzW62vKXQAErRZ-.jpg)


>all this vulgarity and monarchomachism

I never spoke about electoral monarchy, but the electoral monarchist vermin comes out. All I said was we need empires back.


File: 831b97e7a31dd1b⋯.png (1.62 MB, 1200x931, 1200:931, 1200px-Galician_slaughter_….PNG)


>so did the french(although they thought it healthier if they chopped off his head)

Two can play this game.

File: ac2e0be6fce9b70⋯.jpg (89.5 KB, 548x750, 274:375, 361526_lwya_Jadwiga_by_Bac….jpg)


Do you have a devotion to any monarch that has been declared a saint? For me it's mainly st. Jadwiga of Poland but I also pray through the intercession of st. Louis IX of France

11 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



why do u like morocco if u r a christian?


File: 17a19538ffa22a0⋯.jpg (116.12 KB, 720x960, 3:4, 12336028_991792314210304_3….jpg)



Technically an elective monarch. The only male Polish monarch to be declared saint. I approve.



I am part moroccan and part European . My mother baptized me as a child, and I have substantially grown in my Christian faith since then. I still have a strong love for my other country though, and I am partly related to the current ruling royal family in Morocco, so there is that.


File: 988a74023c164e1⋯.jpg (31.83 KB, 257x370, 257:370, Louis-IX.jpg)

>no one mentions the quintessential monarch saint



Not until you came along.

File: c351652f7f7797f⋯.jpg (44.23 KB, 368x540, 92:135, Fionn Mac Cumhaill.jpg)


I'm a descendant of King Brian Boru of Ireland. I'm certain that half of Ireland would have to die before I was anywhere near a legitimate heir to the now defunct throne, but it's something I find fascinating about my ancestry. Are you guys descended from/related to any monarchs or royalty?

11 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



>anime pic

>calls other people cringy

Mr. Pot, I'd like you meet Mr. Kettle.


Stewart clan, 1600s we landed here. Unfortunately half my family lives in poverty




Calm down Tyrone




Delete Post [ ]
Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / dempart / doomer / leftpol / mde / polmeta / tingles / vg ]