Any Reactionaries Out There?

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Flag *
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki	Show oekaki applet (replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1458439287307.jpg (251.33 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, His Serene Majesty.jpg)

Any Reactionaries Out There? Overlord Romanicus 03/20/16 (Sun) 02:01:27 2c54b8 No.13925

Hello /politics/ I have scoured the internet to find a place of political discussion which is welcoming to Reactionaries and I think this would do great. I don't mean the cancerous Dark Enlightenment with their pseudo-reactionary ideas. I mean pure Anti-Enlightenment and deeply religious Reactionaries. You may notice my flag is the symbol of Feudalism (btw what is that coat of arms anyway).

I am free to answer questions about my beliefs and even discuss with other Reactionaries in how we are similar or differ.

Anonymous 03/20/16 (Sun) 02:47:14 a031f0 No.13927

>I mean pure Anti-Enlightenment and deeply religious Reactionaries

Why are you against enlightenment ideas (which era(s) and please be somewhat specific) and why do you think religion should have a large influence in politics?

Overlord Romanicus 03/20/16 (Sun) 03:05:07 2c54b8 No.13928

File: 1458443107073.jpg (3.08 MB, 1920x1080, 16:9, Progressivism Colored.jpg)

>>13927

After long amounts of time thinking to myself about politics I found myself being further bushed into believing that the Enlightenment was pure evil.

It all begins with one important concept of the Enlightenment called "Whig History". Which Wikipedia simply defines as, "presents the past as an inevitable progression towards ever greater liberty and enlightenment, culminating in modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy."

This got me thinking about the progressive idea of "social progress". At first women got the right to vote, then they demanded reproductive rights, and then they become Feminazi SJWs. I imagined that soon the LGBTQ movement will become something like that in a century. Worst maybe pedophilia will become acceptable in the name of "tolerance and progress"

I know this is sounding like fear mongering and slipper slope fallacies but I have legitimate concern that "liberty, equality, fraternity" is an inevitable spiral to degeneracy and decadence. Soon I began to suspect anything that is "socially progressive".

I firmly believe religion is important to society, I am Catholic personally and I want my society to be Catholic. What matters is all societies have some kind of religion, some kind of dogmatism. Dogmatism in morality prevents the Degenerate spiral of Whig History, with exception to religious doctrines that are not morally dogmatic.

So my entire political belief system is designed to oppose socially progressive reforms. I am not a monarchist, I prefer Aristocratic Republics. History shows that, int he Enlightenment, the ones who need to be enthusiastic to reforms where the monarchs themselves. I admire the Holy Roman Empire and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth because their decentralized aristocratic governments held the longest against social progressivism.

Cont.

Overlord Romanicus 03/20/16 (Sun) 03:06:57 2c54b8 No.13929

>>13927

Unlike /pol/, which I am a veteran lurker both in 4chan and 8chan, I do not necessarily blame Jews for the problem though I see parallels between leftism and people of Jewish decent.

Overlord Romanicus 03/20/16 (Sun) 03:23:23 2c54b8 No.13930

File: 1458444203345.png (104.58 KB, 600x400, 3:2, Imperial Banner of the Hol….png)

>>13927

Cont.

As mentioned before my favorite form of government is the Aristocratic Republic.

of "Traditional Authority" known as Patrimonialism and it's sub-type Feudalism. These system of authority is based on personal rule where the leader and chosen administrators treat their positions as something to directly enrich themselves. The private sector and public sector is blurred int he eyes of the state official.

This sounds like corruption, which it is to a modern society, but it has to be stated that corruption is illegitimate private gain. I don't envision creating a perfect society, only one that can work in sync with human nature. We humans are selfish and very self-interested.

In the patrimonial system, a nobleman selfishly wants to make himself richer and more powerful. To do that he must have his estate produce more wealth. To do that it needs to be more and the workers must be best kept as possible to maximize their efficiency (more on serfdom later). It's not perfect, but it is not meant to be because nothing is.

In an Aristocratic Republic, unlike a monarchy, the collection of nobility have complete control in matters of politics. The clergy may also join, depending on the religion of the society. A monarch is more susceptible to social and political reform to benefit himself.

Emperor Joseph II had the ideas of "Josephinism" which were Enlightenment reforms.

King Louis XIV curtailed the nobility with his absolutism allowing King Louis XVI to be more open to Enlightenment reforms, then the Revolution started mostly because of unrelated policies running the country to debt.

In terms of economics I distrust Capitalism and Socialism. Modern conservatives are blind, they don't realize that capitalism is a threat to traditional values. Socialism is generally threatening to anything right-wing in general. The truly traditional economic system is the Guild System which are essentially Government chartered cartels who have the privilege to practice their craft in a certain town. Essentially a localist variant of crony economics, this is essentially the traditional version of Corporatism.

This is a very shot summary but essentially I support a Catholic Patrimonial-Feudal Aristocratic Republic with a Corporatist Economy.

Overlord Romanicus 03/20/16 (Sun) 03:50:15 2c54b8 No.13932

>>13927

The only reforms I do support is technological reforms but only when it is deemed necessary (military tech, increasing standard of living) and not immoral/degenerate (Transhumanism and the rest of the Singularity Cultist including advancing AI)

Anonymous 03/20/16 (Sun) 13:42:11 586bb3 No.13983

>>13930

Sounds like pre 2007 Bhutan would be the east asian equivalent to your dreamstate..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Bhutan

Concerning the guild system, Cologne was a city which was stuck in the past for the standarts of the 17th century, maintaining both a hundred years old medieval jew-ban and a guild system.

Both were abolished by napoleon 1794 as the city surrendered to him before any harm could be done. Now, the guildsystem was described as being a hinderance to the economy (albeit I havnt found a specific reason why tho) and the changes did not leave an all too bad long term impression on the population.

Would be interesting to find something more about that particular economic system, albeit I fail to imagine how it could work in the present time.

In the end I believe that while the belief in eternal social progress cant be good because it will soon strain the limits of what a society can adapt too (and has negative consequences if other societies stay conservative while capitalising on the errors that sometimes happen if you try things out that have never been tried yet, like the muzzies in europe.)

I dont think a total denial of some form of steady societal change by the means of technology is viable.

The internet alone does things to the people which lead to social dynamics that were unheard of in all of human history.

Neoreactionarys try to be like the western equivalent of the salafis in the muslim world but fail to gather much influence because there arent enough uneducated people who believe them unconditionally because god/allah/King-Sheik/authority of your choice I guess.

Overlord Romanicus 03/20/16 (Sun) 18:10:55 2c54b8 No.14063

>>13983

OP here (Different Computer)

Actually my East Asian Equivalent is Japan during the Azuchi–Momoyama period or the Republic of China under the Beiyang Government, which was essentially governed by various cliques of Warlords.

I envy Salafis, they try to emulate the Umayyad Caliphate and Muhammad's rule of the middle east which dated back from the 630s-700s yet my belief was High-Late Middle Ages Europe. My beliefs are ironically more "recent" yet Salafis have a mainstream existence in the Middle East.

Overlord Romanicus 03/21/16 (Mon) 01:30:01 2c54b8 No.14165

>>13983

The guild system was viewed as a hindrance to the economy because they were inherently rent-seeking. Guilds were granted charters by the government to have monopoly of their trade in certain cities (this rule varied but that is general rule).

There was no free enterprise, essentially if there was a shoemakers guild in your town only they can make shoes and no one else can. Guilds eventually limited membership so fewer people can join them. I support this

economic system because of two reasons:

1. Businesses join the patrimonial system and become loyal clients to the government since they depend on our support.

2. Even with slower economic growth and slower technological innovation I fully consider this and prefer the social advantage guilds create to preserve traditionalism.

Anonymous 03/21/16 (Mon) 15:08:29 fdafc7 No.14205

>namefag with meme political belief and obvious bait

Anonymous 03/21/16 (Mon) 17:10:01 44687c No.14215

>>14205

>meme political belief

Like anarchism?

Anonymous 03/21/16 (Mon) 17:43:36 822fed No.14220

>>14205

>anarchist

>criticizing anyone for his political beliefs

kek

Anonymous 03/21/16 (Mon) 19:39:31 cf41ee No.14233

I think to forsake the benefits of the Enlightenment is to spit on the graves all those who were killed to get it. If we keep what we gained, then they died for something.

Overlord Romanicus 03/22/16 (Tue) 01:39:54 2c54b8 No.14323

>>14233

>spit on the graves all those were killed to get it

So I spit at:

>Voltaire

>Rousseau

>Locke

>Robespierre

>Jacobins

>Napoleon

And I uphold:

>Joseph de Maistre

>Louis de Bonald

>The Catholic Church

>Faithful Peasants and Nobles

I don't really see a problem at "spitting" at those philosophes and revolutionaries