Monarchy vs Nazism

I'm pretty sure he vastly preferred the term Fuhrer either way. That's fucking stupid, what you said.

But God isn't real.

Well, the third reich instated a Fuhrer. Maximilian wasn't instated, Ernst was sent to a concentration camp. Both were arrested by the Weimar assembly, which Hitler himself also opposed.

Berthold was completely ignored. All other monarch families were kept out of the Hitler government. It's kind of nonsensical to call your government a "Reich", but have no traces of old monarchy abolished because of the commies.

It doesnt even matter, in the context of society it can just represent absolute indisputable authority to athiests like you. Without god we are left with moral relativism and essentially all modern social problems stem from a weakening of religious institutes. Whether you believe in god or not, if christianity was supreme society would not be collapsing because all degeneracy is against god, and the muslims and jews could be removed without protest.

two (2) years.

We should have a theocracy but with (((God))) replaced by a sufficiently based and redpilled machine intelligence.

I guess such a system would be a botnetocracy?

What idiocy. A nation is always ruled my man.

...

I think this thread is ment to ask things like “what if Hitler and the Reich were jews (See Miles Mathis on this); afterall the NS gov was modern in many ways as though they thought it best to become the jew in order to beat him at best and at worst were jews themselves?” and “If there is no way to wield (genuine) moral force against the oligarchy/ies as racial realists or chaos magicians, what at all is wrong with restoring traditional culture and government when the kernel of Christianity has been worked on for 2k+ years and all that remains is to retake our religious institutions and make them more Catholic in the sense that the Fathers intended”? Too bad this question is intractable due to incompleteness in the historical record.

I think you're playing too much Deus Ex. Besides, such a machine could turn on all humanity too easily. This is essentially why globalism wouldn't be conducive to good rule, power is too centralized.

I'm sure there was an old king or emperor that passed his kingdom to an animal.

No, it's not meant to ask any of those questions, but the discussion of the second can have some merit. What if pro-monarchy movements could archieve the same results?

I think we just need to wait for the second (third) coming of hitler (jesus) so that we can finally reaffirm our position in the world.
youtu.be/4rysHrMClDE

The age of throne and altar is dead, while this may be lamentable in some respects; the bourgeois democratic revolutions and abolition or restriction of absolute monarchical power, the rise of communism, and the necessary mobilization required for total war made it inevitably so. The only real option was the kind of "ethical socialism" Spengler talked about; "We are all Socialists, wittingly or unwittingly, willingly or unwillingly." If the old reactionary monarchists were in charge, Germany would have fallen to the reds, it took the NSDAP to take the fight directly against the Bolsheviks.

God Machine?

Attached: deusexmachina.png (681x922, 1.49M)

You just create a formal proof that it could never turn on us, and have everything formally proven to be correct down to the hardware level.
We could have a chip installed in the brain that causes tremendous pain when it receives the signal to do so by satellite, requiring a cryptographic key of course.
This would be used to augment behavior in naughty individuals.

It sounds a lot like "leftism is the only way, goy".

Yes, the Mormons have the right idea. Each man gets his own planet and wife, becoming a new Adam and Eve, and starting his own race.

Two words:
British Crown.

The British royal family is still VERY powerful and wealthy. They have ENORMOUS wealth and exert substantial power and influence over the British people, even if their direct role in government is limited. Have they used their wealth and power to protect the British people from kikes and shitholer invasion? No. They have been COMPLICIT in kike control and invasion.
blah, blah, blah.

I will NEVER bow to any monarchikery
American Constitutional Republic.
NOT "democracy" NOT "diversity" NOT kikery
Reestablish the USA as a White Nationalist state, as was the Founders CLEAR intention.
Merit based LIMITED electorate.
National Socialist economics.
Volkish White Nationalism as the underlying philosophy of the Nation.

This.
To hell with that shit.

Morality exists COMPLETELY SEPARATELY from any concept of "god."
How else could the Ancient Greeks have written sophisticated philosophical works about morality hundreds of years before "Jesus" given that they did not believe in an "all powerful god?" (They had gods, but their gods displayed very "human like" qualities and imperfections, as well as limited "powers")
Also, christians have PROTECTED JEWS THROUGHOUT THEIR HISTORY. This SAME FUCKING DEBATE. The occasional expulsion of jews from one White Christian country/ city/ duchy/ whatever into THE ONE NEXT DOOR did VERY LITTLE to harm the kikes. Popes and kings throughout CHRISTIAN Europe issued bulls and laws declaring the jews a PROTECTED CLASS.

Then this shit. Everything to keep the Volk oppressed and servile, right schlomo?

To hell with monarchikery

NatSoc Germany WERE NOT JEWS.
They did not act like jews and they did not think like jews.
Volkism is VERY DIFFERENT from talmudism.
Also, christianity only "worked" because of WHITE GENETICS. The cult itself meant little. Tell me again of the glories of Ethiopia and their almost 2000 year history as a Christian nation?
Oh, right. You can't because they're a shithole. Almost like being christian made no difference……..
Hmmmmmm………

All abrahamic religions are jewish.
All abrahamic religions are semitic death cults.
All abrahamic religions are poison.
To hell with that jewish min virus plantation.

A machine can never be of the Volk.
Volkism.

"The people needs a point upon which everybody's thoughts
converge, an idol. A people that possesses a sovereign of the
stature of Frederick the Great can think itself happy; but if
he's just an average monarch, it's better to have a republic.
Notice that when the institution of monarchy has been
abolished in a country—see France and Yugoslavia to-day!—
thenceforward the institution is given over to ridicule, and can
never again assert itself.
I am tempted to believe that the same thing will happen with
the Church. Both are institutions that naturally developed in
the direction of ceremonial and solemnity. But all that
apparatus no longer means anything when the power that lay
beneath it has disappeared."

"Monarchy is an out-of-date form. It has a raison d'être only
where the monarch is the personification of the constitution, a
symbol, and where the effective power is exercised by a Prime
Minister or some other responsible chief.
The last support of an inadequate monarch is the Army.
With a monarchy, therefore, there is always a danger that the
Army may be able to imperil the country's interests."

It doesn't need to be, since it can be from the Volk.
I'm already working on writing a script for node.js that can get this thing going.

no, I just don't like shitty posts that will inevitably encourage a circlejerk in pseudo philosophy made by people who browse reddit daily.
pick one. now back to cuckchan or reddit (but I'm repeating myself)

I know right-wingers are practically allergic to the word "socialism", particularly Americans who are typically from a conservative or libertarian background; but I refuse to believe that national-socialism is "leftist" because it doesn't allow finance capitalists to run roughshod.

Real stupid idea. There will always be traitors in every government, and if that sort of technology falls into the wrong hands, it will end very badly.

morality might be seperate from god, but god provides the authority to enforce it. Look at the modern legal system and you see it revolves primarily around economics and not morality as the laws of old, as there is no justifiable reason to enforce morality in a godless state.
I think youll notice christians have a long history of expelling jews
theres nothing inheritantly wrong with this, christianity is anti-semetic on a fundamental level anyway, it seems to have sprung into existance as a protest to the jewery, or at least to the jews as they came to exist in the time if jesus. Look at christian societies from a thousand years ago before the church was subverted and honestly tell me theres anything wrong with them. It was a golden era in european history.

Attached: 1uplbv.jpg (720x628, 54.59K)

I can’t see the situation improving when many so-called rightwingers can’t tell the difference between reference to a monolithic argument and making and argument for oneself, although it sure does speak to a deficit in creativity on the political battlefield.

NatSoc is the only socialist theory which puts tradition on a pedestal of imperatives. It is an exception, not a rule, of socialist theories.

The problem with christianity is its increasingly growing passivity, not their core ideas. It is why protestantism and other alternative christian theories were brought up, when before any christianity other than catholicism was deemed an heresy and should be destroyed.

Early Christians weren't even European, it was just another sect within Judaism among many.
It was also very communistic and had "free-love" type shit going on.
Very very degenerate.

Are you OP?

How was it communistic when it was against fucking usury, the source of all communism?

It is broken and subverted, alongside all other aspects of european culture. This is why we need a theocratic dictatorship to repair it. Deus vult could solve all of europes problems.

no

So, because it is subverted it should be destroyed? By this rationale, lots and lots of natsoc groups are subverted by gov't agencies. Should the idea also be destroyed?

Pic is a false dichotemy. Both rejected the Holy See. Napoleon crowned himself. Catholic Monarchy by consent of the governed pre-Vatican II was best for Europe. That was the height of Germany, France, Spain and Poland. Catholic Monarchies blessed and crowned by Pope with consent of the governed (outlined by Nicholas of Cusa).

Constitutional Republic by consent of the governed is currently the best option available.

Attached: embarassing.jpg (444x399, 81.35K)

libcom.org/history/early-christian-communists

Meh, gnostic christianity, jewish gnosticism, zoroastrianism, astrotheology, sumerian swindle. We have this dogged meme that christianity is jewish but there are faiths that predate christianity and judaism, along with plenty of arguments stating they are syncretic/gov psyops, etc. Still, culture warriors imply something like the following when they make this argument: “physics became jewish in the 20th, therefore all of physics, before and after, are trash.” Kike on a stick and proto-Bolshevism rather than scofield bibles and slave moralities being shorn. Seems a disgrace to our ancestors, but no one’s asking me.

you have misread something. I merely want it to rise from its ashes like a pheonix under the leadership of the second coming of hitler.

The reason is that the old noble families were corrupted by bourgeois subhuman taint of the blood. Feudalism was quite meritocratic and kept the merit in the good genes. Then around 1400 they started giving noble titles to those that were bean counting faggots like the (((Rothschilds))) that only lent money for wars.

When you let peasants into the bloodline, don’t be surprised if they begin acting like peasants.

Yes, and I brought up a question:

If the second coming was from a monarchy, would it be okay?

why can people never just look at christian european societies and not modern interpretations of randomly selected shit. You are rewriting history to suit your agenda. Daily reminder that one of the explicit goals of communism is the removal of religion.

false dichotomy

Attached: 183[1].jpg (250x343, 24.64K)

Really gets the noggin' joggin'.

What monarchy? These things dont exist anymore.

I said communistic, as in communal socialism.
Obviously it wouldn't have the materialist ideas of post-Marx/Engels thought.
But there is no denying that it started out as a Jewish sect, referred to non-Christians as gentiles, and only spread to Europe much later.
Many parts of Europe didn't become Christian until the 800s or later, hundreds and hundreds of years after the death of Jesus, and in no way, shape or form could this be considered "early" Christianity.
Early Christianity is a communal, revolutionary sect of Judaism. They lost to the Pharisees and decided to infect the goyim.

Hitler already gave you the answer and very good reasons for it. Monarchy inevitably give you incompetent rulers (usually with the first male heir).

If extremely early desert christianity is jewish communism, then later european christianity is european christianity and the christianity advocated by anyone who ever talks about it. It makes no difference how they act way the fuck over there.

Napoleon famously crowned himself and rejected the Pope. "He who strikes the Pope dies". Everything fell apart for Napoleon.

There are numerous Catholic Saints that were kings in Europe. Great examples pre-Vatican II masonic takeover.

King Louis the 9th was also an amazing king for France unlike Napoleon who really was a self appointed emperor type.

Attached: 250px-Statue_of_Louis_IX,_Basilique_du_Sacré-Cœur_de_Montmartre,_Paris_2009[1].jpg (250x166, 12.36K)

That’s because you only ever hear about either the really good rulers or the really bad ones. Most of the time things ran smoothly, but were uneventful. Don’t be a nigger.

This is a redundant loop of commentary unless you’re going to post sauce.

Then there is the pagan king of the Saxons Widukind. He’s also a saint. lel

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian

You mean like the vatican with all it's homos and pedophiles? Or is that not real christianity which has never been tried?

Attached: Leon-Degrelle-MinisterioG-e1375071991520.jpg (1532x947, 295.58K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_of_early_Christianity_and_Judaism

Not sure if you’re trying to insult me, but I’ll have to dig more than this if I want a satisfactory answer.

Legend is that he converted.

Attached: Charlemagne_742_814_receiving_the_submission_of_Witikind_at_Paderborn_in_785_Ary_Schefferr_1795_1858[2].jpg (2276x1934, 836.63K)

Exactly. If natsoc autists instead focused their energy in researching the causes of the fall of monarchies, and how much monarchies in most of their existance never actually caused any problems to their people, they'd figure out that one of the ways to their goals is to simply push for the return of the royal family as a fourth power. Again, the British crown is taken as the bad example, and we all know why. It's an exception.

No I am saying that real christianity was tried for over a thousand years and it was beautiful. subversion of the churches is a recent development no matter how you look at it.

That's Vatican II taken over in the 60s by masons.

But it doesn’t answer the republican counterargument that a civilization goes bellyup with the birth of one bad son under monarchy.

Elective monarchies are a thing.

Catholic Monarchy, the king's are blessed by the Pope, not simply bloodline Egyptian style birth rights. It's also consent of the governed. Look up Nicholas of Cusa. Both US and Catholic Monarchy's share his values about consent of the governed.

Charismatic leadership < Divine Right unless the overall cultural context is solid. Know of a system besides Catholic Christianity?

Pre-Vatican II, Traditional Pope actually sided with the South during the Civil war, based on consent of the governed and subsidiarity principles.

Monarchy falls and shit happens. Germany gets split, they start killing each, and jews because fuck jews. 4.8 germans die.
Monarchy falls and shit happens. 8 million people die and the country explodes to tens of shit countries most of them you forgot they even existed. Russia turns into a poor shithole that sustains its economy on cp and guns that were designed 71 years ago.
Monarchy falls and shit happens. Everyone escapes to LA and Canada etc. The country turns into an islamic shithole with it's currency falling faster than Kevin Spacey's career. And Afghanistan gets buttraped cause why not.

Socrates was right. Democracy is shit.

Attached: socrates-1-sized.jpg (249x328, 24.24K)

The old testament is literally 100% jewish.
Most of the characters in the new testament are jewish.
There are not-jewish-related religions.
Christianity is not one of them.

Slave mentality.
Do you intend to be a peasant?
This is literally the same shit as the marxist useful idiots who think that they will be "card carrying party members" and thus will not have to go work in a labor camp.
Marxism has many close parallels with "feudalism."
Proletariat = peasants. They are kept ignorant and compliant via party propaganda rather than via christianity.
Likewise, the "party apparatus" parallels the "nobles" and "royalty" since they have ALL the power and rule over the effectively-enslaved "proles."

No.
The whole "jewish prophecies" concept is PANTS ON HEAD RETARDED.
The fact that people with power believe that shit is truly disturbing.

Cherry-picking works both ways.
I have studied "christian european societies" and their history quite a bit. Most people were ignorant, illiterate, peasants who had to work like dogs their whole lives under crushing poverty so that a few nobles and royals could live in luxury and plot wars and intrigue. Then the peasants would sometimes be forced to go die on some battlefield over stupid shit.
Again, do your intend to be a peasant?

This.
Volkism, remove all non-Volk and ban all foreign influence, limited merit based electorate, Constitutional Republicanism.

Cherry picking works both ways.
Again, do you, personally, intend to be a peasant?

Pretty much this.
The whole idea of "the pope" is that he is the "Conduit between God and human beings" or something like that.
Well, the shittyness of the kike jesuit pope and the child rapers in the church implies that something is horribly wrong with that concept.
As in, it is bullshit.

What an idiot.
"muh not real monarchy, despite centuries of history and rule"
Again, most people under "kings" before the last couple hundred years were ILLITERATE IMPOVERISHED PEASANTS.
DO YOU INTEND TO BE A PEASANT?
DO YOU WANT YOUR CHILDREN TO BE PEASANTS?

"Real Christianity" was simply WHITE PAGAN EUROPE that occasionally went to church.
Pre-reformation christianity was less "the bible" and more "what White Europeans were doing anyway, just make sure to cross yourself occasionally."
"Real christianity" my ass.

The same pope who washes muslum nigger feet?

I like the first part of this, but consent is manufactured by culture; in other words, by media.

You guys need to look up Nicholas of Cusa. That's all I can say. Do some research.

What about scientific technocracy under apriori mathemagics? “Civil religion,” or ecumenism.

It does answer the question raised in republican governments about what to do with ambitious men. Most good monarchs delegate their important duties to merited men.

Please stop shilling your we're-the-real-catholics appeals to divine right here. Your cult is moribund and your claims cannot be falsified. Secular, rational solutions to political problems are welcome here.

Yeah that's a real problem. The nuclear family is the first line of defense against that. That's the principle of subsidirity. It's the parents that are sending their kids off to public schools and putting them in front of the boob tubes.

Again look up Nicholas of Cusa. La Rouche Institute is a good resource on the subject.

Yes, those ambitious men who seek money, not power. Lesser men.

I get that monarchies were often stable in the past, but we're living in unprecedented times. How are royal families going to rid us of muds? Look at Spain after Franco.

Yes, they are kept ignorant by their own biology.

Not owning a television or radio myself, I often wonder where I got infected with the lyrics to pop songs and lines from movies on the Talmudvision. Man as social animal.

Why not combine the two into a Kaiser-Fuhrer? That way the jews can't divide us into subcultures that hate each other? I don't know.

Attached: f03df88ab4da62f67b7bc420d2cfdaefbe1df175bb48d3a35474750e1f99ee54.png (725x821, 75.26K)

So in other words, a long history of playing kick the can instead of actually dealing with the Jewish problem.

I think you meant "philosemetic".

Jesus was a Jewish schismatic, nothing more and nothing less. It wasn't exactly uncommon in those days.

So Sicut Judaeis was the result of an unpozzed church at its zenith? Fucking wew.

If protecting Jews and ignoring Muslim aggression while persecuting Europeans for their traditions is a "golden era" then I think we're better off without it.

That's called saudi arabia.

It doesn't matter what you think of them, what matters is that they turn republics belly-up just as often as bad heirs turn monarchies belly-up. LBJ was an ambitious men that participated in a quiet coup d'etat against JFK. One cannot simply kill the king without taking his place, which requires the public's knowledge and consent that your dynasty has replaced his. One can weasel their way through the bureaucracy and influence their son, or wife like Rasputin, but the king has much more power to sniff out and remove ambitious men than an electorate has to remove them in a republic.

Can a distinction be made between historical eras in christianity and “fundamental axioms of christianity,” or “just the words of christ and no other”? Or are we stuck playing Originalism vs Living Document games?

chechar.wordpress.com/2018/07/13/masthead/

chechar.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/judea-vs-rome.pdf

…sorry that's called Saudi Arabia

I agree. I have always considered the firewalling problem of utmost import in which system is superior, finding monarchy better for this.

Well, if you're a Kaiser, it is redundant to call yourself "Fuhrer", since every king is the guidance, leader of their nations.

1945 was the year of the total inversion of Aryan values into Christian values. —Joseph Walsh

Foreword
The purpose of this book is to give an idea of what happened
to the Ancient World; of how Europe fell into the Middle Ages and,
especially, to what extent what happened in Rome 1,600 years ago is
exactly what is happening in our days throughout the West: but
magnified a thousand times by globalization, technology and, above
all, the deputation of psycho-sociological and propagandistic
knowledge by the System.
What is dealt with in this book is the story of a tragedy, of a
n apocalypse. It is the end not only of the Roman Empire and all its
achievements but also of the survival of the Egyptian, Persian and
Greek teachings in Europe in a bloodthirsty process: a premonition
of the future destruction of Celtic, Germanic, Baltic and Slavic heritages,
always accompanied by their respective genocides

It’s not just the monarch that kept things stable. In fact, kings and emperors were often hands off, letting the lords handle much of the daily happenings. You see, feudal society was very modular. Whatever you saw at the royal level was repeated and scaled down the further you went down the hierarchy.

These days if a cancer affects a nation, it affects the whole nation with this nation-state thing. In the old feudal days, if a cancer affected the nation, you simply replaced the lord. And it was often easier to contain social and political problems due to the modular nature of feudal society.

The benefit of a monarchy isn’t necessarily the monarch, but mostly the lords and the federalism, and the reliance on tradition rather than written law.

Modularity good, decentralization good, consent bad.

Religion is a rational solution to politics, it held civilization together for thousands of years. What does a solution to politics look like to you? Every empire in history appealed to divine right in order to maintain their authority, and religion always forms the foundation of the moral doctrines which keep a society healthy. You should not have to rationalize everything or convince every single person of every little thing, it should be enough to tell them dont fuck each other in the ass or youll go to hell.

of course, early christians didnt actually kill every single jew so they must not be legit. my mistake.