1
AmericanMonarchist 1 point ago +1 / -0

America was a libertarian exercise in self-governance.

The Founding Fathers were anything but libertarian. They restricted suffrage to White Anglo-Saxon Protestant landowners. The 1790 immigration act in turn restricted immigration to WASPs only. Many of them were avowed monarchists who tried on multiple occasions to have King George III, George Washington, or Prince Henry of Prussia lead the United States.

2
AmericanMonarchist 2 points ago +2 / -0

It makes you wonder how much of our accepted history is fabricated.

Most of American history has been fabricated. I remember learning in school that King George III was a tyrant who oppressed the American people until the day we rose up and established a democracy that promoted equality and fairness. If anything, that is the exact opposite of what happened. Our Founding Fathers had more in common with monarchists than they do with any of our political parties today.

The Patriots were seen by London society as an extension of the Jacobite rebellions in the first half of the century, and for good reasons. Benjamin Franklin wrote that the casus belli for the war was that the colonies were subjects of the King and Parliament had no authority to levy laws against the colonists.

"To me [Parliamentarians] seem to have been long encroaching on the Rights of their and our Sovereign, assuming too much of his Authority, and betraying his Interests." - Ben Franklin

The Continental Congress petitioned King George III to restore royal authority. They had no desire to be independent and only launch a war of independence when they realized that democratic institutions usurped the power of the king. This petition was signed by great men such as John Hancock, Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and John Adams.

Alexander Hamilton was a life long monarchist who wanted to establish an Aristocracy in this country. Thomas Jefferson agreed with Hamilton on the importance of aristocracy and wanted the United States to have a system of governance that selected "natural aristocrats" and place them in positions of power. This was at a point in American history where only Anglo-Saxon protestant descended males who owned land were granted suffrage.

Continental Congressman and Constitution signer Rufus King put it best when speaking to third generation Americans in the twilight of his life. "You young men who have been born since the Revolution, look with horror upon the name of a King, and upon all propositions for a strong government. It was not so with us. We were born the subjects of a King, and were accustomed to subscribe ourselves 'His Majesty's most faithful subjects'; and we began the quarrel which ended in the Revolution, not against the King, but against his parliament."

Our governments wants us to believe that they are continuing the works of our wise Founders when in truth the Founders stand against everything the state propagates.

11
AmericanMonarchist 11 points ago +12 / -1

"Very hard to rig something again once you exposed your hand." Is it? If anything I would believe it would be easier now that they realize that they face no punishment for rigging votes. They have a low chance of being caught, an even lower chance of retribution, all for a very high reward. That sounds like a perfect storm, would you not agree?

"Trump was still 43,000 votes away from winning" They want to keep it close to keep people like yourself content with voting rather than causing trouble. A close race provides legitimacy to the system even when its undeserved.

"down ballot Rs did very well." Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. The uniparty could not care less if Mitt Romney beats out his Democrat opponent. They both serve the same master.

7
AmericanMonarchist 7 points ago +8 / -1

Frankie, may you please walk me through how not participating in a rigged election is letting the democrats win? A rigged election already has a predetermined winner by its very nature. It does not matter how many rightists vote, it matters how many rightist votes are counted and those votes are counted by people who want us, quite literally, dead. We can no more effect the outcome of a rigged election in the United States than we can effect the outcome of one in North Korea.

2
AmericanMonarchist 2 points ago +2 / -0

China historically prefers tributary states over direct imperialism. China has no reason to invade as long as American leaders kowtow to their Chinese "betters" and offer tribute.

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” - Sun Tzu

4
AmericanMonarchist 4 points ago +4 / -0

I have trained many dogs in my life. Some of them are quick studies who I only need to discipline a few times; other dogs were some of the most stubborn sons of bitches I have ever worked with. No matter how stubborn the dog is, I always make sure that I give them the treat when they do what I ask. The dog just doesn't learn otherwise. Most human beings on this planet are slightly less intelligent than the dogs I bred.

2
AmericanMonarchist 2 points ago +2 / -0

What we really need is to enact criminal law to make it a criminal offense to mandate any medical procedure on someone — especially as a condition for employment, education, housing, transportation, food, water.

The real rub is figuring out how to implement this.

2
AmericanMonarchist 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am pro-choice. If you have sex, you choose to take on the responsibility of potentially raising a child. That is the purpose of a reproductive act.

3
AmericanMonarchist 3 points ago +3 / -0

Much of right-wing thought today could be characterized as reactionary. Some reactionaries look to the Roman or Byzantine models, others to the Catholic and Orthodox traditions of throne and altar. Even clueless conservatism today is rapidly becoming reaction, albeit a modest reaction that looks only to the classical liberalism of the American founding or perhaps to the feel-good freedom of the Reagan era. But how can reaction succeed? History repeats itself — and returning to the past will just bring us back to the present in short order.

Civilization is its own worst enemy. The successful civilizations begin their lives under realism. We accept that humans are different, even within the nation, and sort them by caste with our best on top. Under this aristocracy we prosper enough that cracks begin to form. People who lack the physical and mental acumen to survive in nature can now thrive under civilization. Wisdom is a rare commodity so these drones --to borrow Plato's terminology-- become far more numerous with every generation. Civilization begin degenerating through Plato's civilizational stages: timocracy begets oligarchy which in turn sires democracy and finally tyranny before the cycle begins anew.

This, then, seems to me to be the proper grounding for a new right-wing worldview. It would stand as an antithesis to postmodernism. Starting from scientific evidence collected under the current materialist paradigm, we abductively infer the existence of a natural order, designed to produce and support life on earth, and of a human nature that has emerged within that natural order.

Every reset of the cycle, the new aristocracy tries to learn from the failures of the previous cycle. All eventually failed because at the end of the day a government is a group of human beings trying to make a decision. Do you remember group projects back in university? The conversation begins with how to make the best project, but it is quickly hampered by people injecting their own personal desires into the mix. The lazy member wants to punt the work onto other people, the ideologue wants to inject their beliefs into every slide, the tyrant wants to be assigned project lead because they crave any amount of authority. Eventually the group's aim devolves from fulfilling their goals to being pragmatic. Pragmatism shifts the focus from accomplishing the mission to keeping the group together, and there is nothing people love more than free stuff and being told no one is better than them.

The fault of our demise isn't reactionaries per se, but because civilization itself is a trap that we have yet to solve. A return to aristocracy is not only needed, but inevitable. It is the most realistic system of governance in the human toolbox. The form it will adopt will change. TreeofWoe is correct that we do not want to repeat the mistakes of the past. Instead we need to be conservatives and conserve the best of the previous cycle, while testing our new methods against reality rather than human desires to see what is successful; physiocracy as he puts it (I prefer to conserve the old term, but I am a conservative) Will we succeed? Probably not. However we will have several dozen generations living a better life under civilization than under anarchy. Who knows, maybe the millionth time is the charm?

Thank you for introducing me to this author. I look forward to reading more from him.

4
AmericanMonarchist 4 points ago +4 / -0

You have great taste. The Zouaves were very fashionable for almost a century. Europeans and Americans all rushed to adopt them in some shape or form.

4
AmericanMonarchist 4 points ago +5 / -1

A good rule of thumb in life is that if something sounds simple, but it is not implemented, then it isn't as simple as it sounds. Women, especially those who wasted their 20s, have learned to fake being "tradwife" material to sucker in a man. People have also been known to flip their political views. Here is a thread on NoNewNormal where a woman is complaining that her conservative boyfriend is turning leftwards. I witnessed this myself with my own parents having become staunch Biden supporters after supporting Trump in 2016. In a way I was lucky that they both converted because I could not envision the marriage surviving if only one changed. There is wisdom in the Biblical command to not be unequally yoked with those of alien values.

Countries that have accepted modernity have higher divorce rates, lower birth rates, and lower rates of marriages. Our current way of life is civilization cyanide and is not easily undone.

1
AmericanMonarchist 1 point ago +2 / -1

If you are a gambler like myself, then minimize your risks to the best of your ability and play the game. I will not fault others for not wanting to pickup the revolver and spin a half loaded cylinder.

5
AmericanMonarchist 5 points ago +5 / -0

Modernity has killed femininity and masculinity. Quality spouses of both sexes are extremely rare.

5
AmericanMonarchist 5 points ago +6 / -1

They are sexually attracted to women, but recognize modernity has killed the family. Dating and marriage are games that are rigged against men for prizes worse than our grandparent's generation.

4
AmericanMonarchist 4 points ago +4 / -0

It was truly brewing for nearly a century. The Casus Belli for the war was Parliamentary usurpation of rule over the colonies and Parliament was only able to do that with their usurpation of His Majesty King James II in 1688. The Colonies were legally possessions of the Crown and under the purview of the King alone.

"To me [Parliamentarians] seem to have been long encroaching on the Rights of their and our Sovereign, assuming too much of his Authority, and betraying his Interests." - Ben Franklin

0
AmericanMonarchist 0 points ago +2 / -2

The vast majority of Earth is teeming with life. We would commit ecocide on a terrible scale if we try to accommodate ten billion people.

by Taliban
15
AmericanMonarchist 15 points ago +16 / -1

I wonder what the people who use "stormfag" think of our Founding Fathers. They are in many ways more extreme than the NatSocs on ConsumeProduct. You average NatSoc has no qualms about Swedish, Italian, or even Baltic immigrants. Benjamin Franklin argued that importing those swarthy people would dilute the pure white blood (his words) of America. NatSocs believe in egalitarianism for whites while our Founding Fathers wanted a "Natural Aristocracy" to form a caste system.

This is not a rhetorical question. If you are someone who dislikes paleoconservatives, I would love to hear from you. Try as I might I cannot think of an answer other than "We live in more enlightened times". It is a good answer, but it also reinforces the leftist position that The Constitution should be subject to interpretation based on modernist beliefs.

2
AmericanMonarchist 2 points ago +2 / -0

And God, for whatever reasons, has chosen to not give us those infinite resources today. For all intents and purposes our resources are finite.

3
AmericanMonarchist 3 points ago +4 / -1

I don't think Obama is distancing. I expect Congress to propose an immigration reform bill in the next few months. It will be praised as Democrats securing our border, but the requirements to be an immigrant will be made so easy that even Terri Schiavo could pass. Democrats want to make illegals into citizens so that even if we return to power, we cannot reverse the demographic replacement without "disenfranchising Americans".

1
AmericanMonarchist 1 point ago +1 / -0

You cannot choose who you rent to, hire, or service since the 1960s. Our firearm rights have been consistently infringed since 1934. We have been taxed twice on our money since 1913. A once voluntary union has been held together at gunpoint since 1861. Our freedoms are but table scraps compared to what our Founding Fathers envisioned.

4
AmericanMonarchist 4 points ago +4 / -0

Why would I spend billions of dollars researching a drug when someone can spend a few million to copy it from me and undercut my price?

1
AmericanMonarchist 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is an interesting paradox with men that someone pointed out in this thread. Simps want a woman, but cannot get one. The manly man can get a woman, but refuses for lack of quality. Modernity killed both masculinity and femininity. Marriage has become a game of Russian roulette with multiple chambers loaded. The game is stacked against the man, and even if he does survive the bang like you did it still is a loss for the children involved as they lose out on their mother. A child needs both parents to reach their full potential.

The problem in our society is not in getting laid. If that was the issue then prostitution would be the big boom rather than OnlyFans. Casual sex is as much of a facsimile for a relationships as prostitutes offering the girlfriend experience or OnlyFanners flirting with their subscribers. A first world civilization requires stable monogamous marriages to raise the next generation and that requires quality men and women; both of which are in short supply since our 1960s push into liberation of all sorts.

view more: Next ›