/b/ - Random

Democracy is trash to fool retards into believing they have a say in major decisions.

Id rather see a king in a monarchy

>>330744
Several problems
1. Even if you have a king, he will need some form of political ruling class. So it'll likely be an aristocracy and we've seen how they sell out their country as soon as they get a certain amount of wealth. It's almost as if there is a specific dollar amount that they must amass and then a switch activates and they go into full treason for the sake of fun mode.
2. You imagine that the king will be you or someone like you. That is very unlikely. More likely is that he is the most influential elite. But influential elites are the absolute worst ones.
3. Monarchy is pretty damn unlikely. To get a change in government, you'll need a revolution. ALL the elites oppose you and will oppose your revolution so you'll need to have a grassroots one. That's about the least likely place from which a monarchist ideology will arise. Furthermore, once the rebels take control, there will be many factions and most of them will be unwilling to surrender power to your chosen monarch. A literal "Who?" 

>>330741
I live in a trailer park. ngl.
Maybe you live in a city. Maybe you live in a McMansion wasteland. Maybe you live in an isolated redneck utopia.
Given what you know about the jew worshiping, treasonous elite who literally make every decision based on what hurts you the most, would it be an improvement if laws were passed based on a pure referendum of everyone within 10 miles of you?

>>330740 (OP) 
Democracy for anything beyond the size of a village is jewish and for fags, since direct democracies are the only form of democracy that's a real democracy and a direct democracy is not possible beyond the scale of a village. Monarchies blow only slightly less and even the best are suspectible to jewish poisoning, unless you do it in a pseudo-dictatorship / philosopher king-warrior form such as the one Adolf Hitler held with modern technology and developments.

>>330760
What if we eliminate elections at the national level and establish rule by a village?

>>330740 (OP) 
In a way, you are describing how a classical British style democracy is meant to function. The House of Commons was designed for the Commons. It was a place for the average person to have some self-government. And the Aristocracy were meant to stay in the House of Lords, and the Monarchy is for the King. All three systems functioning as one. But the Aristocracy took over the Commons, and the Monarchy is noy toothless. 

I like the idea of radical democracy, but also, you need a higher level of citizen. Much like how, in colonial America, your average person was as well read as a European aristocrat, and morally far stronger and better.

I'd rather participate in a democracy server in meincrack than in occupied JEWSA

>>330921
Radical Democracy sounds good, but it needs to be build on Radical Citizenry

>>330759
1. we ain't getting away from there being an elite
2. I don't, I just want a leader accountable for their actions for their whole life
3. I don't care if it happens now or later, it is what our biology is most adapted to, as whites die off and we shift into a harsh environment they need a king because it is more efficient, and the only reason democracy is because death cults rule the zeitgeist.

>>330928
Its not only an elite that is accountable, but getting an elite that has a sense of loyalty. An elite the benefits directly from those who they govern, so they dont feel the need to fuck them over constantly.

orange_man.jpg
[Hide] (65.4KB, 1280x720) Reverse

>Elites are all traitors. Name a rich man and you will name a traitor. These sinister snakes actually go out of their way just to humiliate normal people and destroy their nation. I say "their" nation but it isn't theirs. They are a rootless, cosmopolitan class with no connections to any nation but their own. They're all anti-White parasites and I'm not even talking about the jewish ones. 
eat more bone marrow

>>330741
/thread

>>330928
>I just want a leader accountable for their actions for their whole life
That rarely happens in a monarchy. They have too much power and too little connection to the nation. I want a government that is loyal to the nation. Making insanely rich people in charge is not a good idea. Monarchs historically have not been patriots, they've been loyal to internationalist families.

>I don't care if it happens now or later, it is what our biology is most adapted to
I'm a White nationalist. I like the culture White people create. Therefore, what better form of rulership than to simply put White People in charge? Again I ask you: Who would you rather rule? A random selection of your neighbors? Or a random selection of the rich and elite?
Who is more inherently moral?

>>331037
>They have too much power and too little connection to the nation
There is no leaving the bag for the next guy is what I was getting at
>Who would you rather rule?
A population under harsh selection, I would bet the house if you any the vast majority of poors power you get worse outcomes then just just letting what will naturally be (families of intelligence Psychopaths gaining and keeping power), be

>>331053
>A population under harsh selection
What selection?
The present party system has selection for the most ruthless liars. In an aristocracy, there'd be no selection at all except for the most ruthless backstabbers.

>>330741
Democracy is the greatest scam of all time. I sorta respect countries like china, north korea, iran and saudi arabia because at least they are honest about not allowing the masses to have a say in what the government does nor fool them into thinking that marking a piece of paper or pressing a button on a screen behind a curtain which only allows you to choose the candidate and not really have a say in who the candidate chooses to be in their cabinet or run whatever department. No wonder jews love this shit retarded ass shit. It also works well when you have two political parties that attract the biggest retards and power hungry plebs in the country to keep fighting one another over meaningless nonsense.