>>16118
There isn't much to defend with current monarchies. Like I said, the malady is they are either too Liberal or too Christian for their own good.
If you fully empowered the Windsors, you'd probably wouldn't get very much--so in that respect, yes, it is pointless and achieves nothing.
When I talk about monarchy, my pattern is State Shinto, North Korea, Louis XIV, Frederick II, Roman Emperors.
Much like Zoomer Historian will say there were better days with historical Christianity, my mindset is the same except with monarchy.
>I'm not tied to any particular economic or political system
>(my rule is that it must be good ethnic Europeans above all other concerns)
I think National Socialists will say this before Fascism, but Hitler himself nevertheless relied upon a corporatist system / one party state.
Monarchy -- in my mind -- is simply a corporatist system, except instead of the preeminence of one political party, it is one royal household with preeminence before all the estates. I would say that Monarchy, in spite of what traditionalists say upon the pretense of their Integralism, has more in common with other corporatist ideologies like Fascism/Natsoc, which is that the State is to be organized by a unitary mode of politics.
Personally, I don't think it is a coincidence that Natsoc has aligned with corporatist politics.
I defend monarchy because unlike Hitlerists I do believe in a kind of dynastic patriotism and I blame the deficiency of this on Christian integralism... so when Hitler brings up the Habsburgs, I blame that on the deficiency of Christian integralism.
The way Plato describes the best unity of a state consisting in "acting like one person" -- that is the lifeblood of corporatist politics and IMHO monarchy's fruition in a cult of personality like North Korea or State Shinto does is the best fruition of this design. I deem that a kind of civic religion, because sovereignty reimburses the entire State in the way God does to all forms, so the royal estate does for all estates and persons... one person for all persons... that will be a bridge to communicate, like a singer before a crowd--and a crowd lacks any coordination without a singer, so for that reason monarchy is my law to ensure the community of goods and a community of pleasures and pains -- as described in the Republic -- I think race politics has the same basis, that similarity and unity is the greatest benefit of a state and unity in race allows better communication and civil peace... when a city is divided against itself on terms of race, like Plato laments, one side of the city is lamenting, the other side of the city is rejoicing, --and multiculturalism and George Floyd is a great example of that, one side of the city is revolting and the other side is being attacked by these riots, and the root of this disorder is this lack of community... race politics is that if we could keep everyone in the same race, then community will flourish... and my mentality is not too far, that this is best mediated by a cult of personality, so people have a person whom they respect and revere, this becomes a civil religion, a god.
I don't think it is merely a coincidence there the lives of kings and gods correspond or that cities are named after kings or gods in the ancient world. --I see monarchy as a civil religion and natural religion. Much like Confucius, I think manners spring from the familial estate and the first teacher is a father and all manners stem in political life from this relationship. --My ideal state would be that people become a colony of a monarchy to achieve a much firmer community as opposed to multi-party democracies, that they would see themselves as not Republicans or Democrats, but a kindred people and sons and daughters of a king-like figure. This doesn't have to be the kind of traditionalist, Christian integralist monarchies--it could be the modern corporatist system, like I point to with North Korea. The way I see this kind of dynastic patriotism is like how North Korea expresses these terms: like ants or bees, people should see themselves as one big family / tribe with the royal family, as their progenitors, as if their kinship is inseparable from this... I think Christianity is a perversion of this, ultimately for all the reasons I rail about in this thread--I think it ultimately lacks a genuine dynastic patriotism like State Shinto or North Korea does, so that is why I feel Hitler's criticism of dynasties like the Habsburgs is mostly the fault of Christianity. & that kinship portrayal is in popular media like Queen Chrysalis and the Changelings or the Zora from the Legend of Zelda to illustrate the idea of that kind of tight-knit familialism, but the best illustration of this is State Shinto and North Korea today more than anything else... I feel the European monarchies have ultimately failed to capture that lightning in a jar because Christianity substitutes it and gives people a false dynasty patriotism... the closest it ever got was with the late absolutist monarchies to re-stating that ideology, but that was foiled by Christianity... referencing children's cartoons that depict this idea is my way of romanticizing it because I do think in some ways the idea I'm referencing with monarchy is tucked away and forgotten... neither Plato nor Aristotle said that people should live like ants or a beehive, but ultimately the familialism of monarchy and its corporatism lean this way... most monarchists themselves hardly think this way (except with Jesus, lol)... but that is where I think monarchy and race ideology mix, is that monarchs are -supposed- to be progenitors and facilitate this idea that these kinsmen are descended from this progency and form a kind of national family that way, exactly like State Shinto and North Korea says... --now, people will say this is incompatible with Western people, but I say it's sad that Western people do in fact realize this idea, but with Christianity -- that is why I'm SO disappointed with Zoomer Historian and other Christian nationalists, because they get so close, but they do it with a jew and with -adoptionalism- or think they are the true israelites and I think that is the worst way to express dynastic patriotism... so you have dynastic patriotism in the West, actually, but is wasted on Christianity, all the familial and tribal feelings of progeny and familialism are diverted to this Jewish cult and it is based on adoption IMHO, not nativity... -unlike- what CI has to say, IMHO.
--This is what I long for. I think Fascism and Natsoc are better alternatives for now because they are corporatist political ideologies and I think any form of corporatist politics is closer to my fancy... but the ultimate expression of this for me is with a kind of royal monarchy and royal monarchy for me is more naturally tuned to a kind of state familialism in a way I like, the image of the country as a familial bond is complete with a royal family, the correspondence of father and son, father and mother/husband and wife, come to fruition naturally by design... I'll admit that where others see faults, I am overconfident in a way like ancaps are -- you could say that is naive, yes, there are many faults and potential corruption with a hereditary regime, but what I value in this regime overrides those faults for me and are foundational for the vision I have in mind.