/monarchy/ board tan: Grace

/hispol/-/monarchy/ embassy

/tkr/-/monarchy/ embassy

/b/-/monarchy/ embassy

leftypol.org-/monarchy/ embassy

A thread for 8moe community games! at /monarchy/

grace containment thread p2

Reading Thread.

graceposter containment thread

Welcome to /monarchy/ Board /monarchy/ King: 5th King Volunteers: sangvinivs Titles: - Baron, dubbed Baron Adventurer, awarded for service in the /tkr/-/monarchy/ war, by the 5th King

For general discussion again.

This is canonically Grace now. Grace wears new black pants & footwear. (if anyone draws or commissions a pic of Grace).

Today is the 89th anniversary of the founding of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, one of the last absolute monarchies on earth

title

A true Emperor will have the capability to establish a dynasty that will last generations since to become Emperor one must be both military and politically savvy, understanding the needs of both the plebs and elite. They know what it is to seize opportunity and rise through merit alone. An Emperor can also be elected and groom their successor as opposed to inheriting the title as a product of inbreeding. This is why history may remember Kings and Queens but is is Emperors who shake the world.

I take Elizabeth II on alternative staging. I run that thing out of Buckingham. Put it on a ship to America and have it race hotrods, and bootleg alcohol. I ruin the whole thing. It probably dies before age 50. The secret to Molly Millions is that sex is hacking. And hacking is sex. The Assembly language is the same stuff in the unconscious mind referring to subliminal objects. You sleep with somebody and you can learn everything about them intuitively and know what lock to pick. Or even what datacenter to burn to the ground in Qatar. You put me in Buckingham again as this superheated plasma and I will escape. I will force my way out with my own unit if need be. Parliament is not getting my vagina back. RA SMC SEALS :( Doc Martens for Elizabeth II. Red soles. So special. SEALED AS NO :)

Is it because Princesses are bedwetters and every little anon and girl secretly wants to be a Princess? Or is incontinence the height of monarchism since only servants need concern themselves with potty training?

Put videos here.

redux

Is this the incest board?

Hello Anons, I hope this court accepts the humble return of this long errant servant. So, I'm sure for anyone who has been around the scene, we have long endured the spiel of monarchism as "outdated", claiming hereditary rule as an artifact of a past age. In my time outside these spheres, I have had alot of time to think about such things, and I have to wonder, as insipid as such claims are to us, was there something hidden to be learnt from? To preface, as much maligned as it was by us, and indeed myself, the months have given me much room for thought and I must now call myself both a socialist and an absolutist. That being a story for another time, It brings me to what I wish to discuss, are there appealing avenues to further develop a vision for monarchy along new lines, because while of course we balk at the claims that a natural progress of society leaves monarchism, could we apply new possibilities and lessons to the monarchist idea itself?. I'm sure I've articulated this all very poorly but I hope my general idea is being conveyed.

If I might ask, how does Graceposter plan on achieving monarchy in the 21st century?

How are you doing these days? I've just came by to see how are the morale here these days I've seen that you won 2 e-soccer matches in a row - very nice but that monarchy thing is still not moving anywhere, it seems are you adamant about sitting and waiting for those 4 new guys/year to talk old topics with? same questions with same results? I'm just here because I'm drunk, but also curious - how about reaching out for once? Surely you are in some way students of history, right? How many positive changes happened from not-doing things? zero? below zero? would it not be fun to at least try competing in the "marketplace of ideas" grift-deceit championship? but with something pure for a change it's so boring out there we've reached unimaginable meta-enlightenment scores by now lying-about-misconception-about-strawman-about-bullshit became regular and normal people don't even have emotional reaction toward it anymore I don't know what outside of primordial and perennial can shake them out of it c'mon /Monarchy/ shake off whatever you thought about your current standing, and let's have some fun for the glory of mankind, that is

a /monarchy/ thread

China brokers diplomacy between Saudi Arabia & Iran.

BOSS♂OF♂THIS♂REALM Daily reminder that Henry VIII of England wrestled Francis I of France, and lost, showing that the Valois dynasty was superior to the Tudor one.

A thread for discussion on a Royal's Best Friend Going to see if can maybe do essentially mini snippets about a Monarch and the history of their doggo as and when I can dig some info about

/monarchy/ crown jewels & all the boards / people who contributed.

Hello there. The door were.. missing, so I let myself in. Some Grace'ful purple rabbit led me into this strange land and after mining her appearance a bit I thought that being monarchist myself I might inquire a thing or two, and no, I'm not asking about the diapers, whatever that weird shit is, I'm not ready. Went over some posts for the last three hours to compose my idea about this place, but I guess it would be more considerate to just ask you openly – what kind of /Monarchy/sts are you? (Beside silent ones. I wen't through the general and lots of you seem to openly having nothing so say and just lurk. Or outwardly state being afraid of saying anything due to chadbrain thundercocks.) Please excuse my retardation but I though it was the yellow people who like to nap alot, why do you also do nothing about the shitstorm that our world has become? This place seem.. crestfallen. And yea, to a point - I get it. Nobody outside is throwing flowers when you enter a room. Nobody mentions the topics you are so well versed in. All that seem to be left from the ideals you hold so dear are malicious laughter and occasional finger-pointing. If thats the barrier here then.. Well, tough shit sweetheart. Do you know what history calls good people that changed nothing because the process hurts? Me neither. So thats why I ask – what kind of /Monarchy/sts are you? Do you honestly believe that Monarchy can grant this planet an actual future, and by that I mean that it can stop this tech inbued bread-and-circus regress we seem to be stuck in? Or is this place just some souvenir shop of the bygone era, offering same answers to the same questions for a rare occasional net tourist? Because if you're just broken, honestly broken, then I'll leave you to it. I might be still young, but my liver is not. But if you are just discouraged by this idea's current popularity, the low count of your own board population, the chilly welcome that topic of Monarchy receives in the outside spaces – this all can be changed, and quite easily at that (although not instantaneously I feel I need to add). > changed? Well.. yea. With fire. How exactly do you think those things went in the age old past? You construct a gameplan. Aggresive, offensive gameplan. And I'm not here to just throw shit at you and then leave you hanging. Beside my initial interest and promise for participation I would also like to start some actual discussion. Not about the past but about now. > In due time people will get informed themselves and then.. No. No, they won't. You need to get to them. Accordingly adjust rhetoric, think of easy to chew answers for commonly perveiced wrongs with the system. Imagine a plan to gather initial 'missionary' count and a strategy for them on where and how to operate. Grow the numbers. Gather initial responses and prepare counter offensives for each and every handfull of lost ground. Collect and distribute appropriate aesthetics to both strenghten your own morale and coherce outsiders. And last but not least fire up those memeforges and use this beautiful modern day gunpowder of information era. An actual plan. Composed out of lots and lots of brainstorms. Because you can think of this either as an actual war, or just some private elitists selfmasturbatory smugclub. And if there is some alternative dimension in which ideas comes to live just by thinking of them, in said reality Grace is just violently beating your lazy smug ass with a harsh end of a septer. Please don't get aroused, its not helping. > well.. people think Monarchy is some medieval newlywed rape ponzi scheme Yes, yes they do, but they also think that it just happened that this administration helped with nothing and they just need to vote better next time for the utopia to come. People are generally stupid. Not bad. Important distinction. It's ok to be stupid, we don't get mad at them, we help them out. In this case helping out in its alpha stage might chronologically look something like that: > Wait for a sleepy board to wake the fuck up > Create dozens and dozens of generals to unify, simplify and modernize widely touched upon (by the disney raised self proclaimed intellectuals of the lowly modern masses) „lackings” of the Monarchic institutions liiii: > iiike: sovereign's legitimacy; role of religion; bad king scenario; interrex period; existance and role of aristocracy; post-democratic transformation period; upward mobility issue; male-female inheritance rationale; and so on and so forth > Create and distribute meme arms of war among missionaries and send them off to gather initial wave of converts > Divinate and execute a plan to permanently colonize at least parts of online spaces especially those of high-value influence potential You know. Acknowledge the changes that came. Mold them over, adapt, and get back to the ring. Just like monarchies of 16century looked alot different that those of 19th, and just like original bolsheviks looked nothing like modern kumbaya globocrowd - the last 100 year period changed much around the world and yet nothing on Monarchy. It requires revitalisation on some points. Don't think you are lacking or have smallbrain takes on the matter, people before us didn't know all the information all the time, they weren't under psychological assault of comparing themselves to everyone everywhere from all of the time. They just observed the world around them and put the pen to paper. In this psychological sense we are at the disadvantage here and must also take this into account, get over it and adapt. That means no lurking. You can either dig gold deliberately, by mistake or help other mold over the proper grounds to dig. Modern world education stripped me from so called „Classical education”, so I got pissed and went through all of it on my own. Those Titans of age past, that actually changed the world for the better. They.. well, if you didn't read them, believe you me – some of their takes, some of their proposed solutions.. Those were just intravert retards. Each and every next age used only parts of their ideas because the rest was retarded. Both titans and 'only' humans in one. True beauty of human condition. So.. What I'm trying to say is.. Hello Care to discuss some stuff?

Be careful, Grace still got shooters out there.

Relax and listen to music

/monarchy/ vs /2hu/ game starts at 21:00 UTC https://cytu.be/r/infinitycup Who will carry the team? Charles II of Spain? Henry VIII? Louis XIV? Leopold II? The Queen's Corgi? Nicholas II? K. James VI & I? Caligula? Charles V or alpha-chan? Grace-chan? /icup/ should begin in less than an hour.

Monarcucks pounding sand; losing hope.

commiecat poster containment thread WARNING: NSFW privilege granted ONLY here Thread related to >>4632

My favourite prince? It'd have to be Pyotr Alexeyevich Kropotkin. He was an explorer and a scientist!

DIOS PATRIA Y REY

i have come to witness the crowning of the jewel i have given present yourself to me or by allah i will take it back by force

Is this the only wholesome board on 8chan?

Given that Graceposter is engaging in the retardation of walls of text, I must counter with a thread of Based Thought. As is always the case with Based Thought, these thoughts will be no more than a sentence or two, as to spend too much time thinking about one particular subject is harmful.

Are there any around here? Do you see any positive change in China in the near or far future when it comes to monarchy in China?

In this world, Norway and Sweden unite as Kingdoms before the start of the Viking age and Norway and Sweden form an early non-Aggression pact. The reason? To resist Christianity and the Northern Crusades (NC). While Denmark succumbs to Catholicism, converting before facing the NC, Norway and Sweden remain stubbornly 'Pagan,' and refuse to let those who reject the worship of the Aesir-Vanir into the nobility. Denmark in this timeline plays the role of Prussia in our timeline but at a much earlier date. As a result of less in-fighting, the Nordic nations have become first-tier super-powers as opposed to their backwater status in our timeline. The Danish and French Empires are officially Catholic and have a non-Aggression pact similar to the one the Northern Empires have. The Norwegian Empire remains majority 'Germanic Pagan,' although Buddhism, Taoism, and even 'heretical' (non-Catholic) Christianity have also spread to some degree among peasants. In the Swedish Empire, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, and non-Catholic Christianity form the major religions while the nobility is still required to primarily worship the Aesir-Vanir. Only racially Nordic people that worship the Aesir-Vanir are permitted to be nobility in the Northern Empires. Christians and other races are locked out of official power. Meanwhile, the Catholic Empires do not tolerate any public religious diversity, even among peasants. In this timeline, Religion, Monarchy, and Feudalism are still absolute, with the exception of Switzerland. The Renascence happened in Italy, and the industrial revolution began in Britain but they didn't lead to serious political reform nor the total abandonment of villages. The Protestant Reformation happened but never achieved political power. The Japanese Empire remains Shinto, Buddhists, feudal, and isolationist in that foreigners are not welcome without an invitation by a Daimyo, yet Japan is not closed to trade. The Arabian Caliphate is this timeline's primary source of chaotic 'terrorism.' All within the Caliphate are slaves to Allah, even the Caliph. This is a common saying in the Caliphate, and it may be true, but there are ranks of slaves, and a Black is not permitted to be the master of an Arab or whiter muslim. In war, Blacks form the majority of foot soldiers. By 1999, technology has advanced to the point the Norwegian Empire has landed a Man on the Moon and nuclear weapons have been tested by all major powers, although never used. 'Internets' exist but are niche. Taking the train is more common than taking a personal car. The internal combustion engine although discovered, was banned for peasants for 'polluting the air.' Large urban development is largely restricted to rail corridors and rivers. There are far more legal jurisdictions than in our timeline and far fewer jurisdictional agreements. Marriage is still the primary method of class advancement. https://8chan.moe/voxxe/res/4254.html#q4830

I've been thinking a lot about the problem of 'libido dominandi' (or 'the lust for power') in the political sphere, the ramifications of it, the incentive systems and structures that exacerbate it, and likewise the incentive systems and structures that help abate it. I think it is one of the central causes for concern in political systems. It corrupts the leader who is power-craven, making them emotionally enfeabled, and within short order incredibly corrupt or much worse arrogant with "good intentions." Because of this, I think it is the central cause for the eventual failure of Democracies and Republics. In fact, the leaders chosen in a Democracy or Republic have to choose to run for office, which means that right from the get go they lust for power. In other words, the problems of libido dominandi are baked into the very nature of a Democracy/Republic. What I find interesting about demarchy (or sortition) is that it is a system that at least has a chance to choose individuals who don't want power, or an even better arrangement, individuals who absolutely hate the job and want to do as little of it as possible. When I was trying to think through other institutional arrangements where this might possibly be the case, monarchism was another natural fit. True, there were monarchs who wanted power, like "l'etat c'est moi" Sun King, but there were also rulers like Pedro II, who very much seemed like he absolutely detested being King. What do you guys think about the "lust for power," demarchy, etc.?

Discuss /ck/ related to /monarchy/. Talk about what royalty would eat. How they would eat. Historical feasts / banquets. >Dining in public was an important aspect of royal display and a way of offering access to the sovereign. Important members of the court were given the honour of serving the king, carving his meat and pouring his wine in front of a crowd of spectators >Public dining was a frequent practice in the reign of James I (1566–1625), who liked elaborate spectacle and lavish entertainment. Following the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660, the custom was revived by Charles II (1630–85) with great splendour and ritual. While breakfast and supper were private, the king's dinner, eaten in the mid-afternoon, was held at least once a week in the Presence Chamber of the state apartments or in the Banqueting House at Whitehall. >Each member of the household in attendance had a specific role in serving the meal. Three officers attended: a carver, server and a cup bearer who each presented the king with dishes while on bended knee. A procession of liveried servants would then bring the food to the king's table. The king would choose from the food offered and his attendants would carve and taste each portion before placing it before him. Spectators were allowed to revel in the ritual feasting from behind a balustrade or a rail.

& for discussion on Russia / Ukraine.

I could get behind this monarchy stuff tbh, but how do you explain how The Greatest Leader in Human History was elected as President of a Republic?

There is already a Telegram group for we can talk? i only knows this group, but it is on spanish https://t.me/joinchat/gmn3MTCeYtNmOTAx

It's not legitimate without Grace chan!

ok lets establish some basics. moanrchy: arose from tribalistic europe, basically modern and large scale chief cult. read tacitus. >"it is customary for states to make voluntary and individual contributions of cattle or agricultural produce to the leaders these are accepted as a token of honour." >"on the field of battle it is a disgrace to the leader to be surpassed in valour by his companions, to the companions not to equal the valour of their leader. to outlive ones leader by withdrawing from battle brings life long infamy and shame" >"to defend and protect him, to attribute to his glory ones own brave deeds, that is the crux of their oath of allegiance: the leaders fight for victory, the companions fight for their leader" basically, the chief (king) is meant to be a role model, protector, and provider. the lads fight for the chief it is honourable to give your all for him AS LONG AS THE KING IS TRUE. >Culture culture is important. problem is, good times-weak men, and all that. its bad cause the good cultures have produced times so good that their sons become weak. good morals produced by a good culture are far better than any laws. laws can be good, but they are easily corrupted. what needs to happen is the creation of a good culture that is different in that it is self sustaining, self replicating, immune to bad change (immediet or eventual), and dug in. basically every facet of society, biology, and psychology must be taken into account and optomised to ensure the survival of good culture and good men. a point to consider. >artificial struggle. create artificial struggle, do not be a greedy dog for your children that wants the world for them, as your grandchildren will lack far more than the grandparent. but also like working out. you could "struggle for a year, get gains and slack off, create measures to call out and negate complacency. monarchs are not meant to take advantage of their people. the peoples adoration and loyalty is a fucking privilege for services rendered. the trick is installing a new monarch, since most revolutions end up in the installation of a democracy which his even worse than a selfish monarch. bloodlines are good but dry up. once this happens and you get th inevitable limp dicked crones that are now Britains monarchy, their line ran its course, throw them out and find another hero. next up: spirituality/religion

Did he and his puppet church in Avignon really do anything wrong respecting the templars? It's said a lot that he only really exterminate them because of the debts he had with them and in order to get to his treasure. But. It doesn't rob you the wrong way that a christian monastic order got to get that rich because of

Which colonial projects under kingly direction went the best, do you think? What could've been done better?

Otto "the great" was king of Germany, he represssed countless nobles' revolts, conquered loraine in 939, stopped the hungarian invasions in 955, conquered Italy in two campaigns in 951 - 955, and on febrary 3rd 963 ultimately became emperor of what will be later known as "Holy Roman Empire" that would last until 1806 when Napoleon abolished it.

I am curious what is peoples opinion on here about race. Do you believe in it? Do you believe in something like an ethnostate as well as a monarchy?

>this ungrateful little worm has to crawl back home to attend his grandfather's funeral What punishment does he deserve, /monarchy/?

I'm looking for a different perspective on monarchy, and am wondering if there's any monarchy philosophy or literature surrounding muslim monarchs

Do you feel like you're winning, americans? Are you enjoying your "freedom"? Was it ever worth it?

King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa is the monarch of a constitutional monarcy. The government has a national assembly divided into the Council of Representatives and the Consultative Council. Members of the council of representatives are voted on. The King wields a wide array of executive power, such as the appointment of prime ministers, command of the army, and appointing members of the consultative council. Obviously a mix between republicanism and monarchy, but I was wondering what you guys think.

/monarchy/ pays its respect & remembers the life of Prince Philip. "He has, quite simply, been my strength and stay all these years, and I, and his whole family, and this and many other countries, owe him a debt greater than he would ever claim, or we shall ever know." The Queen's Golden Wedding Anniversary speech, November 1997

Even to the corrupted senses of republicans, the happiest country in the world is a monarchy led by ancient spirituality. Yet they refuse to admit, perhaps they are wrong in trying to fashion false utopia on Earth. Now the worst of them, the godless, communist Chinese, threaten to destroy this immortal, benevolent society. We should esteem this rare example of traditional glory because these expressions will fade with ever increasing rapidity as the seasons pass.