A Monarchist Party?

[osan]

Heh, empirical history.

That is a reference, not a presentation.

 

[osan]

Once again, please tell me what specifically is wrong with the three-part argument I posted.

I'm not going to respond to your questions until do you me the courtesy of addressing what I said.

His questions carry the response.

Have you no analytic subtlety?

 

[pcosmar]

Once again, please tell me what specifically is wrong with the three-part argument I posted.

Your entire premise is wrong.

A Monarch is nothing but a tyrant who steals and enslaves.
It is a Horrible form of Government and has always been historically.

The American experiment of limited govt, was a new and novel approach,
It has never seen a century of implementation and can not be evaluated in a historical manner.

Monarchy has a proven history of failure,

 

[pcosmar]

My point is that a monarch has the incentives of an owner,

How does this tyrant become the owner?

How do you OWN human being?

The only Owner of Humans is the Creator of Humans.

any other claim of authority is usurpation.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Your entire premise is wrong.

A Monarch is nothing but a tyrant who steals and enslaves.
It is a Horrible form of Government and has always been historically.

The American experiment of limited govt, was a new and novel approach,
It has never seen a century of implementation and can not be evaluated in a historical manner.

Monarchy has a proven history of failure,

Ah..

As I said, this isn't for everybody.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Someone mentioned Lucifer on the throne; there it is.

...the more graphic and realistic images were burned by the "freedom fighters."

 

[Origanalist]

Lol, this thread got a 4 star rating? I guess I'll vote after all.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I ought to have extended the polls to more days.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

This is the funeral of Otto von Habsburg.

 

[PierzStyx]

@PierzStyx You're not going to answer my question?





For your convenience, I've simplified the argument and broken it down into its component parts.

Tell me exactly which of the parts is wrong and why.

I've answered your question. The problem is that your assertion is a socialist fantasy. Give one person total power, collectivize the ownership of all property under their rule, and the end result will be starvation, oppression, and slavery. Just ask anyone who lived under Uncle Joe or any of his successors.

 

[pcosmar]

This is the funeral of Otto von Habsburg.

I've seen a lot of funerals,, and even participated in some.

What is your point? or are you just a fanboy?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I've seen a lot of funerals,, and even participated in some.

What is your point? or are you just a fanboy?

I thought it was interesting (esp. the overwhelming celebration).

Austrians still have some sense..

..for a dynasty that ceased to exist a century ago.

I've answered your question.

No, you haven't.

 

[Origanalist]

Why is this ridiculous shit in grass roots? Does RPF's now consider a monarchy relative to the liberty movement? I realize things have changed somewhat but when did a monarchy become something to be desired here?

 

[acptulsa]

Someone mentioned Lucifer on the throne; there it is.

...the more graphic and realistic images were burned by the "freedom fighters."

How smugly you sit in judgment of people who knew far more than you do. It's long past time for you to go do some homework. Here's your assignment:

Go read one of the works of Marquis de Sade.

Go read a second work of Marquis de Sade.

Go read a third work by Marquis de Sade.

Come back and tell us how the French Revolution was an irrational act.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Someone mentioned Lucifer on the throne; there it is.

...the more graphic and realistic images were burned by the "freedom fighters."

How smugly you sit in judgment of people who knew far more than you do. It's long past time for you to go do some homework. Here's your assignment:

Go read one of the works of Marquis de Sade.

Go read a second work of Marquis de Sade.

Go read a third work by Marquis de Sade.

Come back and tell us how the French Revolution was an irrational act.

Neither side was any good.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Neither side was any good.

No, the side which encouraged the development of civilization was/is better than the side which put heads on sticks.

...fairly straightforward.

How smugly you sit in judgment of people who knew far more than you do. It's long past time for you to go do some homework. Here's your assignment:

Go read one of the works of Marquis de Sade.

Go read a second work of Marquis de Sade.

Go read a third work by Marquis de Sade.

Come back and tell us how the French Revolution was an irrational act.

The Marquis de Sade was an illiterate lunatic barbarian who represented the opposite of civilization.

I'm not sure if you're kidding, but I certainly hope so.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

From @acptulsa:

The 'illiterate lunatic barbarian' was on the side that 'encouraged the development of civilization' and you damned well know it.

Sade was a revolutionary communist, militant atheist, and moral degenerate ("Sadist") of epic proportions.

He sided with the Jacobins et al in their quest to destroy all property, religion, family, etc - civilization.

His modern day equivalent would be a "Black Bloc" member who also directs hardcore porn.

 

[lilymc]

Why is this ridiculous $#@! in grass roots? Does RPF's now consider a monarchy relative to the liberty movement? I realize things have changed somewhat but when did a monarchy become something to be desired here?

My thoughts exactly.

But I do think this topic leads to some interesting discussions. And there is one thing about monarchy that hasn't really been talked about here, so I might start a new thread on it.