Is It Time For Kings To Replace Democracy?


Phrased alternatively:

“Have you learned enough about the horrors of mob rule?”

In North America, not yet.

Give it another 20 years.

UPDATE 1800E 03MAY2016: Related.

40 responses to “Is It Time For Kings To Replace Democracy?

  1. oughtsix

    The author rails against the bloody history of “democracy” asserting its Luciferian influences, justifiably so. Simultaneously, he extols the virtues of monarchs as divinely ordained defenders of the Faith and protectors of the people.

    This is specious propaganda of the worst sort.

    Tsar Nicholas and his family were murdered by vile and evil men, who had not the slightest interest in justice for the peasants, but the peasants labored and starved under the monarchy as they would under communism. Ditto Louis XVI, and just about any other monarchy one could name. Kings who truly rule “Divinely” to the great benefit of their lands and people are as rare as uncorrupted politicians in any other form of government.

    Dire straits beget strident calls for excessive “solutions.”

    • Or sober consideration of that which has been dogmatically rejected for centuries of humanist ascendancy.

    • Don’t forget though the history of life under monarchs has been written by commies and other haters. The ‘French’ revolution was choreographed by masons and banksters and I know Loius was a tool but that didn’t stop him from helping [for selfish reasons I suppose] the fledgling USA. Nicolas II was a dope but his grand-father ended serfdom and for his efforts the commies blew him up as he was taking the wind out of their shit-stirring . Not saying I support this but all the kings combined couldn’t conceive of the industrial scale slaughter or the baleful busybodies we contend with since WW 1 under ‘representative’ govt. The Putin cult is a proto-monarchy in suits. Divine rule is more a reference to positive male energy as opposed to the female negative energy we labor under now – and I mean meta-physical energy not the retarded man vs woman variety.

      • oughtsix

        Recent history of all types, is written by propagandists and revisionists. It was not always so. Romans wrote their own history and many of them told the truth especially as regards the likes of Caligula and Nero, for example.

        Aeschylus, the Greek, wrote, “In war, truth is the first casualty.” So no, the history of the excesses of monarchy are well documented, long before the marxists decided to misappropriate history.

        I will allow that monarchy based on merit rather than heredity (which seems always to devolve) might correct some of the megalomania and theft.

        But who decides who…?

        • ExGeeEye

          Almost like you would have to have elections of a sort. The only question is how many voters would be involved…at one extreme, the way Popes are chosen by few enough people that they can all fit into one good-sized room, and at the other, Universal Suffrage (which we here in the US do NOT have!).

        • ExGeeEye

          Oh, and in my non-Catholic opinion– they really effed it up this last time…

        • That’s it – recently written history is the problem as it is written under the auspices of oligarchy which has always been and still is the bane of both kings and the individual. ‘Who decides…’ The ancient riddle. Those who seek power are unfit to rule and those who are fit abhor ruling .
          Still , 5000 years of kings vs 100 yrs of occult power is no brainer. Kings were held accountable whereas the trash that rules the roost now have built a matrix hall of mirrors that is becoming transparent to all but the dim-witted. Anyway I like most all on here don’t need any kind of govt. to do the right thing but sadly most humans do.

  2. Scientistic, reductionist thinking has led us to where we currently are.

    In a society where man is reduced to an “animal” at best, and an electro-chemical meat-machine at worst, the well has effectively been poisoned.

    Until a society springs forth that exalts honor, integrity, and reunites with a core, spiritual, philosophy, we’ll get more of the same. While a benevolent, Godly, king would be preferable to what we have currently, I’ve lost faith in the possibility that such a man could ascend from the kleptocracy we’re currently slaves to.

    No, if we’re to get a “King”, considering the contemporary, “American” milieu, we’d get a Tyrant of the highest magnitude.

    A bad tree doesn’t produce good fruit.

  3. outlawpatriot

    With that, Bugs has to be jacking off in a corner somewhere.๐Ÿ™‚

    I would demand that the writer stay the hell away from here. That said, I do wish him the best of luck with his Eastern Orthodoxy.

    Communists, Progressives, Nazis, socialists, liberals, anarchists, et al. And now, the fuckin’ Tories are makin’ a come back. Whelp, I’m off to the gun store. I definitely don’t have enough ammo.๐Ÿ™‚

    • Steve Kristmann

      Yup, figured that ‘out on the lawn’ couldn’t resist ‘going there’ when he lumped us anarchists/voluntarists in with every other collectivist that he
      supposedly despises…which makes no sense as anarchists/voluntarists are the only people that DON’T demand a ‘political solution’ and don’t believe in using force for anything other than defense. We do ‘mind our own business’ and don’t tell others what to do, or demand that they ‘conform’ to our world view.

      About the only thing I can say that I agree on with him is that I need to buy more ammo..much more!!

      Yours In Liberty thru Anarchy!
      NorthGunner III

  4. CZtheDay

    I posit that refusing to follow God has resulted in our current situation. Monarchies, Republics, Democracies, Socialist-Anarchies, etc., will all result in the same cultural suicide if not truly and actively seeking to serve God. We’re seeing now that even political conservatives, when divorced from serving God, are as misguided and base as anyone else.

    Another point, I’ve been leaning toward monarchy if only for the reason that it takes one man a lot longer to plot and execute evil upon a country than it does 535 people putting on their thinking caps on how to take over and destroy the system.

  5. True democracy is a myth.


  6. Grenadier1

    I will have to come back and read this whole thing later to get the full gist of what he is positing, however on its face this appears to be misguided logic at best.
    It proposes that we have become so corrupted that in order to return to what the author deems to be the right path that we must embrace the strict controls of a godly monarch. Its a logical reach for any philosophical life raft in the storm of modernity.
    Throughout history the lives of humanity have been a ship with basically three factions vying to be captain.
    Princes, Priests and the People themselves.
    Very little of our history has been under the command of the People themselves.
    This man is making the argument that we have for too long been under the influence of the Priesthood (not the old religion but the new religion of Science, entertainment and Academics). He is making the case that we only have one option to pull the ship back on course and that is to embrace not the secular Prince but the divinely inspired Prince.
    Sorry sir,
    You are offering us a Prince none the less….You are denying the lessons of the Gnostics and the lessons of the Founding fathers. That we can live a life close to God and free to choose our own future without a Priest or a Prince.
    It is not the failure of “democracy” that has caused our fall. The founders never advocated or promoted democracy, they spoke Latin and knew the meaning of its root word. It is the failure of the citizen to resist the influences of those wishing to enslave us. The Priests and the Princes.

    • outlawpatriot

      Well said.๐Ÿ™‚

    • Absolutely.

      I see his point, but it’s wishful thinking at best.

      Noble, but wishful.

      Contemporary society is too corrupt, too arrogant, and too self-absorbed to ever produce a righteous King. Even if said King were to arise, to borrow from the great philosopher James Hetfield, “Where’s your crown, King Nothing?” Lord over this pre-officially-declared-Balkanized, mass of seething backbiters? Pass.

      Between the lines of the article, there’s only one type of King who’ll arise outta this mess, and he ain’t gonna be pro-Liberty. Like other ideas to immanentize the eschaton, the Utopian fantasy of a Righteous King ranks right up there with Communism. Sounds great. Until it ain’t.

      There’s a name for Kings in contemporary society, within our cultural milieu: Tyrants.

      The divinely-guided King ain’t happenin. That ship’s sailed. You want a savior? Find the nearest mirror.

      Anyway, the only Monarch we’re gonna get is Queen Hillary, the Bipartisanly Anointed One.

      So, that, and this damned old knee of mine only hits the ground for one King.

      • Well said and on the money, all of it.

        “Like other ideas to immanentize the eschaton, the Utopian fantasy of a Righteous King ranks right up there with Communism. Sounds great. Until it ainโ€™t.”

    • oughtsix

      Again, yes.

  7. Anonymous

    The present-day rulers already are nobility, they operate under different legal rules than the commoners. There is no time or place in human history where the rulers were forced to obey their own laws. The political behavior rule most humans follow is the divine right of celebrities.

  8. an actual Orthodox Monarchist

    I like to ask people what it would take to fix this country. Right about the time they start talking about reversing certain policies (Obamacare, the open borders, whatever) I ask them who would actually have the actual authority to do that. Executive Orders can only go so far. Even if Congress somehow unfucked itself, we’re still subject to the whims of the SCOTUS, which is definitely unhinged.

    A king could fix everything with a penstroke.

    But the real beauty of monarchism isn’t that the king has a more efficient way of doing things, it’s that he’s the final word on all things. Congress has a single-digit approval rate, but it’s always “those guys from the other states that muck things up.” So at best, we can send one schmuck to battle the rest of the schmucks, and then we’re surprised when a few terms later, he’s been corrupted.

    And we, the people, have absolutely no one to hold accountable. Ever. Look at the last four Presidents, and despite the absolute train wreck our country has become, ask yourself if they’ll ever be held accountable in any way.

    And that’s the final beauty of it. A monarch can be deposed if he fucks up bad enough. There’s no recourse for the king to blame partisan politics, there’s no “prior administration”, it’s all on him. So if it all goes tits-up, he will be lucky to survive the experience, let alone keep his crown.

    At this point in America, only a righteous king could fix this country.

    • outlawpatriot

      Oh Gawd, there’s another one?

      I hold you accountable Peter. You’re encouraging these Tories.๐Ÿ˜€

    • oughtsix

      Even David, “a man after God’s own Heart,” and anointed by God to be the first King of Israel, could not keep himself from murder and adultery. He crossed God’s law for taking census of the fighting men of Israel and God took the lives of 70,000 men as punishment.

      Whence cometh your imagined righteous king?

      The anti christ will appear to many as that perfect ruler….

      When Christ returns, and not before.

    • Grey Ghost

      Let’s be clear… fuck the King, fuck the Queen! Monarchy is just a nice way to say DICTATORSHIP and eventually the monarchs turn against the dirt people.

      Grey Ghost

    • an actual Orthodox Monarchist

      Well, this has been educational. Pete repeatedly states “THERE IS NO VOTING (Y)OUR WAY OUT OF THIS”, and asks “Have you learned enough about the horrors of mob rule?โ€, and the answer is apparently “no.”

      Imperial Rome was a powerhouse for FOURTEEN CENTURIES, America is falling apart halfway into our third. But to hear this crowd tell it, Democracy is totally better because it’s THE CURRENT YEAR and we’ve made such progress over those backwards idiots of yesteryear.

      Funny enough, America, democracy and freedom and all that rot, is one of the only non-Islamic countries in history to attempt to ban alcohol. Because when “We, the People” get to vote on shit, the stupid just keeps building, and do-gooders take over. I’ve never even heard of a traditional monarch attempting to ban booze, they’re generally too busy trying to gain or keep world-stage power to bother with the lives of mere citizens.

      Yet the average citizen of the Roman Empire was free to safely walk the length and breadth of Rome and all her territories without being hassled by the majority of criminals. The most secure, safe, and stable nation in history, and these fools want to throw out that formula because they don’t like the idea that someone could tell them what to do.

      Regarding the update to the OP:

      I’m a wrench monkey, not a student of international relations, civil administration, nor even (I’ve been told) people skills. Being part of a civil government is not part of my skill set. I am what I am, and I have no problem letting other people be what they are. Some men are natural leaders, some are just as comfortable being a supporting cast member.

      There’s a lot of big-swinging-dick types here who don’t like the idea that someone else may be the CO, but I’m just fine with not being in charge. I’ve noticed, from gig to gig, that it’s a hell of a lot easier to be a mechanic when I’m working for an Alpha-male-type than a more “people skils and friendliness” type. I’ve got both at my current job, depending on the days I work, and the one who’s the most authoritarian is also the one who gets more done per worker than most of the other leads in the building. He pushes his team harder, and we deliver more, which ultimately is better for the company.

      I’d rather leave the governing up to the government. Historically, taxes and conscription aside, most “oppressive” monarchies have been just as, if not more free than we currently are here in the FUSA.

      But hey, it’s getting early, and I worked late, so I’m going to leave off.

  9. Aerosmith’s Kings and Queens,from Draw the Line Album. Yeah I’ll hit the half century mark in November. Says it all to me. I don’t watch TV. Music.

  10. Alfred E. Neuman

    Reblogged this on ETC., ETC., & ETC..

  11. Adam failed. He existed in a world not yet cursed by the entrance of sin and was given dominion over it. He still failed. What makes anyone (any “king”) think they can do any better?

    People have an inherent problem. Self.

    There is only one solution. Christ.

    • oughtsix

      No King but Jesus.

      Otherwise, it’s every one for themselves, or subordination to group or ideology.

      The results are those we have now.

    • oughtsix

      “People have an inherent problem. Self.”

      Sin is the problem. The ungoverned, un redeemed self cannot conquer it.

      Salvation by Faith in Jesus, just so.

      • By grace through our belief in the faith of Christ indeed brother oughtsix (Gal 2:16).

        A (hopefully interesting) question though… did not Adams self exist prior to sins entrance into the world? The essence of sin is choosing ones self will over the will of God for man, is it not? Adam chose to ignore God and listen to his wife (a physical part of himself). Therefore self before sin; or “self” leads one to sin.

        The center of sin is I. Sin is the condition which needed to be remedied by Christ (and what the world is cursed by); but Adam (and thus all of humanity) governed by self will, chose sin first. That desperately wicked heart and all…

        “The ungoverned, un redeemed self cannot conquer it.”

        The governed, redeemed self cannot conquer it either. It took God and God alone to do the deed. Mans self problem (which led directly to sin) is so great that God Himself had to become us and pay the price in order to solve it.

  12. ExGeeEye

    A long time ago there was a nation that had a very few, easily-memorized laws, outside of which everything was permitted and nothing mandatory. A few judges to ensure the law, and the peace, was kept, and a priestly class that communed with God and kept the judges in line. Defense was handled by a part-time militia. They did very well, considering.*

    And then they demanded a king…

    I Samuel 8: 11-21

    The Divine does not appoint kings.. He merely permits them when the people are foolish enough to demand them.

    *Yes, I know, that’s not where we are. We came pretty close between 1783 and 1860, and IMHO it didn’t start getting really bad until just about the time I was born, 1964…so maybe it’s my fault :p

  13. SameNoKami

    A noble and godly king would last one generation. His. The next inbred idiot in line would not be like the father.
    I’ll pass on the king thing.
    We’re not voting our way out of this and we certainly aren’t ‘kinging’ our way out of it either.
    Must. Have. More. Ammo.

  14. SameNoKami

    What’s up with the democracy thing ?
    Up until the end of the big WW2, democracy was listed in military manuals as a no-no right along with communism, socialism, tyranny etc.
    The US is ‘supposed’ to be a nation of laws. We at least give lip-service to the rule of law.
    IF laws were followed by decent men in office, we wouldn’t be where we are as a nation and we wouldn’t need a ‘decent’ king.
    Decent. Yeah. Like that’s gonna happen.


    There are those who will insist when the FF won the Revolutionary War, one monarchy was replaced with another. Washington and Hamilton. Everything was just fine until the Whiskey Rebellion. The mask came off and has never been put back on.
    We have a modern-day monarchy here in Amerika. It is a judicial dictatorship backed up by an army of non-elected bureaucrats, federal prosecutors, and their Orcs with guns and badges. the same circus exists at state and local levels. Welcome to the FUSA.

  16. King?
    Hasn’t that been tried already, and found wanting, throughout history?
    Someone has forgotten their Monty Python…