>>81590You have no idea, how often I find conservative royalists or libertarians say, "You must like Chairman Mao, ha, ha, ha, you honestly believe there should be one sovereign ruler?" And libertarian / ancap monarkiddie converts nervously laughing and making this connection about, "Well, at least, with Monarchy, it isn't like you'll get a Mao or Stalin, as that is found in democracy." While they contemplate uncomfortably & compare Monarchy to them – But also others snide at me about basically supporting a DICTATORSHIP or basically Mao.
Let me give you a conversation.
Conservative royalist: "The rule of one man is the best, how extraordinary" (his sarcasm). I doubt any reigning monarch will endorse your view. Monarchy is about legitimacy to rule, exclusive to one king. A constitutional arrangement of state. You are purely suggesting nonsense that doesn't even constitute a viable dictatorship… I doubt that you are a fan of Mao. I can replace your every mention of one man with Mao."
Me: "You could refer to Mao in that case. Yes, Monarchy is the rule of one man. By constitution, it is the body-politic of the state, the true unity of it all, in one person… As the whole in relation to the part. The Monarchist opinion since the Herodotus Debate has been, that the rule of the one best man is preferable. [You really believe in the Nobles more than the Monarch. A big conceit in any nobles, but left it at the door with the Monarch? You say, that you don't believe in the government of one man, but that is the pre-eminence of Monarchy. It might be with great disbelief, that we trust one person to govern over an entire people, but that is the true majesty of monarchy–that one person, above all other persons, is able to govern and decide for the greater benefit of the whole."
Conservative royalist: "Then I am afraid you know nothing about monarchy… What is that I'm reading I wonder. Trusting a philosopher-king to govern? How ridiculous. Other worship of yours, including worshipping Mao Zedong as the Great Helmsman who-knows-best, doesn't matter. Monarchy is political arrangement, not cosplay… Nobles support such a structure. Bureaucrats don't. The rest is bullshit. I can write a thousand words Chairman Mao the Great Helmsman knows best."
Me: "The Monarch is rightfully compared to the Helmsman of a ship–even if Mao said it–it is a Monarchist point of view, no matter how much you dislike Mao."
Conservative royalist: "You are highly prone to communist propaganda. I assure you."
>>71029Yes, I hate how they always believe in nobles, but don't believe in Monarchy. I despise these wannabe elitists.
Internet royalists disappoint me.
They don't think the Monarch is capable of holding a pencil.
I view most royalists / trads as bankrupt when it comes to Monarchy – they might support nobility, titles, traditionalism, and even royalism, but they never have monarchist views…Whereas leftists, if I were to judge from these videos alone, genuinely believe in their Leader rather than these royalists/trads, even allude to monarchist views rather than these royalists/trads, & overall say it better than these royalists/trads.
That is why I distance myself from royalists / traditionalists, but also use the term royal monarchy & monarchy almost exclusive from royalism. It is one thing to have monarkiddie views, but a royalist is something else – for example, if you were to have two kings, it would be diarchy rather than Monarchy, & not every Monarchy is particularly royal or wears a crown