District of Corruption
While I was at the beach in Florida, I watched a lot of television and followed the news, but the poor internet service there prevented me from commenting on current events like the fall of Iraq to jihadists, the federal government’s PC war against the Washington Redskins, Camp of the Saints unfolding on the Mexican border, and Eric Cantor’s surprise defeat in Virginia followed by his swift replacement by Kevin McCarthy who is an even worse pro-amnesty establishment Republican.
In reaction to Cantor’s defeat, Sheldon Adelson in Politico, Richard Trumka in The Hill, and Rupert Murdoch in the Wall Street Journal have written editorials demanding amnesty for illegal aliens. There’s also the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) announcing that “gay marriage” is Christian. A recent poll that found that 54 percent of Americans believe that Obama is incapable of leading the country. The approval rating of the U.S. Congress has reached “historic lows” at least 12 times since 2010.
All of this was the backdrop of an epic debate at our hotel room about the merits of monarchy vs. republicanism as a form of government. My position was that republics naturally degenerate over time, there are no limits on “liberty” and “equality” which crowd out all other values, republics are plagued by perpetual social revolution, power in republics is ultimately based on sheer numbers which means there is always a built in incentive in the system to expand the electorate, and that there isn’t a single historical example of a republic that has stayed or become a more stable, conservative society in the long run through the electoral process.
Roll the tape in any country where the republican form of government has been tried and you will always find a culture on the way down whether it is European folk songs degenerating into American pop music or, even in the absence of Jews, the Japanese samurai and kamikaze degenerating into the hikikomori of modern Japan since the emperor lost power following the Second World War.
Even if there was a “White Republic” or a “Southern Republic,” could we have any confidence that it would not follow the same downward trajectory, slowly as in the case of American Republic, or very fast like Revolutionary France, into the course of all the liberal democracies that have proceeded it?
Would our descendants have to struggle to overthrow another wild democracy where in Plato’s words, “the horses and asses are wont to hold on their way with the utmost freedom and dignity, bumping into everyone who meets them and who does not step aside. And so all things everywhere are just bursting with the spirit of liberty.”
Another debate over systems?
Get ethnonationalism right and the system largely doesn’t matter.
Without monarchs, there’s not a system that references blood ties, not really. When ‘the republic’ of the u.s. was (as stated in the constitution) “For US and OUR posterity,” which was pretty clear, it worked as an ethnically driven country. Then other people came and changed the laws (so they would feel at home in someone else’s society). The danger is any ideologically based society, (like latin/romanist societies, or the often jewish-led communism—both of which ‘universalize’ the population and pretend they are unified under their tax collection systems). Long live the Queen!
I know I’m accused of being a jew for pointing it out, but how many of those people from “mexico” in the vid are jews? Um…bet not a one. Which is why I keep trying to say we have undergone latinization, (not judification). They SAY it’s about “race” or “color” but obviously it’s a religious movement.
In the U.S., ethnonationalism is a response – kind of like the cry of a wounded animal – to the crumbling of racial, ethnic, cultural and religious bonds under liberal democracy.
Re: Dixiegirl
In Europe, it is Islamification and it is also due to sheer proximity as self confidence has broken down under liberal democracy.
I’m a Southern ethno-nationalist who favours monarchy as the best, most traditional system of government. That said, I’ll take any system at this point which rids us of the USA – which I am confident is the most destructive anti-White, anti-traditionalist regime in all of human history.
Re: countenance
If all known examples of the republican system of government drift toward the same result (all republics have become less conservative over time), it is likely due to the system itself.
History has shown successful white monarchies and republics. What it has never shown is a white empire staying white.
That is the real crux of the matter.
Switzerland has always done well as a republic.
If we continue to import non-Whites and Catholics, I can see the USA becoming a monarchy in this century. Roman Catholicism has always been pro-monarchial down to the bitter end.
20 percent of Switzerland is now foreign born.
@ countenance
+1
History clearly shows that Nationalist Movements arise when common native people finally realize they’ve been taken over by a foreign power or entity.
I rarely see posts pointing out this obvious fact about the US; it is in the full grip of a foreign entity and has been for quite some time. The evidence is plentiful from its “war” driven govt // business model to its Open Borders policies driven by the Oligarchy that is in power.
Switzerland has a greater percentage of its population that’s Catholic than the USA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_in_Switzerland
“Roman Catholicism has always been pro-monarchial down to the bitter end.”
Only because the FORM of Monarchy (the revivified Pagan = “Holy” Roman Empire) served their purposes far better, than the older Ethnarchs of Orthodox Europe.
The Papacy didn’t care for ANY Monarchy where the populace was not Papist. Remember Elizabeth I, or Queen Victoria, or the Czars?
No, valid monarchy, where the king is the ‘little father’ of like ethnicked subjects, is both biblical (the Davidic kingdom) as well as practical. After a while, you can’t die for a proposition. But a king like Henry V?
Well… “non nobis nomine, Domine,” as they say.
They SAY it’s about “race” or “color” but obviously it’s a religious movement.
Laughs. These border crashers are, for the most part, irreligious mestizos and Indios from Central America, not Mexico. And if you knew anything about Latin America, you’d realize that the Catholic church has been moribund there for decades while the Protestant churches are thriving. There are now more practicing Protestants (mostly Evangelicals and Pentacostals) than Catholics in Brazil, and the rest of LA is quickly moving in the same direction. I’d guess you’d let all these wogs into your country as long as they were Prods, eh Dixie Girl?
That said, I’ll take any system at this point which rids us of the USA – which I am confident is the most destructive anti-White, anti-traditionalist regime in all of human history.
Yeah well don’t get too confident because there are many, many other nations more anti-white and anti-traditionalist than the US. Sweden would be my pick for the most anti-white of them all, but don’t forget Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand et cetera ad nauseam. It’s an unfortunate worldwide phenomenon not at all confined to America.
Roman Catholicism has always been pro-monarchial down to the bitter end..
Is that so? Out of scores of Catholic-majority countries in the world I count exactly two kingdoms: Spain and Belgium. Out of far fewer Protestant-majority countries, I count about two dozen monarchies: the UK, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia, New Zealand (all amongst the most suicidally liberal countries in the world, funny that) and a whole whack of tiny island nations in the Caribbean and South Pacific. Wrong again, Butz.
20 percent of Switzerland is now foreign born.
Actually it’s more like 24% foreign born, but there are two crucial differences compared to the foreign born population in the US. One, the vast majority of foreigners in Switzerland are white Europeans, largely from the culturally similar neighbouring nations of Germany, Austria, Italy and France.
Two, and most importantly, very few of these foreigners have or will ever get Swiss citizenship. So they have no political rights in Switzerland and can be — theoretically at least — deported at any time.
Switzerland has a greater percentage of its population that’s Catholic than the USA
The Catholics in Switzerland are also generally more conservative than the Protestants. The same thing goes for Germany and the Netherlands too. Only in the Anglo-Saxon countries are the Protestants more conservative. Personally, I blame the Irish 🙂
The immigration problems in Protestant Europe are relatively recent. I doubt they will go on too much longer.
Switzerland, and Britain have been easy on refugees, but, refugees have no permanent immigration status in Switzerland. In Switzerland they are called resident foreigners. Don’t confuse them with immigrants.
I can’t say that I would disagree. Whatever works, works. Unfortunately, many have such a vested interest in their own fantastical visions of what this force would and should look like that they probably wouldn’t realize a “good” system if it was staring them in the face. There isn’t a system that is perfect for everyone. Someone is always going to complain about this aspect or that aspect. So, no, there obviously isn’t a perfect solution for all. But there is going to be a solution(s) that can get most people a hell of a lot closer to their own personal preferences and views than other systems—especially when you look at the viciously anti-White system we have now.
It seems to me that there are just too many people who would rather drag themselves and everyone around them down just to be able to say they were “right” rather than push aside their egos for the chance to get some kind of traction and gain some ground. Republics fade and die, and Monarchies are overthrown, but winners still win and losers still lose. That never changes. So where are the winners?
Some of you Roman Catholics should understand this, the border with Mexico is wide open, and amnesty for you co-religionists has already happened.
How about your coreligionists Butzhead? Not two far down the street are a couple of “Iglesia Bautista Mexicana” churches…that means Baptist if you don’t speak Spanish. Or the Iglesia de Agua Viva” Mexican Pentecostal church.
I’m sure you’re fine with THEM getting amnesty..right?
touche. its not the religion it’s the ignorant PC bastards cultivated by the jewmedia.
Unfettered freedom just allows your enemies to come in and use your freedom against you. You just need a government system that is built around making laws and regulations that protect the people of your country, white gentiles. There is one already — National Socialism.
In the same sense that Democracies lead to Mob Rule, which lead to Dictatorships, maybe Republics lead to Democracy; as evident by the US, which started out as a Republic, but now is referred to and seen as a Democracy.
Monarchies might be better, but I doubt the common Southron would accept a king, just because of “Muh Revolution”.
I agree with you, Palmetto. I don’t care what form of government we have, just as long as we’re sovereign.
Switzerland is a Confederation, isn’t it?
What republic? It must be in the same fantasyland as the free market.
Frenchie—You Roman Catholics can all pray together to the Virgin of Guadalupe. Holy Mary we sure screwed the White Protestants…LOL.
Little Butzhead…do you lie awake at night waiting for the Pope to break in? You really ought to do something about that obsession…but you didn’t answer my question..are you ok with the Mexican evangelicals breaking in?
Monarchy’s are ridiculous. Some people say all we need is a King and a bunch of guards with pointy hats and everything will be ok. Ha! What about England? Bunch of perverts run that place and are being blackmailed to keep the bankers, Jews(I know redundant), and mass immigration going. All we need is another Nero or Caligula type mad King. The ruin and destruction over the eons from bad kings could fill volumes. People who want Monarchy’s want perfect government. There is no such thing. (Repeat three times…) The Mediterranean Republics lasted a long time until trade patterns shifted. Switzerland has been given as an example. We need to follow the original pattern of OUR Republic. Limited franchise for those of means or I would add those with some defined level of literacy based on test. This would immediately destroy the hoards of leftist voters needed to continue the present pattern of disbasement of our country. Some say,” We’ll never get that”. I say to them good luck on getting a King. That would be even more difficult. This notion of getting a King is DIRECTLY from the Jews. Moldburg and that bunch of the #Neo-Synagoge. We should from now on call it Kingism because it’s just another -ism to distract White people from the root of the problem which Jews, Liberals and their ilk.
The most democratic institution in the history of the West was probably the Bretton Parliament established by and guaranteed by the French monarchy for the self-government of the Bretton people in N France. Like all the French nation state, founded upon the Apostolic government of the Church, none of the Estates could just pass any law they wanted – infanticide OK, let’s have a Jew bank, pornographers should have their own industry, sodomites – let them do it in the park etc.
The temporal powers of the Christian nation state had to legislate on the basis of the faith and morals of the Church.
In France, this regime lasted up until the Masonic republican revolution (1786)overturned throne and altar, unleashed ethnic cleansing in Brittany and the Vendee, outlawed the Bretton language and culture which persisted up until about 20 years ago etc.
Republics are inherently unstable by nature and are easily got control of by the Money Power – in the real world this is the Jewish Power.
England and Scotland prior to the Reformation also developed representative, democratic government. And it was the anti-Reformers like Saint Thomas More who argued for the rights of the Commons against the royal supremacist (divine right of kings) reformers. Bet they didn’t tell the little American inDUHviduals that in the gummint skool.
http://americaneedsfatima.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/saint-who-confronted-mandate.html
Beautiful portraits of St Thomas More. Scroll down for the famous Vivian Forbes painting of the Saint defending the liberties of the House of Commons (1927) against Cardinal Woolsey (who sided with the Oath of the royal Supremacy). This great work hangs in St Stephen’s Hall, Parliament House, London.
“In France, this regime lasted up until the Masonic republican revolution (1786)overturned throne and altar, unleashed ethnic cleansing in Brittany and the Vendee, outlawed the Bretton language and culture which persisted up until about 20 years ago etc.”
Lynda- fascinating part of the French revolution I knew NOTHING about, until I watched Anne Barnhardt’s video’s on the subject, which I would recommend to all and sundry on this forum.
People keep harping on their pet peeves, while never taking to heart the sincere advice being offered. Typical of the modern atomistic Western/protestant, (whether atheist or merely hedonist) worldview, as viewed through the skewed lens of the Egalitarian blasphemy.
The comment “That said, I’ll take any system at this point which rids us of the USA” is, in the long run, the one that scares me the most. This is the slippery slope from which there is no escape. As Chesterton said, “”When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing–they believe in anything.”
Which then leads to the following: “If you believe in nothing, you’ll fall for anything.”
And THAT is where we have gone. Look at Obamugabe. Twice, people fell for the belief that ‘race doesn’t matter.’ Twice, people forgot to ‘judge a person by the content of their character.’ Twice, we voted in a Nigger, and turned aside numerous White Men. We’ve not only fallen for anything that appears NOT to be ‘racist,’ we’ve enshrined it in the ugliest piece of stone ever chipped at- the ‘MLK Monstrosity’ in D.C.
People hate monarchies (the PROPER spelling of this plural, SamIam!) because it means they are reduced to the state of COMMONER; not because a despotic king is intrinsically more evil than a Dictator, or even an ‘elected’ Nigger.
So many egos, so little intelligence. (Remember, you all voted in this Nigger- twice. q.e.d.)
But a monarchy of an earlier, Orthodox sort, coupled with a bicameral legislature, cordoned off by a racial and religious litmust test, (as Britain had until about 1890) could give us the sort of ‘kingdom’ we want. I mean, even Disraeli noted “At the front of every one of these revolutionary movements for the destruction of authority, nationhood and religion,” noted an eminent elder statesman, “you find a Jew.”
That ‘litmus test’ has to be both racial, as well as religious, to keep ‘beyond the Pale’ BOTH the mestizo, as well as the Menshevik.
Oh, and expulsion and execution as the ‘double-edged sword’ to enforce same.
For further reading, Lasha’s newest post.
http://www.darkmoon.me/2014/the-jewish-question-a-problem-without-a-solution-part-1-by-lasha-darkmoon/
Aristotle, in the pre-Christian age, preferred the ‘mixed polity’ containing ALL the better forms and elements including democracy, but we have a still better form of government, the only SURE foundation for any nation, with the coming of the Gospel. The Talmudists and other alien bloods marry into ethnonational monarchies, so the blood and soil connexion is lost and the mixed progeny become foreign parasites of the host nation. Hereditary power, wealth and leisure will corrupt and cause the destruction of the host nation.
‘People hate monarchies (…) because it means they are reduced to the state of COMMONER’:
Yes. ‘This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you’.
And who will be our royal families?
The Kennedy family – they really pushed hard for Camelot
,
The George Bush family?
CT Senator Prescott Bush
CIA chief, VP and President George Bush Sr?
President George Dubya Bush Jr (more like a Texas good Ol frat boy, “Jethro” character from the Beverley Hillbillies TV show)
More likely some Hollywood actor prince and Princess gay actor Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt.
Maybe a Brit, European royal can be loaned to us – there are always Saudi Sunni Muslim royals.
Nah, guys. M’thinks you wasted some hours in your hotel BSing about things that just aren’t relevant to USA 2014.
This was time wasted that could have been better used updating the LS web page, editing, posting some of my OD articles.
Hey Hunter,
I can’t reach you. Your phone message system is full, not accepting anymore .
I think your young family needs a nanny.
Hunter, where we went wrong is with universal suffrage. If the vote had been restricted to land owners of upright character who had to show 3 generations on both sides to vote, we would not be in this mess. The politicians are pandering to the lowedt common denominator because of universal suffrage.
But monarchies work to. Read William Blackstone. Right of birth is one of the simplest and fairest and peaceful ways to determine the executive.
I would like to hear from ODs religious specialists on this. Please no Catholic bashing.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/06/who-needs-conspiracy-theories-when.html?m=1
Mosin, relax man. If you really believe what you say, God will save you.
Fr John, I too (a product of American public school education) knew very little of the history of Europe before the Reformation in England (Oath of Supremacy and dissolution of the monasteries) and in Germany.
When I travelled in Europe (extensively in France), I discovered that the important history was monumentalised in the parish churches and in pre-Revolutionary public buildings and memorials from the Pre-Revolutionary tradition. Most parish churches in Brittany and the Vendee have memorials to the Chouans who took up arms against the infernal columns and the Masonic partisans of the republic. They wore the badge of the Sacred Heart of Christ the King with the letters Dieu et Roi.
I met people who still spoke the ancient Bretton tongue and it had only been permitted in public use in their lifetimes.
The reason why all this history is suppressed is because we are supposed to believe that the French Revolution was this spontaneous uprising of the French people (poor peasants) against an effete, corrupt and oppressive aristocracy. In fact, it was the peasants (the Chouans) who took up arms against the Masonic republicans in defense of their families, parishes, churches, lands and their king.
The Chouannerie is not forgotten and it is from the Chouannerie that the true France will rise again. The Crown of the Lilies will be reclaimed. When it is, the authentic institutions for political self-government will be restored to the French, the Brettons and the Basques in the south of France.
Embracing monarchy is the logical solution given your anti-Constitution and anti-Founding Fathers attitude.
I wonder if the next LoS rally will feature “bring back the King of England” banners? Do you really think that Southerners will support that message?
Also, Fr John thank you for posting the link Darkmoon’s essay.
I do beg to differ with her, however. The Jewish problem does have a solution – it is called the Church and the Christian nation state founded upon the Church – God’s kingdom order for nations. The great political experiments in self-representative government, democracy are creations of the Christian nation state. I am thinking of the Magna Charta and the Declaration of Arbroath for Scotland.
A visit to the historic Jewish quarters of the Christian nation state of pre-Revolutionary France reveals that these were prosperous communities. Laws were in place to prevent their predations upon the Gentile population. They were free to be Jews and to earn their living in their Jewish communities, but they were not free to spread Deicide to the population or to exercise it through Talmudic law over any Christian, however humble. Of course, the J-factor will insure that Jews are not going to accept that, but even so, the Jews were a damn sight better off under the Christian nation state than the Palestinians and ‘Palestinians to be’ are under the Jew state.
Gulags were unheard of in Europe until the Jews seized power.
The Masonic, republican revolutions that swept the Christian nation states of Europe post 1776 were ultimately revolutions (funded by The Crown of Jewry on the sq mi of The City in London) for the non-separation of synagogue and state and the entire republican swag of liberal laws crafted to uncrown Christ the King and outlaw God and His rights – to which the state is obligated.
Hate to tell the liberals, but this doomed project does not have a happy ending.
Re: Sam2
I agree that there is no perfect system, but the republican system of government seems to correlate with extinction everywhere it has been tried (even in Japan where the Japanese are the oldest people in the world), and anything is better than dying out.
Re: Clement Pulaski
I’m not impressed with Federalist propaganda. The last two centuries have vindicated the critics of the Constitution.
I agree with what someone said earlier about universal suffrage being the pitfall of republicanism, rather than the system itself. A representative republic with pro-nationalist requirements for holding office and voting would be my top preference.
With that being said, I’m not dead set against monarchy either. What’s most important is the restoration of our Southern nation’s sovereignty and identity, regardless of the form of government we settle on. However right now, barring a revolution that dramatically alters our political institutions and structure, state secession seems to me the most likely first step to sovereign nationhood for Dixie. The sociopolitical climate here isn’t conducive for pushing revolution. All that’s going to do is get you put in prison. Nationalist sentiment will have to grow much more in scope and influence before total revolution outside state secession becomes even a remote possibility. Southern Nationalists would have to achieve a status of having substantial political power, and then it would take a flat out refusal of the state governments to submit to our demands. That’s when a revolution becomes more likely.
I think most Southern Nationalists, as well as the League of the South, are making the correct decision to focus on raising national awareness and officially endorse state secession as the political means to accomplish the national independence and sovereignty we seek. We can get way ahead of ourselves and kick around the ideas of alternative forms of government for the future, but in my view any hope of a Southern Nationalist victory must begin with calling for state secession. Conditions haven’t deteriorated enough, and we’re also nowhere near influential enough, to propose the idea of instituting an entirely new political order that has no historical precedent with our people for the last two centuries.
In the event of a full blown and successful nationalist revolution, of course all bets are off and it’s impossible to predict the outcome in terms of what kind of government/governments is/are established in the aftermath.
Re: Wayne
In the United States, the system was initially restricted to White male property owners, but it had thrown off those restraints and moved toward universal suffrage within thirty years.
Discussing the merits of a monarchy as an alternative to representative republics is fine among ourselves, but IMO it would be a huge mistake to let such contemplations make their way into our public propaganda.
Yeah, this is the type of thing we should be talking about:
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=17960
We’re not advocating a public position here.
My position is that anything is better than the system we have now which is moving us toward racial, cultural, and ethnic extinction. Anything is better than collective death.
If this result were unique to the United States, it could be attributed to local causes, but it seems to be a universal tendency of democracies. Some here have already observed that there are countries which are more oppressive and anti-White than the US like Sweden and Canada.
Until any ‘nationalist’ or ‘secessionist’ movement addresses the collapse of the white middle class, you have nothing but hot air. The link in my above post demonstrates this. Revolution will come from those who haven’t fallen yet but who have no illusions about the hamster mill turning them into the rich, which is the middle class, particularly the bottom half of it.
Even if we seceded from the United States, what would stop us from becoming another Ireland, which has the republican form of government and is brimming with Third World immigration?