/lit/ - Literature

>>13966367
Butterfly is right on this, which doesn't say much for our NuRight larpers.
Divine Right is hubris and completes the descent into Christian degeneracy. It's carte blanche for moral faggotry and is one of the major causes of liberalism. Governmental types are not a good thing in themselves and once they betray their own foundations they are perhaps worse than even their opposed types. It's no mistake that ancaps, fascists, and other NuRight retards tend to have sentiment for the absolute worst form of monarchism.
Liberalism is really just a degenerate form of monarchism in which its power and sense of divine right is extended to all people.

>>13919772
Monarchy isn't a good thing in itself, many were modern, especially the late ones. This is clear in all of the libertarian/urcapital types identifying with its methods.
You make a distinction with aristocracy, but the same question remains, which type?

>>13865217
So a blood democracy?
That's not what a nobility is, so your position isn't really any better than democrats. WHy do you think drag queens are true art if they have some inbred blood?

>>13810952
But the majority of authoritarians are retarded too.

>>13659266
Predictable response from the NuRight.
More accurately, it is the extension of Divine Right to each individual, the abstract reigning figure, as well as an act of abstention and absolvement. Hence the generalised lunacy as democracy begins to degrade.
But feel free to debate me and prove me wrong.

>Divine right formalises the monarchist structure and allows it to become rigidly hereditary. Legal divinity takes the place of legitimate divinity, as ancient monarchies had the right - or, more appropriately, duty - to slay a demon who appeared on the throne as a form of divinity. A false spirit threatened the entire city or nation, and a law of divinity would be seen as the very same thing. Essentially it would mean that a demonic throne remained sacred.

>Liberalism functions in a similar way, a synthesis or formalisation of succession. Succession itself becomes the divine transfer of authority, and is in a sense even more absolute as it institutes into law a king who cannot be killed. A headless king. Only the head of the Leviathan has true absoluteness.

>That is only one similarity. There is also the historical connection in that liberalism develops as an enclave of absolute monarchism. Monarchism proved to be incapable of maintaining its growing borders and wealth, in particular the expansion of the new world. In many ways liberalism is just a development of monarchist efficiency - a necessity of the system's growing size and mobility, thus extending its power to the sovereignty of each individual.

>>13371351
>>13371356
He's literally a Chad of the late nobility.

>>13359558
>>13359595
Who are the slowest liberals? g/acc, r/acc, or nrx?

lol
basic common sense.
And who the fuck are these people sourcing rationalwiki? >>13274286
Fucking ASSfags are swarming this place, and they're worse than the trannies.

>>13272785
So, given that utopia is wishful thinking we should simply regress to the worst ideas possible.
Great idea.

>>11662862
>evolutionary pressures

>>11645559
Primitivism is the only true tradition.
>>11645585
Only civilised people were too stupid to understand that lack of sun causes your teeth to fall out and that evergreen tree resin not only cures scurvy but prevents the minor wound from becoming sepsis.