T O P
[deleted]

[удалено]


bokthebok

brain worms


High_Speed_Idiot

I feel like this is more advanced. Like, brain worms but the brain worms have their own brain worms. Fractal brain worms all the way down.


murrman104

a teenager


HopefulStudent1

Dictatorship of the proletariat with Habsburg Jaw characteristics


UfV3wb2

Probably enlightened despotism tbh. Some people claim certain emperors were socialist-ish so it’s not *entirely* impossible


SomeArtistFan

I can tell you as someone who was in that brainrot for a hot second one good thing: it's usually monarchists slowly becoming socialists aside from that, it's usually heavily based on the concept of a "good king"- one that cares for his people and roots out business exploitation at every corner. Not realistic at all, but certainly a sign someone is just politically illiterate, not evil.


ironicscumfuck

Left Carlist probably? realistically means like, Market socialism/anarcho-syndicalism but there is a monarch for abstract kinda reasons.


AutoModerator

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand anarchism. The ideology is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of political theory most of the jokes will go over a typical liberal's head. There's also Bakunin's antisemitic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation - his personal philosophy draws heavily from William Godwin literature, for instance. Anarchists understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of this ideology, to realize that they're not just funny- they say something deep about SOCIETY. As a consequence people who dislike anarchism truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Noam Chomsky's support of the Khmer Rouge, which itself is a cryptic reference to Stirner's The Ego and Its Own. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Chomsky's genius unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have a Nestor Makhno tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZedong) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Randolph-

Royalties are just leeches who contribute nothing to society.


cfgaussian

Parasites of the worst kind for which there are only two solutions: what the Bolsheviks did or what the CPC did.


Greevar

Billionaires are just the modern equivalent of royals. The only difference is that it they aren't also explicitly the leaders of the state authority.


eisagi

To be fair, billionaires are worse than monarchs. There's only the one monarch (+family) and ideologically they're supposed to protect/care for the people. Billionaires proudly owe you nothing.


Greevar

Yeah, that kind of relates to that disconnection to the state. No state authority, no state responsibility.


KobaBR

>Brazil will bring back it´s monarchy KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK vai sim confia


dr_srtanger2love

Só nos sonhos frebril deles kkkkk.


KobaBR

[CONFIA](https://imgur.com/gallery/Ih7qm2O)


dalbomeister

Os cara vê comentário de cara com foto de perfil da bandeira do império e acham q essa galera é maioria, sinceramente deprimente KKKKKKK


KobaBR

suporte crítico a meia dúzia de marmanjo que levam bandeira imperial pra protesto bolsonarista e enganam os gringos do reddit fazendo pensar que tem uma massa de monarquista no BR


dalbomeister

É igual a galerinha em Cuba que leva bandeira dos estados unidos pra protesto, todo mundo vê e acha que representa a população


BrandNoez

Bruh why do Brazilians laugh like that it’s always so funny to me kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk


Logan_Maddox

It's kinda like a Mutley laugh, idk We also use haeuahsushsushuse and variations of that "Hahaha" is very polite, so it's mostly older folks who use it, or it's seen as sarcastic


Logan_Maddox

traz a monarquia de volta pra gente depor eles do jeito certo dessa vez, à francesinha


FlyingProcrastinator

Claro que ambas a Revolução Francesa e a Proclamação da República foram revoluções burguesas, mas pelo menos em uma delas as cabeças certas rolaram


lssssj

Isso parece depor a governança atual com mais etapas.


grumthor

Uhum Cláudia, senta lá. É só comédia


FlyingProcrastinator

A qualquer momento o Brasil voltará às mãos de seu herdeiro divino: Ednaldo Pereira


wholesome1234

Cope incest lovers


[deleted]

[удалено]


oliveiramg

Critical support for the bourgeoisie when they got rid of monarchists.


AndrogynousSlut

Robespierre was the one good liberal


ConceptStriking

Just admit you believe in eugenics and save everyone some time you weird fucks.


dr_srtanger2love

One of the many mistakes of the 1st republic was not having guillotined Dom Predo 2 and his family.


TransTankie

Whose that?


Rothaarig

Former king of Brazil


Logan_Maddox

Emperor, actually. The royals had the gall of claiming an empire.


TransTankie

How did revolutionary France get him?


dr_srtanger2love

I was referring to the First Brazilian Republic which was formed in 1889 after Dom Pedro 2 abdication. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Brazilian_Republic


Rothaarig

No idea. I only know the name from Civ V.


-Xavy-

Whats stopping you? \-people who have more than 2 neurons \-people who lived under monarchism and saw how it ruined our countries \-the armed workers I could go on, but its silly to give a dying system the time of day


banomboy

Can't wait to go on that sub when Elizabeth II. dies and hopefully the british monarchy along with her


UnVirtuteElectionis

I can't believe these people are serious.


oliveiramg

Monarchists have a repressed cuckold fetish.


PowerfulProle

Do they just vicariously live through their narcissistic champion? I don’t understand it!!!


Althussers-Ghost

Napoleon’s empire was built on a completely different social platform, than the one of the Bourbons though. Except for Haiti, his rule was in every way a negative things for the reactionary monarchs of Europe. He was a decent synthesis of the right and left wings of the revolution. He realized, that the nation needed a centralized leadership, as opposed to the quasi-anarchist ideas of the left wing, but also, that he had to continue the struggle against feudalist legal and economic structures, support progressive nationalism, and suppress the church. The guy started his fucking career with massacring Royalists.


cfgaussian

Meh, let's be careful and not simp for Napoleon too much. He was better than the old monarchies, and did a lot of good things for France and Europe, but he also ended the revolution, and a lot of French soldiers died needlessly in his completely pointless Spanish and Russian campaigns. And he crowned himself emperor and tried to start a new European royal dynasty, that's pretty fucked up.


Althussers-Ghost

And Lenin wasted many good Russian lives in the Polish-Soviet war. Nonsense logic, comrade. It’s not simping, it’s class analysis. Read Eric Hobsbawm’s Age of Revolutions and you’ll see why Napoleon was great for Europe. He couldn’t do half the shit he did without the support of the majority of the progressive forces in France behind him. The French people also rallied behind him a second time, when he escaped captivity, even after the blunder in Russia. We can also ask why Gramsci “simped” for Machiavelli, a monarchist, Italian nationalist. Gramsci saw the progressive elements in Machiavelli’s thought, that promoted an early, revolutionary humanism and national self-determination (of Italy against the HRE, France and Spain). Gramsci saved Machiavelli from the clutches of Fascist and other reactionaries that way. As for the revolution, it was already “dead”. The left wing wanted a decentralized state, that would have been crushed, while the right wing, which was dominating, was close to accepting a return of the Bourbons in the form of some kind of constitutional monarchy. Napoleon stepping up, meant the survival of the impulse, that resurfaced in the 1848, by spreading the revolution’s basic ideas across Europe. The Sans-Cullotes ideology returned in the form of the decentralized Paris Commune and we know how it ended and how Marx judged it.


cfgaussian

There is a reason why the term "Bonapartist" is an insult in leftist discourse, if it wasn't for the progressive momentum of the French society left over from the revolution Napoleon would have been just another military dictator. Also, the Sans-Culottes were way more based than Napoleon ever was. And the Paris Commune had its issues but it was the first truly proletarian revolution, i wouldn't discount it so quickly, and neither did Marx, there was a lot to learn from it. (And the Polish Soviet war was started by Poland, it's a bad comparison, Poland invaded Ukraine and Belarus)


JoetheDilo1917

Cope and seethe, monarchoids. Yakov Yurovsky did nothing wrong.


humziyang

I got a question: Why though? Like, why? Why suck the dick of a group of people that are supposedly born "higher" than you are?


dgaruti

1980s: "the internet will bring an end to ignorance" 2020s: "monarchies should come back" telecommunication allowed us to listen to other pepoles bullshit , when i hear this i can rationalize that at least it's not anarcho-monarchism


AutoModerator

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand anarchism. The ideology is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of political theory most of the jokes will go over a typical liberal's head. There's also Bakunin's antisemitic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation - his personal philosophy draws heavily from William Godwin literature, for instance. Anarchists understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of this ideology, to realize that they're not just funny- they say something deep about SOCIETY. As a consequence people who dislike anarchism truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Noam Chomsky's support of the Khmer Rouge, which itself is a cryptic reference to Stirner's The Ego and Its Own. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Chomsky's genius unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have a Nestor Makhno tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZedong) if you have any questions or concerns.*


General_Liu1937

Don't give up hope. If you feel down, know the guys you support are some of the richest people on the planet and instead of logical merit, they are put in their position of power because they claim a higher being said so. Whatever they're smoking, I kinda want some to see how they got to that point lol.


YoreDead_Freeman

We. We will stop you. We will fight tooth and nail against any tyrannical monster who thinks he's chosen by God to lord over All those "unholy peasants"


grumthor

Remembering that in Brazil the monarchist movement is only a thing in the south of the country where there are the most German and Italian descendents and is the hotbed of fascism in the country. The rest of the country just laughs at them.


Lenin_Vlad

I have to ask because I've never engaged with these people. What exactly is their motivation for supporting Monarchs? Or is this just another meme ideology? Does anyone know?


[deleted]

If Americans had a monarchy I guarantee the first monarch would be Queen Hillary Clinton I. Congratulations monarchists, enjoy your new leader


PerseusCommunist

Capitalists and socialists at least have one thing in common: Anti-feudalism, anti-monarchy.


mc_k86

Literally half the countries in Europe still have a monarchy


PerseusCommunist

Constitutional Monarchy. These monarchs don’t have power, and the capitalist republicans can kill them anytime. Most of the monarchs were overthrown in the past because they didn’t agree to give up power to liberals and wealthy capitalists.


themustybook98

Honestly I think being a monarchist is the lowest of the lows when it comes to political ideology in my opinion because it’s literally just bootlicking


sondanielshah

Imagine simping a wealthy family and teaching your kids to do the same.


ZeusieBoy

What does the commonwealth mean?


Johnmerrywater

OC: Obtuse Copium


[deleted]

[удалено]


banomboy

Praying for her suffering to end soon 😔🙏🙏


Logan_Maddox

yes may she join Him shortly


GeneralDerwent

If there is a god, I can assure you he wants nothing to do with the British royal family