Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Monarchy is bad. I say this as the democratically elected leader of /h/drama. We will not stand for the unjust tyrannical rdrama.net monarchy!

May drama last a thousand years.


:#marseydisintegrate: :!#marseyflamewar::space::!marseyagree:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hiel Drama

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Dude bussy lmao :#marseysoylentgrin:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I am a staunch monarchist, assuming I am the king

:#!marseykneel: :#platyking: :#marseykneel:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think they call that Anarcho-monarchism :hmm:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

they want to go back to endless wars of succession

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Better than what's on TV

Jewish lives matter

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Monarchy is unironically bad. Here is why:

It creates a single head of state the death of whom is always likely too start a inheritance battle.

Organizations already exist that as a group can perform the functions of a singular king but better.

People leading the monarchy have more freedoms and get out of jail cards than representatives of the people in a democracy.

If Monarchy's were actually good they wouldn't be dying out over the course of two centuries.

43 sovereign states remain across the world and it is more likely than not that there would be even fewer by the end of the century.

@timmy_blueballs stand with Israel.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The biggest issue w/ them was that most of the monarchies were hereditary. Even worse, there were often clearly defined rules of succession. This meant that if the ruling king's firstborn son was a complete fricking r-slur, or an evil sociopath, or in any other way just completely inept and unable to lead the country, too fricking bad. He's gonna be the next king and the only way around it is civil war. Even in the few situations where the ruling monarch could choose their heir, they usually chose their own children (obviously biased lol).

And sure maybe you could assassinate the shitty firstborn son so the next in line will become king, but what if the current king only has 1 son? What if he has no son? I mean the pool of potential successors is so tiny that it's very likely over a dynasty you're gonna get some lemons in there to frick everything up.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

He's gonna be the next king and the only way around it is civil war. slow poisoning by way of arsenic.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Easy solution. Be like China so you have so many people that half of them dying still leaves you with a functioning powerful state.

@timmy_blueballs stand with Israel.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

https://i.rdrama.net/images/17243526208388672.webp

Daily reminder that Jewish Lives Matter circumcizes converts too mentally buck break them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

THE SEVEN KINGDOMS WILL NEVER ACCEPT A RULER WITH A C*NT.

#TEAM AEGON THE DRAGON PEEPEE!

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That all sounds fun

Jewish lives matter

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is what Danes actually believe

:#marseyfrederikx:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It seems like most people are jerking each other off in agreement in that thread

Jewish lives matter more than monarchs

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

May @Count_Sprpr reign eternal.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.