Davis Aurini - Why Monarchy? Part II

Feb. 13, 2014 - Davis Aurini

12:47

Why Monarchy? Part II

My blog: http://www.staresattheworld.com/ My Twitter: http://twitter.com/Aurini Download in MP3 Format: http://www.clipconverter.cc/

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Why monarchy?
	Part 2.
	For part 1, click the button right over there.
	Monarchy is a dirty word in the modern vernacular.
	Saying that you're pro-monarchy makes you sound like you're pro-authoritarian rule.
	You're pro-abuses from the elites.
	That you're against freedoms for the average person.
	It's sort of like saying you're anti-environmentalist.
	After all, everybody likes the environment.
	What sort of crazy person would be against the environment?
	And it's really just a question of how we're using the modern language and our ignorance of the etymology of all of these words.
	But to discuss monarchy, we first need to start by discussing what a myth is.
	In modern parlance, when we call something a myth, what we're saying is that it's untrue, that it's a fable, a fictional way that we want reality to be that is in contradiction with how reality actually is.
	But that's not what a myth is.
	The myth of a society, the myths of people, of religion, are absolute truths.
	They are universal truths that apply to all people and all situations on a meta-level.
	They're not simple made-up stories.
	They are universal truths.
	They are things that dictate our perception of reality and our responses to it.
	Myths are absolutely foundational.
	And the idea that we're all materialists, we're all objectivists, we all finally have an accurate perception of reality, unlike all those crazy people from all of history, that is the modern myth.
	We have a myth that rejects myths.
	And so to talk about monarchy and democracy, what we're really talking about is the mythology of it.
	We are not discussing the practical day-to-day aspects.
	Voting, for instance.
	Voting is no more part of monarchy than it's a part of every single other system.
	Any system on the planet is going to have voting.
	Quite frankly, take something as extreme as a military unit.
	A military unit is probably the most autocratic organization you can imagine, and yet even it has some remnant aspects of voting.
	The troop commanders are going to see how their troops are doing.
	They're going to talk to their troops and understand what's going on for them.
	And then the troop commanders are going to talk to the sergeant, who's going to talk to the sergeant major, who's going to talk to the captain.
	Every way, from the bottom up to the top, there's this trickle of information coming to the CO, and he's asking people questions to figure out what he should do next.
	Was this training exercise effective?
	What could I have done to make it a better training exercise?
	Any sane system is going to have these democratic elements.
	If you take something like the American Republic, the vast majority of people get to vote.
	Everybody except for children and criminals, essentially.
	If you take something like the British monarchy, only certain people got to vote.
	Only the nobility, the property holders got to vote.
	But in both systems, you are going to have a vote.
	Nobody has the exclusive truth, and nobody except for the insane thinks that they do.
	Anybody in any leadership position is going to be constantly asking for information from their subordinates.
	And that right there is the vote.
	Every system is going to have it.
	When we're talking about monarchy and democracy, we're not discussing voting.
	We're not discussing the legalities of how the system operates in particular.
	We're talking about the foundational myth that creates the whole system in the first place.
	So monarchy and democracy.
	What are the etymologies on these words?
	Well, they're both Greek, so I'm sure you already know.
	And the occracy part simply means to rule.
	It's the words that go into the beginning that are the critical difference, the foundational revolutionary difference between these two systems.
	Demos means the people, the majority, the mob.
	Democracy is Greek for mob rule.
	It's when the mob, the mob mentality gets to define what reality is.
	Monarchy, on the other hand, monarch comes from mono, the one, the one ruler, but also the individual as the primacy in society, that the individual is ultimately what matters, not the mass opinion of the mob voting for breads and circuses, but that the individual matters.
	In fact, this is the irony that people now think democracy is connected with all these rights and freedoms granted to the individual, but democracy does not care about that.
	The foundational myth of democracy is whatever the majority thinks, the masked man, the degenerate man.
	And if you look at modern culture, this is a democratic culture.
	Lowest common denominator is what democracy means.
	Monarchy means that the individual matters, that the individual should be given an opportunity for growth, an opportunity for development, and advancement, that the mob should never be able to silence and destroy the individual.
	Plato wrote about this in the Republic, and he summed it up thusly.
	I am paraphrasing, but it is thusly.
	Monarchy is when the greats in society elect one of their number to protect them from the mob.
	The greats know that the mob is full of uncivilized cannibals.
	They are a bunch of wild animals who have absolutely no grammar, no logic, but are extremely prone to falling for rhetoric.
	And so the greats to protect themselves from the degenerates, who are more than happy to rip apart everything that the greats have in society, they elect a monarch who sets an example and tries to encourage the masses to imitate the greats.
	Democracy, on the other hand, is when the demos, the mob, the majority seize the greats who have built themselves a peaceful civilized society, who built themselves wealth,
	who build up beautiful homes, who enjoy high culture, and out of their venal jealousy of these people who they think somehow stole this wealth from them when they refuse to create their own wealth and destroy their neighbor's wealth,
	they vote for a tyrant, and the tyrant then confiscates the wealth of the greats and hands it over to the demos, who consume it and produce nothing and destroy civilization.
	See, at the heart, it's the individual, the primacy of the individual is what creates civilization.
	Civilization, that thing that we're all willing to self-sacrifice for, does not come from the majority, it comes from the individual.
	The majority only ever cares about the short term.
	The mob wants the degenerate easy culture.
	They want hamburgers, and they want candy, and they want free sex without consequences.
	And they will vote their way into getting this until there's no more wealth left to redistribute to them.
	They have no long-term thinking, and they're not willing to self-sacrifice for the sake of their neighbor.
	They are cannibals that want to rip their neighbor apart.
	The individual, on the other hand, the individual who celebrates their own existence, who uses their short life on this planet to better themselves, that's somebody that understands the value of existence.
	That's the person that is willing to sacrifice themselves not for the state, but for the civilization.
	When you see mothers who are willing to tell their sons, come back carrying your shield or on it or not at all.
	Those are women living in a society that celebrates the individual.
	And because they are individuals, they are willing to sacrifice themselves or their progeny for the sake of the civilization.
	The democratic mother, the mass mother, the single mother is not willing to sacrifice anything.
	Her children are number one to the detriment of everybody else.
	Now, as I said, monarchy is a dirty word nowadays.
	And democracy is a friendly, happy word, even though the American Republic is not supposed to be a democracy, even though that's nowhere in the foundational documents of it.
	So if we're going to talk about monarchy for an American citizen, it's best to avoid the word monarchy, isn't it?
	Let's consider for a moment Heinlein and his book Starship Troopers.
	In Starship Troopers, the right to vote, the franchise is earned by displaying pro-social values, that you're willing to sacrifice not to be obedient to the state, but for the sake of the civilization.
	And only those who have that inner nobility are allowed to have the voting franchise.
	This doesn't encompass all forms of greatness.
	As he clearly lays out in the book, even a retard will be given a dangerous job if the retard wants to be part of civilization and vote, because as Heinlein said, better to have a retard voting who loves his country than a sociopath who doesn't.
	But at the end of the day, what you get, you get this elite, these people that hold sway over civilization, who are willing to sacrifice themselves and who jealously guard their vote.
	They're not going to throw it away.
	They're not going to give it to just anybody.
	They don't view the massed opinion as the intelligence of the civilization.
	These are all people that served in the army, and these are all people that experienced being a private, not knowing what to do, and looking to your leadership to guide you.
	And then they themselves become the leadership for civilization.
	That is monarchy.
	The original system set up in the United States was monarchy at its deepest mythological level.
	It was not democracy.
	There was no mass franchise.
	It was property holders alone who were supposed to be voting, the sort of people that volunteered for the military.
	And it's only over the past couple of centuries, thanks to that filthy revolution in France, that now people think it's a democracy.
	Mob rule versus the importance of individuals being allowed to think for themselves and speak their mind.
	Why monarchy?
	Because our individual freedoms matter.

▲