I’m not right wing and I’m not left wing. I’m not some agnostic sitting in the middle either. I just no longer buy into the democratic game because it is a trap. To play is to lose. If you accept their terms of their democracy then you must by default surrender any hold that you might have had on any other, perhaps more valid, form of government.
Democracy exists to grow capitalism, and in many of our nations we are closing in on the end game of capitalism. The end game will be one company that owns everything. In democracy, all that matters is GDP, even though GDP itself is fake and gay. But that doesn’t matter; as long as it looks like GDP is growing then all is good in democracy.
One of the main reasons that our political leaders are so intent at bringing in hordes of incompatible immigrants is to prop up their GDP. The numbers are fudged, it’s all a lie, but people haven’t been telling the truth for a very long time. In capitalism people cease to be citizens and instead become units of production. Units of production are interchangeable, so if one nation has an oversupply of such units then the rational thing is to move them to another nation which has an undersupply.
Our own nations have a chronic undersupply because there has been an overt war against the family for six generations in one form or another, with the end result being that people are having far less children. Our political leaders created the problem and now they have the solution which is to simply bring in more units of production, slap a citizenship paper on them, and then demonise and attack anyone objecting to this social and cultural betrayal.
This is democracy. It was sold as you having a political voice, but in reality it is about you being replaced. So if you participate in it then your descendants, if you manage to have any, will eventually be doomed. It doesn’t matter if you’re right wing. And what is right wing today anyway? It is simply leftism of perhaps 30 years ago depending on how far along the scale you are.
The only form of government that works for our civilization is Catholic Monarchy, which is why the proponents of democracy spend 500 years trying to destroy all such monarchies in the world, culminating in the Great War. The Second World War was simply to work out who would emerge the clear victor and enjoy the spoils. The winner of that game was not the United States, although it may have seemed that way at the time. Rather, it was the United Nations and its NGO offshoots. That is who runs most of the world today.
In a Catholic monarchy I would not have any political voice, and I would be perfectly content with that reality. I would have my place in the social hierarchy, a place where God had inserted me, and I would like to think that I would do my very best to live up to my responsibilities and serve my feudal lord to the best of my ability. I think such a reality, living in a community connected by faith and by birth, seems like a perfect paradise to many of us today. In a Catholic monarchy, faith is integral to its existence. The people are bound together by faith and blood.
There is no faith in a democratic system, nor is there in capitalism, as there is no place for it. But we are not only made up of the body, we are also made up of the soul. Yet open any online newspaper today from your country of origin and it will be full of stories about politics, the economy, medical health, and sports. All things that interest a society entirely focussed on the body, on material things and on attempting to live as long as possible no matter how miserable the existence.
There will be nothing concerning the soul. The soul has no place in such a system because the system itself is soulless. Once again, to play the democratic game is to lose even if you might win a battle here and there. Trump didn’t save us, nor will Pauline Hanson if elected in Australia, and nor will Rupert Lowe in Great Britain.
I have seen Catholic monarchists mocked as autists. I think the real autists are those who still actually believe that democracy works in any way to our advantage. Democracy in the West has a 500 year history of failure. Of rights being steadily stripped from native populations while the power of government and its institutions grows and grows, while they offload any undesirable controls to corporations and then blithely mouth that the free market is deciding things, nothing to do with them. We are slaves in a technocracy being lied to that we are free.
This confusion regarding democracy traps many well meaning Catholics into rejecting nationalism, such as this example here from a writer referring to himself as the Aussie Papist. Catholic social teaching is meant for a Catholic monarchy, not a godless democracy. Nationalism is not compatible with Catholicism, not for the tortured arguments that he attempts to weave into a coherent whole, but simply because democracies are godless. But in a Catholic monarchy, the nation is truly under God.
So pray for a restoration of our birthrights. Pray for the return of our precious and beloved Catholic monarchies. May the godless reign of democracy enjoy a quick and sudden end.
It's a mistake to associate capitalism with 'right-wing' politics. I know this might seem a bit pedantic (I apologise), but the free-market is incompatible with traditional conservatism. 'Free-trade' and unrestricted capitalism was historically endorsed by liberalism; conservatives were more sceptical, believing in protectionism and the importance of the local and the 'small'.
To some, it might come as a surprise to learn that Liberalism isn't necessarily in tune with democracy. Many old-fashioned liberals were opposed to the concept, due to their concern that the 'mixed constitution' of King/Queen, Lords and Commons would be undermined by extending the franchise to the working-classes who were believed (in the Victorian era at least) to be in thrall to powerful, trade union leaders who would instruct their members to vote as a block in order to a elect a government that would significantly penalise the middle and upper-classes with tax increases and land redistribution programmes. In relation to the last point, many Tories and Liberals feared that extending the franchise to the proletariat would lead to permanent working-class rule as they were the largest 'class cohort' in Victorian Britain.
Despite being on the 'Wet' faction in the British Conservative Party, Sir Ian Gilmour's statement on laissez-faire capitalism is correct from a proper, right-wing perspective:
"In the conservative view, economic liberalism à la Professor Hayek, because of its starkness and its failure to create a sense of community, is not a safeguard of political freedom but a threat to it."
Whilst I share your concerns about democracy, I don't really believe that — in our lifetimes at least — a monarch from a Catholic or Protestant background will arise to bring back stability and order to a Western nation; most people are content with a secular political system. The gradual decline of the Boomers and emergence of Gen-Z won’t do much to change that fact, in my view.
If ‘based Gen-Zers’ are perfectly content with ‘childcare’ and other progressive measures, why should they be perceived to rescue the West from its turmoil in the near future?