No where in the history of mankind have you won by putting an X with a pencil on a piece of paper.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
-1
genesisSOC on scored.co
1 month ago-1 points(+0/-0/-1Score on mirror)1 child
The problem with jewmacracy is that people are too stupid to know what they want or need, including White land owners. They need a king to make authoritative decisions. If you aren't a king, then you're a fucking retard who should shut the fuck up and bow to one. Or a fuhrer. No other options. The reason I say this is because we as White men always fall for the classic jewish cycle of expulsion; after about so long from their last expulsion, jews prey on our natural compassion to take pity of them and let them back in. If we have a king, the chances of that happening are much lower, and he can respond to it much quicker and better than after jews control the "White land owners." I didn't start Noticing the jew until about 22 years old, so as a "White land owner voter" I would've fucked the country over until it was too late to save it. A king would've fixed all that.
1 month ago-1 points(+0/-0/-1Score on mirror)1 child
> people are too stupid to know what they want or need, including White land owners. They need a king
What, is the king not a "white land owner"?
Do you not understand what makes a king a king? Hint: It's not genetics.
There is, and always will be, a separation between the noble and the villain. One person is not only capable of securing their wants and needs, but free thinking enough that they can figure out how to help others get theirs. The other would sell their firstborn for a few lines of coke.
1 month ago-1 points(+0/-0/-1Score on mirror)1 child
>What, is the king not a "white land owner"?
Do you not understand what makes a king a king? Hint: It's not genetics.
Yes, it is genetics, set up by God Himself for us in Judges and Kings. It is the Natural Order God made when we asked Him to create a government system for us. It's passed down through genetics. Sometimes it gets usurped outside the gene line, but they're still kings from that point. The difference between a king and a land owner is the same as a king and a knight. Knights, land owners, serve the king and do what he says as the only authority above him is God. Which means when the king says kill the fucking jews, you kill them no matter how much interest debt you owe them. Or you're a rebel and get killed by the king. That's the point. The only "ones" that are capable of securing their wants and needs are those that know the jew, and those that know the jew know that monoethnic White Christian monarchy is the superior system, with only National Socialism being right behind it. 99% of the time it takes for you and your descendants to learn and know the jew, it's too late to do anything about it. A king prevents all that. It was kings who expelled the jew 95% of the 110+ different countries over a 1000 times since at least 1200 BC, not "White land owner voters." All your "White land owner voters" right now are boomers who hate you, themselves and the White race while giving full support to Israel. That's the problem. They shouldn't have power. A king should.
You're the one with a perverted sense of monarchy and feudalism lmao. Some kings lost to nobility. Other kings destroyed their enemies. In all these instances of history, how many times was it that the kings expelled the jews vs. the nobility that usurped? I'll take King Louis IX, King Henry III and King Edward I anyday. Even King Alfred the Great and King Richard the Lionheart.
The kings of England were never absolute monarchs, but more of a chief of chiefs. Before the Norman invasion, the position of king was more of a temporary promotion, a position that only had meaning in times of invasion or war.
Even after the Norman invasion they had to work for the interests of their vassals, otherwise their vassals wouldn't support them. The Normans found out really quick that the English people were not ones to be pushed around and had to incorporate the Earls into their political hierarchy.
What, is the king not a "white land owner"?
Do you not understand what makes a king a king? Hint: It's not genetics.
There is, and always will be, a separation between the noble and the villain. One person is not only capable of securing their wants and needs, but free thinking enough that they can figure out how to help others get theirs. The other would sell their firstborn for a few lines of coke.
Do you not understand what makes a king a king? Hint: It's not genetics.
Yes, it is genetics, set up by God Himself for us in Judges and Kings. It is the Natural Order God made when we asked Him to create a government system for us. It's passed down through genetics. Sometimes it gets usurped outside the gene line, but they're still kings from that point. The difference between a king and a land owner is the same as a king and a knight. Knights, land owners, serve the king and do what he says as the only authority above him is God. Which means when the king says kill the fucking jews, you kill them no matter how much interest debt you owe them. Or you're a rebel and get killed by the king. That's the point. The only "ones" that are capable of securing their wants and needs are those that know the jew, and those that know the jew know that monoethnic White Christian monarchy is the superior system, with only National Socialism being right behind it. 99% of the time it takes for you and your descendants to learn and know the jew, it's too late to do anything about it. A king prevents all that. It was kings who expelled the jew 95% of the 110+ different countries over a 1000 times since at least 1200 BC, not "White land owner voters." All your "White land owner voters" right now are boomers who hate you, themselves and the White race while giving full support to Israel. That's the problem. They shouldn't have power. A king should.
You have a very perverted sense of how monarchy and feudalism worked
You sound like the king of France before he got his head chopped off.
There is a relationship between king and subject, lord and vassal. It is a two-way street. It is quid-pro-quo.
Even after the Norman invasion they had to work for the interests of their vassals, otherwise their vassals wouldn't support them. The Normans found out really quick that the English people were not ones to be pushed around and had to incorporate the Earls into their political hierarchy.