Sunday, May 20, 2018

Constitutional Monarchy and Democracy-a Contradiction in Terms

I no longer follow the western media whether it be in the form of television news or newspapers and feel much healthier and saner as the result! I obtain my news from a source less contaminated by Zionism although of course it is not without its faults-Russia Today (RT). So I discovered by accident that there had been a 'royal' wedding the other day between Prince Henry ('Harry' is just his nickname) and an older divorced mulatto woman. (Almost shades of Wallis Simpson there). There certainly is no accounting for taste! This mismatch with a mixed race descendant of slaves clearly says it all. How the advertising industry must be revelling in this moment and will no doubt step up a gear its efforts at socially engineering the masses, working for the day when England becomes one raceless and genderless coffee coloured soup. Prince Henry and his bride will be presented as the future of England, an 'ideal' and something that we should all aspire to. If nothing else it will help to show one's 'anti-racist' credentials!

All sarcasm aside this event surely represents a nadir in the fortunes of the 'royal' family. Royalty is built upon one thing and one thing alone-the purity of the blood, the nobility of one's caste. Despite her age (36-not an advisable age for a woman to conceive) no doubt she will try to produce a 'royal' baby for her Henry. The prospect of a mixed race great grandchild for the English queen must surely send a shiver up the spine of the most ardent royalist! If it does happen then this will be the death blow for the monarchy which is already in its death rattle. It is a toothless shadow of a genuine monarchy and has been since the so-called 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688. A 'constitutional monarchy' is not a genuine monarchy by any meaningful interpretation of the term. He or she is merely a cardboard cut out, a puppet, a parvenu, resembling a scene from a tin of  'Quality Street' chocolates. It would be far better indeed and less hypocritical to dispense with the whole charade and become a republic. I am not advocating republicanism as a political model but simply pointing out it would be a far more honest step for a supposed 'democracy' to take. Democracy is incompatible with monarchy. You cannot have both without both becoming watered down from their original and intended model.

For even a fake constitutional monarchy to survive it must preserve a certain aloofness from the masses. The attempts at modernising the monarchy began certainly by the time of the 1969 documentary film 'Royal Family'. The 'royal' family truly debased itself in the 'Royal it's a knockout' television show, aired in 1987- 'getting down' with the masses! Surely by then any thinking man must have realised that the 'writing was on the wall' for these clowns? Instead the masses go along with the fiction that these over cosseted and pampered dissemblers somehow have their 'nation's' best interests at heart. The main objective of the 'royal' family is not the survival of the 'nation' (which effectively no longer exists) but the survival of their family business. They have truly miscalculated if they believe that appearing to be 'ordinary' will somehow ensure their survival. IT WILL NOT! The only thing that could have helped them to survive a little longer is the preservation of an aloof and distant aura. They forget the show business maxim-'always leave the audience wanting more'.

As a follower of the writings of Julius Evola I can see the value of a genuine royal tradition that is rooted in both blood AND power. The monarch has not had any real power for over 300 years and they are now endangering any mystique that is present in the blood through miscegenation. Germanic royalty has its mythical origins (which are pre-Christian) in the Gods of the blood of our peoples. The kings of the various Anglo-Saxon kingdoms all claimed to be descended from the God Woden for it is through this most important deity that they derive their nobility and authority to rule. It is rooted in the blood. All kingship derives from Him whether they acknowledge Him or not.

We are living in an age of upside down values. Even in my lifetime I have witnessed a significant downward shift in attitudes. What would have been viewed with contempt when I was young, for instance the lunatic concept of 'gay marriage' is now not only permissible but de riguer. This if anything illustrates that there are dark influences at work in the world today.

Writing in his Pagan Imperialism Evola argued that even "Where monarchy still subsists, it has become a survival, a symbol rendered mute, a function which has lost its true sense and is cut off from reality. It is better than nothing-but from those who, not only in name but also in spirit, are of royal blood, it would be to ask for the courage to no longer tolerate compromises and uncertain accommodations; it would be to demand to disdain royal dignities when they correspond to nothing, or almost nothing-or to return resolutely, as centre and head of the State, to crush the 'legal' usurpations of recent times, and to make themselves again, in an absolute and transcendent sense, leaders of the people."

It should be borne in mind that Evola wrote these words back in 1928 and so compared to his later works it has its limitations although many of the arguments contained in Pagan Imperialism are to be built upon later in his magnum opus Revolt Against the Modern World, published in 1934. He goes on to say: "Wherever monarchy, in hands that were no longer able to hold a sword and a sceptre, was beaten down by the intrigues of the mob of Jews and merchants, it must be restored. Wherever, by force of inertia, it still exists, it must be renewed, strengthened, and made dynamic, as an organic, central, and absolute function, embodying simultaneously the power of the force and the light of the spirit in a single being who is truly the actualisation of an entire peoples, and at the same time the point which transcends everything that is conditioned by land and blood."

Times have certainly moved on and European royalty is now in an even more decayed state. Rather than revive that which is terminally ill far better to send it on its way. At some future point when we are in a position to restore the ancient order of castes we will look again for leaders that have the necessary blood for that blood has not disappeared. Many of you will question the wisdom of restoring kingship when it has gone but what we have now are merely mountebanks that carry the name and have the blood but crucially-lack the spirit. As Evola stated one must not merely have the necessary blood but the spirit which gives life and meaning to the blood. Our ancient Germanic nobility elected their kings, those fellow nobles who had both the necessary blood AND the spirit to rule well and wisely. Current European monarchs and their descendants as I have pointed out are purely constitutional. They lack any genuine power and in all probability any CAPABILITY to rule. For this reason they must be given their 'P45' and sent on their way to the most distant island, never to trouble us again with their presence.

It should not be forgotten that the Anglo-Saxon and other Germanic kings betrayed their peoples to the christian church and in so doing betrayed the very Gods that gave them the divine authority to rule. They and those of their descendants who currently 'rule' are thus traitors to both folk and Gods. Therefore only they who have the necessary blood AND loyalty to Woden will ever be fit to form a new noble caste.


Steed said...

Astute post! I'm a Monarchist in principle, and echo your views on it. But this current Monarchy are a plague that should be swept away and to which we should pay no heed whatsoever. One day we'll have a righteous Monarch.

Wotans Krieger said...

Agreed and the future monarch will be both loyal to their folk and our Gods and should for the sake of continuity and divine virtue be able to claim descent from Woden/Odin. Then we will be able to re-establish our ancient caste system and our folk will find fulfilment in a traditional (but not oppressive) ordering of society.

Jenainsubrica said...

Can I ask you a couple of questions?
1-So what was the last true king of the English?
2-I would like at this point what your position on the independence of Scotland is and if you must have a king apart.
3-In the Ingling Tradition with respect to the King the priest what position must he assume?
Thank you

Wotans Krieger said...

It depends on your definition of 'English'. If you mean Anglo-Saxon then I would suggest Penda of the kingdom of Mercia (died 655 CE), a great heathen king and descended from Woden.
I have no 'position' on Scotland for I am not a supporter of the United Kingdom. Neither am I Scotch so I will leave that issue for that people.
My position on the caste system with regards to the relationship between priest and king does not reflect Woden's Folk teaching. I believe in the primacy of the priestly caste over the warrior. I know Wulf takes a differing view to mine.
My views on monarchy are for a distant time when the United Kingdom will have ceased to exist and the native Germanic English people regain the land that our treasonous governments have taken from them and given to the alien.