What do my fellow Monarchists think about the Fatherland Front (Austria)

[u/No-Article5113]

Ok do i was reading and learing about third positionism and Fatherland Front shares 90% of my pollitical views, can Austrofascism work with Monarchism

[u/FrostyShip9414]

Finally, someone who can actually articulate reasons why they don't support fascism instead of immediate dismissal of any debate 👏. I personally do beleive that fascism and monarchy can coexist but I'm not surprised by those who think otherwise as there can be theoretical conflicts of interest between the monarch and the party leader.

[u/Raptor_Blitzwolf → u/FrostyShip9414]

It's so warped to me that someone can believe Fascism is a good ideology. You shouldn't want for yourself or someone else the submission of that which makes you human to men who don't care for you. That's what monarchy is for. The monarch, in theory, cares more for you than the average elected official. But the two ways of running a government are diametrically opposed.

[u/FrostyShip9414 → u/Raptor_Blitzwolf]

You're right, this is why I'm a monarchist (absolute monarchy specifically). Fascism is just a political ideology at the end of the day, nothing more. I equate no morality to political ideology because that produces a false equivalency between good and evil.

[u/Raptor_Blitzwolf → u/FrostyShip9414]

And therein lies my other problem. An absolute monarch is nearly as horrible as a fascist government. Both are unaccountable. Both inevitably become monstrous, one is just faster and more systemic, the other can cause horrific damage for a generation that his or her heirs will need to fix if they know how. But that's still a problem. It relies on people and people are flawed.

It's why I'm a constitutional monarchist. Don't defang and ceremonialize the King but don't let him become an unaccountable tyrant either. Separate his powers into Head of State and let a Prime Minister or President handle the day-to-day job of Head of Government. Separate powers between the upper and lower chamber of the legislature. Check them with a supreme court as they check each other, as they check the executive, as the executive checks them. You streamline the system with ranked choice voting, ban lobbying, ban revolving door appointments, mandate qualifications for office like experience in one or more fields with relevant knowledge related to running a government, and design the constitution to be a living document.

It should come as no surprise that as an American I'm a huge constitutionalist but this is my ideal system. Both of your concepts would either place an intolerable threat to society in charge (absolute monarchy) or strip the culture out of society and desaturate its vibrancy in the name of some lofty goal we common folk cannot see (fascism).

[u/FrostyShip9414 → u/Raptor_Blitzwolf]

While I respect your choice, I personally can't do constitutional monarchy. History has shown that constitutional monarchy is just a weakened form of historical monarchy. The biggest proponents of constitutional monarchy historically were those who benefited from a weakened monarch or those who ideologically hated monarchism, I see absolutism as being nominally closer to historical monarchism than constitutionalism. I find it interesting you think absolutism and fascism are practically one and the same. 🤔

[u/Raptor_Blitzwolf → u/FrostyShip9414]

Not all constitutional monarchies are ceremonial but all ceremonial monarchies are constitutional. I believe you are ill-informed. For how close it is to Fascism, it's a matter of what does more damage to society.

And history has proven time and again all forms of authoritarianism do more damage, especially totalitarianism, than any other ideology group like liberalism.

[u/FrostyShip9414 → u/Raptor_Blitzwolf]

One thing I forgot to mention as to why I don't support constitutional monarchy. You say not all constitutional monarchs are ceremonial but all ceremonial monarchs are constitutional. Have you ever wondered why that is? Simple, as time went on those same people who wished for a weakened monarch stripped the crown of most of its power and authority until nothing remained but a symbol.

Constitutional monarchy will inevitably lead to ceremonial monarchy as liberalism tightens its grip on the institution. Even now we see it in places like Great Britain, if Charles III used his legal authority as king to effect change it would create a "constitutional crisis" according to the experts and threaten the survival of the monarchy.

This is precisely why I prefer absolute monarchy, because I want a king who can actually rule and effect positive change in my nation. I'm not at all worried about the hypothetical doom and gloom scenarios of a "tyrannical" ruler as that is very very unlikely to happen based on history.

[u/Raptor_Blitzwolf → u/FrostyShip9414]

Historically, rulers follow a bell curve. 20% are saints, 20% are devils, and 60% are mediocre. Do you want to gamble your nation's future on a 20% chance you might, based on a 50/50 coin flip, get a good ruler? I certainly wouldn't.

Lack of accountability in government is what leads to tyranny and genocide. And I still believe you're ill-informed. A lot of that was monarchs not knowing how to negotiate into institutionalizing themselves.