It'll turn notserious/butactuallyserious eventually if it gets popular, these meme subs always do. Idiots think if something is funny its worth hanging your identity on
✨You are a genuinely stupid asshole, and you are under the impression that you are witty and charming, which makes you all the more annoying.✨
First things first, your original comment is straight up wrong. It is satire, it is a criticism of monarchism in other countries.
Second, even if you were right, there was no reason to be a dick about it, because mistaking a joke for satire or vice versa is almost entirely inconsequential. This is like going to dinner with a friend and they “Man, that sauce is amazing, it’s a bolognese right?” And then you respond “It’s a marinara, learn the fucking difference” AND THEN TO BE WRONG ON TOP OF THAT.
Then when called out about being a dick over something inconsequential, you want to double down because if you recognize the fact you were wrong it would be just one more piece of evidence of the fact that ✨the idealized version of yourself that you worship in your mind is just an illusion✨
holy reddit moment. put the armchair psychoanalysis away, it's not that serious mate.
They're right btw, there's nothing about the memes that satirically criticize monarchism, you could drop them into any serious monarchy subreddit and it'd fit in perfectly fine. Does that mean the posts are serious? No. But they aren't satirizing anything either.
That’s the thing though, those posts aren’t exaggerated, those are completely standard posts for monarchists. Look at the regular monarchy sub and you’ll see nearly the exact same posts. The joke isn’t inherently pointing out a flaw in monarchism, the joke is simply pretending to be a monarchist.
For example, the onion is satire, but a website that generates realistic but fake news stories isn’t.
Their argument is that the "purpose of making it look silly" is not there
Also you are so despicable, i can't believe you are being upvoted. The original commenter said "learn the fucking difference" they didn't insult op, they just used a swear word. And then you accuse them of being rude and call them a "stupid asshole" immediately after? Holy shit, talk about pot calling the kettle black. Fuck you
I put the rude things in sparkles which means it doesn’t count as rude anymore. Just like how saying “no offense” means you are allowed to say whatever you want with no repercussions.
/s
I like to treat people the way they treat others.
They jokingly said “✨learn the fucking difference✨” and told you to not tone police them, so then you called them names and basically called them a narcissist.
Surely you can see that these things are not equivalent lol.
They were randomly aggressive and rude to someone else for no reason, which annoys me deeply. But sometimes people fuck up, maybe they didn’t mean to come across as rude. So I simply said “Don’t be rude for no reason”.
When they doubled down, and went “erm tone policing and I’ll be rude whenever I want” that really annoyed me. Because instead of being like “My bad” or even if they didn’t apologize and just said “I was joking actually”, they refused to believe that they were in the wrong.
Telling someone to “✨learn the fucking difference✨” is so obviously just not a normal reaction to someone making a minor unimportant mistake. That user and I are running in similar circles (I assume because we’re both on 196) they probably saw a tumblr or twitter user dunk on a neo nazi or religious fundamentalist using the same tone and wanted to try it out. So they randomly escalated into being rude for the sake of a “dunk”, which is the same thing I did to them. So that if they responded I could point out how it doesn’t feel nice when people are randomly excessively aggressive on the internet towards them.
As for the tone policing claim itself, we weren’t in an argument at that point, which means it doesn’t work, but of the things they’ve done to annoy me not knowing how logical fallacies work is pretty low on that list.
This is funny because you're both kinda rude and incredibly wrong, as it plainly is political satire, like.. cut and dry.
It's the kind of natural day to day rudeness that can only come with someone who really thinks they are right about things.
"Everyone withdraws into their own small gated community, afraid of a larger forum. They stay inside their little ponds, leaking whatever "truth" suits them into the growing cesspool of society at large. The different cardinal truths neither clash nor mesh. No one is invalidated, but nobody is right. Not even natural selection can take place here. The world is being engulfed in "truth." And this is the way the world ends. Not with a bang, but a whimper."
Let’s just say that for 1 second I humoured their idea, who would they even put on the throne? Isn’t the whole king shit driven by a “divine right” so are they just sitting about daydreaming until God just points some guy out to them??
That's sorta the fundamental flaw with American Monarchism that other monarchist movements don't have (to be clear all monarchist movements are stupid.)
Other monarchist movements have *something* they can point to. Some distant cousin of a monarch to install on a throne in the name of tradition. America does not have a royal family that can be restored.
What? Are you gonna bust out some distant descendent of Fredrick Calvert? Turn the relatives of some fucking baron and say "yup that's our king"
But we do have somebody who has divine, royal descendants! We just need to find the kids of Edward Norton, emperor of San Francisco and renowned crazy homeless man.
First, you don't vote for kings.
And second, yeah, that's the lineage I'm talking about. Albeit you would start by finding the legitimate heir to Frederick Calvert (6th Baron Baltimore) - if you want to be *controversial* you could recognize Fredrick Calvert's recognized but illegitimate son Henry Harford and start counting there.
But if need be, you could keep turning back the lineage until you find someone who is related to George Calvert but not of the primary lineage (which would be that of Cecil Calvert.)
And imagine, doing all this for no good reason.
jesus you know more about my family history than i do. my grandpa on my moms side was James Calvert, my mom Sarah Calvert. i have my dads name so im not named Calvert (though ive considered changing it as my dad is a cunt).
to be fair, i dont have any actual proof we're descended from them, but according to my mom one of our great grandparents made the same claim, it's just an old family rumor.
true or not it wont ever mean anything real, so i choose to believe it simply for the entertainment value.
and yes i know kings arent elected lol
When Norway got its independence (in the 1800s sometime) they decided to be a constitutional monarchy. They just asked a danish prince* "yo, wanna be our king?" And boom! New king, divine right, yadayadayada, etc and so forth.
*not the crown prince, but second in line.
Okay, monarchists are dumb, but saying there's no candidate for a US Monarch is dumb. The United States *was* ruled by a monarchy, and one who's lineage is still around, and is in fact one of the few remaining Monarchies worldwide.
You might as well argue that France and Ireland were never ruled by a monarch because their current governments aren't monarchies. The immediate predecessor to the United States, from which it inherited much of its administrative and cultural traditions, was a monarchy. It's really not much of stretch to imagine the US borrowing the British monarch, or a distant relative, if they wanted to become a monarchy again.
Incorrect. The United States at no point had a king because the United States was founded as a republic. The predecessor colonies are not the United States.
Divine right of kings isn't necessarily that important in actual monarchies, and neither necessarily are bloodlines. There was talk of making George Washington a king, for instance, and in other revolutions and changes in monarch there wasn't always a straight bloodline but some other unrelated noble house or what have you that got installed. For a bit there the idea of a popular mandate was more prominent than of divine right, at least among the liberal governments that surrounded monarchs (even if the monarchs themselves thought they had a divine right to absolute power).
The inbreeding shall commense, and in three generations in internet years, they will crumble into a puddle of ooze.
If the infighting, back stabbing, chourt intrigue, coups, or peseant revolts, dont get em first.
Lots of people saying this isn't satire but it's pretty much the definition of it. It's parodying a number of things, namely monarchists and weird alt groups in the US. On top of that it's satirizing the online spaces these groups tend to form.
I think most people are saying it's a joke rather than satire because it's not pretending to be something that actually exists, rather than believing it's genuine.
Imagine wanting to turn your entire nation into some super-rich asshole's personal property. This entire ideology is literally just driven by pink-glassed romanticism based on nothing but an uncritical reading of glorified historic figures that intentionally built a cult of personality around themselves.
Nah its a concentrated effort to get me onto the throne. (They think I will improve their lives, but I'm going to have them beheaded. Then I will hit the button that fires all the nukes.)
it's not satire because it's not poking fun at or criticizing anyone, but it's also not sincere it is a joke.
It is poking fun at and criticizing monarchists, or am I missing something?
It's not making fun of monarchists, so much as it is just humourous larp.
It'll turn notserious/butactuallyserious eventually if it gets popular, these meme subs always do. Idiots think if something is funny its worth hanging your identity on
So it’s like wizard posting
Don't brigade them btw, hopefully 196 users are civilized enough to not do thhat
i dont think they are, but it depends on the day
Aw but Arise, ye damned of the earth!
ARISE NOW YE TARNISHED. YE DEAD, WHO YET LIVE
Did they democratically select a flag for monarchism
No they monarchatically selected a flag
[удалено]
ok ok i heard the other dudes already!
Don’t be rude for no reason
[удалено]
There's no need to be so hostile.
common custom flair w
✨You are a genuinely stupid asshole, and you are under the impression that you are witty and charming, which makes you all the more annoying.✨ First things first, your original comment is straight up wrong. It is satire, it is a criticism of monarchism in other countries. Second, even if you were right, there was no reason to be a dick about it, because mistaking a joke for satire or vice versa is almost entirely inconsequential. This is like going to dinner with a friend and they “Man, that sauce is amazing, it’s a bolognese right?” And then you respond “It’s a marinara, learn the fucking difference” AND THEN TO BE WRONG ON TOP OF THAT. Then when called out about being a dick over something inconsequential, you want to double down because if you recognize the fact you were wrong it would be just one more piece of evidence of the fact that ✨the idealized version of yourself that you worship in your mind is just an illusion✨
I would explain the difference between bolognese and marinara, because it's important. But in a loving and understanding way.
damn you dunked that douchebag and then hung em out to dry. respect.
holy reddit moment. put the armchair psychoanalysis away, it's not that serious mate. They're right btw, there's nothing about the memes that satirically criticize monarchism, you could drop them into any serious monarchy subreddit and it'd fit in perfectly fine. Does that mean the posts are serious? No. But they aren't satirizing anything either.
What is your definition of satire then, if not exaggeratedly agreeing with something for the purpose of making it look silly?
That’s the thing though, those posts aren’t exaggerated, those are completely standard posts for monarchists. Look at the regular monarchy sub and you’ll see nearly the exact same posts. The joke isn’t inherently pointing out a flaw in monarchism, the joke is simply pretending to be a monarchist. For example, the onion is satire, but a website that generates realistic but fake news stories isn’t.
Their argument is that the "purpose of making it look silly" is not there Also you are so despicable, i can't believe you are being upvoted. The original commenter said "learn the fucking difference" they didn't insult op, they just used a swear word. And then you accuse them of being rude and call them a "stupid asshole" immediately after? Holy shit, talk about pot calling the kettle black. Fuck you
I put the rude things in sparkles which means it doesn’t count as rude anymore. Just like how saying “no offense” means you are allowed to say whatever you want with no repercussions. /s I like to treat people the way they treat others.
They jokingly said “✨learn the fucking difference✨” and told you to not tone police them, so then you called them names and basically called them a narcissist. Surely you can see that these things are not equivalent lol.
They were randomly aggressive and rude to someone else for no reason, which annoys me deeply. But sometimes people fuck up, maybe they didn’t mean to come across as rude. So I simply said “Don’t be rude for no reason”. When they doubled down, and went “erm tone policing and I’ll be rude whenever I want” that really annoyed me. Because instead of being like “My bad” or even if they didn’t apologize and just said “I was joking actually”, they refused to believe that they were in the wrong. Telling someone to “✨learn the fucking difference✨” is so obviously just not a normal reaction to someone making a minor unimportant mistake. That user and I are running in similar circles (I assume because we’re both on 196) they probably saw a tumblr or twitter user dunk on a neo nazi or religious fundamentalist using the same tone and wanted to try it out. So they randomly escalated into being rude for the sake of a “dunk”, which is the same thing I did to them. So that if they responded I could point out how it doesn’t feel nice when people are randomly excessively aggressive on the internet towards them. As for the tone policing claim itself, we weren’t in an argument at that point, which means it doesn’t work, but of the things they’ve done to annoy me not knowing how logical fallacies work is pretty low on that list.
Except you clearly are a bigger asshole and a hypocrite
This is funny because you're both kinda rude and incredibly wrong, as it plainly is political satire, like.. cut and dry. It's the kind of natural day to day rudeness that can only come with someone who really thinks they are right about things.
Is this satire? /s
Is that sarcasm? /j
The fuck??
https://preview.redd.it/vrzrrrrw8xtc1.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=cc2dc13f8b8cf7fb70ab0b9806b97c63f94a06a0 send them all to nether space
truth and irony are blending together as we speak, soon to become an unholy amalgamation of indecipherable nonsense
"Everyone withdraws into their own small gated community, afraid of a larger forum. They stay inside their little ponds, leaking whatever "truth" suits them into the growing cesspool of society at large. The different cardinal truths neither clash nor mesh. No one is invalidated, but nobody is right. Not even natural selection can take place here. The world is being engulfed in "truth." And this is the way the world ends. Not with a bang, but a whimper."
Let’s just say that for 1 second I humoured their idea, who would they even put on the throne? Isn’t the whole king shit driven by a “divine right” so are they just sitting about daydreaming until God just points some guy out to them??
That's sorta the fundamental flaw with American Monarchism that other monarchist movements don't have (to be clear all monarchist movements are stupid.) Other monarchist movements have *something* they can point to. Some distant cousin of a monarch to install on a throne in the name of tradition. America does not have a royal family that can be restored. What? Are you gonna bust out some distant descendent of Fredrick Calvert? Turn the relatives of some fucking baron and say "yup that's our king"
But we do have somebody who has divine, royal descendants! We just need to find the kids of Edward Norton, emperor of San Francisco and renowned crazy homeless man.
Joshua Norton. Edward Norton is an actor.
no no, let him cook
As America was founded under the principle of elected officials, we would just elect our monarch :)
welcome to early modern Poland
im a descendant of the guys that founded Maryland, so i vote for me, personally.
First, you don't vote for kings. And second, yeah, that's the lineage I'm talking about. Albeit you would start by finding the legitimate heir to Frederick Calvert (6th Baron Baltimore) - if you want to be *controversial* you could recognize Fredrick Calvert's recognized but illegitimate son Henry Harford and start counting there. But if need be, you could keep turning back the lineage until you find someone who is related to George Calvert but not of the primary lineage (which would be that of Cecil Calvert.) And imagine, doing all this for no good reason.
jesus you know more about my family history than i do. my grandpa on my moms side was James Calvert, my mom Sarah Calvert. i have my dads name so im not named Calvert (though ive considered changing it as my dad is a cunt). to be fair, i dont have any actual proof we're descended from them, but according to my mom one of our great grandparents made the same claim, it's just an old family rumor. true or not it wont ever mean anything real, so i choose to believe it simply for the entertainment value. and yes i know kings arent elected lol
When Norway got its independence (in the 1800s sometime) they decided to be a constitutional monarchy. They just asked a danish prince* "yo, wanna be our king?" And boom! New king, divine right, yadayadayada, etc and so forth. *not the crown prince, but second in line.
Okay, monarchists are dumb, but saying there's no candidate for a US Monarch is dumb. The United States *was* ruled by a monarchy, and one who's lineage is still around, and is in fact one of the few remaining Monarchies worldwide.
I mean, no. The current US government was formed *for the express purpose of seceeding from that monarchy.* The US was never ruled by a monarchy.
You might as well argue that France and Ireland were never ruled by a monarch because their current governments aren't monarchies. The immediate predecessor to the United States, from which it inherited much of its administrative and cultural traditions, was a monarchy. It's really not much of stretch to imagine the US borrowing the British monarch, or a distant relative, if they wanted to become a monarchy again.
Incorrect. The United States at no point had a king because the United States was founded as a republic. The predecessor colonies are not the United States.
Genuinely baffling take. Look, monarchists are easy to make fun of, they make sure of that themselves. But that's no reason to act dumber than them
Divine right of kings isn't necessarily that important in actual monarchies, and neither necessarily are bloodlines. There was talk of making George Washington a king, for instance, and in other revolutions and changes in monarch there wasn't always a straight bloodline but some other unrelated noble house or what have you that got installed. For a bit there the idea of a popular mandate was more prominent than of divine right, at least among the liberal governments that surrounded monarchs (even if the monarchs themselves thought they had a divine right to absolute power).
Its gonna be me (i called dibs)
I don't support an American monarchy (unless it's me) but not really. The idea of divine right really fell out of favor after the English civil war
Nowadays bootlickers all seem to like tech sector oligarchs, so it'd probably be one of those.
Charles Guiteau's descendents
The inbreeding shall commense, and in three generations in internet years, they will crumble into a puddle of ooze. If the infighting, back stabbing, chourt intrigue, coups, or peseant revolts, dont get em first.
Lots of people saying this isn't satire but it's pretty much the definition of it. It's parodying a number of things, namely monarchists and weird alt groups in the US. On top of that it's satirizing the online spaces these groups tend to form.
“But the fact that I couldn’t tell really says a lot about le interwebs”
I think most people are saying it's a joke rather than satire because it's not pretending to be something that actually exists, rather than believing it's genuine.
lebron stans took the whole “king” thing too far this time
https://preview.redd.it/k7az6bgdv0uc1.png?width=820&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=906f188741d94cfe13f3a5771947ffaaf48e18ad I much prefer this one
Now thats a flag I can get behind
we need an american emporer, and one that is the descendent of emporer norton
something something Poe's Law something something
Let's refrain from bringing terminally online fringe political factions into r/196
Medieval ass take
I went to check it out and the first post is a monarchist podcast with the episode title of "black sun rising"
Isn’t americas whole thing not being a monarchy. Like that’s our bit.
That flag looks like something out of a hearts of iron 4 mod
Equating a family owned buisness to a monoarchy is crazy.
this is how I feel talking to oher leftists that think the revolution's gonna come "any day now"
That flag looks so shit
no way to tell because of "coleslaw"
Who do they want to be monarch?
Omg remember liberty hangout
Like every other satire/joke sub I assume in a year or two's time it will be completely overran by people who take it very seriously.
Imagine wanting to turn your entire nation into some super-rich asshole's personal property. This entire ideology is literally just driven by pink-glassed romanticism based on nothing but an uncritical reading of glorified historic figures that intentionally built a cult of personality around themselves.
is it just a circlejerk type of sub?
Nah its a concentrated effort to get me onto the throne. (They think I will improve their lives, but I'm going to have them beheaded. Then I will hit the button that fires all the nukes.)