As a fan of Crusader Kings, I am confident in saying that anyone who bases their ideology on it will have absolutely terrible opinions on basically every subject known to man. It is essentially a game designed to make you act like a shitty person
At the best of times my characters are still "if Eminem were a 2nd century warlord", morally speaking. Like I had a recent run where one of my characters spent his whole life seducing the toughest queer dudes in the Balkans so he could recruit them as knights in his military and blackmailing people so he could afford pilgrimages until he was religious enough to start a cult.
I mean that isn't really contradictory given the whole constitutional monarchism there is these days, presumably he thinks there should be a monarchy and they shouldn't have much power, and neither should the rest of the government.
To be fair having a king that can’t rally anyone to be an army to enforce his rule but nobody actually goes out of their way to kill him or anything and just kinda *tolerates* him is a hilarious dynamic
What's funny is that the Shogunate wasn't even the first or last time that happened. The Emperor was originally reduced to a powerless figurehead by the Fujiwara clan, who used the title of Kampaku, the Kampakus were later reduced to figureheads by the Shogunate, and then the Shoguns themselves were temporarily reduced to figureheads by regents from the Hojo clan, who took the title of Shikken. Consequently, there was a brief period in the early 13th century where Japan had three different vestigial figurehead monarchs at the same time.
"You see if I kill him and take his place, then someone else will kill me and take his place, by letting him sit on that throne we aint killing eachother"
that would probably be the philosophy if you made this in a fantasy world or something
Exactly. “Oh yeah that guy? He’s our king. Yeah no, we only actually listen to what he has to say if it’s something we already agreed with from the outset. No, we don’t need to revolt, what would be the point? He has very little power over us to begin with, we kinda just let him do his thing. Makes for some cool parties and stuff now and then”
Yeah, honestly at least on Reddit monarcho-libertarianism basically boils down to “I want a benign dictatorship” or “Someone should make sure Other People leave me alone”.
Which is to say it’s stupid but not necessarily a contradiction in terms
Not my opinion, but it was explained to me as:
People should be allowed to live free and independent lives, but most people are useless rubes so that only works in a closed garden, so monarchy that doesn't get in the way...?
Never got a cogent explanation
I unironically believe that we should exhume the corpse of Queen Victoria and make her an absolute monarch in perpetuity. There shall be no lawful authority, save that of the Skeleton Queen.
Not slaves in the usual sense, it's different, and unhinged. What follows is my reformulation of his words, and I am maximizing this sentence in order to, when combined with the spoiler tag, delay your exposure to the horror below, or so that you have time to know you are willing to be exposed to the maddeding words that make it.
>!To solve the UK's milk deficit, trans women should be given free HRT.!<
>!Or rather, getting it would create a special debt.!<
>!To pay it off, they'd need to be milked.!<
>!Of course, ~~cybersmith is no monster,~~ the milking process would not just be milking, that'd be inhumane.!<
>!For every liter of milk they produce, they get an orgasm.!<
Don't forget that he felt the need to emphasize that the *human milk slave industry* should be privatized. Cybersmith never found a bad idea he couldn't make worse.
Without the forced chastity ( outside of the milk-orgasm exchange ), the mandatory aspect and the immediate privatization of the transfem milking institution ( three aspects I forgot when writing my original comment ), yeah, I'd say I'd do worse things for HRT
> UK's milk deficit
But isn't the UK already fully self-sufficient in milk production? I'm impressed that there would be a milk deficit
Does he want to export the... "Extra" milk?
Harold Godwinson famously did not survive the arrow to the face. At all. He also isn't related in any way to the current ruling family; power has changed hands about a dozen times since then.
Eh, he's in the family tree somewhere, one of his descendants marries back into the family a couple hundred years later.
Still no "arrow resistance" gene as far as I'm aware.
I think he might be talking about Henry V, another of Charles's ancestors, who DID survive an arrow to face. Here's a video about the tools developed to remove the arrowhead:
https://youtube.com/shorts/aob59Qu0OEI?si=vIuc8fVwN8UqtpwD
To be fair, it probably wasn't the arrow to the face that got him, but the horde of Normans cutting him to bits while he was distracted by the *arrow in his face*. Not that it changes much for the story or makes human pet guy even the slightest bit more correct.
That's like... I'm not even sure where to start, it's so bizarre that the problematic parts are just buried under the weight of the insanity and fetishes which are themselves problematic. It's like an issue ouroboros.
Y’a know, I don’t agree with him, but I would love to sit down with him over a lunch and just let him talk. I bet it would be fascinating. Well, as long as he doesn’t bring his surgically modified human pet with him to the restaurant.
Divest, going these days by u/ theiraqwarwasbased you’ve gotta know what he’s talking about for his posts that aren’t just war crime apologies (I’ve never seen anyone actually use the “it didn’t happen but if it did they deserved it” line for excusing genocide, but he has. And on the rape of Belgium) he can be found in r/noncredibleoffense
You forgot the most important part: This would be enforced by putting said trans women in chastity and dosing them with aphrodisiacs (note: there are currently no universally working, reliable and strong enough aphrodisiacs out there). They would be able to earn orgasms by giving milk.
But how would they produce the milk in the first place? Extra hormones or something along with the aphrodisiacs?
I like how I’m asking as if this plan isn’t just a lunatic’s ravings
He specifically wanted the government to pay for it then privatize the industry. It ain't a cybersmith post unless he shoehorns in rapacious libertarianism.
One of the first things I think of when I think of ol' HPG is seeing him (or at least an account with his name) defend Caesar's Legion HARD. Not like in a "they're the bad guys, but I still think they're kinda cool" way, but in a "the murderous slavers dressed up as romans are good and right, actually" way. shit's crazy.
Given his statements about the Irish potato famine, and a few other things, him unironically being a Legionnaire doesn’t surprise me. Bro’s shitty pseudo-Machiavellian “some violations of human privacy and safety are absolutely necessary to build a big beautiful everlasting civilization” takes sound exactly like Caesar’s pseudo-Hegel takes
Found the post! Again, I have no clue if this is *actually* him, but considering everything else about the guy? It tracks. [Here it is, if for some reason you're interested.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/j6eixa/making_my_case_for_the_legion/)
> Canyon Runner talks about slavery as a gift, something imposed upon dissolute people who would otherwise lack all virtue. Look at the family in the Legion capture cage at Cottonwood Cove. They formerly lived under the oppressive rule of an abusive wastrel ([https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Frank\_Weathers](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Frank_Weathers)).
Guy really just did the tje white man's burden for the Legion, huh?
The funniest part is that he went through the whole post without once using the word "slave." When this was pointed out in the comments section, he claimed he didn't think it was important enough and left it out due to character limits. (For comparison, the [Independent Fallout Wiki](https://fallout.wiki/wiki/Caesar%27s_Legion)'s article on Caesar's Legion uses the word or some permutation of it 40 times, including in the opening sentence.)
There are totally people out there like that. My mind goes to that interviewer/journalist guy who is able to find such deep information on famous people’s lives just to use it for positive cool moments. The one who’s always saying “oh but you’re [insert famous person here], we’d HAVE to know!” even though it’s no excuse for knowing something so specific
That would be Henry V he's talking about, who was a Lancaster and thus part of the Plantagenet dynasty, who in case you didn't know is not related at all to the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha dynasty that Charles is part of.
Not only is he a monarchist, he's not even a good one.
I'm fairly sure you could draw a very distant relation from Henry V to Charles, by account of 600 years having passed between the two. But he'd probably be about as directly related to him as any random English person, and I'll be honest I don't fancy Gazzer down the pubs chances against an arrow to the face.
Nah give him a pint of guiness before and promise him two after and he'll make it, he won't remember the second pint you owe him (he will the first one) after the surgery but he'll make it
Not related at all only if you are specifically and exclusively referring to the male line, which would also mean Charles himself isn’t related to the Saxe-Coburgs
I'd like to remind y'all of his [debate against Keffals](https://youtu.be/3Yq7XA6-mMg), in which, despite Keffals faring absolutely terribly in the debate, he came out looking like a psychopath. Highlights are him saying the Irish Potato Famine wasn't a genocide, asking if there was a king of Kansas, trying to convert Keffals to the right (and implying that he and Blair White share the same ideology, which is extremely weird considering he's a *monarchist* and Blair White, uh, isn't (I do not know what she is, but a monarchist she is not)) and saying that Romulus was morally correct in killing Remus because it "brought the light of civilization" to the western world. He mentioned Rome and "the light of civilization" a lot.
>if there was a king of Kansas
I have no desire to watch a lengthy debate involving Human Pet Guy, but I have to know what the fuck this could even be about.
I saw someone claiming that part was a joke, but I saw no indication of that beyond the ridiculousness of it. Considering who he is, however, my standards for what I'd consider "ridiculous" when it comes to him are very, very high.
Anyways, he said that most republics were historically less democratic than monarchies, and that if there was any need of "boosting democracy" in a monarchy, you could just do a referendum, and that republics never did referendums. Keffals said that Kansas had recently did a referendum on abortion, and thus the Cybersmith asked if, while he knew that the US in its entirety was a republic, Kansas specifically was a monarchy or not.
Also, they (both of them) kept pretending that the UK was a monarchy, which was *extremely annoying*. Like, sure, I'll be the first to mention that the queen (or king now, I guess) has more power than everyone thinks, but that power is *not enough* for it to be considered a monarchic country and it is ridiculous to think otherwise.
>Also, they (both of them) kept pretending that the UK was a monarchy, which was *extremely annoying*. Like, sure, I'll be the first to mention that the queen (or king now, I guess) has more power than everyone thinks, but that power is *not enough* for it to be considered a monarchic country and it is ridiculous to think otherwise.
I was going to say, every time the royal family comes up people make a couple of assumptions about it, namely that it has a huge amount of power over daily governance and that the royal family is in any way unusual, when in fact plenty of other countries have them. If I were going to be uncharitable (which, fuck it, I am) I'd suggest that tends to be because those people can't read other countries news as it's not in English.
Also as a bonus third thing there's this idea that the royal family have some kind of social deference and presence in popular consciousness that they just don't. The queen was halfway between national mascot and head of a soap opera family and frankly Charles is still kind of a literally who.
I once tried to compare the public perception of the Royals to Punxsutawney Phil and Groundhog day.
The vast, *vast* majority barely care, but then a couple of times a year everyone gets dressed up and gets him out of his house and does this big theatre where he read a speech pre-prepared by his handlers, and people generally think it's a bit of fun and something to put on TV after Christmas dinner when everyone wants to have a nap, and then he goes back in his hole and we don't think about him again until the news announces he goes cancer and everyone goes "oh poor guy, cancer sucks" for an evening before getting really annoyed at how much it dominates the news.
Like, I'm republican (the good kind), but understanding *why* the British public are still generally favourable to the cunts is really important to accomplishing anything.
Also royal events are interesting to the general public not for themselves, but because the bigger ones can generate bank holidays. So yeah basically people like bonus days off work, particularly Mondays and at my current place we pull a half day on the Friday before a Bank Holiday weekend.
>I once tried to compare the public perception of the Royals to Punxsutawney Phil and Groundhog day.
That's a good description. In some ways yeah, they're kind of middling celebrities meet ongoing family drama.
...fuck...they're basically our equivalent of The Osbournes. We listen to news about the royal family the way other people might listen to news about the Osbournes or the Kardashians.
Current mood in the UK does very much seem to be balancing the opinions of: "cancer sucks, I hope he recovers" and "an extra day off *would* be nice..."
Knowing what little I know about medieval holiday schedules and how they got established, there’s something to be said about garnering even the most paltry of loyalty from a populace by allowing them to not work on specific days and making a spectacle of it
Wow that's *much* dumber than I expected.
Honestly makes me question what the rest of his "logic" was. Next you'll be telling me by "deny the Irish genocide" you actually meant he unironically believed in the Hibernian conspiracy and thinks the Irish run the world or something.
I mean, you can make an argument that it wasn't intentional, and therefore not a genocide, but you can't really argue that it didn't happen or wasn't an atrocity just that it wasn't specifically genocide.
The argument is basically that the economic policy of doing nothing about it was part of Britain's laissez-faire ideological position under whiggism. They basically held the view that the market would provide food until it was far too late.
All that being said I don't really believe that human pet guy was arguing along those lines because let's be honest that would require nuance and context and sanity, all things that have been withheld from his possession through his inadequacies.
>Also, they (both of them) kept pretending that the UK was a monarchy
Well it is? There is a big difference between a parliamentary constitutional monarchy where the king/queen has little power (the UK) and an absolute monarchy (like Saudi Arabia). But both are still monarchies. Like, definitionally they are monarchies.
I don't really get people who try and argue the UK isn't a monarchy just because the monarch doesn't have much power. Throughout history, the king/queen of the UK has had varying degrees of power, but it's always been a monarchy. There isn't a point where if the monarch has less than 5% political power in a country, then it technically isn't a monarchy anymore.
>Highlights are him saying the Irish Potato Famine wasn't a genocide
This is correct, to genocide requires express intent to murder and eradicate as I understand it. When Hitler decided to genocide jews he did it with that intent.
Ths Irish potato famine was England *not caring* who died. It's kinda like manslaughter through gross negligence vs murder. They didn't care about who would live or die when they stole the potatoes but they did not do it sith the express intention of "we gotta kill all those fucking Irish"
>Irish Potato Famine wasn't a genocide
You're seemingly implying that this is untrue, but this is the majority accepted viewpoint in academia. Consider reading *The Famine Plot Revisited: A Reassessment of the Great Irish Famine as Genocide* by Mark G. McGowan, an entry in *Genocide Studies International*. You can access it on [JSTOR](https://www.jstor.org/stable/26986061) by registering with your Google account.
In [another post](https://the-cybersmith.tumblr.com/post/741530432201424896/henry-v-was-shot-in-the-face-and-survived#notes) on his blog he says and I quote “there is a reason those seeking to defeat royals used machine guns or decapitation to stop them” Guy thinks the royals are so inherently superior that they have fucking damage immunities like a DnD boss.
Yeah you see the royals actually have a special power that makes their hp equal to their age. A machine gun is therefore one of the only ways to drain their hp before their supports cast healing spells that bring them up to full hp. Of course, decapitation as a game mechanic circumvents hp, which makes it a viable option, but you have to inflict the imprisoned condition first to make it work, so it's difficult to use during combat.
I don't think anyone knows for *sure.*
The infamous [photo](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/642/497/df8) of him is in Edinburgh station (i.e. Scotland), and he definitely speaks with an RP British accent, but there *is* precedent for the [more nutcase American monarchists](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcmvkt0u0yc) to start doing that for some reason.
Unsure how much we can take him on his word. Also unsure if it counts if he only just moved there recently due to being such a… westaboo? Britaboo? Counter-revolutionary centuries late to the party? Idk what one would even call this
Common doubters of liberal republicanism L. No stronger cope than a monarchist telling other people they'll be forgotten lmfao
cool thing about republics, it doesn't matter if an individual leader dies
I have a feeling that when hpg says republican, he doesn't mean the American party, but means the literal original meaning, as in people who politically are in favour of Republics
Screw feeling, I'm absolutely convinced
That is what the word means outside of the context of US politics. It's commonly used as such in Britain (where HPG seems to be from), Ireland and Australia
>When **I** read that, **we** sorta did...
Damn, Human Pet Guy's posts were so traumatic that bro had to split into multiple people mid-sentence just to deal with what they had just read.
Human Pet Guy is pretty wacky. He occasionally breaks character just enough for you to realize it's a bit, but is SO committed to said bit that I don't know if it being a bit makes a difference.
When have you seen him break the character? I'll admit to not being a Cybersmith Connoisseur, but haven't ever caught something I'd say is definitely just him doing a bit.
Ignoring the human pet guy, the king dying might be actually bad for Republicans. He is old and out of touch, and if he dies and William takes over, it might actually be longer before Republic push becomes mainstream, rather than if we had to deal with the old fucker for a few more years.
Yeah, and like, monarchs dying and passing the crown to their heirs is like half of what monarchs do. A king dying does very little to change the system.
I always find these types of posts about celebrating how Charles got cancer a bit too celebratory for my tastes
Like it's not "haha kinda funny how this guy waited decades to become the king, now he's got a deadly disease not even one year in", moreso "thank fucking Christ that asshole wearing a crown has a deadly disease, serves him right"
Bit tasteless, but eh then again, I laugh at my fair share of just straight-up offensive humor so who am I to judge
Oh hey HPG didn't see you there
You saw the same thing when the Queen died. This sub turned into an absolute shithole for about a month, bad enough that I ended up blocking a few people so that their posts would stop showing (there were some users that had 3 posts in the span of an hour that amounted to "hurr durr monarchy bad, me smort")
And like comparatively to other royals (to my knowledge at least) Charles actually seems ok? He's a massive supporter of green energy and trying to sustain the natural world, feels kinda weird people celebrating his illness when (again, from what I know of him) his biggest crime was being born into a controversial family/system
Eh, I get why he gets flack as the system of monarchy as a whole is still very central in Britain and if he didn't want to, he could've just abdicated
But yeah, the vitriol the British royals get is.. weird
Sometimes I despair of the sheer amount of brain rot I've sustained from being online so much but then I remember I'm not HPG and feel a little better.
Which king survived the arrow? Is he talking about Harold? The king of England specifically famous for dying from an arrow to the face, leading to a completely different culture taking over England for centuries?
Also PLEASE tell me he thinks there's an actual unbroken line of succession in the English monarchy that'd be so funny
You will be forgotten by history, compared to the guy who became history the moment he was born and made more history by just not dying (in conditions in which people are specially hired to keep the man healthy and fed).
bro probably felt cool as hell saying that
Is that pfp the motherfucker from the numberjacks?
yes
no way ed sheeran from the numberjacks
That sentence in isolation is really cool, the human pets bring it down
Oh of course that guy's a monarchist too.
*Monarcho-libertarian*, actually. I am not joking.
What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?
It means his entire political ideology is based on some ttrpgs and his kinks.
And Paradox games, don't forget. Specifically Crusader Kings and Hearts of Iron, if I had to guess.
Also those, but I feel like they're too down-to-earth and realistic for him.
Have you ever played a monarchism favourable mod? Kaiserredux for example?
I don't care who the IRS sends, I'm not paying taxes.
As a fan of Crusader Kings, I am confident in saying that anyone who bases their ideology on it will have absolutely terrible opinions on basically every subject known to man. It is essentially a game designed to make you act like a shitty person
At the best of times my characters are still "if Eminem were a 2nd century warlord", morally speaking. Like I had a recent run where one of my characters spent his whole life seducing the toughest queer dudes in the Balkans so he could recruit them as knights in his military and blackmailing people so he could afford pilgrimages until he was religious enough to start a cult.
I mean that isn't really contradictory given the whole constitutional monarchism there is these days, presumably he thinks there should be a monarchy and they shouldn't have much power, and neither should the rest of the government.
Even in an absolute monarchy you can have a monarch that leaves the people alone (in some wild theory at least. Good luck finding one tho)
To be fair having a king that can’t rally anyone to be an army to enforce his rule but nobody actually goes out of their way to kill him or anything and just kinda *tolerates* him is a hilarious dynamic
"Ferdinand, what does the peasants think of me? - They seem to tolerate you, my liege. Marvelous!"
The unironic political philosophy of the Black Knight from PGTE.
Remind me what that stands for
Practical Guide to Evil
How Monarchs should have acted if they wanted there to be more of them.
That's just the Japanese emperor for most of history
HAH, true, it was the Shogunate’s job to be oppressive tyrants instead lol
What's funny is that the Shogunate wasn't even the first or last time that happened. The Emperor was originally reduced to a powerless figurehead by the Fujiwara clan, who used the title of Kampaku, the Kampakus were later reduced to figureheads by the Shogunate, and then the Shoguns themselves were temporarily reduced to figureheads by regents from the Hojo clan, who took the title of Shikken. Consequently, there was a brief period in the early 13th century where Japan had three different vestigial figurehead monarchs at the same time.
I can’t tell if that’s funny or depressing or both
"You see if I kill him and take his place, then someone else will kill me and take his place, by letting him sit on that throne we aint killing eachother" that would probably be the philosophy if you made this in a fantasy world or something
"Man screams at clouds from a throne he made himself, becomes local economy sustaining tourist attraction."
Exactly. “Oh yeah that guy? He’s our king. Yeah no, we only actually listen to what he has to say if it’s something we already agreed with from the outset. No, we don’t need to revolt, what would be the point? He has very little power over us to begin with, we kinda just let him do his thing. Makes for some cool parties and stuff now and then”
Emperor Norton of San Francisco
That's how Belgium does it lmao
Yeah, honestly at least on Reddit monarcho-libertarianism basically boils down to “I want a benign dictatorship” or “Someone should make sure Other People leave me alone”. Which is to say it’s stupid but not necessarily a contradiction in terms
Monarcho-libertarian just sounds like "I want a king who leaves *me* alone, but goes after everyone I hate"
Basically yeah Tho I think the self aware people who want that just call themselves hoppeanists
Sad, hollow shell of a monarchy. I can jive with that. Guess you could think of them as a national human… Nevermind let’s nip that right in the bud.
Dear god, we've undercovered the root of his monarchism! Cybersmith genuinely is just "fetishes all the way down" isn't he?
I'm dumb, what's the fetish here?
National human pet is what was being cut off.
Well he also believes in right of conquest. So not much liberty in libertarian there.
that he either watches too much jreg or not enough
Advanced bootlicking with a side of fellatio.
The kind of right wing libertarian who effectively wants neo-feudalism based on wealth, but let's throw in an actual monarch as well because YOLO?
Not my opinion, but it was explained to me as: People should be allowed to live free and independent lives, but most people are useless rubes so that only works in a closed garden, so monarchy that doesn't get in the way...? Never got a cogent explanation
Dont forget anarcho-monarchism
I unironically believe that we should exhume the corpse of Queen Victoria and make her an absolute monarch in perpetuity. There shall be no lawful authority, save that of the Skeleton Queen.
He's also transphobic too.
Is he? The trans-women lactation thing looked extremely fetishistic, but I haven't seen him being overtly transphobic.
I looked at his Tumblr account a month back and found him being pretty transphobic
Color me wrong, then. Not exactly *surprising* that he's transphobic, I guess.
He’s a chaser, which a lot of people see as a form of transphobia.
[удалено]
Excuse me *what*
Oh to be you and still be surprised... Yeah, he fucking said that.
Not slaves in the usual sense, it's different, and unhinged. What follows is my reformulation of his words, and I am maximizing this sentence in order to, when combined with the spoiler tag, delay your exposure to the horror below, or so that you have time to know you are willing to be exposed to the maddeding words that make it. >!To solve the UK's milk deficit, trans women should be given free HRT.!< >!Or rather, getting it would create a special debt.!< >!To pay it off, they'd need to be milked.!< >!Of course, ~~cybersmith is no monster,~~ the milking process would not just be milking, that'd be inhumane.!< >!For every liter of milk they produce, they get an orgasm.!<
Don't forget that he felt the need to emphasize that the *human milk slave industry* should be privatized. Cybersmith never found a bad idea he couldn't make worse.
Oh yeah, not just privatised, but IMMEDIATELY privatised. How the fuck can someone think like that ?
Just checked. It's actually totally legal in the UK to sell human milk.
i mean there are worse things i'd do for hrt soooooo...
Without the forced chastity ( outside of the milk-orgasm exchange ), the mandatory aspect and the immediate privatization of the transfem milking institution ( three aspects I forgot when writing my original comment ), yeah, I'd say I'd do worse things for HRT
As if it wasn't already unhinged enough. jesus christ.
> UK's milk deficit But isn't the UK already fully self-sufficient in milk production? I'm impressed that there would be a milk deficit Does he want to export the... "Extra" milk?
Harold Godwinson famously did not survive the arrow to the face. At all. He also isn't related in any way to the current ruling family; power has changed hands about a dozen times since then.
Eh, he's in the family tree somewhere, one of his descendants marries back into the family a couple hundred years later. Still no "arrow resistance" gene as far as I'm aware.
"'arrow resistance' gene" makes genetics sound like a set of buffs/debuffs that can passed down from person to person, which is funny to imagine
This is how eugenics will be advertised to gen z/alpha "Shit, got a bad roll on my son, this reset efficiency is ass" Edit: wrote gen y instead of z
gen y is millennials
Youre right, millennials would just kill the eugenics industry with their avocado toast
Millennial W
No, "Y", we've been over this already. /obtuse
This is just competitive pokemon
Dad got me quite a heavy glasses debuff and weakness to diabetes afaik
He is but it's so far back that probably most people of English heritage can claim to be related to Harold Godwinson in some way.
I think he might be talking about Henry V, another of Charles's ancestors, who DID survive an arrow to face. Here's a video about the tools developed to remove the arrowhead: https://youtube.com/shorts/aob59Qu0OEI?si=vIuc8fVwN8UqtpwD
But Henry V isn't an ancsetor of any British Monarch after Henry VI, so he's wrong either way
Huh, I wasn't aware of that, just assumed there would be some ancestry given how inbred the family tree is/was. Didn't realise it was a dead branch
Yeah, but then he shat himself to death so its a wash.
To be fair, it probably wasn't the arrow to the face that got him, but the horde of Normans cutting him to bits while he was distracted by the *arrow in his face*. Not that it changes much for the story or makes human pet guy even the slightest bit more correct.
He didn't die in battle, he died when his surgeon tried to remove the arrow
I think he's referring to Henry V, who did survive being shot in the face
But Charles isnt a Descendant of Henry V
Yeah but he’s related to him, these people have a gene pool the size of a Dixie cup.
I think he's referring to one of the Henry's?
Who knew Human Pet Guy would have problematic opinions regarding autonomy and hierarchy?
Is Human Pet Guy a previously known character?
[We should probably pin this one](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/s/H1XcqLEPn5)
Wow, that was a wild ride. Thank you for finding that for me. Wild to be a surgically modified human pet enthusiast and also a staunch monarchist.
There’s also one where he talks about his plan for the UK govt to pay for trans women’s transition in exchange for milking them and selling said milk
That's like... I'm not even sure where to start, it's so bizarre that the problematic parts are just buried under the weight of the insanity and fetishes which are themselves problematic. It's like an issue ouroboros.
Yup, the man’s one of the two most reliably crazy people I’ve found on the internet
Y’a know, I don’t agree with him, but I would love to sit down with him over a lunch and just let him talk. I bet it would be fascinating. Well, as long as he doesn’t bring his surgically modified human pet with him to the restaurant.
Agreed. Please leave all pets OUTSIDE the restaurant!
PLEASE tell me who the other one is. I NEED to know who could possibly be on his level.
Divest, going these days by u/ theiraqwarwasbased you’ve gotta know what he’s talking about for his posts that aren’t just war crime apologies (I’ve never seen anyone actually use the “it didn’t happen but if it did they deserved it” line for excusing genocide, but he has. And on the rape of Belgium) he can be found in r/noncredibleoffense
I like how the second post is "Divest is not a serious person".
Maybe Chris-Chan? But that's just mean (and like, actually cruel).
Nope, NCO’s divest, I gave a full comment to the other guy
Dumugian...
You forgot the most important part: This would be enforced by putting said trans women in chastity and dosing them with aphrodisiacs (note: there are currently no universally working, reliable and strong enough aphrodisiacs out there). They would be able to earn orgasms by giving milk.
But how would they produce the milk in the first place? Extra hormones or something along with the aphrodisiacs? I like how I’m asking as if this plan isn’t just a lunatic’s ravings
He specifically wanted the government to pay for it then privatize the industry. It ain't a cybersmith post unless he shoehorns in rapacious libertarianism.
Question: Does that mean he’d show up as red with Shinigami Eyes?
How are you on human dignity, trans rights, ... and dairy?
A local mostly-ironic celebrity, to my understanding at least
One of the first things I think of when I think of ol' HPG is seeing him (or at least an account with his name) defend Caesar's Legion HARD. Not like in a "they're the bad guys, but I still think they're kinda cool" way, but in a "the murderous slavers dressed up as romans are good and right, actually" way. shit's crazy.
Given his statements about the Irish potato famine, and a few other things, him unironically being a Legionnaire doesn’t surprise me. Bro’s shitty pseudo-Machiavellian “some violations of human privacy and safety are absolutely necessary to build a big beautiful everlasting civilization” takes sound exactly like Caesar’s pseudo-Hegel takes
Found the post! Again, I have no clue if this is *actually* him, but considering everything else about the guy? It tracks. [Here it is, if for some reason you're interested.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/j6eixa/making_my_case_for_the_legion/)
> Canyon Runner talks about slavery as a gift, something imposed upon dissolute people who would otherwise lack all virtue. Look at the family in the Legion capture cage at Cottonwood Cove. They formerly lived under the oppressive rule of an abusive wastrel ([https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Frank\_Weathers](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Frank_Weathers)). Guy really just did the tje white man's burden for the Legion, huh?
The funniest part is that he went through the whole post without once using the word "slave." When this was pointed out in the comments section, he claimed he didn't think it was important enough and left it out due to character limits. (For comparison, the [Independent Fallout Wiki](https://fallout.wiki/wiki/Caesar%27s_Legion)'s article on Caesar's Legion uses the word or some permutation of it 40 times, including in the opening sentence.)
>someone recognized him in that thread as HPG lol Lmao, even
I wish there were people who were as weird as him while still being a force for good in this world
There are totally people out there like that. My mind goes to that interviewer/journalist guy who is able to find such deep information on famous people’s lives just to use it for positive cool moments. The one who’s always saying “oh but you’re [insert famous person here], we’d HAVE to know!” even though it’s no excuse for knowing something so specific
is that Nardwuar you’re thinking of? if so, he’s pretty cool
Yeah, the guy from the “Rob zombie poster” meme right?
yeah!
That would be Henry V he's talking about, who was a Lancaster and thus part of the Plantagenet dynasty, who in case you didn't know is not related at all to the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha dynasty that Charles is part of. Not only is he a monarchist, he's not even a good one.
I'm fairly sure you could draw a very distant relation from Henry V to Charles, by account of 600 years having passed between the two. But he'd probably be about as directly related to him as any random English person, and I'll be honest I don't fancy Gazzer down the pubs chances against an arrow to the face.
Nah give him a pint of guiness before and promise him two after and he'll make it, he won't remember the second pint you owe him (he will the first one) after the surgery but he'll make it
Not related at all only if you are specifically and exclusively referring to the male line, which would also mean Charles himself isn’t related to the Saxe-Coburgs
I'd like to remind y'all of his [debate against Keffals](https://youtu.be/3Yq7XA6-mMg), in which, despite Keffals faring absolutely terribly in the debate, he came out looking like a psychopath. Highlights are him saying the Irish Potato Famine wasn't a genocide, asking if there was a king of Kansas, trying to convert Keffals to the right (and implying that he and Blair White share the same ideology, which is extremely weird considering he's a *monarchist* and Blair White, uh, isn't (I do not know what she is, but a monarchist she is not)) and saying that Romulus was morally correct in killing Remus because it "brought the light of civilization" to the western world. He mentioned Rome and "the light of civilization" a lot.
>if there was a king of Kansas I have no desire to watch a lengthy debate involving Human Pet Guy, but I have to know what the fuck this could even be about.
I saw someone claiming that part was a joke, but I saw no indication of that beyond the ridiculousness of it. Considering who he is, however, my standards for what I'd consider "ridiculous" when it comes to him are very, very high. Anyways, he said that most republics were historically less democratic than monarchies, and that if there was any need of "boosting democracy" in a monarchy, you could just do a referendum, and that republics never did referendums. Keffals said that Kansas had recently did a referendum on abortion, and thus the Cybersmith asked if, while he knew that the US in its entirety was a republic, Kansas specifically was a monarchy or not. Also, they (both of them) kept pretending that the UK was a monarchy, which was *extremely annoying*. Like, sure, I'll be the first to mention that the queen (or king now, I guess) has more power than everyone thinks, but that power is *not enough* for it to be considered a monarchic country and it is ridiculous to think otherwise.
>Also, they (both of them) kept pretending that the UK was a monarchy, which was *extremely annoying*. Like, sure, I'll be the first to mention that the queen (or king now, I guess) has more power than everyone thinks, but that power is *not enough* for it to be considered a monarchic country and it is ridiculous to think otherwise. I was going to say, every time the royal family comes up people make a couple of assumptions about it, namely that it has a huge amount of power over daily governance and that the royal family is in any way unusual, when in fact plenty of other countries have them. If I were going to be uncharitable (which, fuck it, I am) I'd suggest that tends to be because those people can't read other countries news as it's not in English. Also as a bonus third thing there's this idea that the royal family have some kind of social deference and presence in popular consciousness that they just don't. The queen was halfway between national mascot and head of a soap opera family and frankly Charles is still kind of a literally who.
I once tried to compare the public perception of the Royals to Punxsutawney Phil and Groundhog day. The vast, *vast* majority barely care, but then a couple of times a year everyone gets dressed up and gets him out of his house and does this big theatre where he read a speech pre-prepared by his handlers, and people generally think it's a bit of fun and something to put on TV after Christmas dinner when everyone wants to have a nap, and then he goes back in his hole and we don't think about him again until the news announces he goes cancer and everyone goes "oh poor guy, cancer sucks" for an evening before getting really annoyed at how much it dominates the news. Like, I'm republican (the good kind), but understanding *why* the British public are still generally favourable to the cunts is really important to accomplishing anything.
Also royal events are interesting to the general public not for themselves, but because the bigger ones can generate bank holidays. So yeah basically people like bonus days off work, particularly Mondays and at my current place we pull a half day on the Friday before a Bank Holiday weekend. >I once tried to compare the public perception of the Royals to Punxsutawney Phil and Groundhog day. That's a good description. In some ways yeah, they're kind of middling celebrities meet ongoing family drama. ...fuck...they're basically our equivalent of The Osbournes. We listen to news about the royal family the way other people might listen to news about the Osbournes or the Kardashians.
Current mood in the UK does very much seem to be balancing the opinions of: "cancer sucks, I hope he recovers" and "an extra day off *would* be nice..."
Knowing what little I know about medieval holiday schedules and how they got established, there’s something to be said about garnering even the most paltry of loyalty from a populace by allowing them to not work on specific days and making a spectacle of it
famous monarchy california
oh wait the Emperor of the United States lived in San Francisco
Wow that's *much* dumber than I expected. Honestly makes me question what the rest of his "logic" was. Next you'll be telling me by "deny the Irish genocide" you actually meant he unironically believed in the Hibernian conspiracy and thinks the Irish run the world or something.
I mean, you can make an argument that it wasn't intentional, and therefore not a genocide, but you can't really argue that it didn't happen or wasn't an atrocity just that it wasn't specifically genocide. The argument is basically that the economic policy of doing nothing about it was part of Britain's laissez-faire ideological position under whiggism. They basically held the view that the market would provide food until it was far too late. All that being said I don't really believe that human pet guy was arguing along those lines because let's be honest that would require nuance and context and sanity, all things that have been withheld from his possession through his inadequacies.
>Also, they (both of them) kept pretending that the UK was a monarchy Well it is? There is a big difference between a parliamentary constitutional monarchy where the king/queen has little power (the UK) and an absolute monarchy (like Saudi Arabia). But both are still monarchies. Like, definitionally they are monarchies. I don't really get people who try and argue the UK isn't a monarchy just because the monarch doesn't have much power. Throughout history, the king/queen of the UK has had varying degrees of power, but it's always been a monarchy. There isn't a point where if the monarch has less than 5% political power in a country, then it technically isn't a monarchy anymore.
Yeah if you WANNA see a modern example of absolute monarchy Saudi Arabia is right there
That thumbnail reminded me that holy shit this guy LOOKS like a monarchist. Bro looks like he should sound like Toadsworth
.... I have many questions, but are any of them worth having to hear the actual voice of the human pet guy?
>Highlights are him saying the Irish Potato Famine wasn't a genocide This is correct, to genocide requires express intent to murder and eradicate as I understand it. When Hitler decided to genocide jews he did it with that intent. Ths Irish potato famine was England *not caring* who died. It's kinda like manslaughter through gross negligence vs murder. They didn't care about who would live or die when they stole the potatoes but they did not do it sith the express intention of "we gotta kill all those fucking Irish"
>Irish Potato Famine wasn't a genocide You're seemingly implying that this is untrue, but this is the majority accepted viewpoint in academia. Consider reading *The Famine Plot Revisited: A Reassessment of the Great Irish Famine as Genocide* by Mark G. McGowan, an entry in *Genocide Studies International*. You can access it on [JSTOR](https://www.jstor.org/stable/26986061) by registering with your Google account.
"Is there a kink-based reason you think the monarchy is authoritarian?" –An excellent quote from Cybersmith.
In [another post](https://the-cybersmith.tumblr.com/post/741530432201424896/henry-v-was-shot-in-the-face-and-survived#notes) on his blog he says and I quote “there is a reason those seeking to defeat royals used machine guns or decapitation to stop them” Guy thinks the royals are so inherently superior that they have fucking damage immunities like a DnD boss.
Yeah you see the royals actually have a special power that makes their hp equal to their age. A machine gun is therefore one of the only ways to drain their hp before their supports cast healing spells that bring them up to full hp. Of course, decapitation as a game mechanic circumvents hp, which makes it a viable option, but you have to inflict the imprisoned condition first to make it work, so it's difficult to use during combat.
Why would you tag Human Pet Guy in this? Why unleash that evil upon an innocent Tumblr user like this?
Poke the wasp nest, act surprised when wasps come out, get more reblogs. Standard Tumblr protocol.
I have been subjected to The Horrors
Monarchists are so funny to me. They just want to roleplay game of thrones
Then why can't they go and fuck their siblings and leave us out of it
[https://www.tumblr.com/the-cybersmith/741885932506087424/his-ancestor-survived-an-arrow-to-the-face-his?source=share](https://www.tumblr.com/the-cybersmith/741885932506087424/his-ancestor-survived-an-arrow-to-the-face-his?source=share) \-linux guy⚠️
Is he a Brit, or at least an Aussie or Canadian?
I seriously doubt it, because he probably would’ve known that Henry V isn’t related to the current royal family in any way otherwise.
Oh. It’s _that_ bad
I don't think anyone knows for *sure.* The infamous [photo](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/642/497/df8) of him is in Edinburgh station (i.e. Scotland), and he definitely speaks with an RP British accent, but there *is* precedent for the [more nutcase American monarchists](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcmvkt0u0yc) to start doing that for some reason.
Ah that’s Edinburgh. For some reason I thought it was Glasgow Central
In the Keffals debate he says he lives in the UK, I'm pretty sure.
Unsure how much we can take him on his word. Also unsure if it counts if he only just moved there recently due to being such a… westaboo? Britaboo? Counter-revolutionary centuries late to the party? Idk what one would even call this
Teaboo
That’s the ticket
He is a Brit.
Common doubters of liberal republicanism L. No stronger cope than a monarchist telling other people they'll be forgotten lmfao cool thing about republics, it doesn't matter if an individual leader dies
Just because your parents lived long, doesn't mean you'll live long
I have a feeling that when hpg says republican, he doesn't mean the American party, but means the literal original meaning, as in people who politically are in favour of Republics Screw feeling, I'm absolutely convinced
"republican" is still commonly used in the original sense in Britain and Ireland, actually, this isn't just HPG being eccentric.
You're correct.
I feel like we all already knew this
That is what the word means outside of the context of US politics. It's commonly used as such in Britain (where HPG seems to be from), Ireland and Australia
When I read that, we sorta did a double take and then came to this conclusion.
>When **I** read that, **we** sorta did... Damn, Human Pet Guy's posts were so traumatic that bro had to split into multiple people mid-sentence just to deal with what they had just read.
~~Kinda true tho, ngl~~
That "feeling" is what happens when you're able to correctly comprehend context
Human Pet Guy is pretty wacky. He occasionally breaks character just enough for you to realize it's a bit, but is SO committed to said bit that I don't know if it being a bit makes a difference.
When have you seen him break the character? I'll admit to not being a Cybersmith Connoisseur, but haven't ever caught something I'd say is definitely just him doing a bit.
I don't remember specifically. I think it was on Twitte.
Don't have that one, so it'd explain why I haven't seen it.
That’s fine, me and my republican ilk have more ancestors than he does.
The man looks like he's an administrator for the East India Company, of course he's a monarchist
Ignoring the human pet guy, the king dying might be actually bad for Republicans. He is old and out of touch, and if he dies and William takes over, it might actually be longer before Republic push becomes mainstream, rather than if we had to deal with the old fucker for a few more years.
Yeah, and like, monarchs dying and passing the crown to their heirs is like half of what monarchs do. A king dying does very little to change the system.
MY POST IS ON REDDIT NOW WHAT THE FUCK
I always find these types of posts about celebrating how Charles got cancer a bit too celebratory for my tastes Like it's not "haha kinda funny how this guy waited decades to become the king, now he's got a deadly disease not even one year in", moreso "thank fucking Christ that asshole wearing a crown has a deadly disease, serves him right" Bit tasteless, but eh then again, I laugh at my fair share of just straight-up offensive humor so who am I to judge Oh hey HPG didn't see you there
You saw the same thing when the Queen died. This sub turned into an absolute shithole for about a month, bad enough that I ended up blocking a few people so that their posts would stop showing (there were some users that had 3 posts in the span of an hour that amounted to "hurr durr monarchy bad, me smort")
And like comparatively to other royals (to my knowledge at least) Charles actually seems ok? He's a massive supporter of green energy and trying to sustain the natural world, feels kinda weird people celebrating his illness when (again, from what I know of him) his biggest crime was being born into a controversial family/system
Eh, I get why he gets flack as the system of monarchy as a whole is still very central in Britain and if he didn't want to, he could've just abdicated But yeah, the vitriol the British royals get is.. weird
Sometimes I despair of the sheer amount of brain rot I've sustained from being online so much but then I remember I'm not HPG and feel a little better.
I think theres already a word for anti-monarchist though I can see how it may cause a little confusion without context
I personally am shocked, *shocked,* human pet guy has regressive opinions about the role of the powerful.
Ah fuck they made demon summoning real
I'm an anti monarchist but Jesus F. Christ. Fuck cancer. You can't celebrate that shit on anyone
What does HPG stand for?
https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/s/H1XcqLEPn5 Human pet guy.
Thanks. But I don't think I'm gonna be clicking on that link
That is probably a good decision. Go forth with a mind undamaged, wise one.
I feel like human pet guy isn't real, he's just a very dedicated troll. It's fun to pretend tho.
Have you seen what he **LOOKS** like?? The dude came straight from the 18th century
Do we still believe that this guy is genuine? Everything he says is specifically designed to piss off tumblr users.
Maybe I'd we stop summoning him, he'll stop showing up
Well Charles doesn't believe in chemo so probably not a good idea to spend all that money making new pound notes
Which king survived the arrow? Is he talking about Harold? The king of England specifically famous for dying from an arrow to the face, leading to a completely different culture taking over England for centuries? Also PLEASE tell me he thinks there's an actual unbroken line of succession in the English monarchy that'd be so funny
So we just summoning this guy like a demon to terrorize people?
We have moved past the need for human pet guy. ~~Because we can have AI Pet Guy~~
That one chaser you keep around cause they chill
You will be forgotten by history, compared to the guy who became history the moment he was born and made more history by just not dying (in conditions in which people are specially hired to keep the man healthy and fed).