Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

240

"Ostensibly, the alliance was formed to instill the divine right of kings and Christian values in European political life, as pursued by Alexander I under the influence of his spiritual adviser Baroness Barbara von Krüdener."

why is this idiot taking advice from a woman? massive sign of weakness.

"On 29 September 1818, Alexander, Emperor Francis I of Austria and King Frederick William III of Prussia met with the Duke of Wellington, Viscount Castlereagh and the Duc de Richelieu at the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle to demand stern measures against university "demagogues", which would be realized in the Carlsbad Decrees of the following year"

a decree which banned masonic frats in the universities. ooo big deal. if you knew the problem was coming from the universities then do a sting operation and execute them all. they hesitated to do this to not 'stir up' more of a response. it's always constant hesitation until the problem is too big to handle anymore. they still held state power back then. nowadays we know it's coming from the universities too but they also have state power so no one can do anything about it anymore.

"Ostensibly, the alliance was formed to instill the divine right of kings and Christian values in European political life, as pursued by Alexander I under the influence of his spiritual adviser Baroness Barbara von Krüdener." why is this idiot taking advice from a woman? massive sign of weakness. "On 29 September 1818, Alexander, Emperor Francis I of Austria and King Frederick William III of Prussia met with the Duke of Wellington, Viscount Castlereagh and the Duc de Richelieu at the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle to demand stern measures against university "demagogues", which would be realized in the Carlsbad Decrees of the following year" a decree which banned masonic frats in the universities. ooo big deal. if you knew the problem was coming from the universities then do a sting operation and execute them all. they hesitated to do this to not 'stir up' more of a response. it's always constant hesitation until the problem is too big to handle anymore. they still held state power back then. nowadays we know it's coming from the universities too but they also have state power so no one can do anything about it anymore.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (9).
[–] [deleted] • 0 pt (edited )

There's nothing Christian about monarchies. In fact all the ba'al/moloch hate in the Bible could be easily interpreted as anti-king/noble since ba'al is Hebrew for lord and moloch is their word for king.

Napoleon wasn't a jew to my knowledge and neither was robspierre. The people overthrew that monarchy because of overt corruption and a failure of that government to perform its basic duties. The nobles played and danced as the serfs starved to death. These nobles were not jews either.

Yid domination of the republics that replaced the monarchies owe chiefly to nepotism and corruption coupled with Christian misunderstanding of their own religion and the basics of how not to be enslaved.

[–] • 0 pt

why comment when your knowledge is limited to 'robspierre wasn't a jew therefore why mention jews'? you don't understand what you're talking about.

those kings were trying to uphold christianity and you slander them because it doesn't fit the unrealistic idyll of the bible. if you don't have power to back up your ideology then you will fall to another who does. your idiotic fairytale of jesus just coming and fixing everything so you can remain 100% passive isn't actually going to happen idiot. it's because of people like you that jews were able to take over. and of course you believe all the propaganda the jews have written about them. the monarchy was so cruel and evil.. yet when the revolutionaries came to storm the palace, the king gave the order not to shoot them because he couldn't stand pointless death. the economic conditions leading to the revolution were purposely conducted by the jews and masons hoarding grain, etc. a very ancient tactic.

nobody's going to argue they were perfect but it was their sticking to christian ideals which actually made them kinder rulers than any others in all of history. most of them were massive pussies. when cortez and co were brutally enslaving the aztecs etc. it was the royals who told them to stop enslaving the natives and instead give them rights like employees: "In many cases natives were forced to do hard labor and subjected to extreme punishment and death if they resisted.[4] However, Queen Isabella I of Castile forbade slavery of the native population and deemed the indigenous to be "free vassals of the crown".[5] Various versions of the Laws of the Indies from 1512 onwards attempted to regulate the interactions between the settlers and natives. Both natives and Spaniards appealed to the Real Audiencias for relief under the encomienda system."

i'm guessing you're an American protestant so you're brainwashed against monarchy. your country was founded by freemasons. they were manipulated, just like you. they thought they were freeing themselves from catholic suppression of free thought and didn't realise at that point that freemasonry was controlled by jews. by giving 'power to the people' all they did was give power to the ones who had power over the people. that was Jews who had siphoned up all the money through their usury monopoly and used it to take control of the new emerging media technologies. it doesn't matter how incorruptible or christian the political members of the new republics were, the game was won by that point.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

I didn't slander anyone but your yid cousins.

The fact that the nobles let the people starve to death doesn't meet the definition of slander because it's true.

If yids were behind the revolt and I'm unaware, now is a chance to educate me.

You don't know my views on Jesus, a savior, God or anything else save that in my view Bible is inherently anti-king/noble. And you certainly don't know my views on the rest of your yid fairytales.

If it was yids and masons that caused the food shortage and the king cared so much, why didn't he just take the food? Or did the army not listen to him? Maybe he was too busy dancing to notice.

I agree Christian kings were superior in most instances to non-christian kings. At least where records were available. Ofc there are many exceptions.

Yep those kings sure did a good job stopping the enslavement of everyone, which is why we are still dealing with the fall out today.

Well here's my problem. To have a king means I am a slave or my descendents will be. No ifs no ands no buts. In fact as a ethnic north European I'm keenly aware that it was Christian kings who enslaved my people and made them serfs after conversion at sword point. But that's the catholic system. Roll in with pikes, murder and enslave and make sure no on can read their holy books except them. Then hope none of the priests notice what it says.

Yeah I'm sure the Masons were corrupted too since everything in this world is in due time. Kinda like monarchies and nobility and the papcy and jews and caliphs and business ppl and everything else.

[–] • 0 pt

i don't have time to reply properly to your time dumb shit atm but ill reply to this: "Well here's my problem. To have a king means I am a slave or my descendents will be."

fuck you're stupid. you're a slave right now facing total genocide. there will always be someone who rules over you unless you're the ruler. that's how humans work, it's actually a necessity. idealist fantasies aren't reality.