Among the Dark Enlightenment legions, there has been a debate recently about what’s the best form of government. Is it monarchy, neocameralism, republicanism? Regardless, everyone seems to be in agreement that democracy is inferior.
Here’s my brief take: Best government for whom? Extrapolating from Aristotle (a proto-HBD thinker of sorts) in his Politics, different forms of government are better suited for different ethnies. While the ancestral traditions of some might steer toward monarchy, others might be better suited for neocameralism or republicanism. Ca dépend. Who is your group, what does it want? Also, the best form of government for a racially homogenous society might differ from the best form for a multi-racial society. And of course, the concept of ‘exit’ adds an entirely new dimension to this question.
Another interesting question, what form of government will be the most eugenic or dysgenic for the natural proclivities of a particular race?
Related:
“The Ancient Greeks & Romans, Beauty and Human Biodiversity”
“Is “Natural Law” Anti-Nature?”
“Can Multi-Racial States Ever Function? Some Examples with Caveats.“
Occam's Razor 
There is a vast number of words yet to be written by neoreactionaries concering the best forms of government for the multitude of Western societies scattered across the globe — let alone the non-Western ones, if we ever feel so charitable.
I am in the process of editing and expanding a 52,000-word fiction premised on a new start for humans (in the far future on a different planet). I am using Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s “Politics” as references, but not necessarily as guides. Having lived an examined life for 77 years, I have my own thoughts as well, some of which can be seen here: http://pavellas.com, and here: http://www.2lobes.wordpress.com. There’s a lot of Carl G. Jung in the latter. I wonder if you may have an interest in looking at and commenting upon my premises for the new world, if I state them briefly (and privately)?
Send a summary of your work and I’ll post it, if you want.
Thanks for your offer, but I’m not yet ready to be so public.
I believe monarchy is the most natural form of government, as most human associations (especially the family) tend to take that form. However, I think republics might suit well small homogeneous countries. By homogeneous I don’t mean only racially homogeneous, but also wealthly and intelectually. One can think of Venice and other city-states. Equality should precede democracy, not democracy should be used to make people equal.
Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Anarchy in the NRx
Excellent if brief post. I believe monarchy to be best all things considered.
A quick glance at history reveals Monarchies to be quite unstable full of wars of dynastic succession, successor kings who cant be bothered ruling, or even try to become leftists themselves.
So I think some form of oligarchy of a restricted franchise, either republic or constitutional monarchy is the best. Sure over the last 150 years ago these have been subverted, nothing lasts forever but they lasted longer than monarchies.
As for other races Im not sure any form of government other than warlordism can survive without outside support in Sub Saharan Africa. I dont know that much about Asian history but post WW2 Japan seems fairly stable.
Different social histories define different acceptable forms of government. Many parts of Africa would do better with a benevolent despot accompanied by a strong military or as the colony of a relatively altruistic first world country. Many Nordic countries where the population is still comparatively homogeneous do well with something approaching democracy with a socialistic flavour. A sub-section of what is now “The United States” could do well with a representative republic and a somewhat restricted voting franchise.
If there’s anything that history should have taught us, by now, it’s that the “forms of government” don’t matter that much, in & of themselves. They matter only if, when & to the extent that they influence the moral character of the people.
Pingback: Lightning Round – 2014/02/26 | Free Northerner
The problem with a properly functioning democracy is it works i.e. it pacifies conflict and creates median prosperity. This leads to a dramatic drop in participation from normal people and a dramatic increase in the proportion of sociopaths. This unusual concentration of sociopaths then wrecks it. This is possibly why Athens experimented with choosing representatives by lottery.
Because normal people would rather be doing something else more fun a long-term democracy requires either a) coerced participation like jury service or b) breeding altruistic sociopaths.
Pingback: Anarquia na NRx – Outlandish