Traditionalist Ultradextroconservative Impero-Monarchism

[Monarcho-Legitimist]

HI! I agree with following writing!!! A Metafizikai Tradíció. Kvintesszencia Kiadó. A Metafizikai Hagyomány Centrumaindex

The Alliance Of Sword, Cross and Crown

Traditional
Ultradextroconservative
Imperio-monarchist and
Monarcho-legitimist
Unity Front

The Ideological Bases Of The Alliance

With Metapolitical Outlooks
1. The organisation
The Traditional Ultradextroconservative Imperio-Monarchist and Monarcho-legitimist Alliance, hereafter briefly referred to as Alliance, is an unambiguously and expressly metapolitically-oriented front- and
movementlike alliance intending to manifest itself also in the political domain. Although the Alliance has a basically supraparty or supraparties orientation, it also shares some party-like features.
2. Extremo-dextrality ( Extreme right-wing policy)
The Alliance starts out from the fundamental and elementary recognition of the fact according to which the political and social plane of the fundamental Weltanschauung of Traditionalitas Spiritualis et Metaphysica, Universalis et Integralis is dextrality and dextrism properly interpreted.
A properly interpreted dextrality means the most radical and extreme extremo-dextrality which is utterly devoid of the contamination like counter-sinistral infiltrations of common, vulgar or near vulgar extremo-dextrality, viz infiltration of the socialistoid type.
3. Ultradextrality (Ultra right-wing policy)
The extremo-dextrality of the Alliance is extremo-dextrality in the sence of ultradextrality. Ultradexrality, thus, carries and represents ideas elitistic, exceedingly aristocratic, exclusive, mentocratic, androcratic and radically conservative in nature.
4. Conservativity
The ultradextroconservative conservativity and conservativism of the Alliance is rootedly and far-reachingly different from conservativitas conservativa quasi-dextra conventionalis, which it rejects in more than one respect, and what it totally affirms in its stead is conservativitas conservatrix ultradextra traditionalis.
5. On revolutionism
The Alliance rejects all sinistral or sinistral-like revolutions and revolutionism. It opposes everything of the kind with the most radical anti-and counter-revolutionism. In parallel, the Alliance is a committed adherent to Revolutio Conservatrix Ultadextra and, of course, also to Contrarevolutio Conservatrix Ultradextra.
5.1. The Alliance sharply condemns, on lines of its historical perspectives, all vulgaro-plebeian uprisings, rebellions, revolutionary activities, peasant and Protestant uprisings. Sharply refuses the English revolution, the French revolution of 1789, the French and European revolutions of 1848, with special respect to the traitorous Hungarian revolutionary rebellion and the evolving armed civil uprising which expanded into a domestic warfare in 1849 and 1849, which made it necessary for a radical foreign intervention to take place. It also refutes the 1870 and 1871 events in France, the two 1917 revolutions in Russia, the Europian revolutions of 1918 and 1919, and, within this, the totally depraved, rebellious Hungarian revolution in 1918 of Mihály Károlyi and János Hock, and that of Béla Kun (Kohn) and Tibor Szamuelli (Samuel) in 1919.
5.2 The Alliance is completely aware of the fact that in the hotbeds of rebellious revolutions, primarily in France and then in Russia, various and manifold social and state anomalies encroached with the encumbrance of serious defects and sins. However, these defects and sins are, in the main, not what are generally imputed, but are connected with the internal and external deviations of sovereign and regal actitudos. Notwithstanding that which came into being in these countries and elsewhere, as compared to the one-time sructures, are incomparably more defective, more sinful, darker, more satanic and demonic than what had preceded anyplace any time. There was not any one positive feature of the 1789 revolution, and it had not any one positive direct or indirect consequence.
5.3 On 23rd October 1956 an anti-communist (anti-sinistral, anti-Soviet) freedom fight broke out in Hungary, which, gradually moving towards the right, was transformed into a war of liberty. This was the one and only ever freedom fight and war of liberty of the Hungarian nation. In the Alliance' s eyes, October 23 is a glorious red-letter day, and it finds it deeply embarrassing that sinistral circles try to monopolise it.
6. On the form of government
The Alliance, regarding the form of government to adopt, is, in an intransigent manner, measure and sense, monarchist, or to put it more definitely: imperio-monarchist.
The original and organic unity, or a near perfect restoration of this unity, of Sacrum Imperium Monarchicum Autocraticum et Theocraticum Absolutum and Sacrum Imperium Monarchicum Ordinarium Feudale Aristocraticum is what the political ideology of the Alliance can and is willing to accept with no reservation. The separation of the two types of monarchies , be that either one of them, and the solidification-fixation in its isolation, leads to deformations, then to serious deviations, anomalies and to the disintegration of the state.
Exceptionally, monarchy-equivalent forms of government could be classified as acceptable, if they were similar to the Republic of Venice in the time of the doges, not later than the 13th century.
In certain circumstances, the Monarch, even for quite a long span of time, could be substituted by a Quasi-Monarch as Ruler Regnant (Regnator) or Governor Regnant (Regnator -Gubernator, Herrscher-Reichsverweser) with nearly all or all the rights of the Monarch. For a shorter period, a Regent-Governor (Regens-Gubernator, Reichsverweser), or, perhaps, temporarily, a Nation or a State Leader could be a partician of the power of the head of the state with a broad, though narrower jurisdiction than that of a Monarch.
6.1 In accordance with the Weltanschauung which it carries and represents, the Alliance would be ready to accept a constitutional monarchy ( Monarchia Constitutionalis) exclusively in terms of a public law provision and not otherwise. In such a sense, it would even be ready to accept the Swedish royal jurisdiction, but not even the existence of the Spanish royal jurisdiction in the long term. As a longer period of transition, it would resign itself to the existence of the Austro-Hungarian royal jurisdiction between 1867 and 1918, but ultimately it would only be willing to accept unlimited jurisdiction with a wide range of autonomous feudal territories.
6.2 The Alliance sharply rejects both capitalism and socialism. It accepts neither private capitalism, nor company capitalism, nor group capitalism, nor state capitalism, nor all-social capitalism, nor nation capitalism. It obviously does not accept sinistral socialism, pseudo-socialism, communistico-socialism, not even Christian socialism or national socialism, the latter being a definitely better formation than its designation suggests.
The Alliance is the adherent to feudalism , neo-feudalism if you like, and proportional refeudalification. (If the will towards it was actually revived with great power, it could, at least in principle, be more or less realized in one hundred years in the 21st century.) Be refeudalification impossible to carry out, and, unfortunately, it is more probable, then one should at least try to form nearing solutions.
7. On loyalty to the nation
7 Hungarian members of the Alliance are loyal Hungarians, more loyal than the members of any other organization. At the same time, in a particular sense, they are loyal Europians, and are loyal to the uranically illuminated terrestrial, human world which is, however, subordinated to the aims and objectives of celestiality.
The same is expected from the joining Germain, Italian, French, Spanish, English, Portugese members and also from those willing to join from other nations. Loyalty to the nation is compulsory, nevertheless, it should be subordinated to other higher, fundamental principles.
8. On nationalism
The Alliance's views on nationalism and internationalism are as follows:
Nationalism and internationalism in today' s sense, after a considerable number of antecedents reaching far back into the past, unfolded from the 1789 French revolution onwards with what could be termed as an explosive force. During the 19th century nationality was one of the most prominent sinistral, what is more, extremo-sinistral subversive forces, which disintegrated, with its nivellating (ie reducing everything to the 'lowest common denomination') nature, the inner, hierarchical structure of monarchies, then, more acutely than ever before, started to oppose states and countries as nations. In the 20th century, the left began to favour internationalism and to oppose the whole spectrum of national ideas. That is why dextrality, and primarily extremo-dextrality, became extremely nationalistic at the time - partly on a truly dextral, and partly on a counter-sinistral basis.
We do not accept sinistral and counter-sinistral nationalism, and dextral, extremo-dextral nationalism contaminated with counter-sinistrality as an anti-differential, anti-integrated and nivellating nationalism, and we, with an utmost effort reject sinistral and extremo-sinistral internationalism, not to speak of its cosmopolitan overgrowths.
There is and there can be, and, in the first place, there should be a positive nationality and nationalism, which is differebtial, integrated, non- and anti-nivellating, structure and hierarchy approving. This nationality and nationalism is not only acceptable to the members of the Alliance, but is something, of which the acceptance is compulsory, moreover: it has the validity of a standard. This is real ultra-dextral nationality.
In point of fact, a positive ultra-dextral internationality is not impossible, furthermore, an ultra-dextral antidote of the maximum of internationalism and interpatriotism, the hateful cosmopolitism, as sinistral and extremo-sinistral cosmopolitism, would be conceivable, which would also be differential, integrated, anti-nivellating and articulation-approving.
This can and must be accepted by all those who classify themselves as ultra-dextral and expect others to classify them as such, and are eager to become and remain members of the Alliance.
The top synthesis of ultra-dextral nationality and ultra-dextral internationality, surpassing both, is connationality and connationalism.
Obviously, only and exclusively an ultra-dextral connationality- connationalism could be counted on, without which, however, there is no and there cannot be ultra-dextrality.
The top of the tops is ultra-dextral transnationality -transnationalism, in other words, ultra-dextral supranationality-supranationalism, which forms part and parcel of ultra-dextrality.
9. On patriotism
The Alliance, conserning patriotism and interpatriotism has a similar standpoint to that of the foregoing.
General and sinistral, often extremo-sinistral patriotism and interpatriotism are not accepted, moreover rejected.
There is and there can be an ultra-dextral patriotism. These are parts of our perspective.
The top synthesis of ultradextral patriotism and ultradextral interpatriotism is ultradextral compatriotism.This is what we radically profess and represent, even as a complement of connationalism.
The crowning is ultradextral transpatriotism, or, in other words, ultradextral suprapatriotism, which we, above all, profess.
10. On Europe and the Pan-European issue
The Alliance, in terms of general europismus and europaeismus, takes up the sharply rejectful standpoint of anteuropismus and anteuropaeismus. With regard to pan-europismus and pan-europaeismus, the way it is commonly conceived, our refusal is even much sharper.
Under no circumstances can we tolerate the fact that freemasons from the Middle East via several roundabout routes to America should define for Europeans residing in Europe from time immemorial what it means to be a European and what to accept, what rules to observe to succeed in getting into the community of European nations.
The Pan-European Union is operating mainly according to its freemasonic sinistral governing will. There may be others who have weight and authotity, but this does not make much difference as to the essential attitude. If the Pan-European Alliance of States comes into being, which is not sure to come about, this will have to be effected by the year 2025. It is probable that after this time only disintegrating processes could be really initiated, and the cohesion of anything will become disproportionately more difficult.
We do not subscribe to the thesis of the Pan-European Alliance of States that is being prepared. The Empire we conceive would be entirely different: it would be an Imperium Monarchicum Pan-Europaeum Dextrum, governed either by an Emperor or a Ruler-Governor, of which Empire the core would be the one-time Holy Germano-Roman Empire with the Hungarian Apostolic Kingdom attached.
A Pan-European Alliance of States, as it is conceived nowadays, would not be acceptable to us, but this does not mean that it would be necessary for us to fight against it. In a Pan-Euroean Alliance of States there could be changes, which could never occur otherwise, elsewhere. One corollary of this, for example, could be an ultradextroconservatively and imperio-monarchically inspirated continental-scale dextral and extremo-dextral uprising, with a possible take-over.
11. On the dynasty
The Alliance is a committed and anshakeable adherent to the Monarcho--Legitimist succession of the Habsburg-Lothringen dynasty.
The Alliance, otherwise, holds that the Pan-European Alliance of States, apart from an incipient period, would be acceptable only as Imperium Monarchicum Pan-Europaeum Dextrum, which would be lead by the absolutely and unambiguously legitimate head of the Habsburg-Lothringen dynasty as a Monarch, an Emperor, who would in point of fact assume the function of Emperor and King of several European countries.
11.1 Otto II. renounced his succession to the Austrian imperial throne on 31 May 1961. He has not to this day - formaliter and declariter - renounced the Hungarian apostolic royal throne and crown. The principle of copossession, however, implies that the ruler cannot renounce its right to rule without losing the right to rule the other as well. Irrespective of this, Otto II. does not recognize Hungary, even de jure, as an Apostolic Kingdom, and does not consider himself to be a Hereditary King, and had considered Hungary as a people's republic until 1989, and has considered it a republic ever since. He has often consorted with the president, whom he regards as president of the republic, and has still more often consorted with the so-called premier, with whom they have mutually high esteem of each other.
Otto I/II. ought to have been succeeded by his eldest brother, Robert I/I., for Otto's renunciation of the throne extends also to his descendants. In turn, Robert I/I. ought to have been succeeded by Lõrinc I/I, Robert's eldest son. However, as far as we know, neither Robert had, nor Lõrinc has demanded the validation of his right to the Austrian and Hungarian throne, moreover, we know of no member of the Habsburg-Lothringen dynasty who would have cherished such initiative.
11.2 The Dynasty has not been deprived of its rights. For our part, we can do no more than to reserve our judgement. And this judgement is obligatory to the Alliance as a whole and to each and every one of its members.
Questions Of Ideology

1. On religions and churches
The Alliance is by no means the supporter of unlimited freedom of religion. There should be everywhere, in principle, one - exceptionally more - state religion and Church. In terms of classification, there should be established denominations, recognized denominations, licensed-subsidized and licensed-unsubsidized denominations, unlicensed-tolerated and intolerated-prohibited denominations. There could, in fact, be no persecuted denominations, but tough measures against the degenerated expansion of intolerated-prohibited denominations could be taken.
2. On spirituality
The Alliance finds that the above-all and before-all predominance of deep spirituality is an essential part of metapoliticity, but also that of truly dextral politicity. This is to be manifested everywhere both directly and indirectly. Obviously, this spirituality should be that of Spiritualitas Metaphysica and Spiritualitas Traditionalis et Supertraditionalis, not only always indirectly, but, in general, also directly. This spirituality can never be constrained: it should be, the farthest-reaching, co-ordinated, but not constrained.
Flowing from its traditional Weltanschauung, the Alliance is the most committed adherent and supporter of spiritual freeedom. Notwithstanding that which is referred to as spiritual freedom in the nearly ultimate phase of the Dark Age, has nothing to do with either spirit and spirituality, or freedom.
Spiritual liberalism is contrary to liberty, and also to liberality, and, stange as it might sound, it is contrary even to liberalism, that is to itself.
Spiritual liberty is not identical to the absolute liberty of counter-spirituality, and the unconditional provision of this boundless, demonic liberty, which some, in there blind mania and according to their diabolical demands, arrogate to themselves beyond all limits. Under no circumstances are we willing to support the 'spiritual liberty' of that which is wildly alien to spirituality and that which is wildly counter-spiritual, on the contrary: we are, in all circumstances, ready to go to war against it, and to continue this war until ultimate victory is gained, even by sacrificing our lives and all our possessions.
3. On philosophy
The Alliance, in accordance with its fundamental Weltanschauung, is strongly theory- and ideology-oriented, more than any other political policy.
The synoptic synthesis of the wholeness of Traditionalitas Metaphysica presents itself articulately as Metatheosophia. Metatheosophia has sophia, has hyperphilosophia and philosophia. To this philosophy belongs philosophia metaphysica, philosophia ontologica, philosophia gnoseologica, philosophia axiologica, and so forth.
The wholly expanded designation of the ideological summation of this philosophy is metidealismus transcendentali-immanentalis et immanentali-transcendentalis theurgo-magico-solipsisticus absolutus.
This is the peak of philosophy understood in its sense of being a school and can be regarded as the starting point of hyperphilosophy ( metaphilosophy).
As a methodological concession, philosophy can go - outwards and inwards - as far as the frontier of subjective and objective idealism, but cannot penetrate into objective idealism. At the same time objective idealism for us is not something to follow, though we consider it to be total of 'legitimate' philosophies. There is only one 'philosophy' of hyperphilosophy, which we have defined above. Members of the Alliance follow this philosophy, and keep possible deviations within the limits of the related 'canons'.
4. On evolution
The ideology of the Alliance necessitates the denial and total renunciation of biological and all other evolutionism.
The ideology of the Alliance necessitates the preference of quasi-creationisticus-involutionisticus-nontransformisticus-organicisticus-graduali-descensionisticus-materialisationisticus to any other such conceptions.
5. On the physical views of the universe
The ideology of the Alliance necessitates the preference from among the most varied physical views of the universe concerning the Earth, of what is the synthesis of the system of Ptolemy and Tycho de Brahe, and partly that of Kepler.
According to these conceptions the Earth can be conceived as motionless, and that is the way it should primarily be conceived. The spheres of heavenly bodies rotate around the Earth, furthermore: the sun orbits round the Earth, the planets orbit round the sun, and, of course, indirectly also round the Earth. If we went to, say, the planet Mars, then Mars-earth would be motionless, and the sun would rotate around it, the other planets, in turn, would rotate around it including the planet Earth. Orbits are elliptical.
The heliocentric conception is preceded by the geocentric concept, and this latter one is preceded by the topocentric view.
All this - apparently and on the surface - has nothing to do with politicity. While embracing a much wider perspective, it should become - and it becomes - evident that the fact of adopting a physical world-view of one kind or another has far-reaching determinative significance, and it also has its political consequences.

The Plans, The Organization And The Objectives Of The Alliance

1. The spatial and temporal direction of the Alliance
While the Alliance has plans and ideas with special respect to Hungary, these plans and ideas are embedded in much wider, more colossal and, at the same time, deeper ideologico-theoretical coherence. The past, the present and the future of Europe is at least as important, but, in many respects, it is even much more important for us than that of Hungary.
Furthermore, the past, the present and the future of the World, but even more its forming principles beyond time and space, in our eyes precedes, the importance of Europe in many respects, and not at all primarily because of its 'range' ( for Europe is not more important than Hungary because it is larger, at least not principally).
2. The Alliance's circle of activities
Although the Alliance came into being in Hungary, it is not organizationally limited to Hungary, and not even to Europe, its main territory of action.
3. On membership
The adherents to materialistic atheism and those indifferent in this respect dare not worm their way into the Alliance. He who is willing to become the inner member of the Alliance, can only provisionally and transiently have other ideas, and should try his very best that on the basis of understanding and conviction completely accept and interiorize those ideological attributes which, in other respects, accompany the political outlook of the Alliance.
4. On the objectives
The maximal objective of the Alliance is the seizure of traditionalized power - in Hungary, in Europe and all over the world.
The minimal objective of the Alliance is the ideological facilitation of the completion, as dignified completion of the Age.
The intermediate objective, and this is what the Alliance has always truly emphasized, is the seizure, conservation, salvage and transmission of those spititual-transcendental forces from the Dark Age into the New Era to come that are necessary for the building and the attainment of the New Golden Age. The realisation of this objective awakes or can awake such further forces, which facilitate the attainment of the Absolute Objective, the attainment of Redexvigilatio Metaphysica Absoluta.

[Caesar Princeps]

Though it is both too vague and too radicalist on some points, some ideas are shareable, apart from the Hungarian POV, which is not relevant to the matter.

However, it is the worstly written text I have ever read recently! How can people read it, I wonder...