👑Artificial Kings and True Royalty
The Vanar believes that a king and a dictator are synonymous. Not knowing the difference, they detest both, which is why there are so few kings right now, and the existing kings of this world are indeed artificial.
A king and a dictator are two different types of rulers, usually distinguished by their method of coming to power, their tenure, and the power structures that support them.
So, let’s look at the differences, starting with the definitions for each:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/king
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dictator
Now, let’s see how they differ in function:
Kings:
Hereditary Title: Kingship is typically a hereditary title passed down through generations of a royal family. Kingship is a lifetime role.
Monarchy: Kings usually rule within a monarchical system or government, which can be either absolute (kingdom) or constitutional (nation state).
Absolute Monarchy: The king has almost complete control over the government and its people as well as the culture of the people. In a kingdom, one culture stands above all others, and that culture is the culture of the king and the king’s people. (True King)
Constitutional Monarchy: The king's powers are restricted by law or by a formal constitution, often rendering them largely ceremonial, with real political power held by elected officials. The king of a constitutional monarchy is weak and subject to the people that king claims to rule. (Artificial King)
Cultural and Historical Legitimacy: Kings often derive legitimacy from historical and cultural traditions and may be seen as symbols of national or cultural continuity.
Legal and Institutional Structure: In many cases, the kingship operates within a legal and institutional framework that outlines the succession and the powers of the monarch.
Dictators:
Seizure of Power: Dictators often come to power through a coup d'état, revolt, or other form of takeover, which can be violent or non-violent. Their rule is not typically hereditary, although some dictators attempt to establish dynasties.
Autocratic Rule: Dictators usually exercise autocratic control, often without the constraints of a legal framework or constitution. They may rule through fear, propaganda, and suppression of opposition.
Lack of Institutional Legitimacy: While dictators may create a façade of legal legitimacy, they often operate outside of historical and institutional norms, relying on personal charisma, force, or control of the military to maintain power.
Duration of Rule: A dictator's rule can be for an unspecified period, often until the dictator is overthrown, dies, or voluntarily steps down. Duration is dependent upon their ability to maintain control.
No Democratic Mandate: Dictators typically do not have a democratic mandate; they do not come to power through free and fair elections, and they often maintain power by suppressing political opposition and controlling elections, if elections occur at all.
DO YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A KING AND A DICTATOR NOW?
If you understand the differences between a king and dictator, you can also see the difference between a lie and reality when anyone claims or implies that a king is the same as a dictator.
It is important to know what a king is because the time for kings of this next era to accumulate position and power is RIGHT NOW. Furthermore, the purpose of a king is ORDER and SURVIVAL for the king’s people and culture. No people will survive and maintain their culture without a king, as has been proven and shown with all people in the absence of a king. This world was built with kingdoms, and nation states are the decay of dead kingdoms. At the root of all major cultures are kingdoms. So to reject or detest the idea of kings and kingdoms is to reject or detest the foundations of every major culture on this planet. Without a king, no people or culture can move forward or survive without being captive to dirigisme or being the victims of CORRUPTION and INCOMPETENCE in a society of DEATH.
It is important to note that not all kings are “good”, but ALL DICTATORS ARE VIOLATORS OF AUTONOMY. A “good” king does not violate autonomy because a true king empowers his people and perpetuates his and his people’s culture. Any so-called king that harms his people and destroys his own culture is not a true king, but an artificial one.
Nation States are the product of the Vanar because the Vanar seeks kingly power without kingly accountability, responsibility, a specified people, and an established culture. Constitutions are NOT CULTURE and politicians are not kings, royalty, or rulers. The Vanar says that “nobody is above the law”, but the Vanar politicians make, break, and eliminate their laws all of the time. The Vanar politicians want the respect and control of a king, but not the duties that come with the role of a king. The idea or concept that a people can rule themselves is an idea that is void of a ruler and the order thereof.
The Vanar has popularized the idea that a society can have many kings, but a KINGdom only has one king. There has never been a “queendom” of any cultural or other significance. No culture ever originated with a queendom because queendom is the position of a queen, and a queen without a king is a SUBJECT and can only exercise the power of a SUBJECT. Any time a queen is in power without a king, the kingdom is in jeopardy. Any time a woman is head of state for a nation state, that nation state is in jeopardy. It is not the role of a woman to rule, because the role of a woman is to maintain order, not establish or enforce it. Just as there are physical differences between men and women, there are also psychological differences between men and women. Those differences are why no civilization, culture, or kingdom was ever established by a woman.
Look at the differences between the definitions for kingdom and queendom:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kingdom
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/queendom
Now, look at the definition for queen:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/queen
In the Ta culture, there is one ruler, and that ruler or preeminent male person is the Kor Atenubi Taharakhti (title, not name). The female consort of the Kor Atenubi Taharakhti is the KORAA (kor-ay). Do not compare these to the kings and queens of the Vanar because the purpose and functions of the Kor Atenubi Taharakhti and the Koraa are not encompassed or accurately described by the definitions for king and queen. The Ta culture is not a facsimile or translation of something else. Ta culture stands on its own and is of its own merit. Interpretatio Graeca CANNOT be applied to Ta culture with the prospect of understanding it, or for the purpose of engaging with it. Do not expect of Ta culture what is not Ta. With the Ta mind, do not expect the Vanar mind. Do not expect the ways of the Ta to be the same or similar to the Vanar.
The consequence of the old era is this new era, and in this new era, new kings must rise… one for each of the cultures of this new era. From within nation states they will come, and without nation states they will rule, but ALL of these new kings must engage with the Ta for the ABSOLUTE INFORMATION that is required for any true king to flourish. The well-being of their new kingdoms and people depend on it.
.:Atenubi:Taharakhti:.
