Monarchism

We can know that monarchism is true over democracy, not because democracy is horrible and monarchism is superior in politics, but because of the very nature of power.

A politician must contain two natures within himself. We believe this not to be a form of hypostatic union, but rather 2 non-strict personal natures within his being. Meaning two forms of nature within his human nature. We know one of the two exists, his carnal nature, as we know our body and soul exist. They are one in this form. Our human nature is able to be under corruption and vulnerable to physical and spiritual harm. We know the second NsPN exists because we know power, as in authority, to exist. We know power exists as we acknowledge politicians have authority over us, there is an imbalance of command, therefore power exists. Leadership exists in actuality. We understand NsPN.2 to be separate from NsPN.1 because we understand that two ordinary men are of equal authority while there is a third person who can command them around, and so there must be a separate NsPN. We also know NsPN.1 is compromised of both the physical and metaphysical as we understand that although our soul, IPsN.1 is not tethered to our flesh, IPsN.2 (IPsN = Interpersonal sub Nature), IPsN.2 is tethered to IPsN.1 in order to be animate and alive. IPsN.1 & .2 are one in the sense of NsPN.
We acknowledge God as the tether to our nature and soul. We also acknowledge that Overarching Strict Personal Nature, OSPN, is entirely composed of immaterial existence as we understand heaven and hell to exist. The OSPN would then contain the NsPN as it is the overarching nature of a personal being. We also acknowledge the problem that if NsPN.1 contains IPsN.2, then NsPN.1 is not entirely immaterial and this would then cause OSPN to not be entirely immaterial. This can be circumvented as to mean that in the case of OSPN, the material nature of NsPN.1 is to mean the nature of the material and not include the material of it. Now, rewinding, we have acknowledged God as our tether and the tether for OSPN. We also said that OSPN is immaterial. Saint Thomas Aquinas proves that the immaterial is greater and nobler than the material in the Summa Theologia, Q3A1. This then leads to the logical conclusion that the material therefore cannot create or compose the immaterial. We may argue that IPsN.1 would allow us to do so, yet as I noted, IPsN.2 is tethered to IPsN.1 and so IPsN.1 could therefore not have total ability to create. This would be if God did not already not give us this form of creation. We notice that we can only participate in the creation of the physical: kindred. We also understand NsPN.2 to be immaterial, we therefore cannot change NsPN.2 through our will. This is what democracy attempts to do. As God alone has the creative capabilities to create and, by extension, give NsPN.2 as NsPN.2 is entirely immaterial in all aspects, it is only right that God gives a form of authority we know to be actual authority.
We know there is a difference between actual authority and perceived authority as we can see that there is a difference between the power of your employer in contrast to the likes of a social group leader. Perceived power may appear similar to  actual power in the sense that we see it as actual, yet it causes no real and hard change. Actual power actually can. As perceived power is not actual power, it would then not contain NsPN.2 as it is of no actual hard binding. Though in the grand scheme of things. Though it may be debated that both of these are perceived forms of power, in relation to each other they are of different kinds of power. Now that we have established that there are two forms of power, we can then infer that as God alone gives actual, yet permits perceived, power, then we can also conclude that humans have no manner of choosing who receives NsPN.2. We also acknowledge God that if He is the tether to our existence and alone gives life, He too gives us purpose as that entails with the idea of creation. God being omniscient and the giver of purpose, would then He not know who is to get power? And as God is the purpose giver, He may give more specific purposes to individuals before they came into existence. We note this in Jeremiah 1:5. It would then only be logical that as God creates you in your mother’s womb, God would then implant your OSPN with NsPN.2.
You may argue that if democracy does not contain NsPN.2, are we then not bound to it? Or how is it that it causes actual change? Yet, as I noted, perceived power will appear as actual power. Although FNsPN.2(False Non-strict Personal Nature) is not TNsPN.2 (True Non-strict Personal Nature), we are still bound to follow FNsPN.2 in the sense that it maintains societal order even if it lacks true legitimacy. Such is why monarchism, in its purity as in to mean power is transferred over by blood, is the true form of government. This reason too is why being adopted into a royal family does not constitute you being a rightful heir, that is unless you already contain NsPN.2 from another noble family. We could also assume that as marriage is the combination of the two persons, we can assume that as NsPN.2 is greater than NsPN.1 as NsPN.1 is to be commanded by NsPN.2, then NsPN.2 is shared among the couple as their marriage would then create a COSPN, Combined Overarching Strict Personal Nature; however, this would not extend to the kindred of the person without INsPN.2 (Initial Non-strict Personal Nature) as they are not the ones being married and are not of their blood.
This causes another issue. How then is Christ the King the heir to the Kingdom of David if His conception was pre-marriage? Well, I would give two answers: Jesus is God so this issue would not matter, Christ is the King of Kings and so how would this not allow Himself to declare Himself the heir of the Kingdom of David.

Possible Biblical Contradiction Fix: This manner of achieving true and legitimate power is merely the ordinary means of doing so, yet still allows extraordinary means of inheriting power. Meaning that this is why Jesus, and other figures in the Bible, had an extraordinary means of power. Of course, much simpler, Jesus is God and is not bound to follow this form of power