Who is king retard, historically speaking? The GROAT?

Who is king moron, historically speaking? The GROAT?

Stratton Oakmont Wolf of Wall Street Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Stratton Oakmont Wolf of Wall Street Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Umm akschully Nicholas II was Emperor, not king.
    But seriously, George III was the least capable of ruling on his own, but he had the Parliament for that.
    Louis XVI was very unlucky, not even THAT bad.
    Nicky was a below-average ruler who sadly ruled a state which was still in the 18th century - IE full-on absolutist.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      fpbp

      I'd have used Charles I instead of George I.

      George I is another good candidate. He's one of those royal marriage kings who had nothing but contempt for the people he ruled over. He even refused to learn English out of spite

      Fernando VII of Spain. Managed to destroy the Empire singlehandedly, and ruined Spain for the next century by being unable to produce a mail heir and being too much of a b***h to accept the succession line. Even Charles II, a literal drooling moron, was a much better king than him.

      Also a good candidate. I have a friend who looks just like Fernando VII, sideburns and mustache and all

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Was does GROAT mean?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nicholas II. All of eastern europe (who DESPISE the bolsheviks) agree that killing him was the one good thing they did.

      Greatest moron of all time.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      (You)

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'd have used Charles I instead of George I.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      *George III

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not pictured but it’s Napoleon III. He’s like an even more garbage proto-version of Mussolini who lost a war to Mexico.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He also bankrolled the invention of margarine.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This guy might win if we are counting what they were given vs what they ended up accomplishing with it. Napoleon III was an autistic butthole who loved corny childish intrigue for its own sake.
      After repeatedly almost getting killed, he ended up seizing power over a country that was still fighting itself over monarchy versus democracy, but was still a global contender.
      He was eventually successfully provoked into a war, defeated and physically captured on the battlefield.
      Prussia announced the institution of the German Empire in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles shortly afterwards, marking the end of France's hegemony on the continent forever.
      A very impactful string of frick ups

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Fernando VII of Spain. Managed to destroy the Empire singlehandedly, and ruined Spain for the next century by being unable to produce a mail heir and being too much of a b***h to accept the succession line. Even Charles II, a literal drooling moron, was a much better king than him.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Louis XVI had "wrong time, wrong place" energy. He was actually pretty sympathetic to the revolutionaries and made huge concessions to them, but they became so radicalized it was pretty much all for naught. Out of the three he's probably the least-incompetent.
    Nicky was actually a fricking moron, like so utterly fricking out of touch and sure of himself that I'd almost feel sympathy for the commie fricks that killed him if they didn't also slaughter his family wholesale like a bunch of fricking savages.
    George III was literally insane after Yorktown so he gets a moron pass after that. Before then his draconian policies on the colonies were pretty fricking moronic, but not as moronic as Nicky. I really cannot underscore how much of a fricking moron Nicky was.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Louis XVI was fricked over by his own vassals
    >George III was just a solid king, don't know what your beef with him even is
    >Nicholas II inherited a shit show and did more than anyone could reasonably expect of him to set things right
    All of these were good monarchs.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OP is clearly American, hence his antipathy of King George

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nicholas II, by leagues

    He allowed a fricking sex addict monk to take over his family and destroy its reputation

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      To be fair, said sex crazy monk was the only one that managed to save his haemophiliac son and heir when he had a crysis. Doctors just made things worse, while Rasputin managed to calm the child down and get him to heal. No wonder he trusted him.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    George III. He could have solved History, had he told Lord North to frick off and allowed William Pitt the Younger to pass Catholic Emancipation

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    George III was a good monarch and not even in the same league as the other two. His reign directly preceded an era of British global hegemony. Nicholas and Louis lost their lives and crowns because of their moronic actions.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nicholas wouldn't have ended so badly had his minister Stolypin not been assassinated.
      Also, he wasn't responsible for WW1

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >era of British global hegemony
      >hegemony
      >most important colony got away
      BTW If you play it like civilization game obvious choice is transfer your state to the new continent. Because North America is everything that made Britain great (isolated from European wars island) but 40 time bigger. But it doesn't work like that IRL people sentimentally clutch their pearls

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Clearly you missed the word PRECEDED

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      George just needed to give Americans nobility proper nobility titles, it was just old boomer arrogance.
      Nicholas needed to win WWI, monumental difficulty.
      Louis needed to defeat budget deficit and binge government lending , impossible difficulty.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This, unironically.
        If Georgy Boy had just let Washington and the gang LARP as the Englishmen they so desperately wanted to be by recognizing the House of Burgess and the like as legit, he wouldn't have lost shit and maybe even gone down in history as the PEAK of enlightened rulers

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    George III of course.
    United States and it's DEI consequences were disaster for the human race

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As a thought experiment I considered which of these men could adequately manage a Wendy's, the result being that Nick the 2 would bankrupt it in 4 months.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *