I started reading that anti-neoreactionary website. I didnt know there would be whole articles dedicated to this considering the neoreaction movement is really tiny and disorganized. I also find it ironic that neoreactionaries always push for truth and how modern society has destroyed truth, yet that Michael guy the article was debunking certainly did not seem to use truth too much.
So I have decided to change my opinion on monarchies:
1) I still hold the stance that a theoretical monarchy would act differently from monarchies in the past because rule of law and property rights had yet to form, capitalism had yet to birth, and by the time capitalism did become the predominant economic system, monarchies had either grown into large government (a phenomenon with any government, not just monarchies) or into parliamentary or dual sovereignty states.
2) Monarchies are unstable and this issue can be at the very least partially fixed. But the fixes do not undermine the problem entirely.
3) I still propose that monarchies as preferential to democracies, but I will prefer to continue that discussion here (if at all) rather than in the thread because the topic has moved on. I am certainly less enthusiastic about monarchies, but I still dislike democracy.