It should be pointed out that whites are not the most profitable race. Ashkenazi Jews are. Since they have the highest average income, followed by northern Asians, and THEN followed by whites.
Why do you think Moldbug, (half Jewish) favored it?
In terms of manual labor, whites are also not the most profitable race. Blacks are, (when enslaved), due to physical stamina. That is why they were brought to america to begin with--by monarchy no less. It was Kings who first created slavery in the Americas.
All pro-monarchy talk in neoreaction assumes an unreasonable faith that the king will have your ethnic interests in mind. This is because historically kings did not betray their own ethnic populations. But then again, historically, neither did democracies. What changed? Well, modern transportation was invented.
Simply put, mass immigration became possible. You take it for granted that monarchy will defend your ethnic interests, but it hasn't historically. Monarchy brought African slaves to america first before democracy adopted the practice. There is no evidence for faith in kings where immigration is concerned.
Granted, it does not have an incentive to replace its own voters like liberal parties do. But is DOES have an incentive for profit, and that has been enough in the past.
If you get a King you can look forward to being the white house cleaners to you Asian an Jewish overlords.
My plan, exitarianism combines the best aspects of demotism, (as a reserve power), neocameralism, (as the management), and monarchical empire, (as the military union). It has far far stronger immigration controls, even within the nation.
Reconsider your support for pure monarchy please.