In this case, they’re referring to the old-fashioned autocratic rulers of absolute monarchies, rather than the otherwise relatively harmless figureheads that constitutional monarchies bafflingly insist on still wasting vast resources on in 2026.
hmm yeah i was asking because in the context of these protests, it’s important to understand precisely what is actually protested against, just for the sake of making more efficient analysis and decisions.
i think they’re talking about a leader snatching up power to make themselves an all-powerful ruler. where the power comes not from a mandate of the masses but from a wet tart throwing a sword at you absolute authority.
yup. we would prefer the power of this nation to live amongst the people rather than allow it to coagulate into a single person or position. unfortunately with what amounts to actual monarchists in control of all three branches of government, we are on the backfoot.
People think the current us administration is doing a low of awful things to a lot of people buts it’s worse that they hold themselves above the law, above the limits of their power, above the checks and balances that usually prevent authoritarianism
Yeah, people often forget that most kings were at least to some extent elected. If the nobility/rich landowners didn’t want a specific king then he was thrown out and a new one was found. Usually within the same line, though. A king rarely has absolute power. For example Denmark has had kings for over 1000 years but less than 200 of those were an actual absolute monarchy. Most of ghe time the king was put in check by the nobility/landowners and the church etc.
What is even meant by “king”? What’s the definition?
In this case, they’re referring to the old-fashioned autocratic rulers of absolute monarchies, rather than the otherwise relatively harmless figureheads that constitutional monarchies bafflingly insist on still wasting vast resources on in 2026.
Ruler of a region.
hmm yeah i was asking because in the context of these protests, it’s important to understand precisely what is actually protested against, just for the sake of making more efficient analysis and decisions.
i think they’re talking about a leader snatching up power to make themselves an all-powerful ruler. where the power comes not from a mandate of the masses but from
a wet tart throwing a sword at youabsolute authority.hmm ok so it’s about the rule of the law that people want upheld.
yup. we would prefer the power of this nation to live amongst the people rather than allow it to coagulate into a single person or position. unfortunately with what amounts to actual monarchists in control of all three branches of government, we are on the backfoot.
People think the current us administration is doing a low of awful things to a lot of people buts it’s worse that they hold themselves above the law, above the limits of their power, above the checks and balances that usually prevent authoritarianism
Leadership by patriarchal lineage.
Not necessarily. Plenty of kings were elected by the nobility/upper class.
yeah german had that concept by the way. it’s interesting to look at history and how stuff was done in earlier times
germany at some time had a king that was elected by the 7 most influential local landlords. they met and elected a king.
Yeah, people often forget that most kings were at least to some extent elected. If the nobility/rich landowners didn’t want a specific king then he was thrown out and a new one was found. Usually within the same line, though. A king rarely has absolute power. For example Denmark has had kings for over 1000 years but less than 200 of those were an actual absolute monarchy. Most of ghe time the king was put in check by the nobility/landowners and the church etc.
Though their existence in the nobility was often through birth, Andorra has an elected prince from the general population.
I was speaking in the context of these protests.
UK is hereditary without being patrilineal nowadays
Authoritarianism - it doesn’t roll of the tongue though as you can see