Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Let's be clear here, the UK isn't a monarchy, we just have a monarch who has effectively zero power and simply serves as a hereditary head of state.

The article we're commenting on makes it very clear that the UK is a monarchy and that the monarch has the power to disrupt public life at great expense to the public and to have said public arrested for offending them.



> The article we're commenting on makes it very clear that the UK is a monarchy

It absolutely doesn't. The article doesn't even mention the word monarchy.

It was written before the recent arrests at the coronation.

We can talk about what influence the monarchy may try to exert on the government behind the scenes (and I believe there will be some - and there shouldn't be) but back channeling aside, our democratically elected government is the body which runs our country, not the monarchy, and therefore is correctly the target of this article.


This situation wouldn't happen if the country were not a monarchy. Further, there has never been a referendum on the matter of the monarchy.


I guess it depends which situation we’re talking about specifically.

You don’t need a monarch to have problems with police overreach and overly draconian/authoritarian laws being brought in.

I think we can safely say that this happens in all types of political/governing systems.

That’s the crux of the issue being talked about in the article.

The issue of the Royal Family is related (and particularly relevant given recent events) but the two issues should not be conflated fully.


It's as if you are completely unaware that the concept of "Back channelling" exists.


I literally mentioned back channelling


I'm sorry, I need to read more carefully.

I was up in arms, and shouldn't have even commented.


I get it. This topic understandably elicits strong emotions!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: