[d4nt]

As governmental systems go, having an unelected head of state is actually kind of smart. Their lack of democratic legitimacy means they don’t try to exercise any real power, leaving that to the parliamentary parties. But they represent the nation and the military swears loyalty to them, so they effectively have a one use “sorry, but they’ve gone too far, I’m dismissing this government” card they can play in case of absolute dire tyranny. There’s no way to fire them, it’s very hard to bribe them, they’re trained for the job from birth and there are backups in place in case they die. The system avoids many of the problems found with elected presidents (whether US or parliamentary style) while preserving all the benefits of democratic government. My only complaint is that the system for choosing the next one could be a bit more representative than “firstborn child of the current monarch”. But changing only that part of the system now without ruining it would be pretty hard.

[hnhg]

However, in practice: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vette...

[DiogenesKynikos]

> they effectively have a one use “sorry, but they’ve gone too far, I’m dismissing this government” card they can play

In reality, they don't have that card. The day the monarch tries to dismiss an elected government will be the day the monarchy is abolished and the UK becomes a republic.

[karencarits]

During the invasion of Norway in WWII, the King was requested by the Germans to appoint a new nazi-friendly prime minister, which the King refused. But as you have pointed out, what the King actually did was to say to the sitting government that he would abdicate if the government gave in to the threats of the Germans. Later during the war, when the King was in exile in England, some parts of the parliament left in Norway (the nazi-friendly part) required the King to abdicate, which he refused.

These episodes are known as "the King's no" and were very important symbols for the resistance movement in Norway (https://snl-no.translate.goog/Kongens_nei?_x_tr_sl=no&_x_tr_...). The actual importance of these "nos" are controversial, but they carry a significant symbolic value and made it harder for the Germans to establish a new government with any legitimacy. I guess faking a vote would have been rather easy, trying to change King much harder

[guipsp]

Oh, but they do exercise real power

[chrismatheson]

BDFL