I wanted to disagree with you and say that is simply not a hereditary monarchy, but after a moment I think you are right.
Monarchy connotes the existence of some sort of elite class and even in cases the monarch was elected it was always from the aristocracy, founding families, or royal family.
The idea that a leader chosen randomly from the general population is a monarch feels like it would muddy the meaning of monarchy to the point of uselessness.
Also, since monarchs have to be politically neutral, which is another absurdity on top of an absurd situation, a monarchy lacks the powers that a President has in parliamentary republics, of dissolving the parliament and calling elections.
The UK has been stuck in crisis mode more than once, because the Queen couldn’t say “fuck it, let’s have some elections because the current state of affairs is damaging the country”.
> The UK has been stuck in crisis mode more than once, because the Queen couldn’t say “fuck it, let’s have some elections because the current state of affairs is damaging the country”.
This is a feature. Let the politicians figure it out or go to the electorate and have them sort it out.
No thanks. To take the contrary example, Kuwait is a constitutional monarchy by definition, almost taking the playbook of the English monarchy verbatim. Except that the monarch has the conditional right to dissolve the parliament for any "valid" reasons. Monarch hates the PM secretly? Monarch doesn't like a new law being signed into place? Monarch feels a bit whimsical? Find a pretext, dissolve the parliament, rule in absolute until the next elections, by which time he will have devised another method to dissolve the next government.
That would make for a fun night of TV.... Who will be Canada's next monarch? Find out tonight on CBC.