Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kergonath 1382 days ago
Yeah. Choosing your head of state should be opt-in, rather than opt-out at best (or, more realistically, no opt at all).
1 comments

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”.

> […] a President has in parliamentary republics, of dissolving the parliament and calling elections.

This is a bug.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021–2022_Tunisian_political_c...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Peruvian_self-coup_d%27ét...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup

> 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.

(I'm Canadian.)

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.