[rmccue]

The UK has a constitution, it's just not written in a single place.

Many (most?) western societies have a similar concept for civil and criminal law with common law jurisdictions, where precedent is used rather than an explicit, exhaustive legal code. Effectively, the UK's constitution is to written constitutions as common law is to civil law.

[GeoAtreides]

I will argue that the UK doesn't have a Constitution and that's because of this one thing: No parliament can bind a future parliament. A Constitution is exactly this: a contract binding all future Parliaments to a specific set of axioms that must be respected.

[desas]

The US constitution is very similar, except in two important regards: amendments require two thirds majority votes in both houses and ratification by 75% of the states.

We don't have the state mechanism. You could argue the four nations could serve a similar purpose, though there's a debate about how democratic that is when England makes up something like 85% of the UK population (and doesn't have its own legislature).

[happymellon]

> The UK has a constitution, it's just not written in a single place.

No we don't. We have what is referred to as an "uncodified constitution".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncodified_constitution

It is a collection of laws and conventions, but there is nothing set up as an overarching set of rules to guide the country. If something were to happen that was deeply unpopular with what the majority of the country feels "makes us British", there is little we could do about it.

Successful court cases against the government have usually been because the government of the day forgot to pass the law that gave them the power to do whatever move they wanted to make. A constitution change is a much bigger deal.

[closewith]

That's nonsense as there are plenty of common law countries with monolithic constitutions. Unlike common vs civil law systems which are both widespread globally, the UK is the outlier in having no written constitution.