I'm not sure how to characterise this slogan since pretty much all of the current monarchs are constitutional monarchs. The current batch are under significant constraints to ensure that constitutional monarchs serve as symbols of national unity rather than as active rulers, reflecting a balance between tradition and democratic governance. And this has been pretty much the case since the 17th and 18th Centuries.
I probably should define "constitutional monarchy" since it seems most people who chant this slogan are ignorant of this system of government where a monarch serves as the ceremonial head of state, with their powers defined and limited by a constitution. This allows the monarch to perform official duties while the legislative body holds the authority to create and repeal laws. Countries with constitutional monarchies often blend traditional royal ceremonies with modern democratic practices, providing a sense of stability amid political changes.
In 2025, there were forty-three monarchies in the world, most of which were categorized as constitutional monarchies; fifteen of those shared King Charles III as their monarch, including the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and several Caribbean nations.
A defining feature of a constitutional monarchy is that the monarch respects the limitations set forth by the constitution and rarely seeks to alter such a document in his or her favor. Even in the United Kingdom itself, which has no written constitution but rather a series of foundational documents, the king or queen remains within the bounds set by customary rules. This characteristic is the important one if one is going to run around ignorantly saying "no kings".
Monarchs don't act like Trump.
On the other hand, the United States is a dysfunctional democracy. Dysfunctional democracy refers to a political system where democratic processes fail to effectively represent the will of the people, often leading to dissatisfaction and instability among citizens. This can occur due to issues like ineffective governance, lack of accountability, and the erosion of civil rights.
A dysfunctional democracy can appear to have democratic institutions, but those don't really represent the will of the people. For a democracy to work, the democracy needs to be properly functioning.This is a good transition to how the current duopoly system doesn't represent the people:
Very few people are talking about how Amazon came into existence during the Clinton administration with its intent of at least cornering the book market. Or to quote what the search came up with "mazon was named after the Amazon River, which is the largest river in the world, reflecting Jeff Bezos's vision of making his store the biggest bookstore." Amazon has made it clear that it aims to dominate the e-commerce market by offering "a wide range of products and services".
Like Walmart, Amazon is good at killing small businesses and preventing the rise of competition.
But, to get us back to the subject of monarchs: which system has universal healthcare, housing, and works for the people: the US's "Democratic-republic" or a constitutional monarchy?
I'll take a monarchy if that's what it offers.
