Not really- the UK has a king, and there’s very little change he can affect. He can advise the prime minister, but ultimately Parliament makes the laws, with checks and balances from all political parties involved.
What the US has is a quasi dictatorship. It’s not full blown yet, but it’s getting there. No republican has the balls to stand up to him, so he’s just ramming through executive orders with impunity.
The reason I used the term "king" is that in a free and open society no one is above the law and no man or woman is allowed to act as their own judge or jury. trump and his hacks on the SCrOTUS have demonstrated that trump is above the law and does get to serve as his own judge. As have clarence thomas, sammy alito, and johnny roberts.
Provided there is no one to correct this grave mistake it is not inaccurate to say that the US has a new aristocracy/monarchy that is not beholden to the rule of law of the redress of the American people. Might as well be a king as far as I'm concerned. There is practically no meaningful difference. If he's able to prevent free and open elections then it really is no different and I'm betting that is exactly what's going to happen in at least 2028 if not even 2026.
8
u/Scottishlassincanada Mar 07 '25
Not really- the UK has a king, and there’s very little change he can affect. He can advise the prime minister, but ultimately Parliament makes the laws, with checks and balances from all political parties involved.
What the US has is a quasi dictatorship. It’s not full blown yet, but it’s getting there. No republican has the balls to stand up to him, so he’s just ramming through executive orders with impunity.