Although I think for a mainly ceremonial head of state who has the power and doesn't use it except to use if like, a hitler tries to take power and remove democracy, it's better to not have people vote for them. Because then only those who are willing to lie and cheat their way to the top and popularity will win, so you're basically guaranteed to get a scumbag. While with hereditary monarchy you're basically rolling the dice. Like the worst thing our king has done was cheat on his wife which is pretty bad, but it's not Trump level bad. Another issue is if you elected someone, they'll only be liked by the people who voted them in generally and only represent them, vs a monarch who the only real dislikers are people opposed to the system. And even then, monarchs have pretty high approval ratings compared to political/elected head of states. Charles has a popularity rating of 56%, with 26% neutral towards him and only 16% disliking him. Although Princess Anne is more popular with 68% popularity and only disliked by 10%.

Princess of Wales (our next Queen Deo Volente) is the highest with 71% popularity, disliked by 8%

(Source: YouGov)

[–] moncharleskey@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's a Monty Python reference. When Arthur is speaking to the peasants in the field in Holy Grail.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 1 month ago

I've seen that film. I might need to rewatch it