Until the UK military pledge allegiance to democracy rather than the king, the royal family is also a risk to democracy.

Thailand is an object lesson in how monarchy is repeatedly used as a lever by military and business elites to overthrow democratic representation "in the name of the king".

It almost happened in the UK once, too, in the same way it happened in Thailand.

The reason the media is so keen on the institution is because it functions as a "break glass in case of emergency" for elites. It's not an organic part of the culture, it is shoved down our throats.

▲

anon84873628 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Should have used it to prevent Brexit.

Just look at the US right now to see how civil military control can go off the rails too.

	▲	stevenwoo 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think the monarchy could have used its power to prevent Brexit, but the monarchy never uses its voice for anything controversial for the most part, that there was a valid referendum and the closeness of the vote and rancor at the time from leavers who held all the reins of power at the time might have made the partial public funding of monarchy untenable, too. Queen Elizabeth seemed particularly neutral even on Brexit, maybe Charles would have done differently?

▲

fmajid 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It happened in Australia in 1975, and Chuck was directly involved in it.