> "but what if King kills someone"

Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard would like a word.

What would the argument even be here? That the UK can never be a democracy because of what Henry VIII did in the 16th century?

▲

zer00eyz a day ago | parent [-]

No.

But processes that exist to preserve democracy that arent governed by that democracy are problematic. Saying the "king would never do..." when a king has makes the argument silly.

The UK is not alone in this - a great example is the filibuster in the us (a senate rule).

	▲	foldr a day ago \| parent [-]
		Hmm, so your argument actually is that a politically motivated prosecution in the 16th century that occurred before the UK even existed, before constitutional democracies were much of a thing, and that couldn't occur under present UK constitutional arrangements, is proof that the UK at present is not a democracy. I'm not sure if you're in a position to call other people's argument's "silly".