American friends, looking on from Canada I am happy about yesterday's widespread peaceful protests against your incipient dictator. But why "No Kings"?
Here in Canada, many of us are quite happy to have a king -- our constitutional monarch, King Charles III, who recently visited Canada to open Parliament, as a gesture very much designed to show that we are different from the USA.
As an anarchist, I value having a Head of State who has zero coercive power.
But I am guessing that when you Americans think of kings, you have poor old George III in mind, and that trouble he gave you with taxation without representation and all that rot?
I am curious!
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
It's terse enough to be a great slogan, and it has deep historical roots in our revolution.
"In America, the rule of law is king. But where says some is the King of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of Britain." -- Thomas Paine
Tяump is bending, twisting, and breaking the law for his own benefit. Our declaration of Independence contains a long list of specific complaints about the King abusing the law at the time. I'll only include the first 5 complaints; the list is long!
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
➽ He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
➽ He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
➽ He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
➽ He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
➽ He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. . . .
