Has someone explained to them that "No Kings" isn't an anti-monarchy movement?
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2026
364 points (96.0% liked)
Political Memes
11744 readers
1130 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Multiple times. They're either being purposely obtuse, or genuinely don't get it.
I'm guessing the latter.
Both. The people in power understand it and are lying to the base so they genuinely dont get it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Also Charles is a King in title only. Hes a tourist attraction. He has no real power.
Unlike what Trump is trying to do/become.
They literally clapped while King Charles fucking dunked on them, the conservatives I mean.
These people just believe whatever the fuck they want. I could convince them that Jesus was actually a mass murderer and they'd be all for it as long as the victims were brown.
Also the actual literal King of the UK has less power in the UK than Trump does in the US and is very specifically not above the law like Trump is.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I kinda think this is a valid point.
Firstly, "No Kings" was always a bit of a piss-weak euphemism. It clearly means No Dictators, but that's too strong language for dems and casts uncomfortably truthful light on the system they want to be in charge of.
Secondly, don't give a standing ovation to an unelected monarch. Just don't. He uttered the words "checks and balances". So what? We have literal concentration camps and no rule of law. A child rapist and a pack of drunk nazis openly loot the public purse. We're way past checks and balances.
This is yet another example of the dems failing to understand the political moment.
Pretty sure the folks behind it are Gen-X calling back to Schoolhouse Rock:
Pretty much everyone of a certain age grew up with this.
I have heard local organizers expressing frustration at the firm grip of democratic party insiders on messaging, goals and other decision making.
The general populace doesn't understand the political moment so idk why youre complaining about the minority party they didn't bother giving any power to.
load more comments
(2 replies)
lol. Imagine the democratic house just losing their shit, booing and hissing whenever a monarchy figure from another nation visits.
That would be, by definition, replublican af.
Ok that would be unwise foreign policy but based as fuck. Just yell "send us one of your elected officials". Hell, we could bar all nobility from entering our country without renouncing their title. Inconvenient as fuck, would piss off so many countries, but it would be incredibly cool
I wouldn't just bar them from entry. I would flat-out make it a capital offense for any monarch or hereditary noble to set foot in US territory. This land should be unsullied by the stench of kings. Any that dare come here should forfeit their life. I consider being a king to be a worse crime than being a serial killer.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Most of them look like they honestly don't give a shit. I see one guy who looks enthused.
Also, "No Kings" means "The United States of America has no kings." It bears no relevance to our diplomatic relations with monarchical states.
Y'all are letting the other side control the narrative, don't talk about King Charles - focus on Donald trying to be a Monarch/Dictator.
They want you to have their bad faith argument so you don't talk about the actions of Trump.
It is actually very relevant to talk about the performative actions liberals take to "challenge" authoritarianism while legitimizing their own claim to power. Liberals have mostly criticized Trump for the disgraceful or embarrassing presentation of his administration, not with critiques on the fundamental immorality of hierarchal and inequal systems of power.
To present someone respectful (classy, polite, civil, etc.) as legitimate is in fact an effective way to redirect systemic criticism into individual criticism. Democrats will not discard whatever authoritarian policies Trump's admin succeeds in implementing, as they didn't from Bush or even Trump's previous admin.
I would oppose King-What's-His-Name being 'King of the US' just as much as I oppose trump's bullshit.
just saying, we don't have kings here, and frankly the visiting one can go back to where he came from.
The other thing is that the king of England isn't really a real king. These days, it's basically a ceremonial position more than anything and doesn't have a whole lot of real power.
UK: The monarchy is ceremonial US: The democracy is ceremonial
The last King of England died in 1702. The Kingdom was abolished in 1707.
Make no mistake, these still aren't good people. The modern 'constitutional' monarchs have not changed from the days of their ancestors. They're quietly waiting on the sidelines, just waiting for the day that democracy stumbles. The minute there's any crisis of confidence, or both parties are hopelessly unpopular, or there's some massive outside threat? The monarch hopes to be there to swing in and reclaim full power.
The French had the right idea on how to deal with kings. Being a monarch is a crime against humanity.
It shows that they even missed the major point that a monarch from the country we freed ourselves from came here to address our Congress on the importance of saving the environment and keeping checks and balances in place to maintain democracy.
He either brilliantly roasted Trump, or us if we never do anything to stop Nazis and rebuild and reform our country.
Is this meant to argue that it isn't a sign of disingenuous values for "anti-authoritarians" to recognize and legitimise a literal monarchy (no matter how "ceremonial" it is)? Democrats are very much not against dictatorial rule, they've been complicit in its enforcement all over the world and have participated in its construction in the US (even if you want to think this is something new).
This is so stupid. Like people trying to call Dems the BLM party
Voters =/= political parties. Voters created the no king protest, voters created black lives matter.
Dems are parasites who act like they're involved
Fuck him too, for what it's worth.
fuck the king
U got a license for that opinion m8
"Fuck the kingsguard. Fuck the city. Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane
load more comments
(1 replies)
My favorite part was when a huge part of the internet went down and suddenly, the amount of conservative posts/twitter users went silent.
The “people” in /r/conservative are either bots or raised on leaded water.
It’s not stupidity, it’s malevolence.
It's No KingS. We're allowed one
It also has a lot to with Great Britain not supporting America in this stupid war, and actually handing out consequences to their people in the Epstein Files.
England, of all nations, has become the good guy, and America has become the bad guy. Ironic.
England is still on the bleeding edge of pushing anti-free speech/Palestine support and anti-privacy laws. Credit where it is due in not supporting Trump's war and with holding Epstein clients to at least some account including the Andrew formerly known as Prince. But "the good guys" they are not, right now.
Yeah, I only meant it in a relative sense. I don't think ANY countries can count themselves as true "good guys" these days. They all seem to be up to something nefarious.
England, of all nations, has become the good guy
Let's not get too crazy here. TERF Island can still sink into the fucking sea, as far as I'm concerned
They are supporting America in this stupid War. This should be pointed out, because allowing America to use its air bases in a war is a form of support. I would argue an extreme form of support.
Also don't be too sure about them going after their Epstein file guys. Cuz old sausage fingers Chuck here is certainly involved. If not with Epstein directly, though I doubt he isn't, he was certainly heavily involved with Jimmy Savile.
Initially they said "US is not UK, it has no kings". It implies "UK is not US, it has kings".
Fun fact: in my Monarchical country the very little I've seen of the "no kings" movement was translated to "no tyrants" or something like this.
Unclear if it's official or if there's a body to decide what's official anyway.
I'd love if the UK decided on abolishing the monarchy, but also, I'm not aiming to start a regime change in a foreign country over this. Instead I'm just gonna treat him as a foreign dignitary from a terrible but powerful family
I think we should make it a capital offense for any monarch to set foot on US soil. Literally any time a monarch dares to set foot on US soil? Straight to the guillotine.
Perhaps it has to do with the non-sovereignty??
view more: next ›