A King does not hypothetically rule in bad taste.

He never does

Bad kings only arise when his or her mental state is disappearing

This doesn't sound very Libertarian

The ideal Libertarian is a monarchy

If the Libertarians are all about ensuring the freedom to life, liberty, and property.

Then becoming your own King over your property

is the ultimate libertarian dream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCj-Rnd5SsA

the laws of a monarch can only be undone by a monarch

As it should be.

The King does not rule in bad taste must I remind you.

space monarchy is the same as earth monarchy lol

If you had a king in perfect mental state, he would not be a tyrant.

However if you had a president or prime minister in a perfect mental state for a democracy

That's pretty hard to come by though

he wouldnt get shit done

either way

the king represents himself sometimes, and they tended to be egomaniacs and\or pure evil

These are the bad mental state

not to sure about that

Kings rule with a healthy mind at the start

I would rather not risk that

but as they get older and age, their mind deteriorates.

Sounds like it breeds corruption

i dont think any monarchy had to contend with 200 million people in their kingdoms

>Be British Empire

```
By 1913, the British Empire held sway over 412 million people
```

they arent a real monarchy anymore

Some-what true

The queen does have more power than you think though

a constitutional monarchy

The Queen has legitimacy

the prime minister does not rule on the consent of the people

he serves at the pleasure of the queen which the queen grants her legitimacy to the prime minister

It is not the prime minister who grants you the passport to travel to other countries

It is the Queen

She represents the popular interest to ensure all of the country's needs are met.

They literally just passed a law to heavily regulate copyright in england

And we will see how they will enforce

A law has 3 different aspects