Can the Queen of the UK overthrow the British government in a coup?
The Queen does not need to stage a coup! It would be odd to overthrow the British Government, as it is her Government. She invites a Party leader to form her Government, following a General Election - it clearly is the one who has the most MPs.However sometimes (once in a generation or 2) things go very wrong with her Government and the Queen acts. Not forgetting that she is Head of State of 16 countries and just in case anyone doubts the power that the Queen has in this regard, the Governor-General of Australia, Sir John Kerr, (her representative and one who would always act with full authority of the Queen) dismissed the Australian Prime Minister, Gough Witlam, in 1975.Details at: 1975 Australian constitutional crisis - WikipediaI do not deny that this caused a furore - of course it did.The Queen also has the power to dissolve Parliament, as has been mentioned.It would have to be an extreme situation that prompted dismissal of a Minister (including a Prime Minister) or dissolution of a Parliament.
Why did American planters overthrow Queen Liliuokalani?
Money. They wanted to control the sugar plantations in Hawaii and they wanted to exploit the native population.
Was the overthrow of the hawaiian monarchy by the US justified?
The US did not overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy.
How would the Queen react to a coup d'etat in the UK?
Rather than a (military) coup d’etat, a more likely scenario is a gradual takeover by a totalitarian government. When if ever will the Queen be able to intervene? Something like this:An economic depression results from weak government, leading toA period of civil and political unrestA Party changes the way in which it selects its leader, enabling one man to take indefinite personal control (probably not a woman …)The Party forms an initially informal youth(?) wing, which "encourages" support for the Party via social (and antisocial) media and quells civil disturbances - while disrupting political oppositionThe Party Youth is kitted out with tee-shirts etc. which eventually become uniforms as the organisation becomes more and more militaristicMass rallies take place, at which the Party Youth wave hundreds of Party flags and ensure massive acclaim for the Leader's speechesThe Party wins a general election on a populist agendaA programme of (re-)nationalisation ensures that more and more people are beholden to the GovernmentActs of civil disobedience (strikes included) are outlawedThe BBC becomes a Government propaganda mouthpieceParty members are appointed to key positions in government agencies, nationalised industry, and institutions such as the police and armed forcesLocal governments still in the hands of opposition forces are taken over by the national governmentParliamentary elections are rigged to ensure that the Party always winsetc.
What was Queen Victoria's stance on the American Civil War?
Queen Victoria’s beloved husband, Prince Albert, died in December of 1861. She was immediately plunged into deep grief, and almost completely withdrew from public business. It is believed that she became depressed, and her depression lasted for many years, including the years of the Civil War.Following the opinion of her dear departed husband, the queen deplored slavery, and as a monarch, disliked attempts to overthrow the establishment—by definition, an hereditary monarch is about as establishment as it is possible to be.She remained a classical liberal with a non-interventionist viewpoint. The only document she signed that directly addressed a Civil War issue was one authorizing the hiring of a lawyer to oppose the seizure of a ship the CSA was having built in England. This was done less out of support for the CSA and more out of a belief that the government should not interfere with foreign commerce that did not directly affect the safety of the UK.
What would happen if your swore at the queen? would you be arrested for treason?
You would probably get away with it.....you might find yourself having to answer a few questions and having your background extensively investigated, but not likely that you would be charged with a crime. That said, I think anyone who would do this is rather foolish. It would serve no point and others might consider you mentally ill or at least immature. best of luck to you!
If North Korea has no allies, who is stopping the US from liberating its people from the regime?
First you are harboring a falsehood. America is not interested in liberation. Let me explain that Korea had been a Japanese POSSESSION. During WWII, there was NO attempt to liberate Korea. After the defeat of Japan, Korea was to be a prize for the winner (the united states. The united states did NOT offer LIBERATION to KOREA. They offered trusteeship.which is NOT liberation,but instead a form of annexation. An American possession. Governed by the united states. Look at it from the view point of Koreans using the united states as the prize in a conflict. The winner gets to take possession of your country (without your approval). Instead of independence you are told YOU MUST ACCEPT TRUSTEESHIP. How would you react ? Would you not oppose it as N.Korea has done. And the primary purpose of “trusteeship” is control of valuable resources. Hawaii is a nation that once was independent. Until Dole of pineapple fame created and armed a militia to depose the king and queen. Like you the queen believed the myth of who we are and what we are about. In this belief she wrote letters to the president,congress and the senate. To restore her and the king to the throne.INSTEAD HER COUNTRY EXPERIENCED “TRUSTEESHIP/ANNEXATION. HAWAII would NEVER AGAIN BE AN INDEPENDENT NATION. Would YOU accept this being done to the united states by another nation ? I would hope not. TRUSTEESHIP was also used on the native Americans. The premise being they could not govern themselves and needed a dominant “father” figure to make decisions for them. The sad truth is very few of the decisions claimed to be on their behalf were not. And are not. Conquest has ALWAYS been about acquisition of resources and the control of them =$$$$$$$$$$. Although slavery is and was evil and unjust. It was and is a BUSINESS MODEL. It did and does not care about liberating ANYONE. In fact,its goal is to enslave the planet,notl liberate ANYONE. If anything the goal is to liberate you and other from any form of wealth.