Was England better off as a monarchy?
This is difficult to answer, as we haven’t had an absolute monarchy since at least 1660, when Charles 2 was really only allowed to rule through regular Parliament meetings, and the Parliament could refuse to pass the King’s laws (as indeed they did). Even before this, however, there would be a parliament that would give advice, pass laws in the King’s name, and so on. So we haven’t actually had an absolute monarchy for hundreds of years, giving us nothing really to compare with the current situation. Also, government depends on a few hundred people, and so is pretty consistent, tyranny relies on one person, meaning each reign can be vastly different from the last, and occasionally you get a total nutter or someone with rather extreme views, which can be very damaging.. I think the current system is probably a lot better than having an absolute monarchy.
