King and President are both head of state (and maybe head of government) why different title?
A King and a President are both the same thing, which is the head of state. But when United States was form, it decided change the title of the democratic elected United States, head of state to President rather then using the traditional title of King or Emperor. Many ancient head of state was also elected, but also call King or Emperor. Because US is the 1st successful modern democracy, all modern democratic nation, change the head of state's title to President. But why did US choose to use the title of "President" for head of state rather then "King" or "Emperor" to begin with?
I don't know all the details which a full answer would entail, but an obvious difference is that kingships normally have a hereditary component. In most cases, it's entirely heritable, as with the current British monarchy; but I think that even in cases where an election might be involved, eligibility was usually pretty restricted to candidates with the 'right' pedigree. (The history of Polish monarchy would be a good example to check out, in this regard, I believe.) The Founding Fathers wouldn't have objected to restricting leadership of the US to their class, race and gender--apparently they presumed just that, in fact. But I'm sure they wouldn't have accepted a permanent restriction to just one of the Colonies (and States-to-be)--even if four of the first six Presidents turned out to be from Virginia, with the other two from Massachusetts.
The other thing that I think plays in is term. Even elected Kings are normally 'in' for life, barring revolution. That wasn't a norm that the Founders were interested in. Remember, the Constitution was carefully framed to *limit* power, and especially executive power. That's one of the attractions of the idea of term limits for some folks today.
A president is (elected) and a king just happen to be born in a "royal family".
A U.S. president has a 8 year term limit if he/she is re-elected after their first four years in office. A king remains a king until he dies.
In many countries a king is essentially a dictator. Their word is law.
Not all Kings and Queens are heads of state. The royal family in the U.K. is primarily symbolic and does not run the country, control the military, or negotiate with other heads of state.
The U.K. has a parliamentary system.
Neither Queen Elizabeth or a future King Charles or King William will ever have the same power of David Cameron the Prime Minster of England. In a free society the people decide on their government.
Monarchs are heads of state, but not the heads of government. That's usually reserved for a prime minister. In the US and a few Latin American countries the President is the head of state and the head of government. In the rest of the world with a republican government instead of a monarchy, there is a President as head of state and a prime minister as head of government. In short, republics are typically headed by presidents. Monarchies are headed by kings or queens.
by Ralph Schwartz 13 months ago
It's been an interesting last year in American politics - one of the topics that's been in the news throughout that period is the "Deep State" What are your thoughts? Does a Deep State actually exist? If you are a believer, do you think it's something that can be eradicated? ...
by ryankett 8 years ago
Whilst our government lays off public sector workers, and increases various taxes, it appears willing to make us all pay £12m ($18m) to host a visit from the Pope for 4 days.The last census concluded that 9% of the inhabitants of Britain consider themselves to be Catholic. The Vatican is estimated...
by Andrew Lowen 2 years ago
How do you approach voting from a Biblical standpoint?So many of my Christian friends have opposing opinions on whether or not we should vote in the upcoming election because of the religious affiliations and moral standards of the candidates.
by AnnCee 8 years ago
According to the New York Times:In the process many have formed some unusual bonds that reflect the singularly nonideological character of the Egyptian youth revolt, which encompasses liberals, socialists and members of the Muslim Brotherhood.I like the Brotherhood most, and they like me, said...
by Brenda Durham 8 years ago
....or are they chicken only when they don't get their way?Wisconsin and Indiana Dems sure have a fine way of doing their jobs.....by running away when unions might have to actually give up some of their power and money. I'd say that's grounds for removal from Office. Not to...
by Vince 3 years ago
Will Trump make a good president?
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|