In a constitutional monarchy, there is a leader (typically a prime minister) and a king and/or a queen.
Why can't we just have a president like America has? Wouldn't it be much more simple?
The king and queen have very little political power. However, they are still very honored among the people of their country.
I helped the United states defeat Germany and Japan in the second World War. I was born on November 30, 1874, and died on January 24, 1965 at the age of 90.
For example, the UK (United Kingdom) is a constitutional monarchy, along with the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, and other European countries.
I was in the conservative party from 1900 - 1904. I switched to the liberal party and was in it from 1904 - 1924, then I switched again to the conservative party and was in it from 1924 - 1964. I was in the conservative party during my leadership.
This government is the best because there is a king and a queen, which honors the country's history, and a political leader (in the UK, they have a Prime Minister) to make decisions.
Winston Churchill was the prime minister of the United Kingdom while George VI was king and while Elizabeth II was queen. Winston Churchill was the prime minister of the UK during World War II.
During his lifetime, he switched his political party twice. He was in the conservative political party during his leadership, meaning he believed in less taxes and less government involvement. The liberal beliefs are more government programs and more freedom of religion, speech, and press.