I understand that, but the Monarch does have reserve powers which, Queen Elizabeth 2 never used. There are well other UK citizens that have a different opinion.Yeah the monarch's role in political handovers is purely ceremonial and they are meant to keep their mouths shut on all matters political. The Queen mostly did so.
Charles has been more outspoken in his views on various topics while he was prince, especially the environment, conservation, and arhcitecture.
I read somewhere the other day that he's got into trouble already as king, for speaking out in private against food poverty. while the tories were in rule, and donating more than £1,000,000 to food banks so they could buy freezers. The fact that he did this in private, but was still admonished by the tories, must mean that one of his aides or servants leaked this information.
£1,000,000 is nothing much for a man of his wealth but it's a significant donation for any charity to receive. And it shows where his sympathies lie.
He'll have to tread carefully now, although I read that he might well form a close relationship with Starmer.
But despite all this his role is meant to be purely ceremonial and he's not supposed to be getting involved in, or speaking out in public on political matters.
I guess it's because he's where he is purely by birth and wealth and so his influence is not democratic. But they've mostly seemed like a decent bunch to me during my life time.
He has some money so tell them to fuck off, why doesn't he use that Rottweiler he is married too, and have her/him/ it, attack. Lol