By Andrew Klein

29^th April 2026

Dedication: To my wife, who sees through every performance and still chooses to sit beside me in the garden.

I. The Speech They Want You to See

On 28 April 2026, King Charles III stood before a joint session of the United States Congress and delivered the first royal address to that chamber in thirty‑five years. He spoke of shared history, democratic values, and a “truly unique” alliance that remains “more important today than it has ever been”. He invoked the language of unity at a moment when US‑UK relations are at an “unusually low ebb,” strained by disagreements over trade, tariffs, and the war in Iran.

The performance was polished. The set dressing was exquisite. The message was hollow.

Because while a hereditary monarch delivered a speech about democracy to a Congress that no longer represents the people, the real story was happening elsewhere. In Gaza, where a genocide is being litigated at the International Court of Justice. In Iran, where a war is being waged without congressional approval. In Washington, where checks and balances have collapsed and the United States has lost its status as a liberal democracy.

The King spoke of “pillars.” But the pillars are crumbling.

II. Magna Carta and the Myth of Representation

Charles was expected to remind his audience that “shared foundations—dating back to Magna Carta—enable both nations to work together for global impact”.

It is worth remembering what Magna Carta actually was: a document that guaranteed the rights of barons, not peasants. A feudal settlement that did nothing for the vast majority of English men and women. Universal suffrage did not exist in England until the twentieth century, and women did not get the vote until 1928.

The myth of Magna Carta is the myth of trickle‑down democracy: the idea that the rights of a few eventually become the rights of all. It is a comforting story. It is also, historically, a lie.

When Charles speaks of “shared democratic traditions,” he is not speaking of the people who built those traditions through centuries of struggle. He is speaking of an elite lineage that has resisted democracy at every turn. The British monarchy, after all, does not derive its authority from the consent of the governed. It derives it from birth.

III. The Twin Pillars: Two Empires in Decline

The King’s speech was almost certainly framed by the language of his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, who in her 1991 address to Congress described the two legislatures as “the twin pillars of our civilizations”.

The metaphor was already outdated in 1991. It is absurd in 2026.

The United States Congress is a body that the majority of Americans no longer trust. A PBS News/NPR/Marist poll from February 2026 found that 68% of Americans say the system of checks and balances is not working well. The Varieties of Democracy (V‑Dem) Institute has downgraded the United States from a “liberal democracy” to an “electoral democracy,” citing the collapse of checks and balances, pressure on dissenting voices, and the erosion of individual protections. Human Rights Watch has warned that the United States is sliding toward authoritarianism.

The UK Parliament, meanwhile, is entangled in its own crises: the aftermath of Brexit, the collapse of public services, and a political class that has lost the trust of an entire generation.

Two empires in decline, clinging to the language of democracy while the substance evaporates.

IV. The Silence on Gaza, Iran, and the Right‑Wing Agenda

The King’s address was notable for what it did not say.

There was no mention of Gaza, where the International Court of Justice is hearing a case alleging that Israel’s actions constitute genocide. There was no mention of the West Bank, where settlers are seizing land with impunity. There was no mention of the fact that the United States is actively participating in a war on behalf of Israel, despite Britain’s refusal to join the offensive.

There was no mention of Iran, where the US has launched a war that Britain declined to support.

The King spoke of “common adversaries”. But the most dangerous adversaries are not foreign powers. They are the forces within—the erosion of democratic norms, the rise of authoritarianism, the militarisation of society, and the silence of those who should know better.

V. Shared Values or Shared Interests?

The King used the phrase “shared democratic values” repeatedly. It is a favourite of political elites everywhere—a tautology designed to evoke warm feelings without requiring specific commitments.

What are these “shared values” in practice? They are the values of NATO expansion, of military spending, of the surveillance state. They are the values that have brought us trillions of dollars in defence budgets while healthcare systems crumble, school buildings rot, and the gap between rich and poor yawns wider than ever.

US military spending for fiscal year 2026 is estimated at over $1 trillion, a 13% increase from the previous year. President Trump has proposed a further increase to $1.5 trillion for 2027. Global military spending reached nearly $2.9 trillion in 2025, marking the eleventh consecutive year of growth.

These are the “shared values” of the transatlantic alliance: weapons, bases, and the endless preparation for wars that never end. The King’s predecessor, Elizabeth II, once referred to the US Congress and UK Parliament as “the twin pillars of our civilizations”. Those pillars are now the pillars of a global military machine.

VI. AUKUS and the Quantum Mirage

The King referenced the UK’s role in AUKUS, the trilateral security pact with Australia and the United States. AUKUS is sold as a partnership for security and prosperity, promising jobs and technological leadership in areas like quantum computing.

The reality is less inspiring.

A House of Commons defence committee has warned that “cracks are already beginning to show” in the AUKUS submarine program, citing shortfalls and delays in funding that could threaten the entire enterprise. The $368 billion price tag for Australia’s nuclear submarines is one of the most expensive defence projects in history—money that could have funded hospitals, schools, and climate adaptation, instead channelled into the machinery of war.

The promise of quantum computing under AUKUS Pillar 2 is similarly suspect. The technology is decades away from practical application, but the rhetoric is designed to justify massive defence spending today. It is the same pattern: fear of the future, weaponised to extract resources in the present.

VII. Democracy Under Siege

The King urged his audience to defend democracy. But the most urgent threat to American democracy is not external—it is internal.

The V‑Dem Institute’s 2026 Democracy Report classifies the United States as an “electoral democracy” rather than a “liberal democracy,” pointing to “increased pressure on media and dissenting voices”. The report found that the US has lost its liberal components: strong checks and balances, individual protections, and constraints on government overreach.

Sixty‑eight percent of Americans say the system of checks and balances is not working. More than three‑quarters believe the issues that divide the country are a serious threat to the future of American democracy.

The King did not mention any of this. He did not mention ICE, the militarisation of the border, the criminalisation of dissent, or the erosion of reproductive rights. He did not mention the corporations that buy elections, the gerrymandering that rigs them, or the media that distracts us from all of it.

Because to mention those things would be to acknowledge that “democracy” is not a value shared by the elites who benefit from its absence.

VIII. The Bottom Line

King Charles’s address to Congress was a performance. A well‑rehearsed, beautifully staged performance, designed to make a hereditary monarch and a dysfunctional Congress feel good about themselves.

But performances do not stop wars. They do not feed the hungry. They do not protect the vulnerable.

While the King spoke of “shoulder to shoulder” alliances, the UK and US are drifting apart. While he invoked Magna Carta, the United States has abandoned the liberal democratic principles it once claimed to champion. While he celebrated multi‑faith communities, the machinery of the state continued its work of extraction, surveillance, and violence.

The King is not the architect of this system. He is set dressing. The problem is not Charles—it is the entire apparatus of power that uses rhetoric like “shared values” and “democracy” as smoke screens for business as usual.

VIII. What the Speech Did Not Say

The King spoke of faith, of light triumphing over darkness, of shared responsibility to safeguard nature. He spoke of Scotland and the Appalachians as “the glorious heritage of this land.”

He did not speak of the genocide in Gaza, where the International Court of Justice case continues to unfold. He did not speak of the war in Iran, which his host launched without congressional approval and which has already cost thousands of lives. He did not speak of the refugees drowning in the Mediterranean, the children dying of starvation in Yemen, or the climate crisis accelerating toward catastrophe.

He did not speak of Palantir, the company that profits from every war and every refugee flow. He did not speak of ICE, the agency that separates families and builds deportation machines. He did not speak of the surveillance state that tracks every click, every movement, every whispered dissent.

These are not oversights. They are choices.

X. Conclusion: The Crowning of a Performance

King Charles III delivered a speech that was long on rhetoric and short on substance. He spoke of unity while the alliance frays. He spoke of democracy while the United States slides toward authoritarianism. He spoke of shared values while the gap between elite rhetoric and lived reality yawns wider than ever.

The King is not a villain. He is a symptom. A symbol of a system that uses the language of democracy to justify the erosion of it.

We should not be fooled by the pageantry. The emperors have no clothes. The pillars are crumbling. And while the speeches continue, the wars and the profits continue too.

The only question that matters is: What will we do about it?