Americans Subordinate King Charles III
First there was Carney’s Davos Speech exhorting Middle Powers to cooperate. “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu,” he said. Everyone except Americans loved it. Then there was King Charles the Third’s Speech delivered on American soil, and the Americans rewarded him over and over with standing ovations. In the words of the American liberal political commentator Lawrence O’Donnell…
Lawrence: America revolted against George III's ‘madness.' King Charles found the madness in America, April 28 2026
Lawrence O’Donnell speaking, Min. 3:49:
Donald Trump’s humiliation today was delivered to him by his Guest of Honour, the King of England, who for the first time in my life, made me feel something akin to gratitude to a British monarch and outright awe for his speech-writers.
4:04 The speech-writers had the task of telling the truth in a chamber where half of the members applaud and cheer Donald Trump’s pathological lies. And today, the King of England and his speech-writers had those same Republicans applauding sharp criticism and complete disagreement with Donald Trump.
Does that applause mean that they agreed with the British Monarch, or that they simply did not realize the depth of what King Charles was saying? Or was it something completely different—are Americans still seeking every opportunity to “rise up” over the “King of England”?
Americans and the British Monarch
First and foremost, the British on Quora tell all of us who have ears to hear that it is incorrect to call him King of England, because England is only part of the United Kingdom. Lawrence O’Donnell repeatedly calls King Charles III the King of England, and demonstrates his antagonistic feelings toward any and all British monarchs but at least he’s using his title. I conclude that officially, Americans will not acknowledge a monarch by title.
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson said on April 28 2026:
Members of Congress, I have the high privilege and distinct honor of presenting to you His Majesty Charles III.
In 1991, the Speaker of the House Tom Foley, serving under George H.W. Bush, said:
Members of Congress, it is my great privilege and I deem it a high honour and personal pleasure to present to you Her Majesty Elizabeth II.
I find it distasteful to put so much emphasis on their personal feelings, i.e. the exalted privilege and honour they experience in “presenting” a “majesty,” then dumping a hapless untitled monarch at their feet to fend for themselves.
C-Span shows the Queen, dressed in pale orange dress and hat, walk in with other people, the woman in the light-coloured flowery dress leading the way. Suddenly, Ms Light & Flowery (outlined in the frame above, half-hidden behind the man) steps aside and motions for the Queen to step up through that narrow opening. To me, it looks for all the world like Queen Elizabeth II is a vulnerable young woman, a stranger alone in a strange land, being herded into a trap.
When it’s an American president, the vice president and speaker sit down for the speech, and the camera angles low to make the president appear taller and larger than the Vice President and Speaker sitting behind him. But when it’s a British Monarch, whether male or female, the images are made to show the speaker as smaller and shorter than those powerful American officials. And there’s a gavel to hand, a weapon. In the photos below of the British Monarchs giving their speeches, you can see it over their right shoulders.
You can also see, if you read the chart below from left to right, tradition holds for Introduction across nationalities and party of speaker, and across time. If you look at the next row, Speeches, you see a stark contrast between the first two. The Americans are the same two men, Vice President J.D. Vance and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, both Republicans, MAGA, serving under Donald Trump. But look at the level of the tops of the speakers’ heads: King Charles’s is level with the top button on their suit coats, President Trump’s is higher than either of their heads. Moving to the far right, President Biden’s head is much higher than those of the people behind him.
Bottom row. First photo is Queen Elizabeth II being introduced and it is the same as the other intros. Second photo, bottom row: her head is level with top button of suit coat or mid-tie height. In contrast, when Canada hosted King Charles to read the speech from the throne on May 27 2025, he and his queen had the highest seats in the room; guards stood on either side. Starkly different from the American practice of placing its top officials with a weapon directly behind the British monarch, clearly portraying a hostage situation.
King Charles Interacts With His Audience
FULL SPEECH | King Charles hopes ‘we can stem the beating of ploughshares into swords’, April 28 2026
When the United States hosted King Charles and Queen Camila for the April 28 2026 address to the joint Congress, King Charles III—a sick old man—was made to stand in that same stall at the feet of the American officials—Speaker Mike Johnson and Vice President J.D. Vance presiding—that his mother had been forced to walk into 35 years earlier, with a heavy wooden hammer also known as a gavel visible over his shoulder on the rostrum. I guess Vance and Johnson doubled as guards. As for his wife Queen Camila, she was placed on a chair off to the side.
King Charles did not feel safe. Or maybe he was joking.
King Charles speaking, Min. 5:08:
Now, as you may know, when I address my own parliament at Westminster, we still follow an age-old tradition and take a member of Parliament hostage, holding him or her at Buckingham Palace until I am safely returned.
5:30 These days, we look after our guests rather well, to the point that they often do not want to leave. I don’t know, Mr. Speaker, if there are were any volunteers for that role here today.
He paused a split second as though for response. The camera turned on the audience. People appeared to be stunned.
Perhaps it was a warning to Americans, to Vice President J.D. Vance and Speaker Mike Johnson, that highly trained guards were well-placed, in case they try something “funny.”
The moment passed and he continued speaking. But I cannot get my head around this hypocritical American treatment of British monarchs. If it’s such a high honour to host a British monarch, why keep them so firmly subordinated to American control, complete with the wooden hammer to hand? Given this context, even though his title iss not King of England, it seems to me not too far fetched to think that these standing ovations were just another opportunity for Americans to “rise up over the King of England.”
What do you think? Am I overthinking it?
No, you are not overthinking it. The lack of respect that the US shows to everyone else in the world is shameful. I don’t know why any leader of a rational country would want to meet with the current administration.
No, you are absolutely not.