You read the article? Monarchy is not oppression, the system in Washington DC is today. That system, incidentally has much less in common with the Constitution than a monarchy would be.
You are correct that the constitutional order in the US indeed precludes a monarchy; but we are arguing in principle, are we not?
Monarchy is by definition oppression. It has NOTHING to do with our Constitution - a document written by men who LOATHED Monarchy and the religious authorities that were so often their crutch.
“What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.” Madison
The principle of freedom is what I am arguing.
No man can be free so long as he is a “subject” to a so called King.
You can call yourself free, and the house slave may think he is free also, but only free to be comfortable in your chains.
“Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” Samuel Adams