anyway, i don't find that binary distinction really useful, it is very simplistic and lends itself to ... binary perception: republic good, anything else bad. death to the king!
Of course it is not useful. It all depends on who has the power. I have a King, Charles the III, King of Canada. In practice he has close to no power, simply the power to advise, warn, and counsel. Also kind of a referee. So yes there is a tendency to think republic bad, monarchy good, but that is a simplification. Trade our Governor General for a President with exactly the same powers and no difference besides now we're a republic instead of a monarchy.
governance has actually many forms and power even more so, being fluid even inside concrete forms of governments. in the end the whole world is governed by various power groups and the institutions in which they operate are just the framework. different frameworks, different tools, different external outlook, same objectives and internal forces.
True.
incidentally, as an european (at some point supportive of the eu, not anymore) i have never heard the eu referred to as a republic, and it doesn't really make sense. the eu isn't even a state, it's an ad-hoc agglomerate with very different interests and a comparatively very short history. if you ask me it is evolving towards totalitarianism.
I've never thought of it as a republic until your comment, but as I was taught in school long ago, it is a binary, Monarchy or Republic, and the EU has a President, not a Monarch.
All governments have a tendency towards evolving towards totalitarianism, the trick is to control that tendency. In theory a democracy with involved voters can do that. The problem is the involved and knowledgeable voters, which there seems to be a shortage of.
What a democracy can do is change governments before they go to far towards totalitarianism. As the saying says, governments are like babies, they need their diapers changed otherwise they get too full of shit.