It's been a short while since the death of the Queen and I remember a reader that I was talking to was surprised that I was anti-monarchy and didn't care much about the Queen's death. I was quite stunned seeing as this reader had read book 1 at least more than once, I couldn't believe the anti-monarchist theme fell on him. So let's take a look at the theme of anti-monarchy within the books.
First thing we should point out is the lack of common born characters. Almost all of our POVs are highborn people and the entire story is dictated by the actions of highborn people. Small folk do not have major places in the story and appear as inn-keepers, stable boys and soldiers if they are good enough but they have no bearing over the story or perhaps any of the chapters at all. They are a supporting role within supporting characters, but what is the purpose of this? Well the author is showing us that within a feudal society the opinions and the lives of the many do not matter, it is only the lives of the nobles that have an impact on anything. Common characters are ignored by the author as they are ignored by the highborn of Cephri. So everything that happens in the story is due to the feudal highborn and thus the negative consequences that affect the lowborn are on the hands of the upperclass. Already a negative image is portrayed upon the upper class who do not interact with the lowborn or even spare a thought about the lowborn. Compared with the author's anti-capitalist beliefs, we can see that the negative and neglectful view the upper class hold on the lower-class influences his own portrayal of the nobility of Cephri.
One time we do see a common born character, Style, who is a POV and we get to see his own voice within the stifling voices of the highborn. Ironically Ameer labels Style's first chapter as 'The Hero' building him up as a conventional rags-to-riches sort of character that will rise through, like a salmon, and perhaps become the king or something regal. Our first thoughts as the reader are that the story of Style will be about a traditional knightly hero who will get girls to swoon over him and fight as a man with honour. Style is first shown off as an innocent young boy who sincerely believes the world will be his, already the small folk are shown to be dreamers. However in his second chapter the illusion of 'The Hero' and the illusion Style has on the world is shattered when he experiences war, he begins to realise that the common folk have been tricked into this war 'He had never fought it, never seen it before, never made it his enemy but suddenly it was his enemy.' So the highborn are presented as tricksters who manipulate the small folk, and we begin to see a disparity between the nobles and lowborn when more of Style's life is revealed, such as his childhood without a father. The chapters of Style present an extremely anti-highborn view and show us how troubled the lives of the small folk are and how they exist in almost another different world compared to the glam of the chapters with Aeyron, Edmund and others. Style's chapters stick out like a rotten apple between the other POVs which increases the impact by creating such a jarring contrast between the POVs. While the nobility are standing around war rooms drinking wine, Style marches around in the cold and dirt with no companions other than his thoughts. Ameer subverts the trope of the common born hero when Style admits he survived the battle by running away while all his friends died, so our Hero is presented as a coward. One of the great moments from Book One is when Aeyron comes face to face with Style and they talk, as the chapter occurs within Style's POV we look at Aeyron with Style's lens and not Aeyron's own lens within his POVs. 'The king noticed [Style's] solemn face. “Do not fret, we will win the war” the king asserted', shows that there is a failure in between the monarchs and the common people to communicate. Aeyron assumes his own problems onto Style, he believes that Style fears what the nobility fear - a loss in the war, yet Style is concerned about the facade the nobility have put in place 'You didn’t give piss shit about us before and you won’t after the war'. Style delivers a really good speech against Aeyron and the nobility but again the miscommunication between monarchs and the people is emphasised when Aeyron says this '“All men must die, do you die a hero or do you die a villain? You must choose”'. The King doesn't want to face the topic within Style's words so comes back with a generic statement; perhaps that is why Aeyron is so bad at keeping his Kingdoms satisfied, he had a big problem with communicated with the people he rules under. He sort of expects everything to be fine.
We also see a rise in outlaw-hood within Book 1 which becomes a massive problem in Book 2. The roots are shown in Style's chapters - 'We can become outlaws like the ones in the stories, we don’t have to abide by the rules. We can make the rules, we can become our kings'. The rise of outlaws seems to correlate with an anti-monarch sentiment; disappointed with the King's failure to rule the kingdoms ('He chose the wolf girl over his kingdoms!'), the commonfolk soldiers decide to become outlaws refusing the laws of the Kingdoms and openly defying the King. It becomes such a problem in Book Two that it is even considered dangerous to travel the north of The Hunter's Gift. The King dispatches Jamie Casterly to deal with the bandits in an attempt that fails, although Jamie does rid the world of some bandits he is indeed captured by The Bloody Servants and is humiliated and beaten. Ameer shows the reader another failed attempt by the nobility to help the normal people of Cephri. But there appears another chapter, seemingly inconsequential, between Jamie Casterly and The Hangman Adam Page where Jamie leaves the bandits free to help the common folk. Ameer explores how the common folk bandid together to form The Shield of Justice, a group which helped the common folk during the war, harassed Nestor Nik's supply and, following the aftermath of the war, removing any bandits that did evil upon the lands. While Jamie's forces are chipped away by bandits, the Shield remain allstrong even rallying the people of Ashford against Lord Granger. There is a theme of common people helping common people presented through this, and Jamie's decision to let them go free shows Jamie as a knight who is closer to the commonfolk than the highborn. Jamie states in his chapters that he never liked meeting with lords and prefered fighting with his soldiers, rejecting the highborn and embracing the lowborn.
One last thing to talk about is the actual war itself. Propagated by the conflict between nobles, the war is started foolishly when Ulthor Young and Nestor Nik are assaulted by Samuel Royce. A feud between nobles bleeds out into a nation wide conflict and thousands of people die, the lands are razed and famines affect the common citizens of King's Landing while the nobles feast. The end results of the war is not good, the rebels are defeated and any sort of doubt is stomped out but the quality of life has not improved, nothing has happened for the people except for death and destruction. The King mourns for eight months, neglecting his kingdoms seemingly learnt nothing from the war - we can criticise Aeyron for being a terrible king, but we do understand he did get world-shattering news at the end of Book One and that his brother died and all the stress would push him down, so may be we will let him off. Sugar quotes it right when he says the common folk are like chess pieces in the game of thrones that the highborn play and even after the war, common people suffer like Mya who is kidnapped and killed by Lord Ahriman for his creation. Now there looms another threat of another war, as Rhaenerys Blackfyres swears that she will make it to Cephri for the throne; the common people can not seem to escape what comes next.
In general, anti-monarchism and anti-highborn themes are some of the most central themes within the entire story. There are messages to take away from what you read.