Main Edition
US
FR
Do you speak Sussex-ese? (Photo by Max Mumby/Indigo/Getty Images)
Over the past month, a new English dialect has mysteriously sprung into existence: let us call it “Sussex-ese”. It was first spotted in the British press in February, when its creator — who shall remain unnamed for now — wrote: “We all lose when misinformation sells more than truth, when moral exploitation sells more than decency, and when companies create their business model to profit from people’s pain. But, for today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won.”
Typified by its remarkable tendency to sound both sincere and insincere simultaneously, this Sussex-ese appeared again in a separate news story this week. “[We are] saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma,” the author wrote. “She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.”
No doubt you will have guessed by now how Sussex-ese was given its name. Both of the above statements come from the House of Sussex, specifically from the spokesperson for the Duchess of Sussex and/or the Duchess herself. And I suspect that they won’t be the last — by all accounts, Sussex-ese is here to stay.
As tempting as it may be, it is not enough to dismiss the House of Sussex’s latest statements as bland, sub-Obama pabulum. They almost always have a certain twist of their own; a style which suggests that Harry and, more importantly, Meghan are not only surprised, but almost amazed that anybody might think ill of them. Excerpts from the couple’s upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey only confirm this.
History is, of course, rife with examples of princes and their spouses expressing their distaste with the lèse-majesté of their critics. But what’s different about Sussex-ese is that it is a creation born not from the Duke’s blue blood, so much as the couple’s unquestionably golden intentions. And as a result, a very modern form of deference is demanded: do not criticise me, for I am doing much good in the world.
Take the first quote above. It relates to the Duchess’s recent successful privacy case against the Mail on Sunday, which published excerpts of a private letter sent by Meghan to her estranged father. Now you could be forgiven for thinking that, even if she weren’t a former actress, the relationship between the wife of the person sixth in line to the British throne and her father is a matter of public interest. You would, however, be wrong — at least that’s the implication of the judge’s decision to halt the trial before witnesses could be called.
But even if you agree with Lord Justice Warby, it is hard to see how “we all won” because of it. For example, you may not approve of the type of prurient Royal-watcher who wishes to know every detail of the Duchess’s life, but clearly those people don’t view the verdict as a “win”. More importantly, though, there is something deeply unsavoury about the attempt to extrapolate Meghan’s personal victory into a universal one, particularly since most people will never be in a position remotely analogous to the one in which the Sussexes find themselves.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI do not normally take much interest in royal/celebrity affairs, and would prefer to take no interest whatsoever. But it is impossible not to notice just how self-obsessed and despicable these two have become.
The narcissism is palpable, isn’t it?
“In Brexit, a group of old, white English people voted for the glories of an imagined past while rejecting a global, multicultural future. The main lesson of the interview is that the UK royal family, tied to a crumbling tabloid press, is behaving much the same way.
“How it works: Prince Harry detailed the symbiotic relationship between the royal family and the UK tabloids. Meanwhile, a glowing Meghan and Harry, happily ensconced in Santa Barbara luxury, are doing deals with Netflix and Spotify estimated at $100 million and $25 million respectively.
“The erstwhile royals might still be reliant on media companies — but the media companies they’re reliant on are young, international, and much richer than the tabloids.
“By the numbers: Netflix reaches more than 200 million subscribers; Spotify reaches more than 150 million premium subscribers and has a total user base of some 350 million.
“The Sun, by contrast, Britain’s biggest tabloid, has a circulation of just 1.2 million, while rival the Daily Mirror reaches less than 400,000.
“Driving the news: The foremost avatar of anti-Meghan tabloid sentiment is Piers Morgan, the former editor of the Daily Mirror with a grubby history involving phone tapping, insider trading, and faked photos.
“Morgan resigned from his daytime-TV gig this week after saying on air that he “didn’t believe a word” of Markle’s claims.
“The bottom line: Harry has gone solo, much like his namesake from One Direction. Just like Vogue cover star Styles, he could easily end up eclipsing his increasingly irrelevant former bandmates.”
Felix Salmon—AXIOS
In Brexit, a group of old, white English people voted for the glories of an imagined past while rejecting a global, multicultural future
Delusional and idiotic and of course makes no sense at all except in the mind of a nitwit.
You complete your nonsense with a boy band comparison
Oddly you use speechmarks for your own comments which suggest the literacy of a marble and the iq of a biscuit
Couldn’t have put it better.
Hey mr Strawman, when is your appointment with the wizard?
This weekend Lady Manners (great name) posted pics where Meghan had copied Diana’s costume exactly-the hat used in the picture is one of them. Harry has married a very strange person.
He married his mother obviously
It was perfectly possible to pay no attention whatsoever by just skipping the interminable coverage in the Telegraph. I’m enjoying this. I’d abolish the constitutional role of the Windsors et al, come to a deal on money and property and wish them all the best for the future. Love seeing DM and others getting their knickers in a twist as privileged parasitical people and their retainers on all sides behave like the entitled, selfish bullies they’ve always been.
Tony Blair for President!!!
Presidents are elected, so I think we’re safe from that prospect. It’s more likely to be Danny Dyer or Greg Wallace.
I nominate Alex Belfield!
Good at outrage; how’s his activism?
Not trans enough
Not necessarily. Just elected for better or worse not just entitled!
That would have my vote… We can always get tess daly to launch any new ships and rubber stamp any draconian legislation passed to her by Parliament, I’m sure she’d do just as good a job as any royal, she’d be cheaper and she knows when to keep her mouth shut.
Claptrap
Ginge and Whinge….what a ghastly pair they are.
‘Ginge and whinge’, very good.
To paraphrase kanye: I ain’t saying she a golddigger, but she ain’t messing with no broke gingers.
Gingist!
Think Cash and Harry. is my fave.
Posh & Bucks?
It takes a particular kind of detachment from reality to lecture others about their “privilege” when you’re a Prince and Princess.
Not to mention the kind of detachment from reality and abysmal cheek it takes to posit yourself as an empowered woman when most of the time you peddle the narrative that you’re a victim and are only where you are today because of the man you married. Feminism my foot. I almost dropped my coffee when I saw the sit-down with Gloria Steinem where M waffled on about how “all women are linked, not ranked.” While of course rocking the duchess title. What planet is this woman on????
Absolutely. That kind of doublethink must do major damage to one’s logic circuits
of which she has but a few . . . or fewer than a few . . .
I cringed at her waffle on the couch for her engagement speech. She sounded like a graduate trainee joining a long established company fully convinced that she knew better how to manage it than anyone else before her. She’s married a man more famous than her and then he’s quit his job, they’ve both left. It’s not a very interesting story. How much more pathos can they wring out of it?
At the start, I was very open to her. I just felt concerned when I saw that interview because I saw that she hadn’t understood the nature of the monarchy or British sensibilities and was going to get a very nasty, rude awakening. It was no surprise that things turned out as they did and Germaine Greer was spot on with her analysis. But the way Meghan and Harry have behaved in separating themselves and pursuing a new life in the States has been a masterclass in getting rid of every scrap of goodwill they had. They’re an absolute disgrace to the Royal Family and the country.
I was struggling to put together a comment on this subject and on the article — which covers the subject pretty well. Then I read your comment, which summarises just about everything I think on this dismal subject, and expresses it more economically and charitably than I was able to do. Thank you!
Whatever happened to Germaine Greer? I can’t see Meghan putting her MINGE on the cover of a book…
I can, anything for attention.
How about him bemoaning the fact that he’s never been allowed to vote as if it was a personal disenfranchisement! Maybe, given the questions still asked regarding his ancestry he actually should have been entitled an is right to moan about it!
I’m not sure about this but if he’s a tax payer, which I assume he is, surely he should have the right to vote
The titles must go. The queen must be seething them making $gazzilions singularly and solely on the back of being a royal Duke and Duchess. Strip their titles and the wizards of California reveal who they really are: Past tense.
It’s hard to imagine Netflix and Spotify lining up to give millions to a former soldier and an ex actress from a TV show nobody watches. I’m not sure removing the titles now will make any difference though, it’s the prospect of them dishing the dirt on the other royals that’s attracting the attention and cash stateside, not the name Sussex.
I think even without titles they are now international shelebrity…
They’re AMERICAN royalty now, titles or not. I just hope most Americans can see through them.
Chances are they’ll love them, and of course Meghan can do no wrong. Challenge her, and you’re racist. She’s not liked because of her skin colour? It’s beyond pathetic. Someone tell her she’s embraced victimhood.
The USA is welcome to them but this egotistical pair of woke whiners (or saviours of the world as they’ll no doubt want to be labelled soon) will be courted by the media and celebrities, raking in the millions of dollars every time they make an announcement regarding what’s happening in their narcissistic, lavish Californian realm. They’ll rule from there if the Americans allow it to happen. And they will.
The smug two have no self-awareness.
Attacking the monarchy as they have, will not end well. Their titles should be removed.
Without the Sussex title, they would be Prince and Princess Henry (or Harry) of Wales. His title of prince cannot be removed as he was born to it, and since she is his wife, she takes his title (has none in her own right). California would still be impressed, I imagine, and their “victim” status would be enhanced.
I do not think she is entitled to ‘princess’ but I am no expert.
If she adopts his name with Princess she can be Princess Henry (his given name). She cannot be Princess Meghan. As a matter of fact Diana was never Princess Diana, that was the press bending the rules for whatever reason. She was Diana Princess of Wales.
Princess Michael adopts this style with the use of her husband’s name as opposed to being known as the Duchess of Kent.
Actually, they are two different people. The Duchess of Kent (nee Katherine Worsley) is married to Prince Michael’s elder brother, the Duke of Kent, so she is Princess Michael’s sister in law.
I lived several years in Santa Barbara, nextdoor to Montecito, and am now in San Francisco. I am not impressed and everyone I know thinks M&H are self-delusional and not very intelligent people. Meghan is a schemer and gets what she wants through manipulation. And Harry? sigh. What a pathetic creature.
Unfortunately you are quite correct … my money’s on them fizzling out; and possibly sooner than we imagine
Picture the scene – the D&D of S, on their much publicised tour of Africa, were in Malawi – one of the very poorest countries in the world. For several days they’d been meeting people whose stories would make anyone with a scintilla of perspective realise just how lucky they are. Children who’d lost limbs from land-mines, lost relatives from starvation or internecine warfare – and what was their reaction? They decided that was the appropriate moment to announce to the world, via their friendly stooge Tom Bradby, that their life as members of the Royal Family wasn’t easy. It beggared belief. Meghan thought we all needed to know it’s really, really hard being Royal whilst being a new mother – as though the vast retinue of domestic servants doesn’t ease the pressure, even just a little bit – and, as if that wasn’t enough of a burden, poor Meghan complained that no one had thought to ask if she was okay.
The mind boggles. Truly, it takes superhuman levels of self-absorption to spend time with children who’ve lost their limbs and their families to a war and then turn to the camera and whine, “Yeah, but what about meeeee?”
Whilst I have no interest in watching the Oprah interview there is a grim fascination that comes from just how tin-eared the two of them are doubtless going to be. The trouble is there will be plenty in their new target audience – America – who will lap this sanctimony up, and imagine that poor Harry and Me-Again are victims. Incredibly, there seem to be one or two posters here who feel the same.
They’ve lectured us on climate change – castigating people who most likely take one flight a year for their holidays – before they themselves hop into the sybaritic comforts of a private jet, that will take them off for another much-needed break from the pressures of their opulent life. Not to mention that, to ensure their tour of Africa was at the right level of comfort, special cars were shipped out to waft them from one photo-op to the next. Their carbon footprint must be absolutely staggering – but God forbid a newspaper might question the Sussexes’ claim to be “committed environmentalists”. Any criticism is obviously proof of racism.
The suggestion – echoed by some on these very pages – that any criticism aimed at the Duchess of Sussex must be rooted in racism is completely unsupported by any evidence or even common sense. You can’t deny that, during their engagement and for the wedding itself, the coverage was universally positive and everyone seemed perfectly happy with the idea of her bringing a fresh and different outlook to the hide-bound monarchy. The matter of her heritage was seen as a positive.
It was only when the two of them started on this ghastly “celebrity” path, constantly virtue signalling and associating themselves with “woke” totems that the tenor of the coverage changed. Surely, that would be more down to their perceived insincerity and hypocrisy than any evidence of racism towards her?
Just imagine the messages that will pour forth from their Netflix documentaries – Meghan reinventing herself as Feminist role model – though ‘Marry a Prince and give up your day job’ is a somewhat regressive feminist message in 2021, isn’t it? It could hardly be more hypocritical if Harry, as a member of the Royal family, criticised someone for nepotism.
LA is welcome to them. A city built on insincerity and hollow adulation of fame. It’s a shame because Harry seemed as though he was a decent sort. He obviously enjoyed his time in the Army and seemed keen to dedicate himself to the Invictus games, association with Military charities and general royal duties. He enjoyed enormous amounts of good will from the British people and seemed to be growing into his role. Any such good will has since evaporated.
When you live in a gilded cage it is never advisable to complain to those outside that your golden handcuffs chafe.
I think the point to make is that neither of them is very clever.
You got it.His brain must have been empty when he thought portraying a Nazi would be jolly good fun.
Patrick – an excellent observation.
Perhaps someone should remind Harry about the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent in the 1930s. Once they were third and fourth in line to the throne, as Harry has been, now they are largely forgotten. Their time in the public eye and conscience was fleeting, as will be Harry’s,
As Patrick said, he had a useful, productive life and enjoyed enormous good will. Now that has all but gone.
It is very sad to witness such a slow-motion car crash taking place in clear sight. But it seems nothing can be done.
I’m enjoying watching these two self-delusional fools expose themselves to the world. All means of financial support, other than Meghan’s Suits savings, should be stripped from them. Who would clean their bathrooms? How would they pay their bills? They are worthy only of ridicule.
Quite sad to see what Megan has done to a fine person, Harry. Watching William’s pain and the demise of a family is awful. And the entire business covered by the breathless press. The Japanese phrase “Have you no shame” comes to min for both the couple and the media.
Is Hardee Hodges your real name?
No, I don’t think that Harry was ever really a “fine person,” as you put it. He was nice enough in his way, but he always seemed to me to be an especially vulnerable man-child.
The only time Harry was mentioned in our California papers was when he was running through Las Vegas hotel hallways chasing naked women. Ah. Those were the days!
I am grateful to Meghan Markle for giving our country the service Mrs Simpson rendered when she removed Edward VIII from the throne.
In each case the youngish man has been the silliest of playboys, at once a very self-willed birdbrain and loose canon.
Prince Harry proved this in many years before his marriage. He had gone to Eton, a sort of brilliant junior university whose pupils are introduced to all manner of topics, activities, interests. Yet apart from his period in the Armed Forces where, like his brother, he was a success, all he could think to do with the rest of his time in this world was to go pubbing and clubbing (continuous boozing).
In that capacity for a while he led Prince William astray. But then Prince William had bigger sounder instincts, looked for a real family to belong to and homed in on that, to his advantage and the benefit of us all.
Harry remained the Princess Margaret of his generation.
This does not eliminate the temporary harm he can do with his commitment to vulgarity and hypocrisy. But inasmuch as it happens 6000 miles away – and will there be subject to the law of diminishing returns (both the Sussexes are stupid people) – I feel inclined to echo Winston Churchill’s final verdict on the Duchess of Windsor: ‘One day a grateful Commonwealth will erect her statue’.
There is the additional advantage that ‘their’ antics do take the spotlight off the Prince Andrew/Epstein affair.
Bread and circuses, as always. Only in this case it’s all circus and no bread.
I’m not so sure about Edward VIII. Although he was a playboy, I read that when he became King and started to travel round the country that he was concerned about the poverty he saw. The politicians didn’t like him complaining and so he had to go. Wallace was a perfect cover to get rid of him.
Who, today, can possibly accept that somebody is born special and when royals start marrying commoners they become pointless. It is time this life of inherited privilege was ended.
‘when royals start marrying commoners they become pointless’
How does that square with William and Kate?
Harry became pointless when he walked away from duty. Just like his great uncle.
“I read that when he became King and started to travel round the country that he was concerned about the poverty he saw.”
This is true – in a thoroughly detached and practically meaningless way.
At the very same time he gave Mrs Simpson fantastically expensive jewels every day – any two or three of which would have set up a workless desperately poor town or district in the Depressed Areas of the cruel 1930s Slump.
(People there and then were truly poor. – Men, thin as rakes, wearing shoes patched with newspaper and cardboard, leaning against their door-jambs because almost too weak from little nutrition to stand upright. Children, shoeless, suffering rickets and dying from TB – essentially lack of food. It was terrible in those areas.)
If you have half a billion pounds at your personal disposition and you deplore the poverty you see; but spend not one penny of it alleviating that poverty, what is it but the same-old same-old virtue signalling which so distinguishes today’s ‘meritocracy’ and celebrities and Ruling Caste?
Precisely. The irony of this sanctimonious preaching and look at me victimhood delivered from their £11m Californian mansion is incomprehensible and should not be underestimated. It fails to take into account the lives of millions of people across the world who have suffered immeasurably during the pandemic. Extraordinary arrogance.
Yes, what she doesn’t realise is that you don’t become virtuous simply by joining the royal family, you have to actually do something. She thinks her words alone are enough to change things but really they are just self-serving. It is a sign of how out of touch with genuine hardship that they think creating a Netflix program or podcast will change things. She’s a walking PR operation. As with so many who seek positions of power they don’t really care about changing anything, it is enough that *they* are the ones running things.
Bingo. The attitude seems to be, “if I tell everyone I’m a caring and wonderful person who’s saving the world” , that makes it true. Its a modern delusion shared by most people in the public sphere, and people with blue ticks on twitter. It comes crashing down after contact with ordinary people, but ordinary people can be safely ignored, because they don’t count.
Self praise is no praise.
They are the embodiment of social media sickness: put out a tweet or a posting and your work for the world is done. A little echo chamber or bubble where virtue signalling is all that’s needed. Is this how the younger generations think? If yes, I fear for the world when they finally have to look up from their smartphones and take over…
In a nutshell: all hat, no cattle.
As we say in Texas.
Sometimes a point is reached when – like the Earth’s magnetic field – the effect of a message is exactly reversed upon itself.
Think Project Fear, BLM, BBC diversity, National Trust, Layla Moran (yesterday) ….
What is fascinating is that those who continue to push the message are completely unaware what has happened. The Sussexes are in freefall but think they are flying high.
But I thought Layla was non-binary?
Has sex with pans, apparently.
They probably are flying high financially, and will continue to rake it in for a while yet.
Teenage? She’s 39!
39 with the brains of a 13 year old. Not a good combination.
Indeed. I mentioned this in a previous post on another article. Our behavior is being dictated to by people with the moral capacity of a narcissistic teenage girl.
A narcissistic, whiney, snivelling teenage girl who quite probably grew up with the disneyesque belief that being a *princess* means a lifetime of whining, entitlement, and complaining about the staff. And complaining about the relatives. About the hooorrible treatment suffered from the relatives / the staff / the subjects. In England of all places, the least whiney culture on the planet. She ought to have had a big culture shock, but i don’t think it even registered on her tiny radar – it flew over her head.
I was with you until the part about England being the least whiney culture on the planet. Having spent plenty of time overseas in quite different countries, Brits seem to be the biggest whingers in the world (when actually living in one of the best countries in the world). Maybe it’s the media portrayal and the stoking of grievances by many political parties that creates that impression.
There has always been the “whinging POM” in Australia: “How do you know when a 747 has arrived from Heathrow in to Sydney? The plane is still whining when they have turned to engines off…”
If you want to hear world class whinging, spend some time with an aussie watching his country lose at any sport.
The better we have it the more we whine because we expect better. During the second world war we had people like Douglas Bader and the Spitfire pilots etc. who were very brave and didn’t seem to whine. I think we have become more feminised now with full grown men going around in skirts etc. We have to hope we shall never have a world war again.
Well, they are about to secede – or not, we’ll see.
Made me to wonder if that‘s really the cause of Scotland becoming the Sweden of the Union? Will never look at a kilt the same way again…
Don’t go to Scotland and say that!
I sincerely hope you are not making a link between feminisation and increased whinging.
Let’s hope not! Nothing so repulsive than men becoming more like women (it’s okay for women to wear trousers becomes it’s less embarrassing to aspire toward masculinity).
Imagine men wearing lace or pastel silk trousers or heels or powered wigs.
Oh wait – that already happened and the world didn’t come tumbling down.
Or did Beau Brummell save us all with his fashionably minimalist and somber toilette?
Good one! Our kids live in Sydney and I need only mention cricket to set off the whingeing….
More in the past than now. There were a lot more of them in the past and with less knowledge about Australia. And compared to Britain today, Australia is a paradise.
Your soooo right Deb G. And when they do the job they wanted to do (a home from home), and were paid to do, and can’t be laid off, and will get a pension, they get literally applauded by the general public – and of course applaud themselves just to keep the game in play – for hurriedly trying to save people’s lives, which is what the NHS between form filling, waddling diabetically along corridors and vying to be interviewed by Channel Four TV News.
Keep pouring the poison, brainless specimen.
I assumed it was a tongue-in-cheek comment.
You might be right, Deb – i’m a foreigner and i still have this “Brits don’t whine” stereotype in my head, largely formed by literature. I agree though it’s not quite the case anymore, esp. since New Labour decided to abolish the stiff upper lip.
I grew up watching films featuring brave cowboys and thought Americans were great. I have been greatly disillusioned since as a lot of them certainly know how to whine with due respect to those who don’t. I think it is all this rights thing. I know my rights and me me me talk.
Southerners, maybe.
No not southerners. A lot of countries in the west have their proportion of whiners and also their share of brave people as well. With regard to the developing world they have less whiners because they are not allowed to whine because of the many dictators there are and lack of free speech although they may whine privately and have more reason to. Once they get here they do whine after a while when they are told what rights they have from the PC class.
After a very short while, and if the whine isn’t catered for promptly enough, they burn down the accommodation.
I’ve also lived in many countries, and I don’t find the English to be whiney, no more or less than any other nations anyway. The English are cynical, which I think could be confused with complaining but on the whole I don’t think we’re any better or worse than anybody else
Utter rubbish, you make such a sweeping statement and probably haven’t been further than you’re own front door.
Okaaay..but if England is “the least whiney culture on the planet” (perhaps you meant to say in the WEST), whence cometh the expression “whingeing Poms” in the colonies?
An Australian expression therefore of no consequence.
She is American and therefore more likely to be culturally immature; she has some ‘black’ ancestry and therefore excels in self-righteous victimhood; she has had some tinseltown fame and desires more; she is graceless and silly with no respect for the feelings of anyone but herself, and Harry as long as he is useful, maybe; and she is a blight on the Royal Family and by extension, so is he.
Time to cut the ties which do not bind.
This reductive storyline is the logical conclusion. I can only imagine the intimate dryness that would prompt such schadenfreude.
The other conclusion is that an attractive prince to the future king willfully committed himself to a Black American woman and wants to protect her from his mother’s fate.
To fantastical to entertain!
And you are the one talking about “internalised misogyny”, eh, Gallego?
Wash your mouth out.
I don’t what you’re referring to. You’ll have to spell it out for me.
Yes, from Carrie Symonds to Meghan Markle to Kamala Harris to Ursula von der Leyen. And that’s just the females.
You forgot the Queen of them all, greta. She at least has the excuse of being an actual teenager
So now we’re giving abuse to teenagers as well? At least it’s equal opportunities hate…
I am sure you would not have made that comment had greta been championing a right wing cause, say replacement.
Replacement of what?
I would criticise anyone as ill informed as she is whichever side they were promoting.
Whenever Greta appears I replace her with the mute button.
Stupid, you miss an intelligent young person. The opposite of those who write comments here. Are you adults?
Oh come on – the laugh alone was worth an upvote.
No use expecting a sense of humour, Johnny, you’re on Unherd!
Not really. It’s not big or clever to mock kids.
Blah..no ones off limits…take it or leave it. World’s a tough place.
Grow up – if you put yourself out there and lecture adults about how awful we are then you can expect some back
Some of the “adults” commenting here could do with a lecture from their mothers, judging by the childish level of insults.
And when did it become OK for a crowd that complains about “virtue signalling” to pile on in an exercise of what seems awfully like “hate signalling”? How is that better?
Pray! Don’t slander children by comparing them lol.
Greta is demanding that tens of millions of teengers, though not herself obviously, by thrown back into poverty in the name of the pseudo-religion of climatism.
Being young is no excuse for offering up millions of people’s futures as a blood sacrifice to your own, special god.
I don’t agree. Youth really is a time to be stupid and take dumb risks.. Where it went off the rails was when the journalists took little Greta seriously. That same profession is where the two, formerly royal, airheads get all their support.
Most youth seem to always go though a rebellion stage. When I was young it was teddy boys, then skinheads, then punks. You name it. Thankfully most of them mature by the time they are thirty. What is frightening is that a certain left wing party wants to give the vote to younger and younger people.
That’s there only hope now the red wall is blue! I just hope they don’t put Jeremy Corbyn on kids tv.
My thoughts exactly. I blush when I think of the opinions I held as a teenager and well into my twenties. Fortunately, although the adults in my life listened, they argued against my more outlandish views and gave me food for thought. Unfortunately, today, teenagers such as Greta are treated like modern day Sibyls by adults who should know better or are just too frightened to speak out.
Is that what used to be called the Global Warming Deception?
Paul I’ve got to say that’s a good line but you know the expression….if the cap fits……
I think teenagers are allowed to whine as they’re growing up. For the rest there;s no excuse
Don’t put Greta or Harris in the same category as MM or Ursula
Why not?
And autistic, apparently.
ASPERGERS…no empathy nor compassion.
Little wonder what then drives someone without empathy or compassion to passionately protest to save the planet and our collective future.
People with Aspergers don’t lack empathy or compassion. A simple Google search refuted this.
10% of the population lack empathy. That group overlays the autism group in part. The rest of the autistic population do not lack empathy but they may possibly show it in a slightly different way.
I blame the parents!
Strange that you chose to single out “the females”. A touch of misogyny perhaps?
Not really. It’s just that the starting point for the discussion was M M. Among current male adolescent leaders/politicians I would include Macron, Trudeau, Salvini (to some extent), Drakeford, Trump (to some extent). Newsom, Cuomo, de Blasio, and I’m sure there are many others.
I think Drakeford is on the way out. I had a call from the Labour Party yesterday – for Covid reasons they are canvassing for the election by telephone this year. The first question was, “How do you rate Drakeford’s handling of the Covid 19 pandemic?” You can imagine that the average answer will be about 2/10. Why ask that question at the start of the canvassing?
Sorry, who even is this Drakeford? I’ve never heard of him / her.
I assume you mean it. The leader of the Welsh Assembly.
Oh yeah…right.
Yes, the Drakeford who wanted to pause the vaccinations in Wales because they would soon run out, leaving the vaccinators with nothing to do…..forget the unvaccinated who might die in the meantime.
In London, all we get is the BBC “Love-in-we’re-all-Comrades-now-especially-the-dreadful-SALFORD-people” and NICOLA STURGEON v Alex Salmond who both, quite franckly, needs horse-whipping.
I’d horsewhip them myself but I don’t have a horse! (Thank you Groucho – I’ll get my coat!)
Exactly…Ich habe keine ahnung wo er ist??
no, don’t include Trump with that lot,
Trump was instinctively opposed to so much of the empty nonsense that macron, trudeau, newsom, cuomo, de blasio, stand fot.
I agree. But all too often he was unable to adjust his behaviour and demeanour to match the substance of his beliefs, policies, and achievements.
Yes, really. During basic military training, women are referred to as “females.” Noticeably, they don’t refer to the men as “males.”
It’s a way to break women down by referring to their sex (reproductive capabilities) as opposed to the gender which is a social construct. The Air Force, at least, has removed this practice because it’s misogynistic.
But nice try.
Good to have you on line because it is another angle, different from the super-male contributors to UnHerd
Oh gawd pass the sick bucket – this platform gets more like Facebook every time I join
That’s because they are all deserting Facebook and need some mature conversation!
I’m always mistaken for a male online. I always take it as a compliment. Nobody ever would mistake me for a male offline – if they did i would be quite outraged, then looked for a mirror to check if i somehow turned into an ogre overnight.
You’ll find that a large amount of those “super-male contributors” you speak of are actually females on any site’s comment sections.
I must stop using irony. I am obviously not good at it.
Woops, sorry! Had an aspie moment. Which means you’re actually very good at irony, the best irony being not instantly recognisable.
Given you an upvote and tried to give myself a due downvote but the system won’t allow the latter.
If I’d venture a theory: it’s the aggressive stance that presumes your gender as a man.
Sexist expectations means people find it challenging to accept that women can be as aggressive as men.
Well, some groups of women over others, which in part explains the armchair speculation and barrage of insults toward Megan like she personally ruined Xmas morning or wrote you a bad check.
But perhaps Megan is all you say she is and it just takes one to know one?
Side note: Women who internalize misogyny tend to be proud for being on par with “the guys.” It’s very Thatcher-esque.
Are you usually on Facebook….
.you seem so sad and angry?
Did you vote for Thatcher?
You mean “women who disagree with people who also happen to be women”?
I said what I said. And I meant what I said.
Haha, that got you stumped.
..
Mind your language chaps there are ladies present.
As a lady i strongly approve of the general tone of the language here.
“It’s a way to break women down by referring to their sex (reproductive capabilities) as opposed to the gender which is a social construct.”
Ridiculous, they don’t need to refer to the males as ‘males’: it would be superfluous: they have already made the distinction/split they mean to make by calling the females ‘females’ so everyone knows who needs to do what.
Basic military training:
Women “Fix your hat, female!”
Men: “Fix your hat, trainee!”
Men are referred to by rank. Women by sex. Not by everyone or all the time but it’s definitely a thing whereas the opposite is not.
I’m ex-Air Force. Nobody will refer to you as a “female” when speaking to you after basic. You will be referred to by your last name or your rank.
The military is the most hypermasculine institution, so it’s unsurprising that women experience sexual assault and harassment disproportionately higher than in the general population.
It follows then that different levels of misogyny exists subtly – and overtly – within systemics.
Calling women “females” while not doing the same for men is one example.
Really ? so the military never say male and female soldiers
Basic military training:
Women “Fix your hat, female!”
Men: “Fix your hat, trainee!”
Men are referred to by rank. Women by sex. Not by everyone or all the time but it’s definitely a thing whereas the opposite is not.
I’m ex-Air Force. Nobody will refer to you as a “female” when speaking to you after basic. You will be referred to by your last name or your rank.
Are you really, truly, that upset and resentful?
Is this where you advise me to go back to Facebook or Twitter or where I came from or whatever zinger people default to when they want to deflect from the point?
That’s a very antisemitic thing to say.
Gain reading comprehension skills or stop being deliberately obtuse.
Are you an aspie, a bame, or a member of the hard left? Those groups lack even the most basic concept of humour.
Looks like I got it right !
But gender is not a social construct, honey.
Gender is what a German table and a French chair have.
Legs!!! I always knew that legs are nothing but grammatical constructs… esp. when i get legless and my grammar is slurred.
And neutral is what a girl is in German!
Sidenote because I’m a linguistics nerd: it’s interesting how if a noun is deemed masculine, it becomes a cultural signifier for strength. The opposite its gender is feminine.
So “bridge” has a strong or delicate/weak connotation, depending on the language. Gendering nouns shapes how people describe the world differently.
One can argue English is more egalitarian than other languages but gender is in the subtext because we detest being direct.
Oh my god Linnette you need to get back on Facebook or twitter!
I deleted my Facebook years ago. I don’t have a Twitter account.
I’m afraid you’re stuck with me. Do you need a cold compress or smelling salts?
No that’s ok we don’t mind you staying with the grown ups!
And that’s probably why all sorts of machinery is referred to in the feminine case in English. Tractors, tanks, gunboats, big badabumm fast cars, submarines, stuff like that. They all have the ‘she‘ pronoun.
LOL
Because it promotes the ideology as women as objects to be steered /driven/ or otherwise commanded.
Because you really tried, if you want a Zoom link to the college course my friend teaches on sociolinguistics, let me know.
Sociolinguistics ROFLMAO!!
I’m very tempted, because her other course on heptagendered menstrual dancing in subsaharan suburban slums went totally viral on Guido, we were laughing our ar$es off for the whole December.
However, i most regretfully decline your kind offer. Work & stuff, y’see. So little time, so much to do…
Another ridiculous subject.
Eh !!!
Gender is a social construct and it’s not entirely.
I’ll pass on reciprocating with “sweetie”, “sugarplum”, or some other know-your-place aggression zinger.
Neither one of us are experts on sex and gender. Both of us can bring whatever research that supports our position to the table but that’s deflecting from the original article’s premise.
There you go again, calling people “zinger”. There’s a giant swastika-shaped chip on your shoulder, pet, you may want to do something about it.
Stop being lazy.
zing·er
/ˈziNGər/
Learn to pronounce
nounINFORMAL•NORTH AMERICAN
a striking or amusing remark.
“open a speech with a zinger”
an outstanding person or thing.
“a zinger of a shot”
Definitions from Oxford Languag
ROFL.
Have you just typed all that out.
Well done. Look, here’s a sticker. It’s MrSmiley!!
Not entirely what??
No, gender is not a ‘social construct’. In certain senses it can be a grammatical construct.
You come across as devastatingly ignorant. And agitated too.
Yawn
Intelligent response
Oh lLinnette….get a grip…. I’m a woman, where’s your sense of humour?
You’re right. Let me get a grip and a sense of humor
because you, one single alleged woman, disagrees with me.
I checked my bills and as I suspected – I don’t owe you anything. Bad-dum tsh.
How was that?
You will find that many more than “one single alleged” woman disagrees with you. You represent an infinitesimally small but hilariously defective minority opinion.
And what’s up with the “alleged”?
Because it’s the internet and people are anonymous.
She was the only person at the time in this comment section who disagreed with me.
Nowhere did I assert that she is the only person in the world who disagreed with me. With 7 billion people on the planet, that’d be a bizarre claim.
I think you’ll find there are millions of women disagree with you
Really?
Boris in some senses
Trudeau never left the classroom
Never learned anything there either.
Out of interest which category would you place our beloved Scottish FM?
Cranky.
Gargoyle.
Justin Trudeau is HOT. His Derriere was even more popular than Pippa Middletons!
I thought the conversation was about females. A kind of ‘little princess’ psychology beingh discussed. Shocking isn’t it, that we might single out women!! Ooh, the outrage!
I don’t feel I have to go round constantly proving that I’m not a misogynist, not a racist, etc. Funny that isn’t it.
Sadly that day has passed. As men, we are inately and irredeemably mysogonists. As non BAME we are inately and irredeemably racist. The language of Woke does not see any way we can avoid or mitigate these sins. No discussion is possible because no common framework exists. It is a Differend not a Difference.
The first step to recovery is admittance.
Good luck!
Don’t be silly. Plenty of white men are neither racist nor misogynist. Whether you yourself are is entirely up to you and the choices you make.
Whoosh.
His admirably sarcastic point (I believe) was that white men are routinely being labelled as “irredeemably racist and misogynist”, and that he isn’t guilty of that.
I’m sceptical of the general claim (none but a minority of hyper-feminist cranks make such accusations). And I sometimes find that those who rapidly deflect to claims that all men (or white people) are routinely labelled as misogynist (or racist) are the ones who themselves have been called out for just such speech. Not accusing Peter of that, mind! I’m sure he’s a perfectly decent sort.
The fact that you don’t have to do these things is the whole point. Not really funny because the modern way has left you behind.
That will be the modern ‘woke’ way of the identity politics pushers, I presume; the uber racists who deplore racism, the uber sexists who deplore sexism etc. etc ad nauseam.
“the modern way has left you behind”
Classic ageist comment of course. Don’t trouble yourself over it. I forgive you.
Or you, rather. The silly seventies have passed quite some while ago. We’re all altright these days. Do keep up.
More than a touch
Get off your woke high horse – this is about MM who happens to be An unpleasant female person
I’m a female, Paul. If there was a touch of misogyny in there, i’d have detected it. There wasn’t.
Unless of course you’re singling me out to accuse me of committing misogyny.
good lumping together, let us all add a few more attention-seeking virtue-signalers
I would add \AOC (as she hates to be known) to that list. Watch her performance re the Capitol Hill event to see a devastatingly accurate impression of an hysterical 18 year old from a 34 year old.
Ouch. Misogyny doesn’t strengthen your case.
So pointing out the fact there are some despicable individuals out there who happen to be female is misogyny- and you’ve just commented about whiners- dear me
Women can be as aggressive as men.
Well not quite.
Women lack the powerholding positions in state affairs and the commercial C-Suite. Also the financial resources and time (caregiving tends to soak up disposable time for dastardly deeds) to truly rival men on the continuum of horror and aggression.
But we’re getting there! 😉
What country do you live in, Uganda, Pakistan, or? Genuinely curious.
I agree. I am a woman and can’t stand the ‘me too’ brigade! I have never understood the need to be better than a man, especially in this day of the social media morons who demand equality….isn’t that conflict of interest? As for Megan Markle it was obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense, what exactly her ambitions were. As lovely as Harry is or was, I don’t think she would have crossed the road for him if he had been an ‘asda’ worker! Apologies to all Asda workers.
I presume you might be referring to the Swedish teenage parrot who has even been proposed for a Nobel Prize, after all, she has been granted an audience with the President of the United States, Obama the 3rd. or was it the other way around????
A little bit. But more how news media, social media, and the education and entertainment industry have conformed themselves to those types of silly sensibilities.
So we have misogynistic ageism and a non-clinical psychiatric diagnosis.
You are referencing “people” for both Harry and Meghan yet chose to label two people explicitly as “narcissistic teenage girls.”
Girls are always more morally depraved than a teenage boy, I suppose. Nothing more hysterical and untrustworthy than a teenage girl.
Do you have the ability to critique without employing tired labels and their biased tropes?
My understanding of Meghan’s character has come from reading comments and analysis from several women commentators, all of whom agree that she is a manipulative narcissist. If it is misogynistic to describe her as this, then there are a good number of women who are also misogynists.
When it comes down to pure wickedness, vindictiveness, manipulation, jealousy and narcissism – females top the league hands down over men, who are largely too blind to see through them. I speak as an elderly white female who has encountered many such women over the years. Hence why most women if asked would prefer a male boss.
How do you know what anyone would think unless they were asked?
Brava! We own an SME that employs older women and gay men. It is a perfect mix!
Yep. Agreed. With the exception of one male manager, all the bad experiences that I have had in the work place have involved women. I prefer working with men full stop. This is not to say I have not worked with some wonderful women, just that in my experience, men are better at separating work from personal views when interacting with others.
Today, your view does not count because you are elderly and white.
But all of the perverts and weirdos were men. Pretty much breaks even for me.
I’m an organizational designer and coach. All I do is clean up after conflict avoidant men who make a mess of things and also fail-ups. Usually they’re one in the same.
In my experience, women leaders tend to be more “together” than the men leaders and have the better teams.
Patently incorrect.
Wonder from what sloppy hell did you pull that rubbish out.
Absolutely. Women can internalize misogyny and most do to some degree.
Usually women wield misogyny to appeal to men (power by proxy) or step on other women deemed competition for higher rank.
“Mind wise” is a great research book on how people are better at predicting how others will respond to given scenarios. But we’re terrible at assessing motivation. Even 20 year married couples only accurately assessed their spouse’s motivation 18% of the time.
None of these alleged women commenters, you, nor I are privy to any substantial knowledge of Harry and Megan’s lives not nor the Royal family’s. Nor is anyone qualified to diagnose narcissistic personality disorder.
At most, Harry and Megan are annoying but not worthy of vitoral. Heterosexual women get off on being desired. A famous man relinquishing the trappings of a wealthy yet unsupportive family is the ultimate peak of being desirable for many women. Perhaps these women commenters are feeling some schadenfreude.
I’m not team Harry and Megan, as much as I team rational and anti-smear campaign.
‘Alleged’, eh?
Does your view of ageism also include remarks against older people or are you being selective?
My definition is inclusive.
No need to infantilize adults nor dismiss them as boomers to get a point across.
Time on this earth hardly correlates to one’s intelligence, life experience, nor wisdom.
Do you have the ability to produce a sentence in the English language rather than wokelish and psychobabble ?
Going over your head is it?
Nope, it’s just what you type is incoherent woke rubbish.
It would appear to be coherent enough.
‘Would appear’ to whom? To a 13 year old with learning difficulties?
No, but this kind of response proves my point exactly. You take the worst interpretation of what is said and nastily twist it to some moral judgement of another – the very actions I was describing in my post. Thanks for proving my point, Linnette.
Why is it different when you do the same with motivations behind Harry and Megan’s actions?
Also, do you need a band aid?
Not surprising in an age when Teen Vogue leads the wokespeak, female teens like Greta Thunberg are global icons and increasing numbers of men want to be female teens.
39; an age where the first career is dead and all that beckons is the possibility of either a talk show host or politics – either of which would leave her in the spotlight she so craves.
They do say that every dog has his day…..
She is ideal Democrat material and I have seen speculation (by other commentators) that she is looking in that direction.
39 going on 13 may not be a good combination but one not unusual these days.
Madame is not stupid. She has no perspective. I predict however the Sussexes will withdraw the interview invoking a compassionate concern for his grandfather’s health
i hope you’re right.
they are both too self obsessed to think of anyone else
A spoiled and entitled 13 year old.
I suspect she’s a smart, intelligent cookie who just happens to be ruthless and self-interested in getting what she wants. I doubt her problem is a lack of brains.
Just a note: I use teenage in the sense of intellect and education. I once had a boss who I referred to as ‘my teenage boss’ for the same reasons.
Acts six!
People that age do seem increasingly teenagers though.
No she’s 43 – born 1977 according to her father.
In years – yes (39), in maturity no way!
These two. So over.
Megan was expecting “celebrity” – she then realised it was actually “duty”, so she returned to “celebrity”.
It’s like watching a never ending video called “Narcissism for Dummies”
Perhaps they “are” making the world a better place, by giving us all something to laugh about?
Other emotional reactions are available, such as puking!
😉
Thank you Douglas Murray, eloquently put, I have no interest in the Sussex’es. When they left to pursue privacy and make their own way in the world, I wished them well.
I can’t balance their wishes against their actions. For a couple who found the glare of media coverage intrusive and mentally harming moving to a millionaires playground in the Republic of California is questionable, spending two hours whingeing to a sycophantic interviewer is a weird way of protecting their family and respecting the Royal Family.
Especially when a grandfather is in Hospital, although Meghan had displayed a similar lack of sympathy when her own father was hospitalised near her wedding day.
I find them both adopting and playing on victimhood the whole time to be distasteful, unpleasant and highly unedifying. It is insulting to those who bear their very real troubles with dignity. The Sussexes have lost support in the UK and will quickly lose it elsewhere. They are a pair of overgrown brats
There does seem to be a belief in many “woke” people that how you present yourself publically is the important thing about you, not who you really are and what you do when you aren’t in front of a camera or on Twitter. They don’t appear to recognise the concept of hypocrisy. Polly Toynbee never seemed to understand why having a villa in Tuscany and sending her kids to private school was a fair line of attack against someone who constantly talked about inequality and called for fee paying schools to be banned. The Sussexes don’t understand why many people bristle at being told about their “privilege” by European royalty living in a mansion in Beverly Hills and lectured about goodness and compassion by an entitled bully.
Perhaps towering hypocrisy is a key quality for the fame gig? Right royal hustlers like these two couldn’t function without an endless supply of it.
What I don’t understand amongst all the Meghan moaning, is that every time she or “Haz” claim that she has been the victim of racial bias in the UK, no one ever says “like what? – give me an actual genuine example”. I think they’d be hard pushed to provide one.
Yes, I’ve noticed that too. And when challenged, proponents of this argument fall back on ‘Oh, it was in the tabloids’ though they have never actually read them, they just know.
Well, for one, i called her “princess golliwoke” in the comments section of Breitbart London. Not once but twice. Somehow doubt though that she’s read it.
Now i did it again. Make that three.
Right
Meghan Markle appears to be a text book narcissist. Like all good members of this species she must have her emotional fuel which she gains, again textbook, through a variety of measures: coupling with an Empath (Harry); creating an ‘Us vs. Them’ scenario through isolating her partner from his friends and family (relocating to the US) and seeking discord, rather than mediation in the name of ‘speaking her truth’; professing to do good whilst furthering her own self-centred objectives; a grandiose sense of her own self-importance and entitlement; a lack of genuine empathy (as an actress she has some skill in faking it though) and referring everything back to herself to ensure the spotlight stays on her (the current bullying claims are immediately turned around to her own perceived victimhood “I was bullied too”).
HM the Queen would do well to strip the pair of their Duke and Duchess titles and remove Harry and his children from the lineage. If it ever came to pass Harry would destroy the monarchy, courtesy of his insatiable wife whose sense of duty extends to brand Meghan Markle only.
Agree, textbook narcissist. No self awareness and tone deaf to public opinion.
It always amazes me how few people actually defend this brain dead duo and the silly, infantile, parallel universe in which they live. Does anyone actually hold these opinions, Elton John aside?
Actually surprises me how many do defend them – which raises questions about the intelligence of these people – eg Susanna Reid, the nodding dog who accompanies Piers Morgan – who to his credit tells it like it is – but to Reid they can do no wrong.
How does keeping his grandson away from Charles square with doing good and spreading compassion around the world?
not only Charles but her father too she is an equal opportunities family denier
MeAgain is all about MeAgain
Can’t wait for the acrimonious divorce.
Don’t get too excited, ultimately you and I will be paying the bill.
I give it 13 years. So end of the decade
I think we should stop writing about them. Stop reading about them. Stop thinking about them. They are inconsequential now. They are nobodies.
She is a low grade actress who has nothing of importance in her acting port folio. He was in the army but didn’t achieve high rank due to longevity of service. Therefore two extremely mediocre characters in world of make-believe that relies on constant media attention. Take the attention away and they will be dry as dust and forgotten.
Therefore two extremely mediocre characters in world of make-believe that relies on constant media attention.
A line that could be applied to more people than a sane person might think possible. It is amazing how often people with nothing to contribute are elevated to celebrity or pseudo-celebrity status. At least the class of Internet influencers does something that resembles work.
So true. Nobodies. The royal family has been in this position for a long time in the commonwealth countries. 9 out of 10 people in the majority of the commonwealth countries are not able to identify the royal family or even know they are ‘head’ of the country. These “nobodies” have only shown up the ‘nobodiness” of the firm ” as dry as dust and forgotten” to the rest of us.
A very good article but it misses the point that the Sussexes are not addressing a British audience but an American one in general and a Californian one in particular. In this Megan Markle plays a brilliant hand with a constituency ready primed after months lapping up episodes of The Crown. This Sunday will see their coronation at the Whinfrey cathedral as the King and Queen of Woke.
You nailed it. Murray might not understand the American public very well. She is playing very well with two big and profitable audiences in particular.
First are the kinds of people who fawn over Diana and read People magazine and are dazzled by the British monarchy even if they might feel compelled to lament how “snooty” they are. But it’s all so grand. To them Megan and Harry will retain a connection to royalty and will have style and these people will feel for them both awe and pity. These people are easy to play.
Second are the vapid Hollywood and media types for whom Harry and Megan are kindred spirits – good people saving the world, elites back scratching each other, making lots of money, never talking about class, always talking about how the world’s problems boil down to other people being mean, up to the second on the latest buzzwords, saying things today like “kindness”.
I suspect like most people, I hoped in the run up to the wedding that they would be happy. Like most people I was irritated by her father and sisters constant harping on about how she owed them and felt some compassion for her predicament. But then they flounced out, like a couple of teenagers at a Prom.
Blaming everyone, pleading the victim and seemingly being genuinely surprised that they weren’t going to be allowed to pick and choose when they were allowed to play the Royal.
Now like most people I’m simply sick of them. I’d like them to have the dignity to shut up, go away and retire from view. They say nothing worth listening to.
Oh and let’s strip them of their titles.
Thing is before the wedding I saw the half Sister interviewed and I thought ‘you really are a poisonous cow’. But now I have come to the conclusion that the sister was right in everything she said. I also think that Harry and that woman have not really behaved very well towards Thomas Markel. I read recently – might not be true of course – that ‘that woman’ told her father he was invited to the wedding only if he cut off contact with his other family, her half sister and brother. One can sort of believe that is true. I also think that the allegations of her bullying Palace staff are true. She really isn’t a very nice person and her behaviour has been deplorable.
I pretty much agree with all of what you say.
I feel the same way about Prince Phillip.
If their mission statement was simply to “do good works” the Firm could have had the Megarry couple booked up 24/7.
I think the problem was as B-list royals they weren’t to chuffed at the prospect of putting up with the drudgery that job often entails (ie; Duty) with none of the A-list fame. Using royal family membership privileges to access the power of the Hollywood celebrity machine seemed a much more attractive plan until the Firm severely cut their credit limit.
They’re hoping that a professionally crafted (that’s Oprah’s job) “we’re just victims trying to help others” spin job will make up their shortfall in collateral.
royalty as victims. The mind boggles.
Well over a year ago I distinctly remember hearing about her treating the staff terribly. I was surprised then no one looked further into it.
Megan Markle – is how she should be addressed is completely using Harry the dolt and the Royal family to stay in the limelight. The press should truly take a stand and not report on their stupid life.
People all over the world are struggling with not being able to make ends meet and to know that she is whining about being treated unfairly is just disingenuous. She clearly has no tact to see how insulting her claims are.
Meghan is an actress so she might want to revisit Shakespeare. To most of us the plays are about love, duty, treachery, murder and betrayal. To the Royal Family they’re about relatives…
One doubts Meghan would be familiar with the Bard…
She’s more likely to vaguely join woke demands to shelve the classics and call out Shakespeare’s works as “problematic” and then mutter something about “whiteness”.
Perhaps Harry should have a shot at basic Shakespeare. As The Merry Wives of Windsor is self-evidently a non-starter, perhaps The Taming of the Shrew?
Don’t give her ideas. Shakespeare was butchered enough already without her having a go at it.
Oedipus Rex would be fitting.
I just cannot buy any of their nonsense which is only possible because of the recent popularity of BLM and the sanctimonious attitude of their followers. The nerve of the two of them even uttering the word “compassion” while badmouthing the Queen when Prince Phillip is in hospital is frankly unforgivable. They claimed to want “privacy” when in fact they are using their notoriety for a “tell all” interview with the queen of victimhood. Her Majesty has been running the country for decades, they instead are just running their mouths to tear down a country that welcomed them with open arms.
Didn’t realise the Queen ran the country- here’s me thinking we were a parliamentary democracy with an outdated institution called the monarchy bleeding us dry
I am amazed how the word “Compassion”, has now become so sullied. When to see that word in 2021, to only bring to mind, a vision of, greed, disrespect, and abuse of power. I hope those two have enjoyed their moments in the spotlight. For when they eventually wake from their epic sense of, victimhood. They will see the undeserved pain they have caused their family’s, and to their own now badly tarnished reputations, that will live on, forever.
What makes you think that they will ever wake up? I think they will be “victims” forever.
In quite a lot of cases:
Victims = Compo
Prince Numbskull of Wales gifted the biggest lottery win in history to this scheming, self-obsessed woman. Fair enough – let them get on with it.
But, from me, to them, three things:
Poor Harry. Before Meghan he had all the attributes of an ‘all round jolly good bloke’ that enabled him to make and could have continued to make his own distinctive contribution as a popular royal. The Invictus Games is a good example. But now he is fated to live out his life as a modern version of the Duke of Windsor. Sad for him.
I couldn’t agree more, Mark. I think he will come to deeply regret all this . While it may be true that she experienced some racism, I think they are both exaggerating it. It is understandable that Harry reacted strongly, given what happened to his mother ,but if only Meghan had behaved with more grace and patience it would have withered on the vine and she would have become a national treasure. She has thrown away the opportunity of a lifetime and probably wrecked his life also. I can’t see him being happy there. It is utterly tragic.
Yes and I can’t see her allowing the children to leave the United States if the marriage fails – and maybe if it doesn’t.
Maybe she doesn’t want to be another sad but dutiful Grace Kelly.
Brilliant comment!
I told my wife last week that for Meghan to succeed, Harry has to fail. She was a bit puzzled. The Oprah interview is just the beginning.
As an American, Meghan is a total nobody who nevertheless has aspirations and Prince Harry provides what she never could achieve on her own. Sadly we now have to see the couple in our daily press looking hurt and sanctimonious. Why? Beats me. Enough already! There are so many people who are more interesting, good-looking and gifted.
I never watched “The Only Way Is Essex” and I have no interest in “The Only Way Is Sussex”. I am, however, intrigued and concerned by how many simply dreadful people (and organisations) appear to be in the limelight these days… They claim the moral high-ground through the lowest of motives and tactics and use social media to promote themselves. Main stream media seems to be under their spell and clamours to “hold to account” anyone who does not fall to their knees before them.
So, those of us who do not want to be preached to and told what we should think, what is good and what will make us happy, how do we counter this movement? How does the “silent majority” find its voice? And how do we make this sorry pair less visible and vocal?
I think just wake more and more people up to them and their tactics. They rely on people’s naivete.
Time moves on so quickly. One minute Harry is running through the halls of a Las Vegas hotel with seven naked women and the next he’s joined forces with a former actress to save the world. They’re self delusional clowns putting themselves on pious pedestals for entertainment purposes only. Let’s retain our sense of humor!
…the Sussexes are not addressing a British audience but an American one in general and a Californian one in particular…as Simon Baseleyssimons said, indeed. I am marooned in her neck of the woods, and she is a replica of many here, from her Botox to her Boho to her mantras.
I want to know why the Duchess of Montecito can say that “it was not her job to coddle people, “ referring to palace aides, and now say that she is a role model for compassion for others and for doing what is good and what is right?
harry always looks miserable/worried these days and he clings on to meghan as if she is his mother. whats up folks.
It’s called Stockholm Syndrome. Or a live hostage video.
The Lady lives in the same self congratulatory self absorbed and self righteous world as the Hollywood luvvies she identifies with ‘ we are not worthy ‘ of course yet she shares herself with us . I’m filling up .
Will staff come forward from when she was married to her first husband, Trevor Engelson. And staff from before she met Harry in America and on filming shoots she was in for television.
Anyone who has ever worked for her should come forward so that we get a fair profile of her though her staff over many years.
We should not just go by Kensington Palace staff and nannies.
I just wonder how Harry is going to fill his long, meaningless days as a Tinsel-Town celebrity.
By imagining he’s a raindrop?
Meghan has issues to say the least. She’s colossally insecure, hence manipulative. I had a sister-in-law like this, who literally destroyed my brother. After she got him by getting pregnant, she got him involved in money schemes which got him imprisoned, lost his military career (he was in Special Forces). She used sex as a weapon. She then started to cheat on him with everyone in sight, even the chaperone on her daughter’s European trip. Then she tricked him again (long story) which got him thrown into prison again; Even the judge said my brother was caught in a bind. My sister-in-law isolated my brother from the entire family, as it gave her maximum control. She divorced him and took everything he had. After he got out of prison, he died in a single engine plane crash – some think he committed suicide. I’m just saying, women like Meghan can be lethal, as their desires and insecurities can know no bounds. Beware Harry.
Very sorry to read this. My brother’s wife is a psycho but compared to your sister-in-law she seems to be a pussycat
A completely irrelevant couple that deserve each other but not the publicity they continue to receive.
As long as this couple is woke, and Meghan is a WOC, they will receive unquestionable media coverage.
All about managing their public profile ‘ caring, compassionate, sensitive people etc etc’ . All to do with ‘brand image’ and sits alongside the carefully posed black and white images of them as loving caring parents and so on. All part of life in Tinsel Town. It could also be that they genuinely believe they are caring etc, in which case, heaven help, them. Sooner or later someone will reveal an exclusive ‘the truth about Harry and Meghan ‘
How does a Eton-and-Sandhurst Royal Prince and his pushy Hollywood Duchess with everything ‘Me too’ themselves? It’s bewildering. Maybe it’s Di’s toxic legacy – she showed how a Princess can milk the public by claiming eternal victimhood at the public’s hand. Markle is exacting her revenge for not being elevated to a Princess on her wedding day. The bullying by Markle charge may evaporate but the accusation has already served its purpose.
Diana did not enter the scene with a chip on her shoulder and parts of the family treated her poorly, Charles included. Unlike Markle, Di was a paparazzi staple; the woman couldn’t scratch her nose without three dozen photogs there to capture the moment.
Di loved, loved, loved, being a focus of the press. She actively orchestrated press coverage and then complained about it. She lived through her press coverage.
Possibly, but only after the press had fed off her for years, and I don’t think she did have the support of the RF, or the love of her husband.
Unlike Markle, whose husband idolises her, and who was obviously welcomed into the RF at the beginning.
Surely Harry has Stockholm syndrome? Somebody should arrange for his army mates to organise a rescue.
I think you are spot on – she has brainwashed him, he coped for 20 years after Diana’s death, which was tragic but the same for William and something many youngsters have to live with, albeit less publicly. When the witch came on the scene he suddenly has mental health issues – no doubt due to her doing a number on him seeing $$$$ signs in a sob story. Would not be surprised if his spaced out look is down to anti-depressant medication she has instigated.
He does follow in his mothers footsteps to some extent. Washing one’s dirty linen in public.
So – Mr and Mrs Markle – how’s the privacy thing going?
The point about the whole Meghan-as-victim idea that troubles me is that how could she not realise what sort of life she was signing up for? After all, Harry knows what his mother faced and Meghan is a smart, media savvy woman. Surely if she really didn’t know the extent of it, then he and Palace officials would have briefed her, wouldn’t they?
If the marriage goes wrong, Meghan has nothing to lose. Fame, wealth and Royal children will be hers. What will Harry have left?
How exactly do you spread compassion round the world? Instead of letting people get away with these vague and virtuous sounding sentiments they should be asked what they mean and how they will do it,
Yes, compassion already exists around the world. It’s positive action that is missing in many places.
What is needed in this situation, is for Harry and his descendants to be removed from the line of succession. From that point on, their antics are of no constitutional significance and the interest of the British public will wane.
I reckon they have embarked on a path vis a vis Winfrey that can only have one outcome. We can assume their first interview will include some measure of trash-talking, I don’t reckon Winfrey would extend the opportunity without some juicy revelations. Trouble is, after the splash, folk lose interest. If they want a second bite, more dirt will be demanded, and so on and so forth until they just peter out. Eventually it will dawn upon them that their position within the Royal Family was really the only magic they had.
I dare say Meghan has a plan for the end game, after all, she didn’t even know Winfrey when she invited her to the wedding.
Having read further, they got engaged around the Christmas time and she then phoned Winfrey’s people to open the batting, and immediately clashed with the palace staff who wanted to know what information she was giving out to Winfrey, and intending to disclose on air. So battle had commenced long before the wedding.
She is holding all the cards now, because she has the little-un in US jurisdiction, and the same will pertain re the new baby. So Harry had better stay on her good side….
This is very astute observation and analysis of that ‘Sussex-ese’ language: something that now you point it out, I realise I had registered but not fully noticed. A form of peripheral emotional vision, it rings not hollow but a touch sinister, and yes, as you say, more than a touch out of touch. Actually, I suppose the tone is ultimately narcissistic.
Going on International Telly and slagging off the in laws is not smart in first couple of years of marriage . Whats the upside ?
$$$$$$
Woke points from a million followers.
Most people don’t care about this grafter and her sad ‘prince.’ I feel sorry for the family for their loss of their brother, son, grandson etc., but he is a grown man and however damaged, responsible for his life and his wife.
The sooner the Queen strips them of all titles and let’s them go off and have their own private life, as claimed, joke Joyce, the better. Harry should also be removed from the line of succession.
While monarchy is a hangover from the past it seems to work well for the British but they need to trim it all down, stop providing support to any but the sovereign and immediate family and let the rest support themselves.
Beautifully put, Master Murray.
I have never met Meghan, and hope that continues to be the case. I always assume the truth lies somewhere in the middle – she is neither a saint nor the devil – and thought we could rely on the known facts: she is older than Harry; she is more experienced than Harry (like Mrs Simpson, already a marriage behind her); and she is more intelligent than Harry – not difficult do I hear someone say? I now realise I got the third part wrong. Her vapid narcissism betrays a complete absence of self awareness and an EQ that must struggle to achieve room temperature.
“Neither a saint or the devil…”
Yes, rather like all of us.
Now that they have well and truly bitten the hand that grandly fed them, let’s just sit back and watch them squirm their way into obscurity. How long? A) 2 years B) 3 years C) 5 years.
Well done! Expresses why my hackles always go up when a person claims to be a source of “compassion” or a victim of “bullying”. Even the Pope demonstrates compassion rather than claiming it as a title, and I would guess Papa Francis to be a bit more experienced in the compassion department. Claiming victimization by “bullying” is also fraught and too often used to justify aggressive action.
They didn’t invent the celebrity culture, or the social media. They have simply used both to monetise the fact that he is sixth in line to the throne. How else could they become rich? The very fact that they have chosen this path should prompt the monarch to withdraw the titles, and the Government to cancel their rights to succession.
It was obvious that Meghan was never going to become a member of The Firm. It would have been better if Harry had stepped down from Royal duties before his wedding. I do not know if this is constitutionally possible, but if it is HM should remove him from the line of succession. Perhaps the Oprah interview will provide the right opportunity to do so.
Increasingly, the Sussexes are seen as a joke — Hairy and Me-again as one wag put it.
I’m having a hard time reconciling the headline “How Meghan won” with the content of the article.
I think it is all more complex than this. Harry and Meghan explicitly want an argument to cause a scene in order to stick the knife in to that evil Western civilisation and its history. I’m not joking or nuts. That is what “woke” is all about…performative repentance and castigation of Western history and culture…
When interviewed, beauty competition contestants used to be asked what their ambition was. They often replied things like “To create world peace.” It’s all a bit like that.
My sides are aching with laughing – beautifully written and perfectly analysed.
I still like Harry – but there is no doubt in my mind he is totally cucked. I noted that the interview is apparently mostly about Meghan and he just joins in at the end like the bag handler he has become.
“….building compassion around the world“…. and teaching the world to sing…. in perfect harmony etc.
Definition of a Sussex sociopath:
1. A lack of empathy for others
2. Little to no genuine remorse
3. The manipulation of other people
4. Lying and deceit
5. A sense of superiority over others
6. Little to no regard for right or wrong
7. The belief that rules do not apply to them
8. Getting into legal trouble or a little regard for the law
9. A lack of responsibility or engaging in irresponsible behaviours
10. Aggression or hostility
11. The exploitation of other people
I rest my case m’lud!
Add to this –
’12. Moral elitism
[What] makes her so uniquely unpopular with elements of the press?
Holier-than-thou attitude.
Race card? Well played.
You actually believe that tabloid journalism is never ever motivated by race, or spite?
“spreading compassion” and a bully. Cares about people in the abstract but flesh-and-blood individuals get pushed around. Her type is all too common these days.
How much does it cost to buy a second hand A-list Royal – now we know the answer, exactly $112million USD.
Harry could have turned up at Netflix with many different partners and landed that deal because in essence Netflix have bought themselves a goodly slice of ‘the Firm’.
For Meghan however, how could she ever land it. She couldn’t. It had to be Harry or bust.
And he only qualified because he was royal. Without that cachet he has zero to sell.
The actions of Ms Markle bring to mind the role of the hostesses in the game show deal or no deal, parading around a set with a empty box opening it on demand to reveal an inevitable disappointment
One would think that a couple so busy ‘building compassion around the world’ wouldn’t trash talk their family, their child’s grandparents, etc.
But then one would also be able to notice the distinction between the noble aspiration to Tell The Truth as opposed to the squishy wishy Lefty directive to Tell One’s Truth.
Edward & Mrs. Simpson had no children, but if the next generation is unreconciled, this story will run and run.
unearned self-importance may well be worse than any drug or booze habit a person might have.
“And as a result, a very modern form of deference is demanded: do not criticise me, for I am doing much good in the world”.
Oh, I don’t know about modern, Douglas – sure, the modern Democratic Party use this rationale to keep American blacks in perpetual poverty, and thus perpetually voting ‘D’.
But, as any of your contacts in the BBC will doubtless freely tell you, so did their much-prized star, James Wilson Vincent Savile, OBE.
It’s amazing how sanctimonious people can sound, when complaining about sanctimony in others (he says sanctimoniously).
Breathe deeply, people. And relax.
What a pair of twits Harry and Megan are!
Yet more grist to the amoral entertainment mill. Yay!
Why turn a page on an unhappy chapter in your personal history when, for want of something more constructive to do, you can so easily monetise it ad nauseam in the country which does it best, particularly after your rather generous purse strings have just been unceremoniously cut?
Not saying that ‘the Palace’ is covering itself in glory here either incidentally, suddenly dragging up bullying allegations from two years ago.
I mean, this begs the question why were they apparently buried then and why have they been dug up now?
Don’t worry, I was being rhetorical.
Truth be known the people most interested in this stuff are the ‘fan my brow’ pearl clutchers whose demand feeds the media monster that in turn feeds off and keeps supplying this tosh to satisfy their demands.
It’s a symbiotic, self-perpetuating, grubby and yet ultimately vacuous existence.
Not only does this insatiable audience get to play judge, jury and executioner with impunity on this whole sorry charade, the likes of Harry who, so goes the narrative, nobly wishes to save his put upon belle from the same grisly fate of his mother, is more than happy to court these very same ‘malevolent’ forces for personal gain that sealed hers.
Don’t sully yourselves. Move on, people. Nothing to see here.
A tad unfair to the Palace. Most of these bullying allegations have been around for ages – I’ve certainly read of them. What was new was the Email from Jason thingey to a more senior member of the Clarence House staff. I bet the Mail have had that for ages, but the trouble is it looks very much like the bullying and poor behaviour on Meghan’s part was reported up chain and nothing was done about it. Certainly the victims of her bullying, which I think is all probably true, are now having their revenge.
If you get someone who worked for the Queen for 20+ years describe them as ‘impossible’ and like ‘teenagers’, and there had even been crossed words with Angela Kelly, the most senior of the Queen’s staff, then it shows something was not right.
‘Most of these bullying allegations have been around for ages – I’ve certainly read of them’
I guess I don’t follow these things that closely as you can probably guess from my comment.
When did you first read about them then?
She’s the palest “black” woman I’ve ever heard of. How many times has she had her nose and lips done?
Collectively we need to ignore such people, in the same way that most of us ignore other bloviating celebrities.
Poor Harry. It reminds me of an Ibsen tragedy. He’ll go insane.
We were just saying the same- it could end very badly indeed.
Like watching a car crash in very, very slow motion.
Yes, but moving on from this particular example of sucking at the teat of public celebrity, what about getting rid of the whole crowd. The Royals slow but enduring translation into soap farce must surely prompt some consideration of moving to a republic. OK, symbolic not substantive. Even if we throw in the Lords. But how about a written constitution. Now we’re talking.
Douglas Murray is only two years older than her.
I often wondered why my parents and grandparents had such a down on Edward 8 and Wallace Simpson. That happened before i was born and i thought they’d quit and kept quiet bar a bit of cheer-leading for the NSDAP, the wokists of their day. I suppose its the notion of leaving an institution that members are supposed to support for/with their lives like the Mafia or Hells Angels. Anyway Sussex-ese is a very naive dialect. It won’t get much support outside the discredited pseudo-academia of the victim and diversity fetishists. Its a pity as the pair could have had something worthwhile to say about the negativity of the press, fakebook, the Uk royal family and its myriad hangers on. Instead they chose to snipe like a pair of rejected concubines from the Chinese Imperial court.
In many ways selfish Harry is displaying many of the traits of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. I’m afraid Harry and that woman have behaved so badly there is no real possibility of them coming back, and looking at comment elsewhere about them it is almost entirely negative and some of it deeply hostile. It seems ‘that woman’ is estranged from her family, save her Mother, and seems determined to poison relations between Harry and his family. He should remember the fate of the Duke. I think it was Hugo Vickers who remarked he had never seen anyone with such sad eyes as the Duke, and ultimately they both lived very empty life in exile in Paris. I suppose California does have better weather.
Stockholm syndrome?
The whole article is sad because it is a reminder that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are only able to perform their charitable tasks because of the money given to them through the Royal Family (i.e. the Civil list and the Duchy of Cornwall) and the British public (through the tax system that pays for the Civil List), both sectors from which they are estranged. Harry’s army pay would not pay for the gilded life they are living now, nor would Megan’s acting proceeds (for which she earned $500,000 per episode of ‘Suits’ which is less than the $1 million paid to the cast members of ‘Friends’ per episode over 20 years ago). In addition, their argument about leaving the UK so they would not face the same media attention as Diana does not wash as his elder brother and family have remained and been an inspiration during the Covid crisis.
You’re a bit behind the times. The ‘Civil List’ has been abolished and replaced by the Sovereign Grant, which is 15% of the profits from the Crown Estate. It was King George III who surrendered to Parliament the revenues from the Crown Estate in exchange for a ‘Civil List’ payment. As Parliament are no longer keeping their side of the bargain whosoever negotiates for the Queen made a fist of it: the entire revenues should have been returned to the Sovereign, not a miserable 15% ! The taxpayer pays for security, but as there is 85% of the Crown Estate revenue left, they make a fat profit from the deal, so no taxpayer funds as such are used.
What sort of inspiration? They all fled to their second / country homes at the first opportunity, leaving not a single ‘working’ royal in the nation’s capital. Charles with his miraculously (suspiciously) rapid recovery from Covid. Then the Queen herself with her ill advised comments on vaccine scepticism, demonstrating a total lack of scientific understanding – albeit probably being used by the government as a regal nudge. Not fair on her, but her continuing friendships with dodgy Gulf royalty somewhat attenuate my sympathy.
William and Kate are fine people, especially compared to Harry and Meghan. But they have yet to inspire beyond the platitudinal during this sh*tshow, sorry, pandemic.
I think she probably found being a working royal too much work for too little adoration. A silly woman who should never have been let into the club in the first place. Americans have never understood the British royal family.
Please don’t lump all Americans into Meghan Markle’s category. I find her whiny and entitled just like everyone else does. It wasn’t the work since all she really did was have a huge expensive wedding. But the stage wasn’t big enough, she wasn’t going to be happy opening supermarkets in cold rainy English towns. No one in California much cares about dukes and duchesses, the only reason they are getting the current attention is that everyone thinks they will drop some huge scoop. She saw poor Harry coming a mile off, dupe that he was. There is a certain type of woman who looks for this amiable dunce type of man. Let’s leave them in California and get the rest of the world back to something like addressing COVID. The sussexes do not matter. Be grateful that William was the older son.
Some have wondered why Mr Murray would waste his talent and his ink in this reflection on the Sussex embarrassment. It seems to me that he is primarily concerned with the way in which our language is being used so that words which seem to say one thing actually communicate something which is more or less the diametric opposite. Hence his invention of the term “Sussex-ese”.
It might be worth repeating what a couple of people have already said. We are not the planned audience for the HAZMEG show. The planned audience is the US of A… and elsewhere. Much of that audience will enjoy any discomfiture that can inflicted on the UK and its royal family. And if anyone can be trusted to understand racism, it’s an american audience. They do rather a lot of it… and,,, inevitably, they obsess about it.
Not being a royalist, I feel that I should suggest that the royal family is one of our most valuable institutions… particularly for those – like me – who do not have much. We help them with their finances and we show deference to the extent that we are inclined,,, all in the hope that we might witness the right way to do this, that or the other thing… and how noble people might be if sufficiently advantaged. It is sad for our country… and for our species… when it goes so horribly wrong as it has with Harry.
What a despicable pair they make, the recent clips of them simpering and whingeing about their perceived treatment is a disgrace to decency. Champions of compassion my back side, they have all the compassion and grace of a patch of Autumn nettles, and similar mental ability.
The sad part for them is that “The Firm” aka the Royals know this sort of business a lot better than they do and will come out on top in the end, the Netflix darlings will be out of a job within 3 years and there will be some scrambling by the pair of them to find real decency but we’ll have left them behind by then. Meghan will go back to Z list acting, and Harry will have a break down of the sort he aspires to suffer from at the moment.
Despicable pair of skins.
My bet is that both Meghan and Harry will end up with more mental issues than her father and her step-sister. In the meantime, I’d love the couple to agree to an interview with Douglas. They’d crumble in less than 5 minutes.
Bravo!
Even up to the sixties Harry or Hank would have been banished to the Bowes-Lyons lunatic attic, as for Markle, they’d have had her chased.
how long before the royal divorce..?
my guess is 18 mths to 2 years.
As long as Harry remains woke, he is entrapped.
Am I wrong for thinking she looks like a burn victim post-reconstructive surgery in that picture?
Is there really moral standing attached to the royal household beneath the veneer of nostalgia? It’s just a very wealthy family who provides a lot of entertainment, nothing more.
A response to the question is “probably”, whilst the statement following would be better understood if considered at several levels. One frivolous one is to observe that the opening of events, as simple as the local fete or as complex as the Commonwealth Games, is more than “nothing” from a societal perspective. The real advantage of an inherited constitutional monarchy is that it means there is no need to indulge in the election of a privileged President at huge expense to the country involved. Consider the number of times the result of such meritocracies has ended badly for citizens. Included here are countries such as Venezuela, Russia, Cambodia, China ….. and the list continues. Be careful what you wish for!
Idiot
I am watching the Oprah interview now. Meaghan deserves a Best Actress Award. On on more serious note, her manipulation of black Americans sentiments is as cynical as it is dangerous.
You were doing ok until you brought up race..
Well said. What must be realized is that this moralization or virtue signalling is no different than that of a religion, that conditions its adherents to believe they are morally a step above the rest of us.
A religion does not need a god. It just has to be belief-based, think by its feelings, and oppose science and logic. This is why the moralizers should be treated as believers in a religion or worse a cult, and for pushing a belief system.
Religion in the form of the critical theory belief system has made a come back, albeit in a slightly modified form. It is good to be religious, as long as you don’t believe in god or prophets and you are ostensibly pro-science and pro-empiricism. Any surprise Douglas, that the Left is so infatuated with Islam, and critical theory is infiltrating some churches?
I’ve click on several comments so far but nothing happens! I’m told I’ve already voted and the figure turns green sometimes but that’s all.
I’d forgotten the word, pabulum, how apt.
sussexcitis. read a book.
Bored of hearing about them now.
Where did half of the comments disappear??
Or rather, why?
I agree; despite her faults, the fact that she is an actress does not mean she would be indifferent to private letters to her immediate family being made public.
As for Harry, the problem with being born into the royal family is that you are lumbered from the start at I am unsure if wealth compensates for a lack of choices in life. It is a pity that he was not taught to have the courage to be honestly reflective.
When I was young I was lucky enough to get a role in PORGY AND BESS, directed by Trevor Nunn. This was the Royal Opera House Production. I was one of about 5 white characters in the production. It was fabulous. Willard White, Cynthia Hamon et al. We were then invited to be part of the fiim at SHEPPERTON STUDIOS. During shooting we would congregate for lunch. I was young and Naive but the conversation amongst my co-actors was about RACE, INTOLERANCE, Not-knowing-whether they should be Black or white (mixed race). It was SO POLITICAL. Sadly, Race has become even more politicised ever since.
Meaghan and Harry are Power Dilettantes.
A reflection of the 21 century, and what we must overcome.
Once I read “Now you could be forgiven for thinking that… the relationship between the wife of the person sixth in line to the British throne and her father is a matter of public interest.” I realised that this could not be a serious commentary.
Yes, that gave me pause ,but I wonder if it’s an error..I think he meant the opposite( did you, Douglas ?)
Prince Harry is a troubled soul. He seems to be reliving the more nightmarish times of his late Mother without really being able to move on. His wife is really more a feature of his stuck place, poor lamb. We forgive him because we know all this but we cannot extend any of our natural genorosity towards her. She seems to have swallowed his plight without being able to reflect upon it. She needs to help him move on, not recreate his past. There is something of Mozart’s second son about Prince Harry. The poor chap started a “Mozarteum” in honour of the famous father, forever reliving his late father’s past rather than finding his own, unique path. Harry needs to face who he is as distinct from his late Mother’s life and move on, like William so clearly has. Maybe Harry should become an actor? He so needs to stop courting attn for attn’s sake, one of the more aggravating aspects of his late Mother.
Poor Harry has complicated his Oedipus complex by marrying Meghan. She’s keeping him locked into it, and we already know the ending of Oedipus’s tragic predicament.
The timing of the release of their awful tell all to Oprah .. while the grandfather is sick in hospital, well, if this helps put an end to the grandfather’s life, Harry tragic wishes will be fulfilled.
I’ve got no time for Meghan – but none for the Windsors either. They’ve brought a lot of this on themselves by being so resistant to change. And why were the bullying allegations not dealt with at the time, instead of being brought up now? I doubt if they have any more care for the alleged victims of bullying than Meghan does. They are just pawns in the game to be moved around the board in the battle between the Windsors..
I don’t see this as being our fight. It’s a battle between two different sections of the elite, just like the so-called culture wars. All that concerns me is that Harry and Meghan Windsor should no longer be receiving money from the taxpayer as they are no longer ‘working’ royals.
The entire concept of royalty is based on the assumption that royals are better than ordinary people. Don’t tell me that the British royal family really gives a damn whether mere employees are “bullied” or not. They have weathered scandals (Prince Andrew included) that make poor Meghan look like a saint by comparison.
Meghan has made mistakes, including her decision to have a host of Black Americans (neither family nor friends) participating in her wedding or telling South African blacks that she is their “sister.” She added to that idiocy in her recent Oprah Winfrey interview by claiming that she and black South African girls “look alike” and that white, red-haired Archie is “of color.”
Marrying into a new family (especially one as snobbish as the Windsors) is like starting a new job. You keep your head down and don’t make waves.
There appear to be many personal issues going on in the psyche of Harry and Meghan that need to be resolved in a professional psychotherapeutic setting, where privacy is assured and denial is exposed. Both appear to be blissfully unaware of the disruption they are causing to our Anglo-American relations. The ‘firm’ isn’t for everyone. Meghan married her Prince in full awareness of her commitment to the Royal Family, including her responsibility to the Nation’s British Monarch. HRH Elizabeth II was not raised in Hollywood. She was born to be a British Monarch, privileged and unprivileged. Her role is anything but a dream. Meghan made her choice and took Harry with her, along with a host of unresolved hurts about his much loved mother, Diana, and indeed various unresolved issues from her own past.
just a test sentence that I can’t remove except by saving this explanation or or typing “nothing”
The fact that Meghan upset members of her household such that that they couldn’t stand working for her shows that she is NOT compassionate!
Who cares ? these are irrelevant , ignorant people – the monarchy is a dead institution – after the Queen departs this mortal world the UK should have a referendum on this outdated relic –
Dear forum-reader: my first entry of this comment was late yesterday night and it has disappeared. Do you know if there is a quicker way the author can search for their posting, like as in The Times forum if you’ve gained at least one thumbs up or reply? My second entry of this same comment at 11am this morning has also disappeared . Does anyone else have this problem or am I being blacklisted for some unknown reason?
***
Diversity and equality are contradictions. If you recognise diversity, then you must be discriminating. So you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t. If you voice any interest or curiosity as to whether Meghan’s baby is black or white you’re colour prejudiced. If you curb your curiosity then you’re trying to pretend it isn’t significant when you know it is, which means you’re frightened to be mistaken by others as colour prejudiced. All of this is on the rise thanks to w.o.k.e-ism’s relentless preoccupation with equality and its risible or embarrassing quota-controlled diversity.
The Royal Family unthinkingly presumed they were immune to all this diversity-equality bu!!5h!t Then along came Meghan, with Harry in tow, making the Royal Family feel they were treading on eggs and the media gleefully playing out both sides of the argument. We end up with an opportunistic dark-skinned sassy American girl from California showbiz marrying a white skinned duke who just wants to have fun, who together have challenged the heart & soul of the Royal Establishment and, unsurprisingly, found it wanting.
Young people who know that tomorrow belongs to them (believe the simple cure is for Royalty to reinvent themselves as fit for the 21st century. Heaven forbid there should be anything in this world, not even with so much happening that is ugly and threatening to society and world order.
While the Royal Family sulkily contemplate their “reason for being”, Meghan & Harry ride in to rescue our stricken planet! Between those youthful trendy moments of feeling mentally ill and suicidal, they plan from a base in California to reach the young w.o.k.e-y parts Britain’s Royal family can’t touch. The Royal Family are now on the backfoot and will be reluctant to accuse Meghan & Harry of being imposters. Whatever their exact titles they can’t be shaken off the Royal Family Tree.
I think Meghan & Harry’s credibility could wane or become flash-in-the-pan and they’ll be yesterday’s celebs, or at least fall from A-list to B-list. Meanwhile, they’re striking the iron while it’s hot and will pick up a load of money to add to the load they already have, so that when they can plateau and live sumptuously and happily ever after. I don’t think their Royal services will seem any more shallow or superfluous than what the Royal Family gets up to. I think all of them deserve one another and I suspect they’ll eventually realise that and find some common ground.
Is there a point to this post?
The point is never trust a virtue signalling sanctimonious person, especially one with a lot of followers. They are often hypocrites, and believe in their own lofty BS, that somehow they are morally superior to the rest of us. Moral elitism is a disease of the woke.
Their ‘fall from grace’ will be cushioned by the millions they have made from the Oprah interview, Spotify, JP Morgan and other sources including of course the Duchy of Cornwall. Even in a world of influencers, I doubt whether so much money has ever before been made with so little talent.
Harry and Meghan’s success in separating Americans from their money is down to the way in which they fit into the current social, political and economic situation in the US. When privilege parades as victimhood, they are the ultimately privileged couple parading as victims. When the US media is censoring dissenting voices, they seek to silence the voices of servants they abused. In a society where so many working people don’t get a wage but instead have to grovel for their tips, the sympathy will be with the woman who couldn’t get the staff.
It is time to rid ourselves of the Monarchy.
I’m wondering what South American country they will flee to if BLM and assorted leftists succeed in their aims of toppling capitalism.
I wonder why Unherd and Douglas M thinks this subject is worth time and trouble. This is jaw-achingly boring; and totally unimportant.
And how can what they and the rest of the minor Royals actually do be classed as ‘’public service’.
This article is quite appropriate. It speaks of this new class of woke quasi-religious moralizers who are the quasi-prophets of the new age. Anyone claiming prophethood (not to a god but to an ideology or a belief system) and who receives unquestioned attention and adulation by the media, is certainly worth writing about.
If we ever get to a time when the reenactment of the Oedipal tragedy becomes uninteresting, please count me out.
What did Harry expect from the royal family, especially when it was clear the family did not approve of his choice of wife? The royal family is not about happiness. It is about maintaining the status quo. Meghan is an actor by profession. Actors need drama and audience. Drama is about undermining the status quo.
Harry has given up his royal family for Meghan. And the royals will never forgive him for that. Harry and Meghan are now without extended family. They should make the best life they can for their family. If they are sincere in just wanting a life outside the royal pressure cooker, a good first step would be to stop giving Oprah interviews, which help no one but Oprah.
Did not approve of his choice of a wife? What makes you say that? The millions spent on their lavish wedding and gifted house re-do? The Queen taking her on a tour on the royal train when even Kate had never been given that honor? All the titles and patronages awarded her by the Queen? How about Charles walking her down the aisle when her own deadbeat dad got caught selling photos? I think the family was very welcoming to her.
Harry is feeble minded. He has been taken for a ride. He was the perfect patsy. Meghan saw him coming a mile away and dollar signs danced in her head. Dollar signs she never in a million years could have commanded without poor Harry’s lineage. Eventually he will be back home with his tail between his legs when his reduced status means he isn’t very marketable anymore. Who wants an ex-royal?
Agree with all you wrote, just adding my own thoughts – i can imagine that Harry was ‘taking one for the team‘, so to speak. Royal marriages being more about practicalities than spontaneous ‘matter of the heart’ affairs (at least they used to be – not sure about current times), and Harry was picked to be the one to tie the monarchy into mainstream global wokery (or “modernise” it as the wokes call it), and Markle ticked all the boxes. What was in it for Harry – well, that’s the “working” part of being a “working royal”. Obligations. And now he’s not even ‘royal’ anymore, only the ‘working’ part remained.
However, the fact that he hasn’t walked away yet proves my theory wrong; he seems to be in it wholeheartedly. Which speaks a lot worse of his character as ‘taking one for the team’ would.
She’s an actress, not an actor. Allegedly
Either way, not a very good one.
Harry is ideologically beholden to Meghan. They will split as soon as Harry gets his senses back and starts to think critically and intelligently.
Not if that’s your definition of “critically” and “intelligently.”
Not sure what you mean. My point is that his attraction to Meghan is ideological. But intelligent people generally do not get beholden to an ideology. Ideology means short circuit of the brain and thinking by feelings and faux-moralism, and is the lazy way to arrive at knowledge and the truth.
one of you said about the war years about a King and Mrs.Simson giving his mistress jewelry that could feed a whole town that was the war years and the then government didn’t starve like the people and what about this government that with a PM BJ with the missing £’s Billions of £’s I would put it at over 20 Billions of £s how many children would that feed and put clothes on there back and shoes and stopped them getting cancers and the celebrities kids get cancer what happens the whole of the people send them money and cards what happens to the poor don’t get a mention this country is full of Hippocrates
Just look how many misogynists there are on this site. Quite off-putting as I’ve only just joined.
I’m no Meghan fan either but it’s not because she’s a mixed race woman.
the victimhood thing wears thin after a time. If minorities of any type wish to be taken seriously, then a good first step is to quit using the minority status as a shield. Harry’s taking heat, too, and he’s among the whitest people alive. No one cares about Markle’s racial status other than the race warlords.
Not seeing that myself. Both Harry and Meghan are held equally in contempt.
Misogynists? I haven’t seen any evidence for such a claim myself (and I’m female btw). There are plenty of flippant or borderline offensive comments, as anyone would expect, but I don’t think the justified criticism of Meghan Markle counts, when she has made such a fool of herself. The only reason ‘Haz’ isn’t getting so much stick is because he has been demoted to a mere sidekick, or an overlooked afterthought.
Judging by the comments to this article, the answer to my question about Mr Murray’s obsession with the Sussexes, is their supposed hypocrisy. As opposed to Andrew who makes no bones about being an old-school toff who can do what he likes… including hanging out with pederasts, dictators and other scum.
And he’s retired from public life. Unless he is charged with sex offences, what more should be done to him? If he was on Oprah whining about his victimhood, or making podcasts talking about his compassion, do you think he wouldn’t be getting it even worse than these 2 clowns?
If you remember, Andrew tried to do a puff piece interview to spin his version and was, rightly, crucified by the interviewer, the public and pretty much anyone who saw it. He’s since been hidden away, and largely forgotten. If he were to reappear and try to cast himself as a victim, he would be crucified again. And quite right too
I’m not at all impressed let alone influenced by the excessive w.o.k.e.-ness of these immature second-division royals, H&M.
But I’m even less impressed by the recent antics of HM Queen’s caporegime who were acting on her orders or with her inwardly-smiling acquiesence.
I think H&M will live happily ever after in the US. I think they have enough smarts, and the US enough dumbness, to make hay while the sun shines, which will more than cover their lifestyle all the way to a comfortable retirement mansion.
I also think they might have enough smarts over the next few years to re-invent themselves when the royalty schtick loses its lustre.
Meanwhile, back in sovereign Britain, Charles will ensure that the monarchy status quo remains preserved in aspic while the rest of the world progresses to something better or something worse.
Once again, the ever-objective Mr Murray sees the Sussexes as a more worthy target than the loathsome Prince Andrew… what is this obsession?
Randy Andy has many faults but is not a sanctimonious preacher
I guess you’d rather spend an evening with Jeffery Epstein…
Andrew is not in the news right now. He’s not doing a rehab appearance on Oprah and I believe he was roundly criticized for his adventures with Jeffrey. Thou doth deflect a bit much.
Wow. I cannot believe the level of crazed outrage here. Just leave her alone. Him too.
will they return the favor? If so, I’m willing to do what you ask but it has to work both ways.
If you are the self proclaimed champions of the oppressed and constantly spout nonsense then why shouldn’t people criticise them – get off your knees man
More whingeing about Meghan. A very British obsession.
No wonder they left.
It’s more like laughing at her.
In his dream world, is Douglas Murray blissfully unaware how irrelevant he is? The antics of the various branches of the British Royal Family are on a par with the plot of East-Enders. Titillating to tabloid hacks but of no great consequence to anyone. Is there one thing I am less interested in than Meghan Markle? Yes – Douglas Murray’s opinion of her.
If you’re as uninterested in Mr Murray’s journalism as you claim to be, why do you bother reading it and, which takes even more effort, commenting on it?
It’s not his opinion, rather his analysis of the situation and events.
She’s black, she’s a woman, she’s doing ok – let her have it with both barrels.
You just have.
She’s the whitest black woman I’ve ever seen.
It means that, like an awful lot of us, the ‘fact’ that she is ‘black’ was totally invisible to him (sorry for assuming your pronoun, Mike) and would never have come up had it not been raised, (positively, if I remember rightly) by the press.
I would have nothing against her if she was not forever telling us what racists we are! If she can criticise us then we are fully entitled to hit back!
I think they should tone down their woke narrative in a big way, BUT I have never even seen such vile attacks on a person as I read in the British media when she was enthusiastically and naively trying to find a place and a voice and to negotiate her way in royalty. This was echoed in millions of equally vile comments from members of the public. It was horrific and way over the top and said way more about the people saying these things than they did about Meghan. For this reason if for nothing else, I hope that they succeed in the US and stick it to the British. Down arrow away!
I think you are being too generous. She was already an entitled princess before she actually became one. The Royal Family and the British public welcomed her, even the press were positive about her. The suggestion that anyone in these Isles was preemptively hostile or even racist towards her is just pathetic.
But once it became clear to her that she was not the centre of attention, was never going to be and that with privilege came duty and deference, she played the victim card and fled.
I am not an expert but I do not think she is entitled to be known as ‘princess’. Duchess is the highest she can aspire to as things are.
I stand corrected! As for the highest, ambitious social climbing knows no limit.
Hi Lesley, is it possible that you aren’t British? Because that would explain that you weren’t here when Harry married her, how positive the press and the public were about him finding the love of his life.
But instead of keeping her head down until she understood the commitment that she had signed up to, she immediately rubbed people’s noses in her ‘woke’ credentials.
No, we do not like being lectured to by our Royal Family, something Charles found out when he was a young man.
As for leaving, fine. No problem, But don’t complain about press intrusion and then appear on TV every week to complain about something or other.
If you want to be a private citizen – be private.
If I remember right Lesley is South African, which probably means that she didn’t get to see the early fawning phase of UK media attention.
As ex-Saffa and now British I do get frustrated with the UK media take on celebrity, which a predictable cycle of bigging up and then tearing people down. But I take it as a good sign that the UK doesn’t have real problems that demand media attention, unlike SA with State Capture and looting politicians.
You are right, unfortunately, about the UK media’s predictable cycle of bigging up and then tearing people down – particularly celebrities. The two minute hate for the out-of-favour celebrity is almost a thing.
I’m not so sanguine about the overall state of the UK though. We do have real problems that demand media attention – which is being distracted with celebrity teardowns. To name but three, we have Covid (even with a successful vaccine rollout), Brexit implementation and the NI protocol, and corrupt looting contract awards. And we’ll soon have an attack on our system of checks and balances in the form of slashing freedom of information, human rights, and judicial oversight. As Sir Humphrey put it to his Minister, if they don’t know what you’re doing, they don’t know what you’re doing wrong.
Ah, the smell of burning martyr. A fine example of the Sussex-esse to which our author refers.
You don’t negotiate your place in that Firm. The Boss tells you which way is up.
The British media was initially very receptive and celebratory with regard to MM, as were the public. Everyone thought it was wonderful that we had BAME member of the royal family. But it became very obvious, very quickly, that she was a wrong ‘un.
‘Millions of equally vile comments’ You clearly don’t actually read the tabloids or know anyone British. The amount of adulation and sycophancy relating to the marriage was, for anyone less than a full throated monarchist, pretty overwhelming. The vast majority of people had no idea Meghan was mixed race until it was pointed out and didn’t care anyway.If you bother to check the stats (Facts, tedious I know) you’d discover Britain is one of the least racist societies on earth and has a high rate of mixed marriages.
I don’t think I’ve read such a fact free post in a while, like many liberals you have no idea what most people think and project your own racial obsessions on the rest of the population. A classic case of truth being far less important than the way you feel
Hopelessly out of the loop. Harry and Meghan have stuck up for what they believe in, then struck out on their own, they’ve survived all the slings and arrows thrown at them and are beyond the reach of provincial sniping now. They belong to the world, wake up to Global Britain!
Since Eden, there is no ‘grace’ in the human race.
What is it they believe in, that is so worthy of our attention?
Everyone fawning over how wonderful they are.
Please sir, can I strike out on my only with only a few million pounds. They (or at least I think Megan does and he does what he’s told) believe in money.
I do not do ad hominem, but I was very tempted to make an exception for you! They have done nothing but denigrate this country and its inhabitants since they ‘stepped back to protect their privacy’. They have superficially promoted virtue signalling at a minimum of expense and inconvenience to themselves. They have reduced their relationships with both of their families to tatters. The world is welcome to them. The one out of the loop is you!
What an arrogant and unpleasant article. I am not sure why UnHerd would put it at the top of its reading list today. There is no doubt in my mind that Meghan Markle experienced racism in Britain and this article only confirms my view.
So, basically, anyone who criticises Meghan is racist.
Naturally. That’s today’s woke Creed. I do recall seeing 1000’s of well wishes lining the streets to cheer their wedding while Prince Charles supported the couple extremely generously. He is not racist. The Queen is not racist. William and Kate are not racist.
Exactly.
I have no doubt that there were racist comments, from a few. Every country has its share of racists. Even the USA – or so we hear. (BLM?)
But she had overwhelming support when she arrived here.
The idea is that people form little groups like: black feminist, black lesbian, black trans. These groups share experiences and call themselves victims. They are dominated by everyone else, specifically white men, and no proof is required. If the group says it is a victim, then it is so.
Specifically what racism did she experience? Were the crowds cheering her at her royal wedding not loud enough? Did her servants not come as quickly as they would have for a white princess? If she is a victim of racism, then the concept has no meaning.
Margaret reveals a level of condescension held by many that holds anyone with any minority status to a lower standard of expectation.
I think she found the role of a minor Royal very dull and full of stuffy people and courtiers. She could have just said it wasn’t for her and retired gracefully to Lalaland instead of creating this circus.
Thanks for your contribution in making “racism” a meaningless term through overuse. Do you have evidence that she experienced racism? You know, something that backs up your claim. And is there something that makes her or actual minorities immune to criticism? Because that itself is a form of racism, the sort of soft bigotry that holds anyone who is not 100% white to a lower standard of expectation.
Verifable evidence for your ‘view’ would be, not only welcome but essential – if you wish it to be taken seriously. Thanks, at this point for what is merely a personal opinion.
Have you been vaccinated recently? Or living under a rock? Either way your judgment is badly impaired. What racism?