Meghan Markle’s Future

I didn’t watch the Royal Wedding yesterday simply because there was rugby on, and it would take more than a grand pageant to stop me watching the Canterbury Crusaders in top form.

That said, it was impossible to avoid the coverage in one form or another – even the French guys I play bluegrass with on Saturday afternoons asked me about it – and it looked as though it went well. At least the weather was good, which is always a bonus in Britain. What I found particularly annoying is the degree to which certain commentators elevated the importance of Meghan Markle’s race. If the media hadn’t told me, and then not shut up about it for months, I would never have guessed she was the daughter of a black mother and white father:

To me, she looks as much Spanish, or Italian, or Lebanese as mixed-race American. Her mother simply looks like someone you’d see shopping in Marks & Spencers in Croydon, so why anyone should think her race is even worth mentioning I don’t know. Actually, I do: it’s because some people think race is the be-all and end-all (e.g. David Lammy, Katie Hopkins), and others simply took the opportunity to virtue-signal, rubbing people’s nose in the subject of immigration:

A British royal marrying an American divorcee? Why, how very post-war! The fact so many high-profile people attempted to make political hay out of Prince Harry marrying a mixed-race woman is an indicator we’re not in the post-race Britain the marriage itself suggests.

I do think Markle’s going to be trouble though, and not because of her ethnicity. It’s not even so much that she’s American, an actress, and divorced either. The biggest problem is that she’s not from royalty. Farmers’ sons tend to marry farmers’ daughters because farming is a unique way of life which beings with it many obligations on the part of the farmer’s wife. For instance, a farmer’s wife would usually be required to assist heavily with the lambing, among other things. If you haven’t grown up in this environment it can be too much for an outsider to bear, and it’s the same thing with the royals. They didn’t intermarry just to keep the peace between warring houses or to preserve ancient bloodlines, they married their own kind because they understood the rules of the peculiar life they lead. Princess Diana struggled with the obligations of being a prominent member of the royal family, and she was hardly from peasant stock. Sarah Ferguson failed at it miserably. Kate Middleton seems to be doing a good job, but all that shows is it’s not impossible. It is very difficult, though.

As one of my correspondents said this morning:

My guess is that she isn’t going to be happy just opening libraries in Lewisham all day.

I suspect she’s going to use her position to get involved with “good causes” which inevitably will be highly political in nature. Something a lot of do-gooders don’t realise is that almost all good causes are political because they involve either legislation or taxpayer funds to achieve a particular outcome, and there are trade-offs. The royal family has generally managed to avoid drifting into the political sphere by selecting activities which are low-key, e.g. the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme, which teaches kids how to erect a tent and stay dry when camping in Britain. However, Prince Charles, with his blathering about GM food and population control, is straying dangerously off the reservation. His ex-wife’s campaign to ban landmines was in my opinion disastrous for the image of the royal family, as was all her campaigning. We have enough campaigns for muddle-headed progressive causes funded by taxpayer cash as it is; indeed it seems nowadays every root and branch of government does little other than campaign from a position of complete ignorance. Add to that the number of millionaire celebrities who enjoy telling us oiks how to live, and we must ask if really need a woke princess joining in the chorus. As many people have pointed out, the continuation of the monarchy depends not on them getting down wiv da masses to show us how normal they are, but the exact opposite: retaining a lofty, detached, and somewhat abstract existence which sets them apart from us. William and Harry have already dented their symbolic status through clumsy attempts to connect with ordinary people, and a Duchess of Sussex who sounds like she’s reading from The Huffington Post might tip things over the edge.

People will think I’m awfully misogynistic and probably racist for saying this, but Mehgan Markle’s success in both her marriage and role as a royal will depend heavily on her keeping her trap shut. Does she look like the sort of person to do so? Not really. So here’s my prediction. Within a short time she’s going to get herself neck-deep in controversy following an ill-judged remark which she thought was helpful, but in fact rubbed salt into wounds she didn’t know existed. Faced with a social media backlash, she’ll adopt a sassy fuck-you-I’ll-say-what-I-want attitude which will have tattooed, purple haired feminists cheering her in The Guardian and everyone else wishing she’d been turned back at Heathrow in May 2018. A huge rift will open up within the palace, and the royal family will be fortunate if the only casualty is Harry and Meghan’s marriage.

In the spirit of Britishness I shall wish them luck, but it will take a lot more than that.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

45 thoughts on “Meghan Markle’s Future

  1. The marriage is a big mistake.

    Were I PM I would have taken the precaution of pointing out to both of them that the world is full of tunnels.

  2. With the score currently at 4-0, I would propose a spread-bet on the time to a female royal marries a male “commoner”, but I have a feeling that wouldn’t pay out in my lifetime. What do you think?

  3. You wouldn’t get the payout if you lived as long as Methuselah Biggie.

    But take comfort that you at least understand women quite well.

  4. Premiership semis were also good games.

    I’ve seen a picture of MM’s mum, she looks mixed race to me. Which would make MM at least 3/4 white. I find this “default to black” irritating, perhaps because it’s reminiscent of that Old South BS about quadroons, octoroons, etc.

    It won’t be the opening libraries in Lewisham that gets her. She’ll be a pro at that. It’ll be the loss of privacy; the protection officers, the staff who anticipate every whim, the fact you can’t have a clear the air row in case you start throwing some priceless porcelain looted by a heroic general with a maxim gun.

    I give it 5 years, a bit more of there are kids, less if there aren’t.

  5. Kate’s mother was a flight attendant, and you wrote recently about how a good stewardess is able to retain composure under stress. This heritable trait is partly what has kept Kate herself out of trouble in the Royal Family.

  6. The Duchess of Kent is the name of a seaside hotel conference suite or a mildly upmarket cigarette brand.
    The Countess of Wessex is OK because no-one knows where that is, and only other count I can think of is Dracula.
    The Duchess of “Clarence” is automatically damaged goods, because of the rumours around the last Duke with that title.
    The Duchess of Cambridge seems fairly classy. Shame that the Duchess of York wasn’t.

    But the “Duchess of Sussex” is the name of a east end pub. It just is. Start by saying “I’m going down the Duchess” in your best Phil Mitchell voice, and it works perfectly.

  7. Princess Maggie did as well.

    I’m proud of the atrocious state of my knowledge of the royal family, but Ecks surprises me.

  8. So Biggie, you pose a question that (somewhere in the dim recesses of your mind) you already know the answer to, and thus know you are wrong. You then blame me for being in error when I agree with the point you made in the first place?

    Truly Germany is the land for you Biggie.

    However exceptions prove the rule. The Royal females are born and raised absolutely secure in wealth and position. Such women might indeed look to marry via emotional choice, even ill-advised choice. But for the average women who has at least the possibility of experiencing material want it is a different matter. Yes, temporary excess of emotion can change behaviour for a while but lots more middle-aged men wreck themselves over excessive emotion towards a female than do middle-aged women over men. The aging female losers who give all their cash to scummy waiters overseas are the exceptions. Which is why they feature in the newspapers. Women generally prefer the cash. Perhaps some emotion once the bank account is secure. Not always but it is the way to bet.

  9. Pingback: Samizdata quote of the day « Samizdata

  10. I watched it with the missus, this was my first royal wedding, she loves them and loved this one. It was honestly the first time that I have heard the term biracial and it was mentioned many times on the commentary. Seriously though this guy could have wed the nicest young virgin in England, so I would say that this royal Kardashian like marriage was arranged and yes we haven’t heard the last from her and no she won’t be getting the arse either.

  11. It was only drawn to my attention a few weeks ago that Meghan was ‘mixed race’. Ok, mostly aggressive indifference, but I’m sure I’d seen a photo or two before that, and it didn’t even occur to me. She’s about as black as Elizabeth Warren is Cherokee.

  12. In the US, the NAACP and leftists rigorously enforce the old Virginia One Drop Rule, so Meghan is black. And in American that means West African, no Pakis need apply.

    Unfortunately for Meghan and Harry, all the sociological data regarding people from broken homes, mixed race marriages and age-inverted marriages indicate that they are headed for a bad divorce.

    The bigger problem, and one that increases the likelihood of divorce, is Meghan’s activism. It will severely strain the unwritten rules of the Monarchy.

    That said, it has always seemed to my that Britain was one charismatic royal from reverting to the monarchy of George I, democracy be damned. Perhaps, Meghan will precipitate a crisis severe enough to do the trick. Prince William looks like a possible Henry V.

  13. Lambing is the ultimate endurance test. After decades of inherited obligation, two of my (women) neighbours have thrown in the towel this year.

  14. “Why should anyone thing her race is worth mentioning … The fact so many high-profile people attempted to make political hay out of Prince Harry marrying a mixed-race woman is an indicator we’re not in the post-race Britain the marriage itself suggests.”

    An unfortunate reflection but true. After 50 years of significant immigration the novelty has long since passed – America has been at it a lot longer and they continue to struggle, have all but given up. I wish the happy couple every success. Even now we have to believe – hope – we are better than the doomsayers among us suggest.

  15. Zara Phillips is married to a commoner, Mike Tindall the (now ex) rugby player. But he was privately educated, so he would have had a bit of a sense of duty and service drummed into him. Plus years of playing professional rugby wouldn’t have been possible without some decent self discipline, so he’s probably as well suited to dealing with the pressures of the Royal existence as anyone.

  16. True some commentators are playing up that aspect, but she is a lot older than say Diana and more worldly wise, she is an actress and if she chooses to take advantage of it there would be plenty of advice on how to conduct herself. I think the balance was just right yesterday between show biz and royal dignity.

  17. I think the biggest issue will be how limited her freedom of speech will now be, she will have to be more circumspect that she has been used to being.

    As some one else said she is likely to cause a lot of bother by just saying something she will consider fairly normal, but which will be seen as not being neutral.

    Hopefully Harry is now far enough from the throne that it won’t matter, but I think it will hard on her.

    Anyway I wish them every happiness, I hope they make a real success of their marriage and have lots of babies.

  18. the fact you can’t have a clear the air row in case you start throwing some priceless porcelain looted by a heroic general with a maxim gun.

    LOL!

  19. Kate’s mother was a flight attendant, and you wrote recently about how a good stewardess is able to retain composure under stress. This heritable trait is partly what has kept Kate herself out of trouble in the Royal Family.

    Good point!

  20. But the “Duchess of Sussex” is the name of a east end pub. It just is. Start by saying “I’m going down the Duchess” in your best Phil Mitchell voice, and it works perfectly.

    Heheheh!

  21. Zara Phillips is married to a commoner, Mike Tindall the (now ex) rugby player.

    Indeed, but Zara Phillips has a sensible mother who appears to have encouraged her to keep her feet on the ground. She had nowhere near the attention Meghan’s going to get.

  22. I think the balance was just right yesterday between show biz and royal dignity.

    Yes, me too, but now they have to maintain that balance.

  23. As a lifelong and staunch Republican (I can justify it and yes I have qualifications about it both not being a priority and quite unlikely for the time being) I dont really care about the celebrity of the royals or much interest in whether two strangers marriage will work out.

    However, I do have an interest in maintaining the settlement we have within our constitutional monarchy, which is that the monarch and the royals do not interfer with the political process nor express views which are political.

    I can definately imagine Mr Harry and Mrs Meghan Windsor both sticking their oar in on seeming ‘non-political’ causes which are definately political. The hollywood smug combining with hereditary privilege and power will be a toxic mix.

    This combine with the looming disaster of Charlie Boy Windsor becoming King, who already has overstepped the mark countless times, might create a situation which will severely challenge the monarchy’s percieved legitimacy.

    Our ancestors didnt die in England’s fields or on the streets to have a hereditary monarch interfere with our civic political life. The prospect of a king who does and the family which does political PR for causes I may or may not support boils my blood.

    If any of you value democracy, I do not ask that you join me and my Republicanism but that you rage with me when the time comes that the constitutional monarchy settlement is broken.

    Pick a side.

  24. She’s a result of the zeitgeist just like Obama. A mixture of preaching and virtue signalling to the commoners from the elites on how to behave.

  25. Although a non-Brit, I have great personal sympathy with the Queen and her husband.

    They have been outstanding in their role as non-executive Head of State and spouse.

    They have, however, no choice but to hand over to their 70 going on 16 years old son, who appears not to understand what made his mother such a good Head of State.

    In turn, after a few years, he will hand over the reins to a son who appears to combine the worst features of both his mother and father.

    As regards Prince Harry and Ms Markle – will their first child be named DuRoyal Markle-Windsor? To be down with the kids, like?

  26. Robbert Harries
    You are a card, sir. We live in a ‘post democratic’ age, as Mandleson pointed out, and what you and I want doesn’t matter.

    The main value of the royals is to stop some Britain hating sack of political shit being president, and so far they are doing fine. God save the Queen!

  27. God save the Queen!

    Robert Harries wrote my post (if in a somewhat more coherent and concise style).

    Charlie is going to take us to a republic the wrong way.

  28. You watched the wrong match – Saracens Vs Wasps ( English premiership semi final) was great. 11 tries, a stonking level of physicality at times and 20 mins in the first half where Saracens looked unbeatable.

  29. Bob Sykes: Prince William looks like a possible Henry V

    “Once more unto the breach beach, dear fiends.”
    (Updated for our more leisured and topless era)

  30. “The main value of the royals is to stop some Britain hating sack of political shit being president, and so far they are doing fine. God save the Queen!”

    This is the main reason why I’m not a republican. Why would any one want some grubby politician as head of state.

  31. …it has always seemed to my that Britain was one charismatic royal from reverting to the monarchy of George I, democracy be damned.

    Perhaps true, but it has always seemed to me that Britain is one detestable royal away from a republic. A second republic, I should add. (Probably wrongly.)

    Every single bit of political freedom the English enjoy has been wrenched away from some overweening monarch; it seems like that’s the only thing that gets the blood pumping enough for us to get our arses in gear. (If some king had done half of what Tony Blair did…)

    Were I PM I would have taken the precaution of pointing out to both of them that the world is full of tunnels.

    The PM is useless and/or doesn’t care, but like a lot of people I was surprised the royals themselves didn’t sort this out ahead of time. Then I realised the awful truth: they aren’t actually capable of doing so. There aren’t loyal retainers with a “very particular set of skills” or old friends in the Admiralty or whatever that they can call on.

    They don’t have any power: now, we all know that to be a fact, and yet irrationally I think a lot of us vaguely thought, without realising it, that they secretly had some, behind the scenes, and that they were a potential firm hand on the tiller. Consider how we hear about how the Queen has been meeting with Prime Ministers for 60 years and therefore they’re inclined to listen to her advice, when in reality, it’s probably just a chore and they couldn’t give three shits what she thinks. They are a Christmas decoration.

  32. Then I realised the awful truth: they aren’t actually capable of doing so.

    Like every other British institution, the Royals have collapsed into utter uselessness. Elizabeth and Philip are the last remnants of the old guard, and once they’re gone, it’s curtains.

  33. Tim, try turning your annoyance into amusement at how pathetic the “radicals” of today’s left are. The British royal family are the epitome of unearned privilege and inequality and they’re responsible for centuries of oppression, imperialism, slavery, etc. Are these people cheering the overthrow of the monarchy? No, they’re cheering that one of the parasitic oppressors is now a *multiracial* parasitic oppressor. Really shaking the foundations of society that is…

  34. The undecorative side of the Monarchy finally slid into uselessness when the Queen allowed Blair to attempt his abolition of the Lord Chancellorship because his friend (Falconer) was too lazy to carry out the multi-functional necessities of the position. For various reasons complete abolition was not possible but a constitutional abortion (complete with the creation of a very communitaire “Ministry of Justice”) was delivered anyway.

  35. It was a nice day out for a multitude of Slebs who in real life probably wouldn’t get near a place like Windsor Castle, but overall — reasonably royalist that I am (if only because the alternative of the likes of T Blair being El Presidente is so frighteningly awful) — I do see this as a significant nail in the coffin of it all.

    I expect Charlie once Liz is done will not be as good as his mother and father and all the tradition and pomp, etc, will be swiftly sacrificed for being nice to people who not only think the British Royalty is shit but actively want to bring it down. Meghan is an actress and maybe can play the ‘princess’ part well to a point, but frankly, there is no class in this Royal business any more. Fergie and Diana were the warnings everyone ignored.

  36. “No, they’re cheering that one of the parasitic oppressors is now a *multiracial* parasitic oppressor. Really shaking the foundations of society that is…”

    We can’t have the wrong sort of lizard winning, you know.

  37. With the score currently at 4-0, I would propose a spread-bet on the time to a female royal marries a male “commoner”, but I have a feeling that wouldn’t pay out in my lifetime. What do you think?

    I think Princess Eugenie of York is scheduled to marry Jack Brooksbank in October 2018.

    From the internets:
    BROOKSBANK IS THE SON OF AN ACCOUNTANT.
    This year, two commoners will be joining the royal family, Meghan Markle and Mr. Brooksbank. Brooksbank’s parents are Nicola and George, an accountant and a company director, per People. He also has one brother named Thomas.

    HE ESCHEWED UNIVERSITY, AND WENT STRAIGHT INTO THE HOSPITALITY FIELD.
    Growing up, Brooksbank’s parents sent him to the private Stowe school in Buckinghamshire, England. He then skipped university, diving into a career in hospitality. At one point he managed the popular London nightclub Mahiki, and is currently the UK ambassador for George Clooney and Rande Gerber’s tequila brand, Casamigos. According to the Daily Mail, Brooksbank has previously spoken about a dream to open a chain of “hostelries.”

    “I have fond memories of Sunday roasts in pubs with log fires, and it’s something I want to recreate,” he reportedly said

  38. @Steve T,

    Right, they stopped a Britain-hating sack of shit being head of state with Edward VIII, didn’t they.

    @Fay, yeah, further up the thread all of us have managed to forget numerous previous incidences of this, with Ecksy even blaming his faulty memory on me (like everything else).

  39. @BiG

    If he had been an elected politician he wouldn’t have been stopped, but Edward was kicked out using a different pre text. Any way no system is perfect.

Comments are closed.