January 10, 2020

"In Britain, royalty and politics are not supposed to mix. The monarchy has a defined constitutional role as the 'dignified' branch, symbolizing the state through ceremony and duty..."

"... the government as the 'efficient' branch, running the country by passing laws through Parliament, which is elected. The two cannot mix. One is apolitical and unifying, the other political and inherently divisive. The royal family’s website puts it succinctly: 'As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.' Harry and Meghan’s popularity is, in part, tied to this unifying neutrality.... Once they start to behave like ordinary people, giving ordinary opinions, then people will treat them as ordinary.... He and his wife will be pilloried for their decision, for their hypocrisy or greed, sanctimony or privilege, depending on who is dishing out the criticism.... You say you’re woke, but the companies you work for [in China are] unbelievable,' said Gervais on Sunday night, tearing into the cream of Hollywood. He was right to say Hollywood is pro–having cake and pro–eating it. But so too, it seems, are Harry and Meghan."

From "The Hypocrisy of Harry and Meghan’s Decision/The couple have committed Britain’s greatest possible sin" in The Atlantic. The greatest sin (in Britain) is (we're told) hypocrisy.

59 comments:

n.n said...

Bigotry. Sanctimonious hypocrisy.

rehajm said...

He and his wife will be pilloried for their decision, for their hypocrisy or greed, sanctimony or privilege, depending on who is dishing out the criticism...

Surely amongst the woke they will be celebrated for their decision, which is why they are doing it.

Gahrie said...

What is it about divorced American women stealing men from the British royal family?

robother said...

I recall Hannah Arendt writing that, in the future, hypocrisy will be the only sin.

Fernandistein said...

A(Harry Meghan) = Garner My Hah
A(Ricky Gervais) = Grave Sir Icky

Michael K said...

Then dignity ended with Princess Di and Fergie.

rhhardin said...

I've lost track of which Royal is Diana's bodyguard's. It probably worked out better than Webb Hubbell's, gene-wise.

mccullough said...

Too much celebrity has hurt the British Royalty.

That wedding of Lady Di and Prince Charles was ridiculous. And Lady Di was a bit too enamored of the limelight.

Same with Fergie.

It certainly didn’t help that Prince Charles and Princess Andrew each got divorced. So did the sister, Princess Anne. WtF. And Andrew is a royal fuckup. And prince Charles with his environmental preening and bag-lady looking second wife is a fop.

Queen Elizabeth and Prince William and his wife, and Prince Edward and his wife get it. They are solid royalty.

The rest of them are shit

So

Lance said...

Charles has run into this issue as well, with his John Kerry-like "I'm a climate expert now and we need to crash the economy" guff. William on the other hand seems to be steering clear of anything partisan.

rhhardin said...

The high and the low stand for each other. Literary fact. Your Highness refers to their ass, as every child quickly decides. It sticks.

MayBee said...

Megan has ruined Harry. I hope they are a happy family.

I don't know.....I look at their responsibilities and their wealth, and I cannot imagine how this is all so unbearable to her. So some people say some mean things about her. In a few years, they'll be like Prince Edward and his wife and kids.

I think I used to walk past Princess Anne in Nottinghill quite a bit. I know I used to see Camilla Parker-Bowles son all the time. Nobody really paid attention. Megan and Harry just need to ride this out a little and they'll be fine.

rhhardin said...

Is it Beechcraft that names airplane models after British royals.

The king air, the queen air, duke, duchess, barron. After Trump's kid.

The best is staggerwing.

John henry said...

I call bs. England has no real constitution. Its "constitution" changes from day to day depending on the whims of parliament and the courts.

Read Bagehot's History of the English Constitution. That's where the efficient/dignified comes from.

He had to do a second edition about 5 years after the first because the Constitution had changed so much during Palmerton's(?) prime ministry as to render the 1st edition meaningless.

The Quenn/King have considerable powers. The Prime Minister doesn't even legally exist.

Even parliament has no right to exist. The queen can shut it down on a whim.

John Henry

rhhardin said...

Piper did Indian tribes. Cessna did grasses and birds. The bamboo bomber.

tcrosse said...

For those following along at home, Meghan has flown to Vancouver to be with Archie. Harry to follow within a fortnight. Their cut of putative Dad's Cornwall estates is on the table, as is rent and rehab costs for Frogmore Cottage. Hard feeling all around. Evidently getting out of the Royal Family is like getting out of the Mob.

gspencer said...

The more I see of Meghan and her influence on things within her sphere, including the now wimpified Harry, the more I understand the justification for her having won that Oscar for her performance in the James Bond smash hit Gold Digger.

Nonapod said...

Norm MacDonald: You know, Patton Oswalt said “the worst thing about the Bill Cosby thing is the hypocrisy of it all...” and I disagree.

Jerry Seinfeld: and you disagree?

Norm MacDonald: I thought the worst part was the raping!

Lucien said...

If strict neutrality characterizes HRH QEII, imagine how regal cruel neutrality is.

TreeJoe said...

I can't for the life the me understand any wealth they are entitled to keep/receive while abdicating royal responsibilities.

If you want out of your responsibilities, then so to must you give up the benefits of those responsibilities in the first place.

There is a belief that because they WERE royalty they need to maintain an image and presence, or perhaps be kept under control so as not to be seen as never worthy of royalty in the first place.

I say: Let those who cannot wear their titles be seen as people who never deserved their titles. Don't let them go on pretending to be worthy of being somehow elite and above others.

Yancey Ward said...

They need to fully renounce all titles and entitlements- literally all of it. That would be the honest thing to do.

John henry said...

rhhardin said...

The best is staggerwing.

For Nancy d'Alessadro Pelosi?

John Henry

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

The greatest sin (in Britain) is (we're told) hypocrisy.

What? The British used to be renowned for their hypocrisy. It was one of their most noted national characteristics. Foreigners groused about Brit hypocrisy all the time, but never noted any Brit simpering, "At least I'm not a hypocrite!"

Their "greatest sin"? Brits appear doomed to be infected by the most virulent strain of every one of the American cultural pieties and pathologies that they once mocked, in their self-respecting days.

Browndog said...

Eventually, after it all falls apart, which is inevitable, at least Harry will have family to return to.

Bay Area Guy said...

She is Yoko Ono, trying to break up the band!

Balfegor said...

What I want to link here is a clip from House of Cards with the scene where Urquhart informs the King that he has to abdicate because he's taken sides against the elected government (of which Urquhart is PM). The King blusters a bit about how he'll fight Urquhart as a commoner, and Urquhart responds:

I wouldn't bet on it, sir. I'm afraid you won't be of much interest as a commoner. I doubt if anyone will be particularly interested in what you have to say. You have no constituency, you see. No power base. You represent nothing but one talentless, discredited family. And very soon, you won't represent even that. You will represent nothing. You will mean nothing. You will be nothing.

Unfortunately, I can't find it, so here's a wikiquote link.

Jim Gust said...

I do not understand why any European country continues to have royalty. It seems such a pointless expense.

If there was a contest of some sort to allow other families a chance at succession, it would be less repulsive, yet not desirable.

I just don't see the appeal. But I'm not one of the millions who watch royal weddings on TV.

Roger Sweeny said...

I do not understand why any European country continues to have royalty. It seems such a pointless expense.

In America, the president invites winning sports teams to the White House. In Europe, the King/Queen, as representative of the nation, invites the team to the palace. People in government are expected to do government things and the royals are expected to do ceremonial things.

Megthered said...

they don't want to be royals but want the titles and land and cash that goes with it? the Qeen and Charles and William should throw them out with the clothes on their back. Let them figure out how to be financially independent. Meghan probably didn't write that part of the speech. Little Miss Wanna be Princess will kick Harry out within a few years.

Gahrie said...

I do not understand why any European country continues to have royalty. It seems such a pointless expense.

History and tourism.

Leland said...

Between Meghan and Wallis Simpson; I wonder if Brits will insist their royals can't marry Americans.

tcrosse said...

Her Majesty must be worried about the future of The Firm once she's no longer around.The Brits will probably never get rid of their royalty, but the Canadians and Australians might think about it. I would not want Charles' picture on my money.

traditionalguy said...

NB: The Brits are coming again to escape the Muslims. The trouble is they expect to come as our rulers like they were in 1775. Markle has taken advantage of that Brit instinct and will cash out of the series after she is finished squeezing him.

Ralph L said...

He supposedly inherited tens of millions from Diana and the Queen Mum. Why isn't that enough? Instead, they're going to sell themselves like the Kardashians--or extort money from Charles to not do that. Edward and wife Sophie extracted a nice income and country house that way after their businesses caused scandals 20 years ago.

Quaestor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rick said...

the Queen and Charles and William should throw them out with the clothes on their back. Let them figure out how to be financially independent.

What the royals gave her can't be taken back. She used to be a little known actress whose highlight was an ensemble role for a niche cable show. Thanks to becoming a royal she has one of the highest Q ratings in the world. Cutting off future funds doesn't effect her Q rating.

Between brand support and starting a charity she isn't going to have any problem making money.

rcocean said...

They want all the benefits of being Royals ($$ and Fame) without the nasty responsibilities. The honest solution was to given up the title of Prince and moved on. But then, no one would care about Mr. and Mrs. Harry Merckel. It's a little bit like Hillary, once she lost the Presidential election, her speaking fees went from 100K a speech to 5K. Suddenly, all those Corporations didn't want her "wisdom".

rcocean said...

Most foreigners only care about the Queen and the Top 2 Princes who are line for the throne. Everyone else is a bore.

Milwaukie guy said...

Harry should abdicate or whatever a spare heir does.

No worries, they will still be addressed as Prince and Duchess, like every Senator, General or Kentucky Colonel.

Well, one big worry. How long will the toadying go on when they're no longer actually "royals."

MayBee said...

Until he got hitched to his halfbreed harridan

Oh, come on Quaestor.

Gahrie said...

He supposedly inherited tens of millions from Diana and the Queen Mum. Why isn't that enough? Instead, they're going to sell themselves like the Kardashians--or extort money from Charles to not do that

I've heard they're planning on setting up their own version of the Clinton Foundation.

Howard said...

You're on fire Q.

Quaestor said...

Oh, come on Quaestor.

What can I say? I luuuve alliteration.

Howard said...

I have edited the TV Series "Suits" to just Megan scenes. Like Meghan Trainor says, she has "all the right junk in all the right places"

Bob Loblaw said...

When you live in a society that no longer has a basis for morality, hypocrisy becomes the only true sin.

Quaestor said...

Hypocrisy is hardly the greatest possible sin, among royals or anyone else. However, a Megxit that is not ordained by Her Majesty, i.e dictated by Meg herself, which it is, will prove fatal to the marriage and damaging to the House of Windsor, something that extremely shopworn Prince Charles must resent and dread.

Until he got hitched to his halfbreed harridan Harry was the hope of the Windsors, though far behind his brother William in succession he was much more popular among the Northern working class, the dynasty's most ardent supporters. William is if anything more insipid than his socially bankrupt father. Charles long ago exhausted his capital, and since the death of Diana, the royal watchers have dreaded the inevitable day. Harry, with his guileless charm and his background as a soldier in Afghanistan, was an acceptable face of the decrepit monarchy. Megxit leaves the House of Windsor in ruins. Too bad. There must be a Stuart somewhere.

Better yet, there's the 15th Earl of Loudoun, the Right Honourable Simon Michael Abney-Hastings down in Oz. Being a ripper bogan and a legit Plantagenet he's ready-made for the Norf working class. The Hanoverians and their Saxe-Coburg-Gotha descendants have repaid their loyalty with rotters and morons for three hundred years, which will prove long enough even for them when Elizabeth kicks the bucket.

(reposted from 2:31 to fix a stupid typo)

Oso Negro said...

Janes Delingpole has been all over her stank-ass at Breitbart. “Princess Pushy”. “Yoko”.

Rory said...

I think that hypocrisy is the dividing line between small and big misdeeds: being a hypocrite about crossing the street illegally is a bigger offense than crossing the street illegally, while being a hypocrite about murder is a lesser offense than actually murdering.

Rory said...

"What I want to link here is a clip from House of Cards...."

I came here to mention that the show dealt with exactly this issue: if the King takes a side, he has to go, because otherwise you have to set up a whole second set of royals to represent the other side. We've seen this drip down now to where huge section of our education system and bureaucracy have chosen a side.

wildswan said...

I think Meghan became panicky because differences between US and English culture made her feel unsheltered; and then that reminded Harry of his mother's death, hunted to death by paparazzi and he thought it was coming again; and then the two took their baby and fled the castle into the night.

tcrosse said...

This is all a fine distraction from what Boris is doing to secure Brexit and to revive Stormont.

rcocean said...

Why does anyone have a king/queen?

Say all the Mr. Spocks. It does not compute. It does not compute Illogical. Illogical.

Gospace said...

I suspect that if The Queen were to order Prince Harry to be beheaded that 1. The offer would be carried out because 2. She probably actually has that power.

Just a random thought.

Gospace said...

I hate automispelling on my phone. Order not offer.

tcrosse said...

I suspect that if The Queen were to order Prince Harry to be beheaded that 1. The offer would be carried out because 2. She probably actually has that power.

More likely she would do it to Meghan. Off with her head! The Firm is threatened. It's not personal. It's business.

Browndog said...

Bay Area Guy said...

She is Yoko Ono, trying to break up the band!


It had to be done

Narr said...

The Habsburgs claimed descent from the Trojans. Beat that!

One good thing about the PBS Victoria is that it shows how shallow and feckless the royals of post-Rev Europe were, most of them. Not a single German, German-origin, or German-studded (see what I did there?) dynasty--Denmark, Norway, Rumania, Greece in addition to the Big 3 Austria, Germany, and Russia-- produced even one individual of outstanding talent or ability in several centuries.

Narr
The sooner they departed the better

JAORE said...

"Is it Beechcraft that names airplane models after British royals.

The king air, the queen air, duke, duchess, barron. After Trump's kid.

The best is staggerwing."
After Hillary.

The Staggerwing is a lovely thing (well, the rudder is a bit off....). And it was way ahead of its time.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

I admire the negotiating skills of Harry and Meghan. They have said they will balance their time between the United Kingdom and North America. But if the royal family takes their house in the U.K. away, they won’t have to, they can just stay in Canada and the U.S. But the best move was leaving baby Archie in Canada, that was just genius.

And what is Archie’s future in the royal family? He’s currently 7th in line, but his destiny can be seen in the Duke of Gloucester, grandson of King George V, who was 5th in line at the time of his birth and is currently 27th in line. Archie has nothing to look forward to but a lifetime of demotions.

In the United States, as a U.S. citizen, Archie’s prospects are unlimited. In 35 years he’ll be eligible to run for President.

Bunkypotatohead said...

Maybe British Columbia will take them on as royalty. Then they can leave the rest of us alone.