CONTROVERSY continues about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their decision to quit their roles as senior members of the Royal Family. Here are extracts from some comments in response to our republication of Kathy Gyngell’s interview with Prince Harry’s biographer, Angela Levin, ‘Don’t say we didn’t warn you about Misfit Meg’. https://conservativewoman.co.uk/dont-say-we-didnt-warn-you-about-misfit-meg/
Pitchfork Revolt wrote:
Beeb 5 Woke had a BAME activist on at lunchtime who insisted that ‘Britain had not welcomed Meghan’ and the elephant in the room was ‘the racism she has been subjected to by the press’.
Does she live on another planet? The big M has been welcomed and given everything she wants by Britain and the monarchy. And what racism exactly? And from whom? When pressed she could only make vague references to ‘things written in the papers’.
It drives me crazy that we are still being fed this picture of an imaginary country where race hate is peddled daily and outsiders are oppressed. And as usual the BBC is front and centre in creating and promoting that image.
I don’t care about her racial background. I do care about her ideas, which I think are incompatible with maintaining the Royal Family’s links to history.
Audre Myers wrote:
I’m sorry; I can’t do it. I can’t hate Harry. Seared into my brain is the picture of those boys walking behind their mother’s coffin. In my heart, they will always be those boys. Like my own children, I look at the adult but see the child that once was. If it is possible to love complete strangers, I love those boys.
I hate her. Loathe her. I can find no charity in my heart for her, please God forgive me. She has taken Harry by the hand and led him down a path he could never have been prepared for. And now – now she’s got adorable little Archie to use as bludgeon against anyone who comes against her. And she will, mark my words. For all his nonsense in his young wild years, he never saw her coming, or was prepared for the likes of her. She is, after all, an actress.
It won’t end well – except for her. When she gets rid of him and has sole custody of Archie, watch what happens.
Fred Smith replied:
Hating Harry doesn’t come into it. I see him as a naive simpleton who’s become smitten with a calculating climber who saw him as a route to celebrity. A wiser man wouldn’t have let such a relationship develop.
Charles, to his credit, does see the need to cut down the numbers of members of the extended family who coat-tail on the Queen. Harry’s idea of doing not much but still picking up millions ought to be an opportunity for Charles to show that he means what he says. I believe he would have the support of the general public in cutting off Harry’s (unearned) hand-outs and forcing him to earn his own living.
Harry has shown himself to be as arrogant and self-serving as she is. If they keep their HRH titles, the royal family are finished. I genuinely feel sorry for his grandmother who has served this country so well.
Della Cate wrote:
I wonder if a divorce will now follow? I wonder if that is what she is threatening if she does not get her way?
By leaving her husband stranded to face the music, she couldn’t have made it clearer to him that ‘it’s them or me.’
In response to Laura Perrins: The Markles will need to shake a very big money tree,
I’m Old Fashioned wrote:
As a lifetime conservative (exhibit A, I still have a Coronation mug from 1953!) I am sometimes shocked at how, after all these years, I suddenly don’t care about the monarchy. Or rather it seems quite sudden but in fact is not at all. The stealthy slide into cultural Marxism, which once proceeded at a glacial pace and thus went largely undetected, has recently reached critical mass and so the tipping point has now been reached. There is no way back to the Christian monarchy of which the present Queen became head of state and to which Charles expects to succeed, so why bother with a monarch at all?
For decades all the big regal events like the State Opening of Parliament and Trooping the Colour seemed to justify their survival because they presented an opportunity to celebrate the fact that the civilisation which created them still existed. This is no longer the case. The society and culture to which they belong has been destroyed, not merely modified or modernised as some would argue, but destroyed. And so they are now nothing more than shallow, meaningless showbiz events, whose dual role seems to be to earn foreign currency from tourists and to help nourish a willing British public’s self-delusions about their country (in fact, even the very description, ‘their country’ is itself a delusion).
I was in Horseguards Parade recently again after a gap of many years. In appearance it would seem that little has changed, but beneath the surface everything has changed. Now the whole place feels like nothing more than a cross between a film set and Disneyland London. The country of which Charles has long aspired to be king is no more. His coronation will be no more meaningful than those silly staged gunfights they put on for visitors to tourist ghost towns in the USA. So please, no more Zadok the Priest, ‘The party’s over, it’s time to call it a day’ seems more appropriate.