By Dr. Douglas Young, U. of N. GA-Gainesville political science professor emeritus
Pity Party Prince Harry and manipulative Miss Meghan Markle may well be the most narcissistic couple on the planet: endlessly self-absorbed, utterly oblivious to others’ feelings, and blaming everyone but themselves for all their “troubles.” And precisely what “injustices” do the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have to gripe about? Of the world’s eight billion folks, Meghan and Harry are easily among the richest one-tenth of one percent, two of the few thousand royals, as well as young, beautiful, and (physically at least) healthy to boot.
Perhaps their real problem is that they are typical well-heeled leftists: incredibly entitled, dangerously bored, cynically secular, and desperately in search of meaning. If they were not such fine-looking celebrities, who would give them a second look?
She comes across as entirely opportunistic and he appears bitter at not being even more privileged, actually calling his ghost-written memoir “Spare” since poor Harry is not first in line to be King. A little gratitude for all their huge blessings would likely help.
To be fair, and to his enormous credit, His Royal Highness assisted orphans in Lesotho, served in his country’s armed forces for a decade, and was a bona fide war hero in Afghanistan, having volunteered to be a helicopter gunner on many combat missions. His royal status could have easily shielded him from such deadly duty, but he sought out a very dangerous job in the fight against Islamic terrorism. After his military service, he went on to help wounded veterans.
So how ironic such a proven warrior gives the impression of being completely dominated by his social-climbing and ever-complaining wife. Indeed, the only other royal thought to have surrendered his autonomy so totally to “the woman I love” was Harry’s weak great-great uncle, Edward VIII. While Harry claims his penis once suffered frostbite at the North Pole, it sure looks like his testicles are locked securely in Meghan’s Strathberry handbag.
Though skilled at scoring fawning media coverage, a la Oprah Winfrey, and making $100+ million from Netflix for extremely little documentary “work,” Harry and Meghan remain acutely sensitive to the slightest criticism. In fact, despite enjoying all their American freedom (and escape from royal duties) amid the lavish luxury of their massive California mansion, the couple often sues newspapers daring to print articles about them they don’t like, with the duke blasting their adopted country’s First Amendment free expression rights as “bonkers.” The duchess even got Piers Morgan fired from TV’s “Good Morning Britain” for having the temerity to question her honesty. How sad if the pair’s press treatment has become their emotional oxygen.
Even by jet set standards, the couple’s hypocrisy is bodaciously brazen. While publicly preening how environmentalist they are, they fly private all over. Likewise, while defaming the royal family as racist, they present zero evidence, yet Harry has called one acquaintance a “Paki” and another a “raghead,” as well as attended a party dressed as a Nazi (but his book blames his brother and sister-in-law for egging him on – of course).
To tar their fellow royals with the ugly racism canard and abandon their royal commitments when Harry’s grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, was in failing health in her mid-90s seems particularly callous. Despite the decadent duo’s endless moans of mistreatment, they display a distinctly cavalier lack of concern for how deeply their words and actions have hurt loved ones.
Consistent with the Nietzschean notion of creating their own “truth,” in May the ever-persecuted pair complained that paparazzi pursued them for “two hours” in a “near catastrophic car chase” … in New York City. But police would not confirm the claim, and even fellow leftist New Yorker Whoopi Goldberg noted it is hardly believable in the super congested Big Apple.
And just wait for the inevitably messy divorce. The Johnny Depp-Amber Heard libel trial will be like a short preview compared to the uber-shameless and seemingly endless psychodrama that tabloids will feast upon when Meghan and Harry at last turn their insatiable anger on each other.
No matter how much wealth, fame, or beauty one has, we all need a purpose, but the renegade royals personify “the idle rich” with way too much free time, endless demands for attention, and desperation to be relevant. In spite of all the good they could do for causes they support, and with two young children to rear, they act like rootless, restless, and tactless spoiled brats.
Indeed, Harry and Meghan are the 21st century’s royal version of Tom and Daisy Buchanan in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s 1925 novel, The Great Gatsby:
They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.
“Careless people”. Yes, that quote from the Great Gatsby describes them perfectly.
I can dimly remember when I liked Meghan*, or at least wanted to like her. I don’t bear either of them ill even now, but – to continue the Great Gatsby theme – they more than most are frantically and futilely beating against the current bearing them into the past.
I lost all doubt that she was a fantasist when she claimed in her interview with Oprah Winfrey that she and Harry had secretly been married by the Archbishop of Canterbury before their official wedding. I have my criticisms of Justin Welby, but I don’t think he’d be up for performing a fake marriage. Poor silly girl probably wasn’t listening and got the wrong idea about the practice session.
*She’s one of those people who would probably be terribly upset if I didn’t call her by just her first name, so I’ll do her that courtesy.
They do seem to be rather unpleasant – endlessly accusing other people of racism, and telling lots of lies.
Sometimes the lies are long stories – for example Prince Harry told a heart string tugging story of how he was told of his mother’s death when at his school (Eton) – in reality he was in Switzerland (skiing with Prince, now King, Charles) at the time. His entire story was made up.
Paul Marks,
He probably believes it himself, having drunk much from the well of “his truth”. Note that he has his own personal supply. And they complain about us wanting to make things private that should be held in common!
At least when poor old Joe Biden talks in a similarly heartrending fashion about how his son Beau “died in Iraq”, he has the excuse of senility.
Just out of interest, is there anyone reading this who thinks Dr Young, Mr Marks and I are all being too harsh on the couple? There seems to be a loose correlation between support for them and being “woke” in a genteel way (serious wokesters want the aristos à la lanterne with no exceptions), but it’s not absolutely necessary in logic.
@Natalie I doubt you’ll find such dissenters in this crowd. They are almost a caricature of woke — the massively self inflated egos, who think themselves so much better than the rest of us because they carefully recycle their plastic bottles in the trash can on their Gulfstream.
I find the whole thing really sad. I was excited for the Royal family when a partly black woman was to join. The idea that there was any racism in the British people about that is insultingly wrong. There were endlessly deep wells of support and compassion for Harry, since the picture of that little boy walking behind his mother’s coffin is burned into the British psyche.
But their Guiness World Record levels of narcissism has drained that ocean of good will, and they well deserve their contemptible reputation.
The incident with the “car chase” in New York is a perfect example. Please persecute me or at least pretend to persecute me so that everyone can see what a victim I am.
My question is, will she still call herself Duchess after she finally divorces the pathetic wet rag that she has turned him into?
Well, people keep refering to her as Meghan *Markle*, so surely they’re already divorced.
If you’re not from that part of the world, or an Oprah fan, your reaction to these people is “who?”
Famous for being famous.
Pair of black holes. Once they’ve consumed everything within reach, they will consume each other, leaving nothing behind.
Not from me. Given the lack of traction of their Spotify wokefest, I’m assuming the general public thinks similarly, although the book “Spare” seems to have sold very well indeed. I doubt “Spare 2: The Whinger Strikes Back” will be as well received.
As others have said, it’s the obvious lies that I find most off-putting along with demands for absolute transparency, veracity and perfection from everyone else.
“Their truth” is about as fake as Meghan’s smile.
I’d love to be able to do a genetic screening and take a look at what Harry has that he shares with Edward, as markers. The two of them seem much of a type, although Harry might have a bit more substance than Edward…
They both married about as well, TBH.
If history does its usual thing, and screws around with the succession, y’all might just get Harry as King if something unpleasant were to happen to everyone between him and the throne. He’s in California, the rest of the family is in the UK, which could get hit with a meteor or Russian nuke…
If that happens, it will probably put one hell of a lot of wind into the sails of those agitating to get rid of the Royal Family and go full-on Small-“r” republican…
Also… Wasn’t Harry the one who washed out of Royal Marine training? I seem to remember he was, and that likely should have been taken as a “sign”.
@Kirk, I’m not sure which Edward you are referring to. If you mean the current Duke of Edinburgh he is thick as two short planks, but he married well. His wife Sophie seems to be a lovely lady who does a lot of what royals are supposed to do, and was one of the Queen’s closest confidants. If you are thinking of Edward VIII, the Duke of Windsor, he was also thick as two short planks, was a bit of a Nazi sympathizer, and his wife was really horrible. His abdication may well have saved Britain from being taken over by the Nazis.
And no. Harry served extremely honourably in the military, taking several active service tours, and insisting that he did over a great deal of objection from the government. The Army transformed him from a broken boy into a very decent man. Meghan was the one who made him the mess he is. He also was very much responsible for setting up the Invictus Games for wounded warriors from the British military. There are a lot of good things to say about him before Meghan ruined him.
Edward (Duke of Edinburgh) was the one who washed out of the Marines, much to the horror of his father, and instead went and started a film company — that exploited his royal connections (including greatly intruding on William and Kate’s time dating at St. Andrews University), before it collapsed due to his complete lack of talent.
Nonetheless, he is now a dutiful ribbon cutting, anodyne speech giving royal right now, backed by his lovely wife. So is very much a better man than is ridiculous Californian nephew.
BTW, William, the current Prince of Wales, was a helicopter pilot in the military. And for a while he often transported his whole family by helicopter with him piloting. Had he ever, God forbit, crashed and killed them all, Harry would become next in line to the throne. If Harry decided that wokeness didn’t allows such elitism for him and his family (which is unlikely, I’m sure Meghan would love to be queen), but if he did next up would be randy Prince Andrew, friend of Jeffery Epstein and possible child molester. And for sure, if he was given the opportunity he’d jump at it.
Nonetheless, should such a thing eventuate, I suspect we’d be looking for a new Cromwell instead.
On the subject of “famous for being famous” arguably one of the greatest proponents of this practice, albeit preaching to and massaging the egos of the great and good as opposed to us mere proles who are expected to get our dose from breakfast tv and tabloid news, has been the newly ennobled Dame Anna Wintour.
That our current monarch sees fit to appoint this person, who I conversely see only as a prime candidate for Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B, to the extremely exalted rank of Companion of Honour suggests that although Harry has ingested a truly dreadful sense of values from his flawed spouse he is also, in this respect at least, his fathers son.
I think Ms. Wintour got it so that everyone would still get invited to the right parties.
She also probably knows a few inconvenient facts that C3 would like to remain hidden.
Don’t forget that ultimately the monarchy is the puppet of parliament and they are the ones who decide who will be the next in line in the case of a break in succession.
So, if parliament decides that Harry is a bit too tainted then the can choose anyone in the line of succession they like. I’d rather like to see Anne the Princess Royal having a go at the job. She seems to have got the more sensible jeans of the current crop.
When parliament chose the successor for Queen Anne who died childless, they ignored the next 50 in the line of succession (admittedly all Catholics) to choose Prince George Ludwig, Elector of Hanover to reign as George I. So there is some precedent.
I doubt they’d base their choice on “seems decent and sensible” though, which is unfortunate.
Being old-fashioned I’d reluctantly go along with Harry as long as he takes a DNA test with the results posted in the London Gazette, announced by Town Cryers through the realm and nailed to the door of Westminster Abbey.
However any evidence of Hanky Panky should entitle Mike Tindall to challenge him in unarmed combat for the Throne of England.
Mike Tindall would lose on purpose. He knows that the crown is a poisoned chalice.
May I remind you that MT would be the first monarch in nearly a millennium to have chucked a dwarf. Certainly the first to be unjustly fined by the RFU for participating in this consensual recreational activity.
He’s the King for me. The mere thought of him summarily dismissing Sunak from his presence gives me goosebumps.
Warrior! ROFL. Harry a warrior. don’t make me laugh. Harry may have served but you don’t get that many servicemen that get promoted and medals so easily. You believe that he was a hero because he volunteered for some missions. If those missions had put him in any significant risk than any other serving soldier he would have been talked out of it faster than Meeghan could say racist. They may exaggerate it up for us, who lap it up like the divvies we are, but shooting insurgents like fish in a barrel ain’t the warriors way and is an insult to our real warriors. Many of whom are destitute, homeless and on the streets not dining out at expensive parties with our betters while whinging and whining because they are not getting their own way.
I watched a documentary on British TV that advanced the theory that Edward viii was pushed to abdicate BECAUSE he had Nazi sympathies. His marrying a divorced woman was, according to this theory, a convenient pretext.
That makes me relaxed about the prospect of Harry or Andrew succeeding to the Throne.
BTW I was not aware that we have a new Duke of Edinburgh. What a magnificent-sounding title!
It’s a good thing that Edward VIII didn’t have children. You can be sure that those children would be demanding some ‘royalties’ from the public purse!
I’d pay good money to watch that 😀
He did actually go within range of Tali dakka dakka, so you don’t have have to like him but he does indeed qualify.
@LordT I think you are being unfair. I don’t think I said he was a hero, just that his service was honourable. From my memory the government tried to block him from going to the front lines but he threatened to quit if they didn’t let him “go with his boys.” He’s no Chesty Puller, but he did more than was demanded of him, and deserves respect for that. And of course it is terrible that many veterans are treated so badly after their service, but that doesn’t cast dishonour on the ones who aren’t just dishonour on the government who neglects them so.
Plus you need to recognize the great work he did in the creation of the Invictus Games, which brought meaning, purpose and life to many badly wounded military men. He did what he could, within the limits of an apolitical royal system of government, to help those cast off by the military.
So there is plenty of bad things to say about Harry, but here was his zenith, and here he rightly deserves respect and honour for it. In many respects it makes his subsequent fall all the more dramatic.
It is ironic, as pointed out by David Starkey, that “Invictus”, which can be alternately translated as “not a victim”, would be created by this man who, while whole in body and mind, and without any of the traditional intersectional genetic bonus cards went on the claim the ultimate victimhood. Much as a good woman can make a man, a bad woman can certainly destroy one.
@John
On the subject of “famous for being famous” arguably one of the greatest proponents of this practice, albeit preaching to and massaging the egos of the great and good as opposed to us mere proles who are expected to get our dose from breakfast tv and tabloid news, has been the newly ennobled Dame Anna Wintour.
Anna Wintour isn’t “famous for being famous”, she is famous for completely transforming women’s fashion through her editorship of Vogue. I care not one whit about women’s fashion, and think that paying $5000 for a purse that can barely hold your lipstick may well be an indicator of mental disease, nonetheless it IS very important to many people, and many people’s livelihoods depend on it. I don’t really care much about movies but I don’t doubt that Steven Spielberg is not “famous for being famous” but for his substantive and transformative body of work.
I doubt I’d like Anna Wintour, I am sure she represents an section of elitist New York society that I’d find vile (and no doubt they’d find me crass if they even noticed me), but she is most certainly famous for something specific.
To paraphrase the late Andy Warhol: “Harry and Meghan, your 15 minutes are up.“
Kirk asked:
Based on a cursory internet search, it seems the Royal Marines have a 40% or so washout rate. If Harry did washout, I wouldn’t necessarily hold it against him. But near as I can tell his entire Royal Marine career consists of being appointed as their Captain-General which is just a ceremonial thing.
@Steven R,
Coupla points to be made about “washing out”. One, while it isn’t uncommon, it is what you should consider an “indicator”. Why?
Because the little boys that go in for the whole idea of joining an elite force are a definite type; they’re in love with the uniform, the idea… And, when faced with the harsh reality of service, they realize they don’t want to make the tuition payments and quit. It’s one thing to “wash out” because your body gave way, or you got injured. It’s entirely another to decide it’s too hard, and go ring the bell. I vaguely remembered a royal scion who demonstrated all the usual warning signs you get used to, and I now see it wasn’t Harry.
You can usually tell these types fairly easily… It’s the guy who talks about the cool Marine Corps dress blues, the one who wants to wear a Ranger beret, etc. Talk to a guy who tells you he wants the challenge of proving himself as a soldier, so he’s volunteering for the hardest school he can find? He’ll be the guy who guts it out to graduation, no matter what. We had a young officer who went off to Ranger School one fine day, and we didn’t see him again for nine f*cking months. That bastard refused to quit, even when the cadre was begging him to. Took him being recycled through things like six-eight times before he finally finished the course, and it was all stuff that was just bad enough that he had to recycle, but they couldn’t kick him out. Bastard would not stop; he left us at around 185 lbs, and came back so emaciated and run down that the guy who went to pick him up at the airport took him directly to the hospital and they admitted him for treatment that lasted about a month. If I remember right, he weighed in at around 120 lbs on return, and it took him about a year or two of recovery before he was really even close to what he’d been before departure.
And, yeah… I question the value of that sort of “training”, as well. Although, I do have to admit, that rather annoying lieutenant earned so much “street cred” with the troops and officers around him that it was probably worth it. Before he left, nobody really paid him much heed; upon return? Dude was the unquestioned master of all he surveyed, and people wanted to work with and for him.
That was a guy you knew wasn’t going to wash out, before he left. The rest of the poseurs he went to that school with? All of them were back within the first three weeks.
So, yeah… While the wash-out rates are high, you can also tell a lot about a guy who does wash out. The guys who just quit, you now know what they’re about. They rarely overcome the experience and learn from it; the majority are just failures. Which isn’t to say that the guys who break legs and so forth are such, at all… It’s the ones that actively quit, or who take the first easy excuse out.
Just to repeat, Prince Harry did NOT wash out of the Marines. He had a successful career in the army.
It was Prince Edward who washed out of the Marines.
As I said… My memories played me false. I just remembered one of the Royals washing out.
And, Edward has pretty much gone the way you’d stereotypically expect a guy who did that to go…
The military isn’t for everyone, and succeeding in it isn’t a mark of any particular virtue. Indeed, I think that there are a lot of people who make successful soldiers that are almost completely unfit for much of anything else, which isn’t to their credit. It is possible to be a very bad human being, and a very good soldier…
And, having encountered more than a few of those guys in the course of my career in the military, I question the automatic assumption everyone makes about the virtues/benefits of having been successful in the soldiering business. Not every one of the men and women who become such are really deserving of the adulation and pedestal-sitting they’re subject to. Some are, some aren’t… Just like with every other field. I know some very good doctors and nurses who are great at what they do, whose patients love them universally, and whose families loathe them because of the things they do at home.
Ain’t none of us really worthy of any sort of automatic assumption of nobility or virtue. Every plaster saint has his feet of clay…
David F. is a chap who posts on AlternateHistory.com; he was Charles’ Close Personal Escort for a while in the 1980s. (Also a veteran of the Falklands War and Northern Ireland. He’s been around the what-if milieu for 25 years or so, and is definitely not a wannabe or poseur.)
In response to some speculation about What-Ifs involving Diana, David recounted what he knew about the Royals. Regarding Edward, David said that he was not a strong personality – but David respected him for recognizing that he was not capable of passing the commando course and withdrawing (instead of letting the instructors walk him through).
(David also noted that Diana was selfish, narcissistic, and a slut – he listed several of her lovers of whom he had certain knowledge; a standing order to any CPE assigned to her was “Don’t”. Also Andrew was a complete douchebag; Anne was the smartest and hardest working.)
“Meeghan”
If that’s a typo, it’s one of the best ever. May I borrow it?