Megxit was not driven by racism

Why are liberals so determined to turn the princess into a victim?

Tom Slater

Tom Slater
Deputy Editor

Topics Politics UK

First they said Brexit was caused by racism. Now they’re saying Megxit was caused by racism.

By ‘they’, I mean the liberal-left commentariat, the people who hate Brexit, hate ordinary people, and have for some reason grown to love our departing royals, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.

This past 24 hours they have closed ranks around the couple – who announced yesterday that they plan to keep their royal titles (and most of their royal income) but leave behind their royal duties – like some woke version of the Queen’s Guard.

They have chastised anyone outraged by the staggering entitlement shown by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have essentially said that they want the status but none of the responsibilities of monarchy. They insist that the poor couple have been driven out by racism.

British author Afua Hirsch, writing in the New York Times, decries the ‘racist treatment of Meghan’ in the press. She says it is hardly a surprise that Markle has walked away from a nation with a prime minister ‘whose track record includes overtly racist statements’ and a ‘Brexit project linked to native nationalism’.

Of course, Boris Johnson has no such track record and the only people linking Brexit to native nationalism are elitist upper-crust Remainers like Hirsch. But no matter. Why let reality spoil the narrative?

These claims made about the ‘racist’ treatment of Meghan at the hands of the British press are incredibly thin. The same non-examples are just recycled over and over again. You’ve probably seen them quoted (out of context) a thousand times.

There’s that Mail piece from 2016, when Harry and Meghan were first dating, that said she was ‘(almost) straight outta Compton’ – at the time Markle’s mother lived in nearby Crenshaw, LA. Hirsch says this was an attempt to link Meghan with ‘racialised forms of crime’, ie gangs.

That’s one hell of a reach. The piece was clearly just playing on the difference in Harry and Meghan’s social backgrounds. If Harry had been dating a white working-class woman from Moss Side, I dare say the Mail would have done something similarly silly.

Another favourite is that weird throwaway line Rachel Johnson wrote, in a laudatory piece on Markle, about the mixed-race American actress bringing some ‘rich and exotic DNA’ to the pale Windsor bloodline. That’s more cringey than racist.

Several pieces have even cited a single phrase in a Sarah Vine column – she said she had a ‘niggling worry’ about the royal couple’s engagement photo – as a bigoted dog whistle. Which is, quite frankly, mental. Such is the lack of actual examples of the press being racist about Meghan.

The only leg this argument has left to stand on is that the sheer volume of criticism sent Meghan’s way was disproportionate. Racism is the only explanation for it. It’s an argument that has the advantage of being based purely on unverifiable speculation and imputing motives. But it’s also, obviously, bollocks.

When the couple first got together the coverage was pretty much gushing across the board. It was only when Meghan and Harry started on their various virtue-signalling crusades – like jetting around to lecture on climate change – that people’s backs went up.

That the couple had already been beefing with the press probably didn’t help either. In 2016, way before Meghan became such a key figure in our culture wars, Harry issued a remarkable statement rebuking journalists for the ‘racial undertones’ of their pieces.

That these privileged royals, kept in the lap of luxury at taxpayers’ expense, began to develop a deep-seated victim complex only deepened the resentment towards them. Last year, Meghan told ITV that public life was a ‘struggle’, and that she was shocked that ‘not many people have asked if I’m okay’. Poor princess.

This picture of privilege is who the liberal-left has spent the best part of three years defending. Even supposed republicans have – after a bit of anti-royal throat-clearing – defended Harry and Meghan to the hilt and helped construct this absurd narrative that they are the victims of establishment racism.

But this says far more about the prejudices of liberal-left commentators than it does about the tabloid press. That they routinely situate Meghan’s supposed mistreatment in Brexit Britain is no coincidence. They think of Britain as a foul place, full of foul people, brainwashed by foul newspapers to hate the wonderful Duchess of Sussex and the obviously brilliant European Union.

What the liberal elite’s severe case of Meghan-mania has shown us is that, for all their posturing against right-wingers, monarchy and the old aristocracy, they’re completely comfortable with the plebs being led and instructed and hectored by our betters.

They would just rather it was woke people doing it, like Harry and Meghan.

Tom Slater is deputy editor at spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_

Picture by: Getty

No paywall. No subscriptions.
spiked is free for all.

Donate today to keep us fighting.

Help spiked prick the Covid consensus

So here we are – 14 weeks into Britain’s three-week lockdown. We hope you are all staying sane out there, and that spiked has been of some assistance in that. We have ramped up our output of late, to provide a challenge to the Covid consensus. But we couldn’t have done that without your support. spiked – unlike so many things these days – is completely free. We rely on our loyal readers to fund our journalism. So if you enjoy our work, please do consider becoming a regular donor. Even £5 per month can be a huge help. You can donate here.Thank you! And stay well.

Donate now

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.


Skeptic 1972

16th January 2020 at 7:59 am

When I ask myself, “who is a true victim of racism in this world?”, my first thought is, “a multi-millionaire member of the royal family”.

Courtney Toms

15th January 2020 at 8:53 pm

I do not doubt MM experienced some racism especially from the press and in chat rooms. However, if one has not had another person’s experience in life, it IS hard to relate at a deep level. Most in the RF are not biracial nor have they suffered economic struggle or experienced life as a working actress who needed to shed husband 1 to get on with her career. These gulfs are not racial.
Nor could/would the Queen reach out to MM enough, given the Queen’s own children lacked enough personal nurture from her due to the demand of her queenly duties. Kate couldn’t or wouldn’t do enough for MM given she has her hands full with three children and her own duties. Also, if MM was suffering postpartum depression, that alone would color others’ slights (real or imagined). Few have written about the struggles many biracial children have fitting in even in their earliest school years, and in MM’s case, her siblings were fully Caucasian and part of a dominant race with MM’s mother having broken up their father’s marriage to their mother (along with his help). She was likely looked down on by them and received their anger because she displaced them in their father’s affections. I find it interesting that the bulk of MM’s friends and her first husband were/are Caucasian, with the exception of a few celebrity African-Americans and Brits of African heritage. That focus suggests a desire to thrive in the dominant culture (which is changing). I find it interesting that not only were her half siblings not invited to her wedding but neither were her mother’s people. Why not? (Was she the one being racist and or feeling superior economically then?)
The Queen and Prince Charles should not spend months in self-recrimination. It is obvious they bent over backwards, but not to her as THE crown princess. I can see that the press’s focus from the engagement through the birth of Archie may have given both Harry and her hope that they indeed would have equal status with William and Kate. After all the press labeled them as The Fabulous Four. And for a moment they were grabbing more headlines than Kate and Will. Not unexpected, for Harry is loved, and she is glamorous.

But if the Queen, or Prince Charles, or Prince Williams, and/or some courtiers told them they now needed to step back some and quit grabbing the headlines from the heirs, it was not due to racism.
It was due to primogeniture. Edward and Andrew had had to cope with being other than the heir, and I don’t believe they were ever given as huge a state trip abroad as MM and Harry were in Australia.
Being told to “know your place” in the RF was not equivalent to Jim Crow laws telling African American to know their place.
It is easy though, for one insecure about his/her place in the RF to construe these words as such.
But that belief is fallacious and doesn’t describe the reality at all.

jan mozelewski

15th January 2020 at 9:27 pm

Meghan Markle was, according to most reports, her father’s favourite and doted on. Before she ghosted him for speaking to the press…oh the irony from the SussexRoyal (dot,com).
She didn’t brand herself as black until it suited her to do so. It didn’t suit her during the TV career and not many people knew about her background at all until well into the engagement to Harry Windsor.
You see in Woke America and celeb liberal circles.what is really really unfashionable is being White working class. They became an embarrassment. Now having black genes is very much the opposite. It was a sure fire way to big-up her appeal to Celebs like Oprah and the Obamas. Being largely white from an ordinary background would have had the whiff of ‘trailer trash’ about it whereas embracing her blackness gave her a point of difference. It wasn’t a disadvantage AT ALL with the young generation she set out to appeal to.
Hence she edited out her unfortunately white relatives and so the only family at her wedding was her black mother. The image was complete and the message clear.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.