Peter Hunt: The Queen ‘acted poorly,’ was ‘mean spirited’ and not magnanimous

From left, Queen Elizabeth II, Meghan Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry Duke of Sussex, Prince William Duke of Cambridge and Katherine Duchess of Cambridge watch the RAF 100th anniversary flypast from the balcony of Buckingham Palace, London, Tuesday 10th J

Over the weekend, the Genesis Women’s Shelter & Support announced on their social media that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had donated to their Dallas women’s shelter. Harry and Meghan donated through their Archewell Foundation, and they did so because the shelter was significantly damaged in the brutal winter storm last week.

Good for them. This shows that the Archewell Foundation is up and running financially too. Which makes me wonder what will happen when Archewell really gets going and Harry and Meghan are partnering with NGOs and billionaires to do big work internationally. I wonder what the British media and House Petty will say then. What will the anti-Sussex argument be when H&M thrive outside of the salty bubble of royal lies? Speaking of, many people were posting and discussing Peter Hunt’s essay in the Spectator. Hunt is something of an old-guard royalist/journalist and he had a much less hysterical take on the Sussexit stuff. Here’s part of the essay:

To Harry and Meghan’s critics – and they have plenty – the equation is simple. If millions of Netflix and Spotify dollars are pouring into your bank accounts, you can’t be opening fetes in Chipping Sodbury; not that such an opportunity was likely to have ever been high on their royal to do list. This analysis is compelling but misses a painful element of the sorry saga. A family has rejected one of its own. The matriarch ensured all olive branches were severed from the Megxit tree.

When Megxit was first added to our lexicon, the Sussexes were naively seeking to have their cake and eat it. A year on, they were just looking for a few crumbs. None were offered. As a family – dysfunctional as so many are – the Windsors could and should have left the door ajar. They could and should have facilitated a future where the couple would return for Trooping the Colour; Harry, who served his country, would lay a wreath on Remembrance Sunday each year; and they would continue to represent the Queen at some future Commonwealth events.

The royals are superb at making it up as they go along. When the Queen was at an engagement last year and clearly didn’t want to be seen wearing a mask, her officials came up with the wheeze of Covid testing all those she would encounter. Instead of doing the right thing – a head of state leading by example – they avoided a confrontation with a 94-year-old and opted for the easy option.

The royals have shown that they can adapt and accommodate. They’ve chosen not to do so for someone who is a grandson, a son and a brother – someone who has been damaged by the ties that bind him. At the behest of his family, aged 12, Harry walked behind his mother’s coffin; something he once said ‘no child should be asked to do’.

The talk and the hope now in royal circles will be of moving on and consigning Megxit to the footnotes of royal history. They can’t see that future accounts will, I believe, record the Queen as having acted poorly when responding to a grandson who adores her. Mean spirited over magnanimous won the day. History will also reflect on how the painful lessons inflicted on the royals after Diana’s death have been forgotten. ‘Show us you care’ would be a fitting lament for Prince Harry.

The royals, and those who surround them, still can’t see what they have jettisoned. It will be on display when Meghan and Harry’s interview with Oprah is broadcast. The monarchy failed, in the 21st century, to embrace a woman of African American heritage. They have reverted to being white, predominately male (only three out of the first ten in the line of succession are female) and, as things stand, a tad stale.

[From The Spectator]

No lies detected, honestly. Instead of taking the long view, instead of spending the past year preparing a different kind of offer for the Sussexes, instead of defending them as a beloved grandson and granddaughter-in-law, the Queen remained as tone-deaf, cold and vindictive as she always was. No lessons were learned from the Diana era. Only this time, they weren’t dealing with an aristocrat’s teenage daughter, someone they thought they could manipulate and gaslight into submission. They were dealing with a 30-something American woman who had lived and worked in the real world. A woman who got one good look at the entire organization and jumped. And she took her prince too. But yeah, the Queen is f–king awful and this has just reinforced all of that.

Lady Gabriella Windsor wedding

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

184 Responses to “Peter Hunt: The Queen ‘acted poorly,’ was ‘mean spirited’ and not magnanimous”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. whateveryousay says:

    Ehh only thing I will say is that she didn’t jump. Harry (rightfully) jumped and took his family the heck out of there. I hope that the Oprah interview gets into that, because calling it megexit, putting all the onus on her, etc. has been and will continue to be BS.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      I don’t understand the pettiness from that family towards the Sussexes. Didn’t her own husband leave HIS country to move in with her? I’d say Harry was acting just like his grandpa.

      • whateveryousay says:

        Thank you!

      • notasugarhere says:

        No, Philip didn’t leave his country for Elizabeth. Philip was an impoverished Danish royal (the pretend Greeks). They were exiled from Greece when Philip was an infant, his father abandoned the family soon after. He was raised grace-and-favour in France, Germany, and mostly the UK.

        Philip was taken in by UK aristocratic friends of the family when he was very young, schooled in the UK. Had no money, joined the UK military at 18. Due to the machinations of another Victoria descendant, Uncle Louis Mountbatten, Philip was thrown in the path of a young and impressionable Elizabeth.

      • anotherlily says:

        Philip had no real home from the age of around 10. Greece rejected the monarchy and exiled his father who then abandoned his family. His mother spent several years in a psychiatric facility. Philip was moved around different relatives in England, Germany and France until he joined the British Royal Navy at 18. His cousin Lord Mountbattern was the nearest he had to a father.

      • lanne says:

        1) she’s biracial
        2) she was good at the job
        3) William was jealous of how good she was at the job, and how her action highlighted his inaction, and Kate’s inaction
        4) Petty Betty puts her head in the sand and bows to the Heir. The Heir before all else (except her)

        I think #1 was always the biggest factor. Even if Meghan crawled on the floor behind Kate while Kate threw treats at her and William patted her on the head. Even if Meghan did the “whatever it is you like” Coming to America Zamunda prospective bride thing and hopped on one foot if the queen asked. Even if she disappeared from view like the Scientology leader’s wife and we only heard about her in whispers, knowing she was “deep inside the Palace somewhere”. Nothing would keep the haters from hating her for the melanin in her skin.

        Meghan never had a shot. She might have fared better had Prince William fallen for her–then she wouldn’t be the wife of the spare outshining the wife of the heir. But then again, no way. Even if it would be acceptable to have a black American future future queen (no way, as we can see), her intelligence and charisma would have made him jealous. Diana 2.0

      • notasugarhere says:

        lanne, part of the problem is, William may have fallen for her. She’s beautiful, smart, talented, and great at the public royaling. There’s at least one pic out there of William eyeing her up inappropriately and Harry looking furious in the background.

        There’s also the fact that Harry and Meghan’s love story makes W&K’s business arrangement obvious. The only PR William has is ‘happy family’, which turns out has never been happy but transactional.

      • lanne says:

        @nota: William may likely be physically attracted to her, but I don’t think he would want someone who could challenge him. I think he’s hung up on the fact that Meghan is the kind of woman you fool around with while Kate is the woman you marry who bears the “heirs.” Prince Albert of Monaco has a child with an African flight attendant and likely another child with a Moroccan woman. You play around with the “colored women” and have illegitimate kids with them. I think William also hates that Meghan isn’t “some floozy actress” as he’d thought. He hates her because he feels threatened by her. She likely makes him feel stupid, so his only recourse is to try to win a dominance fight against her to assert his “superior manhood.” I, as a black woman, have had high-status white men react to me this way: flirt with me, want to hook up with me, then realize I’m smarter than they are and then feel threatened, then try to undermine me to make themselves feel better. Lots of WOC who post here likely have the same experiences. AOC here in the US is the walking embodiment of this for conservative white men–that’s why they hate her so much.

      • MissMarierose says:

        @lanne: Yes, this is spot on!
        “I, as a black woman, have had high-status white men react to me this way: flirt with me, want to hook up with me, then realize I’m smarter than they are and then feel threatened, then try to undermine me to make themselves feel better. Lots of WOC who post here likely have the same experiences.”

        They’re afraid of their attraction and afraid of the fact that a smart WOC undoes their notions of white supremacy. It scares the living shite out of them so they lash out.

      • I think you nailed it LANNE. And thanks for your point of view as an obviously, strong, successful, intelligent, attractive black woman. Thanks for your pointing out how it really plays with males (especially white ones) when you are a woman such as yourself and Meghan. How very threatened they are.

      • Missskitttin says:

        Definitely! I never thought about it that way <3

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Lanne Nota
        You’re both missing something else. She is the spare’s wife. Before Meghan was known we always knew his wife would be attacked endlessly. It’s how the firm functions and there’s decades of press and actions to support this.

        Another bit is that Meghan refuses to dim her light. That is something expected of all women marrying into the firm.

        Yes, being any race other than white wasn’t appreciated, but before that was introduced with Meghan specifically the 2 points I’ve laid out were always in the foundation. They were never going to accept a strong, smart, independent, self made millionaire with a strong work ethic and passion for a life helping others.

        But because she’s biracial… yeah. The BRF and the BM showed their racist side as a way to attack someone they were always going to try and skin alive.

      • Sara says:

        @ Wiglet Watcher : You hit the nail right on the head. I was going to say this as well.

      • Coffeeisgood says:

        @lanne hit the nail right on the head. Ugh though that makes me upset

    • Abby says:

      Exactly. Megxit is a dumb nickname too. Why not SussEXIT which makes more sense? It wasn’t Meghan, it was led by Harry, as he’s said many times.

      • Emmitt says:

        It’s “Megxit” because they want MEG to Exit.

      • UptownGirl says:

        They love to show their own racism, that is apparent in the naming of it.
        Though I did enjoy Hunts take on it. Now my the rest of the RR rats burn in hell.

      • Sandra says:

        Because misogyny is still alive and well. It’s very “Yoko broke up the Beatles” of them. Demonize the woman and infantilize the man.

      • Olenna says:

        @Emmitt, this entirely–they wanted her to leave and when that didn’t work because Harry left too, they just wanted him to come back. Raggedy old conservative men, reporters and commentators, have been stating this plainly and openly for a while. This is what Christ0pher Wils0n said a few days ago on Twitter: “The difficulty was that, at the beginning, there was the hope that Harry would come home. Alone, perhaps.”

    • Chrissy says:

      @lanne YES TO ALL OF THIS!
      But, I’d like to put one other thing on the list – she is also AMERICAN. They don’t think totally well of us in England, though they pretend to.

    • Missskitttin says:

      That sad trope of “The horrible woman who stole the man away, or convinced him to leave, or put bad thoughts in his head” as if he is not a grown man, is nothing but a trope. He has agency, he has a personality and he has lived IRL.

  2. Seraphina says:

    Aside from all you wrote Kaiser, she was awful to her own flesh and blood – her grandson. Her own grandson and the woman he loved and started a family with – the woman who gave birth to another human of her highness’ flesh and blood. There is nothing “highness” about her except the fallacy that she is above all others. I don’t know if she is making these decisions or if others are playing a part, but Charles is not mentioned anywhere. I would assume a father would step in one point, but he is no better than his mother. The apple does not fall from the tree.

    • Levans says:

      All of this! Liz of House Petty acted…..shocking petty and small. History will not be kind due to the major (and justified) shrinkage of the commonwealth but also in knowing that the family behind it all was so damaging to themselves. So many unforced errors in this whole Sussexit.

      • Emm says:

        So many. I mean the bottom line is that any of them could’ve said stop harassing these people they are part of the family and we won’t tolerate it from the beginning but they chose not to do a single thing. That left M & H to the vultures where they couldn’t survive so they obviously left.

        I think all of this has been in the making from the beginning. They decided first thing to not lift a finger to try and protect these two because they didn’t want her in the family, plain and simple. But especially with M when they do everything to protect the pedophiles, the do nothings, and the ones out making a buck on the Windsor name. The double standards towards them and the rest of the family are staggering and they know it but just dgaf because they know they have a built in loyal audience.

    • Osty says:

      Exactly Seraphina , Charles is a bad dad . I dislike andrew but the man has shown the world how much he loves his daughters and is ready to protect them . One thing he and his gritfter of an ex wife have done well is how they raised their kids to love and support each other . Charles didn’t that’s why his boys are “feuding ” . He made sure wills is pampered , he looked the other way when he was abusing harry and using him as a scapegoat. And when harry married he looked the other way when the media was abusing his daughter in law and grandson

      • Seraphina says:

        Correct, and he is a bad dad because his examples were poor parenting examples: Liz and Phil. So if Liz was a poor parent, why should we expect her to be a proper grandmother. The joke in our house (between my husband and myself) is that we became chopped liver once the kids came along. The grandparents SWOON over the kids and let our kids get away with things we never could. Soooooo, one would assume her majesty (I cringe just writing that) would be the same, but no. She is a bitter old woman. Punishing a young couple in love. I am beginning to think it runs deeper than what we think, maybe she never had love in her marriage and is punishing those who find it.

      • Rachel Phelps says:

        “I dislike andrew but the man has shown the world how much he loves his daughters” …and other people’s daughters. You’ve got to be kidding me.

        I am aghast at your comment above. I’m even more aghast that TQ has taken a harder stance on H&M than Pedo Andy…and he remains free.

      • Dollycoa says:

        “I dislike andrew but the man has shown the world how much he loves his daughters and is ready to protect them”
        He does live them. Shame he didnt equate them with other peoples daughters the same age instead of as peasants, there to serve him and his friends’needs and nothing else. Of course he loves them They are Royal. The rest of us are just dirt on his shoe.

      • Bex says:

        Not just Charles, but The Queen AND The Queen Mother were instrumental in making William who he is.

        William started spending more time with the Queen Mother when he attended Eton. He’d have lunches with her at Windsor Castle almost daily. I don’t believe Harry was ever offered that. It’s what the Queen Mother did with Charles, too (taking him under her wing, and not as much interesting in Charles’ siblings).

      • Coco says:

        Andrew dragged his daughters into his supposed pizza party alibi for why he claims he couldn’t have sexually assaulted a teenager.

    • ArizonaRose says:

      Not sure why, but I interpreted Charles’s silence as dissent. Like, “Fine. But I’m doing shit differently when I’m king. That’s my son and I won’t cut him off.”

      Maybe I’m projecting my own feelings onto him. But ya. F the queen.

      • Osty says:

        Ari if doesnt protect them now then when will he, he didn’t protect him when he was only 12, he didn’t when he was a teenager, he didn’t when he got married so I refuse to believe he will when he is king . Andrew is 7th in line or so but even him does everything in his power to protect his kids. He just doesn’t care or is afraid of the media to do anything. So even if he is king it will be the same

      • Lorelei says:

        @ArizonaRose: Anything is possible, but IMO whatever he does once he’s the monarch will be much too little and much too late. They needed his help and public support most over the past four years, and he didn’t give it to them.

        Whatever his reasoning may have been, he was wrong. He wasn’t there when his son & DIL needed him, full stop. I think he did a lot of irreparable damage to not only his relationship with Harry and his family, but to his own reputation as well. It will suffer because he stayed silent instead of doing the right thing. IMO

      • Becks1 says:

        I agree with Lorelei AND ArizonaRose – in that I do wonder how Charles really feels about this situation, and I do think he wanted Harry and Meghan to stay.

        But his silence over the past four years equals complicity at this point – if he wanted them to stay, he should have made that happen. Or he should have come out vocally in support of them. Even over the past week, he should have issued a statement from him, from Charles, Pa, Grandpa – congratulating them on the baby and wishing them all the best in the next stage of their lives.

        He may think he’s playing the long game here or trying to win the PR war (frankly I think he’s trying to avoid a public PR war with William), but at this point he has failed his younger son on the public stage and the actual reasons for that dont really matter anymore.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @ArizonaRose: You have too much faith in Charles. To be silent is to be complicit. Charles has no objection to what is taking place. His popular son and daughter in law are out of the picture and are no longer there to overshadow him. From all reports he and William have grown closer over this last year. He’s not going to jeopardise his relationship with William for the spare and the American. I’ll keep repeating that Charles is not an honourable man. He was jealous Diana and has thrown Harry under the bus many times in order to boost his image. For Charles, it’s in his best interest to keep quiet on this issue and to show an united front with the Queen and William.

      • Seraphina says:

        Charles could have done something ANYTHING, but his silence speaks volumes. Let’s also look at it this way, his relationship with Harry wasn’t perfect. Along comes Harry’s wife, who is trying to be included. Charles could have helped and rebuild a tarnished relationship with Harry and showing Meghan he is not what everyone says he is: a spoiled man, who sacrificed everything (including his relationship with his kids) for Cam’s knickers. But nooooooo, he sits silent as the grave. Not even a leak anywhere, because heavens knows we have leaks from every corner in that shabby palace. And that too is sealing his fate.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think Charles sees that Harry and Meghan are better off away from William in the long run. Charles supported the creation of a new Household under BP to get Harry and Meghan out from William’s control, there was some support there. Does he want Sussex Family back in his reign? I don’t think so at this point. Better for Harry and Meghan to live happily ever after away from Incandescent.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Nota – I also think that’s part of it. I dont buy the PR that Charles and William are suddenly super close. I think Charles sees William for what he is and since we have several reports that he supported the part time idea, it makes me think he was seeing the long game and wanted Harry set up so he wasnt dependent on William in the future.

        But it goes back to – why is this family so scared of William? Does he threaten to walk away on a regular basis? (and if he does, so what? what is he going to do? work?)

      • bamaborn says:

        Don’t know why I think the same thing. Charles never seem to display those distant vibes with Harry like I thought I saw with Bill. We’ll see, if ole Betty ever steps down, if he’s infact a bad Dad or just bidding his time.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “I think Charles sees that Harry and Meghan are better off away from William in the long run. ”

        @Nota – No SCHITT! Charles knows his reign will be short and that Harry is better off building a life while he is young with global popularity than to try and do it in his mid-fifties.

    • Red Snapper says:

      The reason Charles is never mentioned is because he wants to the same thing to Andrew.

    • SERAPHINA comment 2) and BECKS1 at 8:53am): SPOT ON. —- Also, I think we should start referring to Charles as Casper, the ghost. He seems to be totally missing in action lately when it comes to Harry and Meghan.

      And, is it just me or is there something in being raised as the heir to the throne (Charles, William) and wearing the actual crown (Queen) that encourages the development of a narcissistic personality? Charles is all about his wants and needs, as is William, and the Queen sees herself as the be all and end all of everything. The Sun around whom all must orbit.

    • Novice says:

      William got Charles by his balls! Charles wants his wife to be crowned as Queen when he is King. The obstacle is William. I remember just several months ago, there was this massive negative campaign in the tabloids against Charles and Camilla again when we thought it all died down and public had started to accept the notion, just in the middle of Megxit. I suspect Charles tried to intervene William, but William moved his hand by leaking these titbits to DM and The Sun. The timing is just too suspicious.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If Camilla is named Princess Consort, it paves the way for William’s future consort to be Princess Consort as well. It is a less sexist titling convention which has been proposed in the past. If Camilla is Princess Consort, that’s the precedent that will be followed.

  3. RoyalBlue says:

    It is so annoying. We should ensure that the word added to the lexicon is Sussexit, not Megxit. The latter is misogynistic, but many are too biased to notice.

    • Belli says:

      It’s also racist.

      “Megxit” was the term thought up by Meghan haters, especially the overt racists, long before she and Harry actually announced they were leaving. They were demanding “Megxit”, that Meghan be ejected from the royal family in disgrace, that Meghan be thrown out of the palace onto the street, that she be deported.

      Like the royal family, their intention was to get rid of Meghan. Just Meghan, not Harry as well.

      But then the royal reporters latched onto the term when the Sussexes made their announcement (which is… interesting) and moved it into the wider lexicon.

      • sunny says:

        Truly this. I get so mad that so many call it Megxit. The racism and sexism jump out! It also removes Harry’s agency entirely which is totally gross.

      • lanne says:

        It just shows how much the royal rats were in bed with the racists all along. They openly followed and CONTRIBUTED TO racist vitriol on Twitter and they still have jobs. That’s what tells me that british media is toxic, and even the news media is tainted by theit tabloid media.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Agreed, extremely racist. I am triggered whenever I read it.

      • Christine says:

        It must be Sussexit, from now on.

  4. (The OG) Jan90067 says:

    True words spoken. This IS the marking place for the beginning of the end. I truly don’t think there will be any monarch left for George unless there is a drastic turn of events/circumstance/“Come to Jesus” moment for this family.

    They blew it. Up.

    • Liz version 700 says:

      For George I think that will probably be good. Being part of this monarchy seems to be toxic. None of the immediate heirs seem OK. Anne and Edward seem fine being too far down to have to deal with the toxic heads of the family, but really no one in the direct line of succession seems Ok except the one who escaped.

    • Christine says:

      There will be no “come to Jesus” moment, for these fools. They are “ordained by God”, what do they need with his son? They have showed us how much they think of one of their ACTUAL sons. I cannot believe the hubris of the royal family, and their inability to remotely read a room.

  5. Fleur says:

    peter hunt is the only RR who makes clear the political and geopolitical damage caused by Meghan’s racist relentlessness and the departure of the Sussexes

  6. Becks1 says:

    This was such a great read. I really liked the point about how the monarchy adapts – in the full article he specifically references changing their name to Windsor. So many of the defenses of the queen and the royal family in this particular saga have been that it “just isnt done” but the monarchy has adapted in the past to ensure its survival – so surely it could have adapted here.

    And the line about being mean spirited over magnanimous – it just really hits the nail on the head. The royal family could have handled this very differently. They made a choice to be mean and petty and I think history is going to judge them pretty harshly for it.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Yep – history will not judge them well over the way they treated both H&M.

      My big issue is that the Monarchy won’t adapt because the Queen herself won’t – she it too tied to a ‘this is how we have always done it mindset’ and won’t shift from it. Plus she is another one who is surrounded by yes men. She is also notorious about sticking her head in the sand and refusing to deal with situations.

      It will be interesting to see if Chuck adapts the institution when he eventually takes the throne – it’s something that has long been talked about with him.

      • Gina says:

        I’m trying to analyze the situation from the age angle. If the Queen has no intention to retire, she will continue her reign till she would be .. what, 100 years old? 105? Just think about Charles waiting in the shadows to be King and to make “right” decisions for Harry and his family. Laughable. It would never happen. Just imagine his coronation at the age 85-90… Parody. All this is playing into Willy’s hands only. (Tinfoil Tiara: Maybe the Queen wants to outlive her less beloved son to prevent him to become King?)

      • Ainsley7 says:

        The Queen’s current people were hired by Charles. He ousted her people years ago when he started taking on more responsibility. He basically started campaigning to be King in 2017 and has been trying to get her to step down or make him regent. So, either he is trying to sabotage her image and get people to call for her to step down or this is what he wanted. It could be both really. Either way, he’s pulling the strings.

      • Where once, she was the stabilizer of a monarchy in crisis, she is now its worst enemy for survival.

      • Novice says:

        The Queen is just too old to handle these difficult situations. And as you said, she just is never a confrontational type. And the UK consititution also makes it difficult for a strong-willed crown. The establishment moulds the royals until they are now just yes-men without any of their agency.

    • Myra says:

      The irony here is that during the wedding, the global media was portraying the union as the modernisation of the monarchy. It was looked at as a positive thing. Three years later, we see the monarchy repudiate this view and the excuse of tradition or protocol being used to justify Sussexit. Now, “she wanted to change the monarchy” is seen as something bad.

      • Dee says:

        When Kannot and Willnot change something and decide to be lazy, that’s called “modernizing the monarchy” as well. Totally different treatment.

    • molly says:

      “the monarchy adapts”, but the monarchy also MAKES the rules about so much of this crap. Some things require acts of parliament, yes, but the wreath laying and honorary military roles are things the Queen very much controls. Her hands aren’t tied. She’s the literal Queen! She lives her entire life ruled by protocol, tradition, optics, and perception and then turns around and punishes people with it.

      • UptownGirl says:

        Yes she does Molly!! She is fully capable of not being so petty, but it’s apparent that she is a petty and vile woman to her grandson. She will go down in history for having been petty and history will not look well on her or PWT and his insufferable wife.

      • Becks1 says:

        Well exactly. The queen could have made changes if she wanted. I do think that the courtiers call a lot of the shots, but we have heard time and again about how the buck stops with her, she’s the top of the pyramid, etc – if she wanted someone to lay a wreath for Harry, that would have happened.

  7. Merricat says:

    Good for Peter Hunt for raising his ahead above the hysteria and telling the truth.

  8. Snuffles says:

    It’s clear to me that this past year The Firm, the Queen/The Firm didn’t once consider how a compromise could be made to let Harry live his life but still support his family from time to time. Your average person would see that as a perfectly reasonable request.

    Instead, their “plan” and clear expectation was to let Harry cool off, experience the real world, struggle to live outside the bubble and realize he made a mistake and to come back home. They clung to that hope with each new announcement that showed that Harry was establishing himself in the US just fine. The house, the deals and now the pregnancy. Still, not ONCE did they consider that Harry wouldn’t eventually return on THEIR terms.

    If there were any sensible people in the palace, they would have reconsidered their stance the moment Harry bought that house and the Netflix deal was announced. That should have been the moment they realized Harry was serious and he was doing quite well.

    That was SIX MONTHS AGO. They have had plenty of time to rethink the monarchy’s future plans and how to weave Harry and Meghan into it. I honestly think if it was up to
    Charles, he would have. But I think what is stopping that from happening is the man-child heir William that they are clearly terrified of upsetting.

    It’s William that will not budge. The only way he would welcome Harry back is if he came back minus Meghan and capitulated to a life of being his whipping boy and lowering himself to the King.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      They had a year to handle it the way the Swedish Royal Family handled Princess Madeline’s change-of-lifestyle. She’s lived in NYC, London, and now resides in Florida. Kids still learn Swedish and are brought home regularly to visit the SRF. She still participates in some Events but in a very low key way. In everything, she’s still considered a beloved, big part of the Swedish Royal Family. She’s never been told she had to give up her HRH, or her Duchys; her husband refused a title. Her kids had their HRH removed in the 2019 reform, but they’re still styled Prince/Princess and will inherit Duchys through their mother.

      The way the Swedish handled their extra spare – THAT is how people who aren’t emotionally stunted handle their business. The British Royal Family f*cked around and found out what happens when you treat people badly – they SHOULD have learned that lesson from their appalling treatment of Diana. Instead, the lesson was not learned, and the damage was doled out to the next scapegoat of the family – Diana’s youngest son.

      Harry has shown the most emotional and mental health growth of anyone in that family. He chose a partner that is empathetic, wise, and will walk with him on his journey to healing from his traumatic childhood in that palace of horrors.

      In the end, meeting Harry halfway would have required the rest of the BRF to own and acknowledge their damaging behaviour and act to make amends. These abusive, toxic people instead doubled down and punished a charming, loving, empathy-rich couple for existing.

      The BRF and their flying monkey courtiers have, as yet, no full concept of what they’ve lost, what they’ve actively driven away – but some b*tches are about to get schooled.

      • Snuffles says:

        I’m sure Harry used the Swedish royal family as an example when he made his proposition.

      • MaryContrary says:

        I thought exactly of this example. There is no reason the BRF could have done the same-except that they’re short sighted and bitter.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The HRH wasn’t removed from Madeleine’s kids because she moved. The king removed HRH from all the grandkids who are not in the main/Victoria line.

      • Summerlover says:

        But Madeline married a wealthy White man. Therein lies the difference, in the minds of the BRF.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Snuffles: I totally agree with you. Also, some people were saying on twitter, that the Royal Family may have thought that the Netflix and Spotify deals they got were to set up Meghan and Archie financially so that when Harry left in after the one year review, she won’t ask for alimony and child support.

    • superashes says:

      I think your comment makes a lot of sense from a place of rational thinking. Honestly, here lately I’ve shifted into the mindset that they looked at the situation, and thought it was more important to send a message to anyone else thinking of opting out in the future.

      • Petra says:

        I’m in agreement with @superashes. Do we think Anne, Edward and the shamed one want to bow to King William and Queen Kate? Meghan and Harry are just the beginning, once the Queen is gone those others will break loose too. My tin foil hat theory says this is the main reason why Charles is not publicly supporting Harry and Meghan. He knows his position is not stable or guaranteed.

      • Snuffles says:

        That’s also a possibility. It could be multi-fold.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I agree Snuffles, it is ultimately William behind this. Or pandering to Billy the Basher behind this.

      He wanted Harry and Meghan under his control, doing all the work, raising all the funds, and taking all the sh!t from the tabloids to cover William’s wanderings. He either wanted them under his control OR exiled and never heard from again. His worst nightmare is coming true – Harry happy, free, wealthy, and a global star. And himself still tied to Kate because he cannot set her aside right now, much as he wants to.

      QEII and Charles are both afraid of Incandescent. Hopefully Charles continues to have a positive relationship with Sussex Family behind the scenes.

      • Harper says:

        Just imagine if William wasn’t leaking to The Sun, or if he had come to any of the negotiation summits wanting to smooth the way for Harry and Meghan because he loves his brother and wants him to be happy? If Will had helped set the transition up as H&M being royal ambassadors to North America? If he had smiled and actually put his arm around his brother at any point? But none of that happened and instead, Will couldn’t even sit across the table and eat lunch with his brother. I do hope Harry tells Oprah the truth about his feelings about Will’s actions, anger, and lack of brotherly support.

      • Lady D says:

        Why does the Sussex family need a positive relationship with King Charles the Coward? He turned his back on them when they needed him most.

      • notasugarhere says:

        We don’t know what discussions have been behind the scenes. As I wrote above, Charles got them away from William and funded their own Household away from William. That wasn’t enough to keep them safe, so they’ve left. And ultimately, it may be the best decision. Charles and Harry working together to save Harry’s family from William.

        Have you seen the relationship between Harry and Charles? It appears loving, fun, respectful. Go back and listed to Harry interviewing Charles two years ago. If Harry understands the deal of the monarchy, knew he wanted out? He might see what QEII and Charles are doing as painful but required. And he may want his children to have a positive relationship with Charles.

  9. Jessie says:

    Time and time again Elizabeth has shown people who she is: someone who wears their cruelty like a badge of honour. Absolutely no-one should be subservient to this walking case study of a woman. She’s disgusting.

    • atorontogal says:

      Even Phillip seems to dislike her, and he’s a huge POS!

      • Kalana says:

        There are videos on YouTube by a former royal chef talking about the favorite foods of the royals. Apparently Philip always had to follow all of the Queen’s preferences for food when they dined together even though they could have had separate dishes seeing as they have chefs. He looked forward to eating more of the food he liked when he would dine without her.

      • Lemons says:

        I would also live in a separate palace if someone else started dictating my dietary choices.

      • Nyro says:

        WTF is it with her and controlling what other people eat?! Imagine how big a POS you have to be in order to demand everyone eats what you eat and that when you’re finished eating they too had better put their forks down. She’s a tyrant. No wonder he ran off decades ago to live with his mistress.

      • Novice says:

        @Nyro, because she is the Queen. Under the current constitutional arrangement, she knows she is prevented from dicting decrees or even speaking up in the public without her ministers’ approval. So she makes sure she is the Queen in her own giant household. Rather like what her grandfather George V did back in the days, terrorising his two sons.

  10. Kalana says:

    The Palace has spent the last year thoroughly bungling their lead in all this. It’s actually impressive. They’re so used to never being challenged that they damage their position just to answer back.

    At this point though we know that all three, Elizabeth, Charles, and William are all on the same side to one degree or another.

    The Queen has opened speculation on her decision making and values and how she runs things. Sussexit will probably be the prompt for reevaluating her legacy in these next few years after she passes away if things don’t get better. Personally I want to know about the neglect of the royal properties and how much she meddled in politics and covered for her favourites.

    William has finally committed to something publicly but it’s petty fighting and leaking against his brother. Earthshot really needs to be a perfect success after all this because that’s all he has. Charles wisely is hiding as much as possible.

    • Levans says:

      Is it wise for Charles to be hiding? For a father to be complicit in the shunning of his son, whose only crime was loving a biracial American woman? Not wise in my book.

      • Kalana says:

        Wise maybe as a pr strategy with the Establishment and not rocking the boat with William who would run to leak about his father in the DM and Murdoch’s Times and NY Post and Charles seems to always look out for himself first. Least said, soonest mended. Harry probably already knows or has learned his father’s emotional limits.

        The bar is really low. Charles has already established himself as the only one open to half-in/half-out. He would just need the appearance of extending an olive branch. He wouldn’t even need Harry to accept.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        His silence is complicity. He’ll claim he’s busy (too busy to take a stand out of love for a son?) running a shadow monarchy. I get that the BRF is famously tightfisted, but does that have to extend to emotional currency as well?

        Honestly his behaviour savours a bit of Richard III and Henry Tudor’s reputed callousness…

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      @Kalana, I agree about Charles. His silence early on was damning and appalling, but since they left, I’ve felt it was strategic. He’s allowed both Elizabeth and William to show their Royal asses. They are the ones frequently mentioned and condemned. Who would have thought William, the golden boy, would be openly disdained, frequently derided? That his affairs who would openly addressed. And QE, people are calling her out. Before Sussexit, she was the sweet elderly grandmother, who happened to be queen. Not anymore. I think we’ll get a clear view of Harry’s relationship with Charles in the interview. I think they actually talk, but it isn’t advertised and that’s probably how Harry wants it. On his terms.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Charles supported the separation of Households, putting Duchy funds towards getting Harry and Meghan free from William while still being working royals. Ultimately, he understands Sussex Family is safer and better off away from William. Charles might want them half in, half out in his own reign, but not if it endangers their ability to be free from William during his reign (of terror).

    • Jaded says:

      Charles is playing the long game. He’s given William enough rope to hang himself and is simply sitting back watching him fail again and again. William is stupid and arrogant enough to think he can out-strategize his father but he’s wrong – I imagine Charles has banked a ton of negative information on his son and wouldn’t hesitate to sink him if he ever tried to outmaneuver daddy. This is a Machiavellian father/son relationship.

  11. Sunnee says:

    Wow! Just wow. Someone had the balls to call her what she is. Mean and shortsighted. And also call the monarchy what it is. Racist, Anachronistic and out of step.

  12. Osty says:

    They could have accommodated them if the palace wasn’t jealous myopic and foolish. They would have found a way to make it work had they not being blinded by their jealousy and fear of the media . Now the Sussex are global and the palace is trying to do everything to get a smidge of their fame. They are now resulted to inserting themselves in everything harry and Meghan hoping to get some of their popularity. The MAGA 7 isnt cutting it for them

    • L84Tea says:

      Isn’t that absolutely pathetic? That jealousy is what’s ultimately at the root of all of this? These people have everything–money, palaces, jewels, cars, boats, unlimited clothes, everything–and they still couldn’t get past being green with envy of the 6th in line and his wife. Kate is jealous of Meghan’s easy charisma and brains, William is jealous to the bone of his brother for his popularity, his drive, his hair (I’m guessing), and even the Queen is jealous of them. No one can convince me otherwise. On top of all the other crap they have, they could have had the ultimate prize–Harry and Meghan–to carry them further and further into the 21st century, ensuring their longevity.

      But they blew it all because JEALOUSY. Just pathetic people.

  13. L84Tea says:

    Thank goodness somebody on that side of the pond is saying it. This really does drive home how easily the RF could have handled this situation. But alas, I am reminded of the line by Michael Sheen playing Tony Blair in the movie “The Queen”–”would someone please save these people from themselves!”

    • ArtHistorian says:

      That is a line that also pops up in The Crown! Only this time there is no one to help saving the witless Windsors from themselves.

    • MerryGirl says:

      The Windsor’s downfall is there is no Tony Blair this time around. No one to show them the public sentiment.

      The unholy Trinity of the British Royal Family, the British Media and the Boris Johnson Tory Government is that they’re all singing from the same hymn sheet and listening to their own echo chamber so they have no clue what’s happening outside of their racist, Brexit bubble.

  14. Linda says:

    The Queen is like her mother. She looks like a sweet old lady but underneath is a heart of stone.

  15. Midnight@theOasis says:

    Agree with all that’s been said. There was no need for such churlish behavior. Accept and adapt to the changes and move forward. Instead the BRF clung to the old ways to spite The American. And yet, the BRF continues to adopt and mimic the actions of the Sussexes. Now, Mr Incandescent himself is making private donations to help charities:

    • Va Va Kaboom says:

      Going off the dates on the actual tweets, it appears William’s donation was made and announced two days before the Sussexes donated to the women’s shelter.

    • notasugarhere says:

      ‘Private’ but made public so everyone knew, again looking as a bid for military patronages. And did he use his own money or his allowance from Charles? My bet is the latter.

  16. Amy Bee says:

    “Which makes me wonder what will happen when Archewell really gets going and Harry and Meghan are partnering with NGOs and billionaires to do big work internationally. I wonder what the British media and House Petty will say then. What will the anti-Sussex argument be when H&M thrive outside of the salty bubble of royal lies?”

    The British press are attempting to differentiate between the work of the Royal Family and that of the Sussexes. According to them, the Royal Family are doing public service and the Sussexes are doing philanthropy. From where I stand, the work that Harry and Meghan are doing is much more meaningful and impactful than the Royal Family just paying visit to a charity and cutting ribbons. The Royal Family’s “public service” does not help people in need, it only helps to promote the Royals. There is a danger for the Royal Family that the constant focus on Harry and Meghan and their work will lead to people asking whether it’s worth it to have a Royal Family. The Palace’s statement on Friday has already lead to people asking what exactly does a working royal do.

  17. Bibi says:

    Making things up as they go along is eaxctly what it is. A gang of amateurs

  18. Harper says:

    Sometimes I think the Queen takes this Queening gig a little too seriously and has lacked courage and judgment throughout the ages. She’s not a fairytale Queen protecting the throne against invaders…her position is just a figurehead and the keeper of the castles. Perhaps if she was a teensy bit more free-thinking she could have relaxed with all the fake protocol and slapped down the familial jealousy before it turned into the current snake pit we have today. But her lack of formal education impacted her sense of her own intelligence, and the old farty Queen Mum was whispering in her ear too long telling her how to do things. Once the Mum died, Elizabeth had no experience making decisions that weren’t influenced by what her ancient Mum thought was right. So Meghan wasn’t coming up against a modern monarchy but one run by the standards of the 1930s and 40s. That’s why Diana caught the public’s attention because she was obviously so modern in comparison, and Meghan was the same. Kate started out fresh but got gobbled up in the quicksand pretty quickly and is now a Queen Mum-worthy empty shell. Imagine if Meghan and Harry had met under Charles’ reign, what could have been. Elizabeth’s hanging on to the crown with her iron grip and 1930s mentality has caused this mess.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Harper, OMFG I will never stop laughing at “Sometimes I think the Queen takes this Queening gig a little too seriously” lmaooo

    • notasugarhere says:

      She’s lousy at the Keeper of the Castles gig. Hundreds of millions was voted in for BP restoration, because QEII misdirected funds for years and no one noticed. Now they’re calling for something like 90 million to restore *just one side* of Clarence House. SMDH

    • Amy Too says:

      Sometimes I do tarot reading about the BRF and the Queen usually comes up as a page, which is the lowest court card (it goes page, knight, Queen, king) and is meant to represent children or people who are immature and child-like, who are just at the very beginning of exploring things and figuring out if they can turn any potential they have into actual action. I think she sees herself as completely unfit to rule, someone who needs to be told what to do, someone who is really just a placeholder between the old king and the new king, who is there to be the public face of the monarchy but not actually run it or change it in any way because she doesn’t trust her own judgement and/or has been taught that she is just a stupid, uneducated, little girl who needs to be guided by those around her. I think this is partly why she sticks to protocol so much and is very against change of any kind. Like Kate doesn’t see herself as a real Duchess, just aS someone who is playing Duchess because she was miscast in that role, the Queen doesn’t see herself as a real monarch. She is just playing monarch because she happened to be cast as monarch, and is basing everything she does off of what the “real monarchs” who have come before her have done. It’s why she buries her head in the sand and can’t address problems. It’s why she does the exact same thing year after year after year: same palaces at the same times for the same vacations, same patronage visits where all she does is wave and smile (no projects or interesting posts on social media about her charities), same exact calendar of events done in the same way wearing pretty much the same outfit year after year after year. She clings to the small things she can control like people should wear tights and hats and not nailpolish. Because she’s trying to preserve the monarchy exactly as it was handed to her.

      I think that’s what she considers her “public service” duty to be. Keeping the monarchy intact. It’s about preserving the monarchy. It’s not about charity, it’s not about service to the people, only in as much as that charity helps to preserve the monarchy. Harry and Meghan can’t be half in/half out because while that would probably be best for everyone involved and for the family dynamic, it shakes the foundation of the monarchy by showing that maybe royals should all just be part time, or that maybe the most important people in the monarchy or those who are the most personally financially successful and who do the most philanthropy work and who are the most celebrated rather than the monarch and the heirs who are the face of the monarchical institution itself.

      None of this is meant to excuse her behavior or make her seem like a poor little old lady just trying her best. She IS petty, she IS cruel, she IS mean, she WILL cut family members completely if thats what benefits her and the institution. She DOES use her role as Queen to bully people and she expects to have the last word and be followed and respected by everyone just because she is the Queen. She abuses her privileges by protecting her rapist son and hiding her wealth and vetoing laws that would affect her negatively. She can be ill-suited to the role, feel like she’s floundering a little bit and doesn’t know what to do, and still be a bad person. She takes the easiest way out of every situation because she’s small-minded. She could have checked her families’ jealousy and sniping, she could have challenged the press or changed the rota system, she could have found a way to help and support Harry and Meghan, but she chose “upholding the institution” at every turn and she chose to let everyone around her deal with it as if the people being hurt weren’t her own grandchildren and great grandchild who needed her love and care as a grandma.

      • Harper says:

        @Amy Too I think your analysis is thorough and correct. The Queen is also stunted at the age that the abdication went down and has not worked past her fear of being seen as the same type of failure as her Uncle David was. Therefore, absolutely no movement in or out of the Royal sphere because otherwise it is Uncle David all over again. However, I’m of the mind that Harry was meant for bigger things than the Royal Family, and he is on the correct path with Meghan at his side. If it were any less painful and draconian of a split then H&M might not be as free as they need to be to accomplish what they are here to do.

      • Becks1 says:

        @AmyToo those are good points/insights. I do think she is stunted like @Harper said. And to a certain extent, it makes sense, right? She became queen relatively suddenly (I mean they knew her father was sick but it wasnt like she had been preparing her whole life to be queen, being mentored by him, etc) and at a young age. Given the turmoil over the past decades – the abdication, the second world war, and then her father’s death – it does seem like she let the “men in gray” run things and what they weren’t deciding, she was letting her mother decide. So that explains why she bases everything off of what others have done in the past- because thats how she started her reign and she never really figured out another way to do it. I also think the queen lacks any real intellectual curiosity, so I dont think she was especially bothered to figure out another way to do it. Like I dont think she was discussing with her aides if there was a better way, a different way, etc. I dont think the thought ever occurred to her.

        her #1 priority in life is definitely keeping the monarchy in tact. I dont even think that’s a secret or something they try to hide. The sad thing is that she focuses on it so much and its the driving force in her life – but to such an extent that she damages the monarchy. Like this situation with H&M – she thinks that letting them stay part time would have damaged the institution for a variety of reasons, and as it is, handling it in this manner has significantly damaged it. The monarchy looks petty, mean-spirited, and quite frankly, unnecessary.

    • Nic919 says:

      The Queen picked up on Kate’s laziness early on and before the engagement, (the infamous “bit what does she do?”) but as with everything else she does, she kept her head in the sand and let it happen. She also let them be lazy in the early years of the marriage. Had she told Billy and Cathy that they had only one year of part time and then had to step up, we wouldn’t be a decade later with them still doing so little and now with fewer other senior royals who are around or available to make up for the loss.

      • L84Tea says:

        Which really goes to show you how so much of this is the Queen’s fault. If she had forced W&K to step up and actually work early on, they wouldn’t have necessarily needed to rely on Harry so much to do the work for them, which is partially what began this domino effect. Perhaps William would have hit on something by now that he was actually interested in or at least accomplished something. If they’d been forced to step up early on, perhaps Kate would have gotten herself some more in-depth princess lessons and secured herself a real role in some charities. So that by the time Meghan came along, W&K might have felt more secure in themselves and their roles and have been less threatened by her and H&M together. Instead, they sat on their lazy, spoiled asses for years doing the bare minimum while Harry picked up the slack. By the time Meghan arrived and got moving so quickly, W&K were left sputtering and spinning wheels like two kids trying to quickly get the house cleaned up before mom gets home. Suddenly, W&K were aware how little they did and how useless they looked in comparison, which then set all the other balls in motion.

        There were so many reasons everything happened the way it did–so many egos, so many fragile, racist fools. But ultimately, the buck stops with Queenie. If she had done things very differently in the beginning, so much of this would have been avoided.

      • Lizzie says:

        The phrase she should have used was ‘you are in or you are out’ just like she did with Harry. After coasting for a decade between collage and marriage I don’t think there was any reason to grant a part time request. And to be honest they are both still part time.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate did 88 total engagements last year. William was about 180 and Charles close to 250. There is no reason for Kate to have done so little even during covid. And they will continue to do little this year as well because most still need to be vaccinated and they can’t travel out of country to boost numbers with meaningless tours.

  19. bitsycs says:

    No matter how many times it happens it blows my mind how dedicated to flat out dumb behavior these people are (I guess in service to racism and just not caving? I really don’t get it). I also don’t really understand the whole OMG you can’t be half in half out bullshit either. It seems like a made up standard applied only here considering the various royals who aren’t full time working royals.

    This will forever be the legacy of QEII – and I think it will have repercussions to the overall health and reach of the monarchy. What could have shored it up and modernized them a bit will instead be a reminder of their outdated nonsense.

    Just imagine thinking any of this behavior is a good look and the right choice for “the firm”. These people are absolute idiots. It’s comical. Obviously it’s sad for Harry because this is his family, but he’s better off. These people are toxic, stupid, and stuck in the past, unwilling to modernize and save their own asses.

  20. Kalana says:

    Look at the people who have been Elizabeth’s companions and favorites through her life: Philip, Andrew, Angela Kelly, William. The Queen likes obnoxious, unpleasant people who fight with other people. Is this the character trait of a nice person?

    • SarahCS says:

      That’s a very astute observation.

    • sunny says:

      William isn’t her favourite- for years it was reported Harry was one of her favs, and Beatrice and Eugenie(I think). However, William is the heir, and that means he holds an out-sized amount of power in the institution and it is clearly the institution she puts before all. The really messed up thing is that neither she nor her courtiers have enough sense to understand that this is screwing the institution long term.

      • Becks1 says:

        Her “favorite grandchild” varies depending on who is trying to push what narrative – some say its Peter, some say its Zara, some say its Harry, some say its Beatrice. I dont think William is ever considered to be the favorite though.

      • Lizzie says:

        Charles wasn’t her favorite either. The heir, along with a popular spare, is a threat.

      • Kalana says:

        Not so much her favorite when it comes to William but more that she’ll usually give him his way on things like avoiding work and being given a helicopter, and protect him from scandal. I think Queen uses William to undermine Charles and William eagerly goes along with it. I wonder how different things will be when William can no longer run to his granny, though at that point he’ll have of Duchy of Cornwall funding.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Harry because of his nature, and Beatrice/Eugenie because of them being raised at Windsor close to her.

  21. LillyfromLillooet says:

    …and not a word ever spoken of how Harry’s mother’s death and trauma might made him absolutely resolute that this would not be repeated. No compassion for the person who as a boy watched his mother suffer from brutal press and palace and grew up to see the same thing happen to his wife.

    It’s on the RF to do something to redeem themselves. They rule over little else these days than the court of public opinion.

  22. EllenOlenska says:

    Had the Andrew mess and the Ridiculously unequal treatment of Meghan and Harry not popped in the last two years the queen would have died a beloved “ dutiful” monarch whose moments of shortsightedness ( see “The Queen” ) would have been dutifully smoothed over and excused in her obituary. You could even see that coming the past few years as the articles kept throwing back to her speech about duty and country when she became queen.

    Now her legacy is a toxic mess. Hiding a pedophile while treating her grandson as though he had committed a crime. Her biracial granddaughter-in-law treated with contempt without a word of intervention ( yes that one train ride with Meghan was early on. Where was she for the chimpanzee and exile to Africa comments?) when she is the head of a commonwealth of countries where many of the citizens look like Megha and her Mom. And they are taking notes.

    All that’s needed now is for her to sit at the gold piano during her commonwealth speech and sing “My Way” to ensure the message is loud and clear.

  23. Merricat says:

    Seems to me if you have the audacity to claim that your blood is better than anyone else’s, you should try a hell of a lot harder to actually be a decent human. Fail.

  24. Kittylouise says:

    I can’t believe that this is published in the spectator of all places. But I agree with it. They have been utterly failed by the monarchy as an institution, and by family which supposedly loves them. It’s an absolute shit show and I’m glad they’re out of it for their sakes. And I hope they’re blissfully happy and successful away from the hideous scrutiny of the uk media.

    As the article says, they had a wonderful opportunity to have a modern, warm, hard-working and intelligent black American woman at the heart of the royal family, just think of an alternative universe where she was embraced and supported, the ‘firm’ standing up to the media and its treatment of her.

    What a family. What a bloody head of state. They should be ashamed (but obviously never will be).

    • Kalana says:

      What is the usual tone of the Spectator?

    • Kitty says:

      Talking with a monarchist who actually wants the institution to survive and isn’t just in it as a fanboy is very interesting. They see the faults very clearly. It’s just that they are beholden to a system that will fail catastrophically from time to time, because it is designed to valorize individual humans. The underlying problem is that inherited leadership roles are a crapshoot, not a quality guarantee.

      I’ve just been listening to the Tides of History podcast about the Wars of the Roses. Mainly knew it through Shakespeare. At least this problem could be solved by moving to Montecito, not rounding up multiple armies and slaughtering entire families, including young children, not to mention all their followers and random peasants.

      • Ann says:

        There is that episode of The Crown where a journalist hears Queen Elizabeth deliver a speech on the radio. He happens to be sitting in the waiting room of a dentist’s office, the radio is playing and her speech is condescending and poorly delivered, so one of the other people waiting turns off the radio and everyone laughs. He then publishes something about how her speeches are “a pain in the neck.” As it turns out, though, he is a monarchist who wants the system to function, and he is trying to point out how she needs to do better. Well, this is way worse than that speech. I think it’s way too late for her to do better. She’s 95. Harry isn’t returning. And she has decades of pettiness on record now.

  25. Sunday says:

    I agree with Hunt’s assessment, but I think it goes deeper than the queen being petty. Meghan threatened the entire institution of the royal family, because she so easily outshined all of them even when they were trying their hardest to dim her light at every turn, that to allow her and Harry to pursue their goals with the half-in/half-out arrangement would have been to fling back the curtain on the entire royal apparatus. Meghan is a true philanthropist while other royals play at it, Meghan truly cares about people while other royals merely tolerate, Meghan’s presence resonated with the people of color in England, the commonwealth and around the world in a way that the royals haven’t since Diana. That the FK and FFK could be so usurped, so plainly made to look dull and outdated and small by the sixth in line’s wife, simply could not be allowed, and that she was a Black woman at that? An American?! Meghan completely transformed what real royalty looks like, and in their jealous, racist fury they decided that instead of embracing that transformation and riding the wave of her impact, it was better to just stamp her out of the family.

    Paraphrasing Toni Morrison, if everyone around you has to be on their knees for you to feel tall, then you’ve got a problem. The royal family has been exposed for the racist, vindictive, hateful, small people they are, and Meghan will continue to shine her light around the world. Your loss, betty.

    • ennie says:

      She was overqualified for duchessing. especially given who she was measured against.
      If only the others would actually work, but they were the typical half assed workers who side eye and bully the new employee because she/he will make them look bad.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She fits perfectly in the mold of successful modern consort (Maxima, Letizia, Mary, Daniel). As Harry fits the mold of future heir. Trouble is, they were up against the lazy, charmless, workshy W&K who always look pathetic in comparison.

    • anotherlily says:

      Yes. They are rigidly hierarchical and that means William as a future King must be more popular than Harry and must be accepted as superior.

      This was the general perception of William until Harry’s military service, his commitment to Sentebale and other charities, and his more open and engaging personality pushed him ahead. Then Harry got better looking than William. Meghan coming into the picture was the final straw. The contrast between Harry’s confident, talented, and accomplished wife and Kate Middleton was an affront to the whole system. She highlighted Kate’s shortcomings. The fact that she is biracial, American and what these people would call ‘low-born’ adds to the sense of effrontery. How dare she be superior! ?

      • Prairiegirl says:

        Primogeniture is a heck of a drug.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        The problem is that the Windsors are emotionally stunted people who aren’t that smart and they they let everything in their lives as a family revolve around what rank they hold. Charles was pathologically jealous of his young wife’s popularity – probably because he has issues with self-worth. Now it seems that this toxic pattern is repeated with William being pathologically jealous of his younger brother – and he cannot understand or deal with it because Harry’s rank is lower than his.

        There are def inbuilt issues within a hereditary monarchy in relation to a lot of things – but BECAUSE the Windsors are emotionally stunted people, the hierarchy of rank has become the fulcrum of a deeply toxic family dynamic. Other European RFs appear to be able to function as families despite being embedded in a system of rank – perhaps because they ditch rank in private interactions. The Windsors pull rank on each other, even in private! In short, the Windsors don’t know how to be a family – they are people who exist in a system of rank who happen to be blood relatives.

  26. Kittylouise says:

    That said, I’m glad she’s out of it. I’m glad they’re living with their children in the warmth of California, doing their own thing, rather than some miserable house in Windsor, always second place to William and Kate (because even if they’d been embraced, they’d always be one step behind that desiccated pair anyway). I just wish them all success and happiness away from that hideous family.

  27. Maevo says:

    So spot on. If the royals were smart they would have figured out a way to keep H&M working in the commonwealth like doing Royal tours, which are so popular and great PR. But the jealousy won the day.

  28. Cecilia says:

    This was a great article ( tho he needs to get rid of the word megxit) and hit the nail right on the head. The windsors have adapted themselves over the years and this was another moment that needed an adaptation, this time on their media relation and quite frankly the inside palace workings because what firm would allow their staff to run to the press? If this was an actual firm they would have filed for bankruptcy multiple times already.

  29. Wiglet Watcher says:

    I want to say the MM post with his pic pointing straight up to this with a smile made my morning.

  30. lemonylips says:

    Wow the comments on Hunt’s twitter are really something. People are actually defending Andrew ’cause he hasn’t been charged for a crime nor found guilty while attacking Harry. I am speechless. That doesen’t happen often.

    • Lady D says:

      I don’t understand what you mean, lemonylips. It’s always been that way, praise Andrew, slam Harry. Or did I just miss your sarcasm, because that’s possible?

      • lemonylips says:

        Honestly I was really surprised at that moment. I know that is a pattern, but I was surprised to see so many Andrew defenders out there and their logic behind it. Like poor guy – he hasn’t been charged or anything. I just found it very disturbing, cause I’d usually see “give him to FBI” tweets. This was the first time I saw so many people protecting him directly. Wish I was sarcastic. I usually am :)

  31. Liz version 700 says:

    The Royal families in Europe must shake their heads at this lot. They have adapted and modernized and lowered their costs. Had Meghan married into another family I feel like the press would have been stopped from tearing her apart. But Petty Betty and Charles will have the shame of what they allowed/encouraged on them forever. And William will be remembered as the one who ran the popular brother and his biracial wife out of the country. Not a good look

  32. LaUnicaAngelina says:

    100% this. Queen Petty Betty is content to keep her blinders on instead of seeing the great, bright potential future of the monarchy.

  33. me50 says:

    These people don’t interest me at all anymore. I’m more into Harry and Meghan, Queen Victoria,Princess Diana, The Tudors and Plantagenets.

    At least the Tudors and Plantagenets had to earn their crowns.

  34. lanne says:

    I wonder what William’s going to do when celebrities decide to partner with the Sussexes instead of them. I can’t forget that at the counter BLM protests in the UK, the National Front and Brexit types were singing “God save the Queen.” By decrying “woke politics,” the royals align themselves openly with Tories and Brexiteers. In the USA the MAGAts are the ones openly admiring the Cambridges. In fact, the Cambridge lovers are more motivated by the Sussex haters than love for William and Kate. If they care about their image in the US–which was important enough to them to cobble together a BAFTA event on their first tour–that’s not a good tiding.

    The entire royal family are setting themselves up to the the villians in the 21st century’s first great underdog love story.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The BAFTA event and weird side trip to L.A. wasn’t in order to kiss up to the US. It was because Kate wanted a Hollywood kiss my royal a$$ event for her first overseas tour. Didn’t get her main objective, a meeting with Angelina Jolie until later.

    • me50 says:

      The tradwife movement in the US(which is part of the RW) worships Kate and Melania Trump.

  35. aquarius64 says:

    I hope this article and the pockets of some support come out in Oprah’s interview. Especially this article. The BRF and the RRs are running scared. If the House of Windsor falls the RRs would be jobless. The ripple effect could be massive and I hope it sweeps up the Markle monsters as well.

  36. ennie says:

    How long have the royals in Britain done charity as their main focus?
    I think the countries were deep in war before, and “keeping the country together” came around WWII. They have done this to justify their existence. It is ao funny to me how the RF are in deep cahoots with the press.
    The Sussexes were expelled because they did not want to suck up to the horrible press, press that could not let Meghan just breathe.
    Now the press have lost their cash cow and have to conform with the Boring Greys.
    Really that saying is so fitting. Cutting out your nose to spite the face.

    • Lizzie says:

      I don’t know how much of the royal patronages are actual charity. Some of it certainly but yacht clubs, national theater, ballet and so on are just for status.
      I don’t know if any hungry children are fed but at lease the keens zoom someone to say they are proud of them/good job/and be sure to take care of yourself about every other week.

  37. Chisus says:

    Just dropped in to say – we’re so grateful and elated to have the support of Meghan and Harry! The Genesis Women’s Shelter is an amazing resource is our community and the damage from the storm is heartbreaking. So many people have been displaced and it feels like our elected officials don’t give a shit. The community is banding together to help each other out and that’s been the silver lining. With the help of Meghan and Harry, this is a beautiful step towards healing.

    To any royal reporters reading this – TAKE NOTE. THIS is why we are proud of Meghan. THIS is why Prince Harry made the right decision to leave that toxic family behind.

  38. MerryGirl says:

    Although ultimately the buck stops with her, the pettiness and mean spiritedness didn’t only lie with the Queen. His own father (the heir to the throne) and his own brother (the 2nd heir to the throne) chose to sabotage their own flesh and blood because of his relationship with a woman of African American heritage, nothing more, nothing less.

    They ordered the execution (unleashing the racist, right wing press on her), they damaged her reputation (allowing outright lies and conspiracy theories), they poisoned the public’s perception of her (condoning daily negativity in print, talk radio & TV) and they sat back and invited all and sundry to participate in the spectacle (her Markle relatives, op-ed pundits, YouTube hate channels and print & social media hate commentary). They couldn’t even censor or turn off the comments on their own social media platforms that rained abuse on the only black member of the family, something they were quick to do with the wife of the heir when her adulterous past was brought up in a TV show.

    History will remember these rotten Windsors for using the might of the crown to punish their favourite son (the most popular Royal) for walking away from the racist abuse of his wife. History will contrast this with their shielding and protection of a Prince who sexually abused young women.

  39. Farfromreality says:

    While they do make it up as they go along, “superb” is not a word I would associate with their efforts.

  40. Vanessa says:

    The problem is even if the queen and Charles were totally fine with the Sussex’s had no Problem with them it was William and Kate and the courtiers who work over time to get rid of them . That was the main goal of William and Kate to get rid of Meghan with slanders and lies bullying her with the help of the royal reporters who were all to happy to engage in racists tactics . The queen and Charles bury their heads in the sand especially Charles because he didn’t want to be throw under the bus by William and Kate again .The courtiers thought their break up letter would score them so much needed PR points but all it did was backfired on royals make them look outdated and Elitist when it came to public service it made them seem petty and their way was the only to help others . What about nurses teachers doctors people who work in food shelter who give out food to the homeless or people organizing charities for the disadvantage.

  41. Lizzie says:

    It would have cost nothing to tell Harry good luck and we wish you well and would have bought them a lot of good will. If Harry had kept just the military honors he would have been happy. I don’t think much of the palace courtiers but the decision to go scorched earth was the queen alone. Bend just a little and let them keep the commonwealth positions if for no other reason that it looks like many countries will leave the commonwealth over this decision. This is the statesmanship that Will tries to claim but the entire family failed to actually accomplish. The queen in particular has failed every time; Harry, Diana the duke of Windsor and in a different way with Margaret.

    • Coco says:

      Failed the Duke of Windsor? What was she supposed to do, say “No harm done, Uncle Nazi, here’s your crown back”?

      • Lizzie says:

        He had to abdicate because he married a divorced woman – the exact thing Charles has done. All of Philips sisters were married to high ranking nazi’s, so I don’t think it was an issue for the queen.

    • Jaded says:

      Both Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson were cozy with high ranking Nazis who promised to put him back on the throne if he joined with Neville Chamberlain in appeasement with Germany. That plus her two divorces and numerous affairs were reason enough to encourage him to abdicate. When the Queen found out he was a Nazi sympathizer she agreed with Churchill that to keep him on the throne with Wallis as Queen Consort would have been a catastrophic mistake for England and the whole of the UK. Don’t forget, this was 80 years ago and having the King and head of the Church of England marry a twice divorced woman was against the teachings of the Church. Philip’s sisters were estranged from him and weren’t even invited to his wedding. I doubt he saw them for the rest of their lives as they lived in Germany, so it’s a moot point that his sisters married men with close ties to the Nazi party.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Duke of Windsor wasn’t forced to abdicate because of Wallis. The government wanted him out because he was feckless and a Nazi supporter; Wallis was a convenient excuse.

  42. bettyrose says:

    Ever since I heard this story about the Texas shelter two days ago, I realize I have a lot of questions about Archewell. Maybe some will be addressed in the interview, but the model of their philanthropy is fascinating and I want to know more. Like, first, how did they get connected to the shelter in the first place? I had assumed that there was an online portal to apply for help, but I don’t see one on their site. Second, is there a board set up to review proposals and requests? If so, who are they? There’s very little useful information on Google, but here in California, the land of philanthropic foundations, I’d love to know more. Partly because I’m a big H & M fan and partly because I’m genuinely curious how two youngish people, who have money but not a background in finance, go about setting something like this up and finding trustworthy advisors.

  43. K says:

    Meghan and Harry will triumph in so many ways, but my god this is sad. What happiness the royal family has denied itself. Diana was called the people’s princess, and now H and M will carry that on. I think she would be in awe of her daughter in law and son.

  44. Amelie says:

    I have not liked the Queen since Diana died. I was only 8 when Diana died but I was in France the day it happened so you better believe I remember all the news coverage. Every person with a newspaper on the flight back to the USA (no tablets in the 90s) had wall to wall articles all about Diana. I always thought maybe I had misremembered the Queen and her actions in the wake of Diana’s death since I viewed the event through the lens of an 8 year old. Turns out my hate wasn’t irrational as we saw in the fall from grace of Prince Andrew and Meghan and Harry moving to the US.

  45. Coco says:

    I wonder if, when the Queen eventually dies, many people will react how I did when Pope John Paul II died. As a non-Catholic who had only read about the election of new popes in a historical context, I basically thought, “So you’re really going to do this? With the black smoke and the white smoke, and maybe throw some doves in there? You know you could just stop this, right? Well, okay then.”

  46. Keri says:

    I bet the number of mourners and sympathisers for when tq passes has significantly dipped in the last few years. It is under her reign that an accomplished, balanced, hardworking biracial wife to her own grandson has been treated so poorly for what they’ll never be able to explain even if they were given this lifetime and the next. Glad most of us can see it though because it is plain to see that what most of these haters hold against Meghan is her melanin. Shine on hun. Enjoy your marriage, babies, causes and don’t give all the bs a first thought let alone a second one.

  47. Better watch out, Kate, and suck up with the Windsors and the royal rota. You’ve seen how you will be exactly treated when you go off tangent and cross your husband William and his family. Maybe this is why you look so agonizingly scared and devoid of confidence every time you’re with your husband for fear that you might bruise his ego at the slightest provocation. You have lost your voice in that family. I am not surprised if you yourself are suffering from mental issues now after being with William for half of your life and a good 10 years with his family.

  48. Christine says:

    This article is spectacular, and it shows that just like many of us, the refusal of the queen to let Harry’s wreath be placed on Remembrance Day was the last straw for people who were actually ON the royal family’s side. It’s stunning, I didn’t think I would read anything like this, this soon. I thought there would be a lot of huffing and whatnot, from any member of the press who covers the royal family for a living. Nope. Stunning.

  49. Kalana says:

    The Queen’s outfit for the wedding really didn’t age well. Lime green and a feathery purple. Her outfit for Trooping also is meh and looks a little cheap.

    One of my favorites qualities about the Queen, no joke, is that aesthetically she doesn’t have good taste. She has straight up ruined jewelry by redesigning it.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      She really has NO taste! Just look at her hats from the late 60s and 70s, there were some sartorial horrors that made my eyes bleed. Just check her hat from Charles’ investiture as PoW.