Clarkson: ‘There won’t be another Coronation after this one. It’ll be the last’

It’s been more than a month since the Sun published Jeremy Clarkson’s violent screed against the Duchess of Sussex, wherein Clarkson described his fantasy of stripping Meghan naked and marching her down the street so people could throw feces at her. Remember, Clarkson said everyone his age agreed with him. He wrote that right after he had lunch with Queen Camilla, his good friend. Camilla was reportedly quite angry… that she was being dragged right alongside Clarkson. Well, Clarkson has a new column at the Sun: “Royal magic is waning, but it is still the best option.” Clarkson almost edges up to an uncomfortable truth, but of course he finds a way to back away from it.

When I was younger, big royal events came along only once in a blue moon. We had the Silver Jubilee in 1977 and Charles and Diana’s wedding in 1981 then after that, nothing. There was more monarchy-based pageantry in North Korea. Now, though, it feels like we are breaking out the bunting and the plastic flags every other weekend. It’s a constant stream of weddings, funerals and jubilees. And it’s not over yet because in May, there’s a Coronation.

It must be a nightmare for the organisers, because how do they make it feel different? And bigger. And better. Fly-pasts down the Mall? Done that. Put Brian May on the roof of the Palace? Done that as well. Soldiers marching up and down? Been doing that for centuries.

Whatever they come up with, though, it’d better be good. Because I have a sneaking feeling there won’t be another Coronation after this one. It’ll be the last.

For many years, there have been questions about the Royal Family. People have said it costs too much and that it’s stupid to have a hereditary head of state. And now, of course, those questions are getting louder. People are saying that thanks to Prince Andrew and Harry’s book, the whole royal thing is broken, that you could take it down to Jay Blade’s Repair Shop barn but the experts would be forced to conclude that all of the king’s horseman and all of the king’s men couldn’t possibly put it back together again.

I see their point. The monarchy is built on a foundation of mysticism. It derives its magic powers from forces we don’t understand. It’s an institution built on fairy dust. And that is lost somewhat when they’re all falling in dog bowls and, like Prince Andrew, giving money to girls they’ve never met.

[From The Sun]

Ah, don’t you see? People don’t respect the monarchy anymore because of Prince Andrew and Prince Harry! Not the other Windsors, the ones sitting on a billion-dollar empire and going empty-handed to foodbanks. Of course not. And Harry didn’t “fall in a dog bowl” – he was violently assaulted by his brother. William threw Harry to the ground, leaving cuts and bruises. Anyway, Clarkson ends his column with the acknowledgement that “The Australians and Canadians will then excuse themselves, along with most of the rocky islands dotted round the world’s oceans, and then we’ll have a vote here. And everyone will decide they’d rather have an elected president.” Then Clarkson suggests that after Britain elected a president, it will be some reality show buffoon and then, magically, everyone will want William and Kate to be king and queen. As I said, Clarkson almost admitted something real, but then he bungled it. Oh well.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Instar and Backgrid.

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

70 Responses to “Clarkson: ‘There won’t be another Coronation after this one. It’ll be the last’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    Such pretty costumes. Have a masquerade!

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Yes, a coming out from the clutches of this “magical mysticism“. It serves no purpose than fleecing people of their hard earned ££££ and creating a democracy.

    • usavgjoe says:

      Well, it will definitely be Clarkson’s last Clowning/Chubbly.

    • Caribbean says:

      The article is two fold. Blaming Harry, per usual AND trying to rehab Andrew. Saying Andrew Giving money to girls he never met; really? Where can I line up to get my money?

      • Emme says:

        @Caribbean, I didn’t read what Clarkson wrote as “trying to rehab” Andrew. I read it as ultra shade….Andrew, “giving money to girls they’ve never met.” Trust me, in the UK that’s extreme sarcasm, as in why would you give money to someone you’ve never met, eh eh? *nudge, wink*

      • JaneBee says:

        @Emme +1

  2. JackieJacks says:

    This dudes eyebrows annoy the shit out of me. He needs a comb a trim and some gel on those. I mean he’s hideous with no redeeming qualities but like I guess taming those brows is a start.

  3. equality says:

    Someone should explain to him that the nice thing about a president is that they aren’t forever. They are voted out and replaced. Seeing how many PM’s have come and gone recently, he should understand that not forever concept. They are also more cost-effective. Give them ONE residence to maintain and keep them on a specific salary.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      Presidents are also not above the law, they are held accountable to the people and there is transparency in earnings. The King is above the law and not held accountable. The amount of secrecy surrounding his finances means he is susceptible to corruption, and perhaps the courtiers are getting kickbacks in return for their silence. He is, in fact, dangerous and needs to have his wings clipped.

  4. Alexandria says:

    What’s his point?

    • Jais says:

      The only point I see is that he’s still allowed to write his column for the sun. Ipso facto nothing.

  5. Anna says:

    “…there won’t be another Coronation after this one. It’ll be the last.”

    You promise👀👀👀👀

  6. Duch says:

    Sounds to me like he was miffed he got his hands slapped by the Palace, and this is his snapback. I can’t imagine the Palace is best pleased by this column.

    • aquarius64 says:

      Yep, the Palace sure didn’t come to his defense when he was rightfully dragged about his screed on Meghan. And William and Kate would throw them under the bus in the same situation.

      • Brit says:

        That column also helped expose the invisible contract along with that picture of all them at a party. Camilla wasn’t going to defend him and it seemed strange how people were angry about the Sussexes not “forgiving” him, since the palace didn’t come to his aide, they needed Harry and Meghan to do it for him.

    • Tisme says:

      @Dutch…this, exactly this.

  7. dawnchild says:

    He’s still talking.

    Such piss-poor writing…the result of years of frozen educational models, and calcified thought.

    And Great Britain is nothing but a rocky island, if it comes to that…the only reason they climbed so high is because they ripped and clawed and cheated their way into a ton of other countries and devastated their economies.

    And the Coronation is not going to fly in today’s world…because, unlike weddings and funerals which are common to ordinary folks and thus relatable on some level, no one gets crowned as a rite of passage and therefore watching it happen to one old white man with stolen jewels is not going to elicit any vicarious responsive thrill.

    • AnneL says:

      That’s exactly what I was thinking when I read that part, lol. Give me one of the beautiful “rocky islands” of the Caribbean that are currently part of the Commonwealth over England any day. They have sunshine and gorgeous beaches with blue water where you can swim without freezing your tush off. And they aren’t run over with racists!

    • The Recluse says:

      A needy old white man who can’t do much of anything for himself – AND his sidepiece, for whom he set up a sham marriage which he then destroyed with her help.

  8. ThatsNotOkay says:

    No one wants William to be king except Kate. And that’s the truth. Blblblblblblllllblbbb.

  9. Brassy Rebel says:

    I admit I did not have Jeremy Clarkson (almost) throwing the monarchy under the bus on my bingo card this morning. And he forgot to mention that the Queen Consort having smarmy friends like him hasn’t helped the monarchy either.

  10. Snuffles says:

    I feel like at the point, the only reason why the British still have a monarchy, it’s because they simply can’t imagine their identity without one. Especially having had a Queen that sat on the throne for literally every British citizens lives. But, now that she’s gone, that magic spell is waining. Combined with Harry dipping and finding a happier existence elsewhere and him de-mystifying his princely existence, it’s causing people to question the point of them.

    I don’t know how soon it will happen, but it will happen in the next generation or two. It won’t be a bloody coup. It will be a slow, sad fading of royals past their prime, holding on to traditions that don’t mean anything to anyone anymore.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      I agree but I think that QEII was the primary reason as they held back from eliminating their alliance but now that they have KCIII more countries will start defecting. Though some CW countries such as Canada will be much more difficult.

      A glaring glimpse of what is to come with Bullyiam has shown his blatant incompetence and no drive to learn on his own. An outcome when you give into the whims of an anger driven, temper tantrum man-child for his entire life. I believe Harry leaving him is what angered Bullyiam the most as his scapegoat and work-horse has fled never to come back.

      • Steph says:

        It’s Canada difficult bc of what’s required to remove the monarchy as head of state or bc Canadians want to keep it?

      • Feeshalori says:

        Someone more well-informed than me can answer this question, but I think it’s the various government agreements among all the First Nations that would make it very difficult for Canada to leave the CW.

      • Jaded says:

        @Steph — Canadian here. It would be an incredibly long and difficult process for Canada to remove KC3 as head of state. First, there would have to be referendums in every province and all would have to agree. Good luck with that. Second, both the House of Commons and the Senate would have to agree, another can of worms. Third, many of our First Nations peoples have individual agreements with the Crown and those would have to be renegotiated individually and a new Canadian Constitution written. It would take decades to come to any kind of agreement or disagreement.

  11. girl_ninja says:

    I’d never even heard of this loser until his nasty, insulting, misogynistic, racist comments about Duchess Meghan. He can keep his bulbus head moving.

  12. Flower says:

    Notice the vague reference to ‘Prince Andrew’ yet very specific reference to ‘Prince Harry’s Book’.

    They equate Harry’s truths of growing up in a broken dysfunctional family to the actions of a child abuser who hangs around with traffickers. Also shocking is that he mentions the Harry v Dog bowl incident again without mentioning the abuser as a further form of humiliation to Harry. You really couldn’t make this up.

    Also from a Brit perspective, there’s no edging up here, this is a not so covert hit-back piece.

  13. notasugarhere says:

    ‘like Prince Andrew, giving money to girls they’ve never met. ‘ So you raped a trafficked teen but were never formally introduced to her, Andrew?

    I see Clarkson is still issuing these disgusting articles based on exactly what the royals tell him to write. He’s uplifting Charles and Camilla, promoting this Coronation as the best ever, last ever, everyone better get in line and support it. Blaming any criticism of the monarchy completely on Andrew and Harry/Meghan instead of focusing the blame on the outdated, racist institution itself and the key villains – Charles, Camilla, Bill & Kate (or ‘WanK” from yesterday’s great post).

    Any bets on Clarkson also being in Epstein’s book?

  14. tamsin says:

    Clearly, it’s Andrew and Harry’s fault. And make sure they are mentioned in tandem. He’s still carrying water for the royals.

  15. Lurker25 says:

    I tried watching The Windsors last year and found it boring, cringe-y 5 minutes in.

    Then read a comment (here or Twitter?) by someone who said the show’s writers were connected to RF and that there was sly commentary. That after Spare, it seems like the show was sneaking in some truths.

    Read Spare, then watched the show again. Very different experience this time. In the show Camilla is just evil incarnate and no dummy. And her goal is to hijack the institution for herself. She wants ALL the money, ALL the power.

    In Spare, Harry mentions a time when he was fed to the press to cover for Camilla’s son drug bust/behavior. She made sure the institution protected her own, non royal, not in line for the throne, kids. Over the ones the firm is supposed to protect, even by pure hierarchy. She made sure her kids cut in line for press protection.

    So all this to say… Maybe it would serve Camilla to dismantle the monarchy. Her kids wouldn’t inherit the crown as things stand. We know she doesn’t give a shit about queen, country, blah blah blah. Not that this was always her goal, but there’s an spotlight on her now that wasn’t there before. All the image shining didn’t take. She can see that the public turns on her easily. So..

    If the monarchy no longer exists, then William wouldn’t automatically inherit anything. ALL private crown wealth would be Charlie’s to disperse in his will. And Camilla could pull Charlie’s strings to make sure her kids get the lion’s share.

    • Concern Fae says:

      That’s the kicker isn’t it? If they get rid of the monarchy, who gets the crown estates? I think that’s why if the monarchy goes, it will be because of some sort of scandal that will justify the government stripping the crown estates as well.

      Honestly, the biggest problem the monarchy has right now is that the tabloid press makes more money when they’re tearing them down. So they do. Even when they have to make shite up. The monarchy would be doing fine if it wasn’t for the press.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Lurker25, that’s a very interesting and well thought out plot. And I wouldn’t put it past Cruella to be devising such a plan as we speak. She certainly doesn’t have any allegiance to Bullyiam, or KKKHate for that matter, but she does with her own children.

    • Becks1 says:

      I love the Windsors but I do think its better when you realize there is a grain of truth in so many of the stories. Like the whole plot in season 3 about Kate renovating Anmer Hall etc. I said to my husband, “you know that’s pretty much what happened right?” and he was like uhhh….no, I did not, how did you KNOW that lol.

      As for Camilla wanting the monarchy dismantled so her kids get more – well, she doesn’t need to go that far. William does not automatically inherit everything. He would get the duchy of lancaster, yes, but that doesn’t mean he automatically gets anything beyond that. The private estates (Balmoral, Sandringham) and all the private wealth (jewelry, art, other estates, money) is Charles to disperse as he wishes. The only reason right now all that private wealth goes monarch to monarch is because then it avoids inheritance taxes.

      We’ve heard about Charles wanting to turn BP and Sandringham into full time museums or event spaces etc. BP isn’t personal property but Sandringham is. Wonder if Charles intends to turn it over the Royal Collection Trust or something and then William would lose out on it? Same with Balmoral.

      So all that to say, that Camilla can still pull plenty of strings to hurt William and the other royals (including Harry) down the line in terms of money and property (either through trusts, through the will, something) without dismantling the monarchy.

      But I could see her wanting to dismantle it just because she would want to be last queen.

      Its all so very messy and GOT like.

  16. Amy Bee says:

    This is probably what Camilla told him. She blames Andrew and Harry for the Royal Family’s problems.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Agreed, Amy Bee. He’s still tugging the forelock and spewing whatever Charles/Camilla tell him to.

  17. MissBooBoo says:

    This has Camilla written all over it. A warning shot to Willy, and a persistent reminder to Harold. Also, clearly The Girls are fighting!!

  18. HeyKay says:

    I honestly don’t think William has ever wanted to be King.
    He is trapped, as Harry said.
    But instead of becoming a full adult, William has become bitter, angry, and bought into The Firms brainwashing.

    The BRF is the last hold out of Europe. The other royal families seem to have drifted into the current day, more or less. The next gen shows up in the official gowns and jewels a few times a year, drifts away.
    But BRF has truly become a soap opera, and the PR seems to feed into keeping it going.

    KChucky should be dragging everyone forward ASAP.

    I think part of why TQ stayed popular was that during WWII the entire country was under attack and the Pull Together feeling had to happen.
    Also, Churchill did one hell of a job in guiding her PR.

    KChucky has no good will built up, he has his head in the sand, refusing to change.
    Clarkson and the rest, are out of date.

    William really needs to get his ass in gear and make some kind of bold move. Or maybe he is ready for it all to burn down. He has his personal wealth.

  19. Eurydice says:

    There was a wedding 5 years ago and the Jubilee last year. Too bad the Queen didn’t time her death better so Clarkson wouldn’t be bored by too many pompous events at the same time – if only she could have lasted to 100.

    • Lionel says:

      Eurydice: I know! I’m stuck on his opener. Well of course you’ve never seen a coronation, Jeremy, but I must break it to you that a monarch’s death and a coronation always happen within 12 months. And for an elderly monarch there’s a Jubilee every 5 years. Has he entirely forgotten Andrew’s/Fergie’s wedding just a few years after C&D’s, which was a huge deal at the time? I know that’s not the point of his article, but the sheer laziness and lack of logic offends me!

      • aftershocks says:

        Queen Elizabeth’s first Jubilee was Silver 25 years, in 1977; then Golden Jubilee 50 years, in 2002; then Diamond Jubilee 60 years, in 2012; finally Platinum Jubilee 70 years, in 2022.

        And I agree. Clarkson is full of it, as there were plenty of royal happenings in the 1980s and 1990s, including baby christenings, weddings, royal tours, the phenomenon that was/ is Diana — her death in 1997. The deaths of the QM and Princess Margaret in 2002 (same year as the Golden Jubilee, etc., etc.

    • aftershocks says:

      @Eurydice: “… if only the Queen could have lasted to 100.”

      Apparently, had the Queen lived till 2027, she could have celebrated 75 years on the throne with a second Diamond Jubilee! Had she lived till 106, in 2032, she could have celebrated 80 years of her reign with an Oak Jubilee. 👀 Already, it was extremely rare and unusual that she celebrated her Platinum Jubilee at 70 years of being a monarch. LOL that her son, C-Rex-III doesn’t have a chance of even reaching Silver Jubilee at 25 years of reigning, when he would be age 99. Sure it’s possible, but extremely doubtful.

  20. Dee says:

    It’s the 21st century. Why are you having this coronation? Anointed by God? You think anyone believes this anymore? Carry on and start cutting the royal budget and moving those estates toward making money for the people. The royals are nothing but waking anachronisms.

  21. ElleE says:

    Let’s get this out of the way, Brits are the friendliest “help you for no reason” folks out there. A Brit will be the first one to tell you how to get a rickshaw, in some foreign country, explain currency exchange, tell you the great places to eat, upcoming music festivals in Morocco etc. and you can ring them up a decade later to tell them you’ll be in London and they’ll put you up at their parents house in Teddington and clear their schedule for the weekend so they can hang with you. Lovely people.

    And then there are “presenter” windbags like Jeremy Clarkson. Spouting nonsense on a national stage to who exactly? Even a casually bigoted English person is going to remember that they were actually some weddings after Charles (Andrew had one!!) some royals died, new ones were born and other stuff happened so he’s not even making sense.

    He knows zero about his own country – no way is the current government going to do anything like have an elected head of state and change their entire constitution anytime soon. He’s just like that drunk uncle, everyone apologizes for after Thanksgiving.

    • Lionel says:


    • Emily_C says:

      Your examples of Brits are, uh, interesting. People who regularly get rickshaws and dine in Morocco? That’s so far from the average Brit. Those nosebleed circles tend not to have the slightest clue about what the life of a normal person is like, let alone what normal people want politically.

  22. Andrea says:

    It’s a weird trademark of royalists confronting reality that they always willfully misunderstand the nature of a head of state versus a head of government. The UK already has a head of government (the PM) and an elected or appointed head of state would not be in charge like the U.S. president (head of both state and of government) is. They also pretend they don’t understand how term limits or elections work, though to be fair it’s possible they actually don’t. Lol.

  23. Rnot says:

    Prince Andrew got married in 1986. Princess Anne got remarried in 1992. Prince Edward got married in 1999. Princess Margaret and the Queen Mother died in 2002. Whether he wasn’t paying attention then or whether he doesn’t remember now, this is all about his feelings. ‘If they won’t even come to my defense after I was wounded attacking their enemies then what’s the point of them?’ Sad deluded man.

  24. Miss Jupitero says:

    I was going to chime in, but now my cat, HRH Violet, has me pinned down. She found her HRH in a dumpster somewhere btw….

    There. I’m allowed to type now.

    I have the perfect fix! Ditch the monarchy entirely, and give all the palaces over to immersive theatre. Instead of useless royalty, we could have professional actors, performers of all stripes, re-enacting royal history. For a big wad of money, tourists can sleep and eat in the palaces, watch some drama, maybe catch a faux beheading before breakfast. Britain would take in the bucks and we could all have some fun for a change. Seriously, get Punchdrunk on it…. I’m fine with Edgar Allan Poe or Monty Python mashups as well.

    • lanne says:

      Don’t sully Violet’s HRH! HRH Violet’s styling comes more honestly, and from a more noble place, than the Windsors.

      All hail Her Royal Highness Violet Feliniadus Catius Regina!

      And I might actually go back to the UK to see a historical re-enactment after the Windsor show is over. Sounds like fun, esp. if there’s an audience cosplay element!

    • Emily_C says:

      Yes! Make it an extra fancy Renaissance Fair. That would be amazing.

  25. Solidgold says:

    Yuck, please don’t amplify this deviants articles.

  26. Marion says:

    I can! A country that would sell that Royal land and buildings off to fund the under-paid, under-privileged.
    Until Brexit I was happy to be European.
    Of this is a snark against the Royals because of the article, then I’m afraid the RF deserved it.

  27. TangerineTree says:

    When are royalists going to stop feeding on this fairytale bullshit?

    “The monarchy is built on a foundation of mysticism. It derives its magic powers from forces we don’t understand. It’s an institution built on fairy dust.”

    Grow up.

  28. Saucy&Sassy says:

    I for one, am burned out on all of these big “dos”. They have Trooping the Color because . . . well, I don’t know. That seems to be a big do every year. Philips funeral 4/21, QE2’s Jubbly 6/2022 and QE2’s funeral 9/2022. Everytime we turn around we’ve got these people doing some big do to say, “look at me”.

    I have no interest in the Chubbly. I’ll probably see highlights on the evening news, but that’s probably all I’ll see. Frankly, I think they’re over exposed. I feel for the people in the UK who are funding this with their tax dollars. I guess KFC couldn’t just have a quiet Chubbly and donate the rest of the taxpayer money to food banks. Wouldn’t want the little peasants to be too comfortable would we?

  29. blunt talker says:

    He needs to check his pampers and marinate in them to gain some common sense-God made everyone and noone is special or above others-when we leave this world-you can’t enter God’s kingdom by saying you put me on earth to rule over the serfs-God says what have you done personally to help your fellow serfs-everybody will have to stand on their own merits and actions on this earth when they stand before the lord.-the monarchy is a man-made vehicle to suppress others and rule supreme-racially

  30. robin samuels says:

    Clarkson’s article sounds like a clap back. After socializing with Camilla and Piers, Clarkson wasn’t sure who disliked Meghan more, so he felt comfortable writing that disgusting article. The blowback was more than they imagined. It wasn’t about liking or disliking Meghan more so than the misogyny was over the top. Camilla feigned anger and hid in the house for several days until the fires burned out. She nor Piers could speak on behalf of her dear friend, and the Sun took a hit too. Feeling let down and betrayed, Clarkson chose to write another trashy article. He was careful not to mention Meghan’s name, hence his using the dog bowl incident without saying, William. Spare is the on the best-seller list for three consecutive weeks in the UK, but no one is reading the book. It sounds like Clarkson did. Most Caribbean nations will likely remove Charles as head of state. His silence on the treatment of Meghan has more impact on people of color than he believes.
    Clarkson needs to be corrected. It’s not about Andrew or Harry. It’s Charles and Camilla’s lack of compassion and William and Kate’s inability to read the room. It’s obvious Harry was indeed the scapegoat for his brother. A jubilee, a funeral, a new gold coach, a coronation followed by the Trooping of the Colors, all at the taxpayers’ expense. Essential service workers are fighting for decent wages; too many depend on food banks and the rising costs of heating. Corruption at #10 is embarrassing, and blaming Harry and Meghan for the nation’s woes is foolish. Diana said Charles would not be a good king, and she was right.

  31. bisynaptic says:

    “The monarchy is built on a foundation of mysticism. It derives its magic powers from forces we don’t understand.”
    LOL good lord, this idiot.