Generally I don't care about this stuff...but at a lunch recently some coworkers spent a good portion of the time talking about Harry and Meghan. I simply stated I don't generally pay attention to the details of this stuff, all humans are flawed and hero-worship isn't something I go for, generally speaking.
That said, I am a huge Anglophile, which may seem odd as I'm of Irish/German descent. Of course, the Saxe-Coburgs, or Windsors as they care to be known as now, are German, so maybe it's that part that has my pay any bit of attention. Standing in front of paintings and statues of William of Orange or Cromwell (as I have many times on my visits) leave me a bit cold, but I can appreciate the history they represent. Even Churchill, whose relationship with the Irish is tenuous at best, is one of the few politicians I look up to.
Being an Anglophile doesn't mean I'm a royal-watcher or a fan of the monarchy. I've often joked they are the wealthiest welfare family on the planet. This is a bit of a stretch, of course. The family does generate quite a bit of income on their own, with their holdings, and as a result of tourism and fandom. It would be a significant impact to the UK economy to see the end of the monarchy. That said, even today children grow up dreaming of being kings, queens, princes and princesses. As a child, I remember talking of being an astronaut, a fireman, a policeman, etc. So royalty, as a child's dream, is certainly not as awful as one may think.
I'm sure there is a massive downside to this life, however. Even lesser royals in the UK family, and other European nations, complain of the paparazzi, the attention and need to be exposed constantly to the public eye. Unlike politicians, who choose this exposure as part of their role in governing, royals are born into it. As a result, they need to be trained and nurtured to understand and manage that life. I'm not sure it's one I'd enjoy much. I have my own internal struggles leading the Urban Hike.
Here we are, though, with an American living her childhood dream of becoming a princess (yes, they have video of Meghan Markle doing what most kids do and dream of being a princess). It must have been a wonderful feeling, one of great joy. Few children get to experience the achievement of any dreams of their youth.
But now it's all gone a tad sideways for Harry and Meghan. It's their own fault, of course. I won't fault them, though, for two reasons. First, they still have lots of wealthy friends and plenty of money. Second, while it's easy to point to Meghan as the 'cause' of all this (and many do), Harry has to shoulder some of the blame since he's been a willing participant.
For me, the idea of taking the royal family seriously is hard to do. They are not paragons of morality, wisdom, wealth well-managed, or even good behavior. That said, Queen Elizabeth reinvented herself many times and often showed great grace under pressure, humility and often even love. That last point is key because through history, love was never something a royal was supposed to show - love was a sign of weakness.
Instead, I view them as a filter of what ails us today, but also what can make us better. Reinvention, grace, humility - these are all good things.
Harry has spoken of these things as being meaningful to him, in rather ham-handed fashion. I'd say that problem is due to Meghan, but that's my view. I know others who think otherwise. Saying you want those good things that come with the territory and eschew the bad ones, despite your own bad choices being on full display, does little to generate sympathy or credibility.
Ultimately, these dramas are just dramas. There is really only one story here, and it has nothing to do with the Royal Family at all. It has to do with just being a decent human being, a person who is part of a family (regardless of whether it's royal or non-royal) and being honest about who you are and aren't, as a person.
Neither side in this equation is being 100% honest. They cannot possibly be, nor are they ever likely to be. But Harry and Meghan have taken their lack of honesty to new lows. It's become increasingly clear they are all about the fame and money. Harry can say all he wants that he hates the attention, doesn't want the fame, doesn't want the money. He has said these things, many times. Yet everything he's done has been to attract attention and money.
We know the Royal Family exists simply for attention, fame, and money. There can be no other reason for it, in the modern era, it creates more revenue for the UK than it asks for from the state. It is, for all intents and purposes, a corporation of sorts. It's not a horrible one, either. At least they aren't exporting arms, selling drugs, or shopping around a lifestyle (Charles has tried to sell the leftist/green lifestyle but he's a lousy spokesperson for all that). William and Kate seem to have a more modern view of their roles and largely remain silent on such issues.
Harry, it seems, wanted nothing to do with all of that, until he didn't have it anymore. Suddenly he became all about the attention, fame and money.
A common and popular trend today is the "Nepo Baby" concept, and Harry is the ultimate "Nepo Baby".
In the US we claim to not care about the royals or their lifestyle and "we fought a war to not deal with this stuff". It's all well and good, and none of this is true. The US loves royals, and even loves our own royals more than the UK's. We just have different kinds of royals. The Kennedys. The Clintons. The Obamas. The Kardashians. And so on. We create a weird kind of royalty here, and feel compelled to criticize the originals.
It's my view they are all open to criticism. They are all public figures. Like any human, all have faults. Some are just far more faulty than others, and egregiously so.
