For those for whom this is important, the writer has exactly the same parentage as Meghan:
It is absurd to blame the Harry and Meghan fiasco on 'British racism'
SHERELLE JACOBS
DAILY TELEGRAPH COLUMNIST
10 JANUARY 2020 • 6:00AM
In this photo released by Kensington Palace on Monday May 21, 2018, shows an official wedding photo of Britain's Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, center, in Windsor Castle, Windsor, England, Saturday May 19, 2018. Others in photo from left, back row, Jasper Dyer, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, Prince Charles, Doria Ragland, Prince William; center row, Brian Mulroney, Prince Philip, Queen Elizabeth II, Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, Princess Charlotte, Prince George, Rylan Litt, John Mulroney; front row, Ivy Mulroney, Florence van Cutsem, Zalie Warren, Remi Litt.
Britain’s frustration with the Sussexes stems from the pair's desire to have their cake and eat it CREDIT: ALEXI LUBOMIRSKI/ PA
The cultural tension between the Sussexes and the public has nothing to do with colour
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's extraordinary announcement – evening timed for the American audience – may have blindsided the Crown, but the liberal narrative setting in is utterly predictable. According to various commentators, and sympathisers on social media, the couple were partly driven away by British racism.
It is true that Meghan has suffered racist remarks on internet platforms. And, no doubt, a very small minority of genuinely prejudiced Britons will dislike the Duchess simply because of the colour of her skin. But the suggestion that the public at large is instinctively hostile to the couple because a dingy, residual bigotry claws at the inner depths of the British zeitgest is absurd. So too the idea that the country's press is institutionally prejudiced, peppering their copy with double-entendres that Meghan is ‘unsuitable’ for the Royal Family, and doesn't 'fit in'. This theory has been reinforced by the Duke of Sussex’s claim that there have been 'racial undertones' to his wife’s press coverage.
This is not only a fundamental misreading of the public’s frustration with Harry and Meghan’s conduct, but also an analysis that suffers from a short memory. When Meghan and Harry announced their engagement, both Middle England and the media fawned over the couple. Faithful monarchists toasted their wedding day in Jubilee-style street parties. The press hailed her as a “breath of fresh air”. But it wasn’t long before the whiff of rot started to seep from the Sussex’s tacit social contract with the country; the secrecy over Archie’s christening did not sit comfortably alongside revelations about the £2.4 million refurbishment of Frogmore cottage. Nor the career shift to heckling the public on climate change while zipping around on private jets.
Britain’s frustration with the Sussexes thus centres around their naive hypocrisy and self-destructive determination to have their cake and eat it. It is categorically not about Meghan’s race.
Yes, there is a disconnect between the royal pair and swathes of Britain. Not because Meghan has foreign ancestors, but due to the fact that the couple seem to live on another PR-oiled, celebnocratic planet. As reflected in their new website which toothily techno-jabbers about going forward in a “progressive new role” and continuing to “collaborate” with Her Majesty.
It is, of course, true that there has been a tension between the pair and the wider public, but this is cultural rather than racial. The Middle English instinct is that we should aspire to a colour blind society. This is partly because, unlike America, the UK has not need to find a language of ‘empowerment’ or a legal framework for affirmative action, to cauterise deep wounds from an incendiary race relations history. But also partly because – ironically enough given the royal subject-matter – Britain’s demons are entangled in class rather than race. Meritocracy runs in modern Britain’s marrows, because most of us fiercely believe that people should not be defined by their background.
Meghan’s perspective on race, is unsurprisingly, more informed by the American, than the British experience. Hence her rhetoric about sisterhood, and self-identifying as ‘woman of colour’. But for many Britons it just jarred. Including for this writer, who has almost overnight gone from being mixed-race when filling out forms, to a being, by metropolitan cultural definition, a one-drop ‘person of colour’.
Such is why that Vogue magazine cover – which featured 15 inspirational women – ruffled so many feathers. The celebration of “black” ballerinas and “Somali” boxers was weightily cadenced poetry to the pious wokeocracy. But to the rest of us, it exposed a lightweight and flippantly tokenistic attitude.
Many will continue to insist that the scourge of racism drove Harry and Meghan away, but one wonders whether the modern phenomenon of victimised narcissism is actually the culprit here. Eyebrow-raising elements to this story – from their discourteous behaviour towards the Queen to the decision to quit their apparently taxing public role after a six-week luxury holiday – all hint at a lack of self-awareness. Relieved of their royal duties, one can only hope they find the time to indulge in some soul searching. Meanwhile, the British public have clear consciences.