Rita Panahi: Selfish Harry and Meghan don’t deserve to play the victim card
The virtue signalling Duke and Duchess of Sussex misread the room and have settled for a deal that is starkly different to what they wanted, writes Rita Panahi.
Rita Panahi
Don't miss out on the headlines from Rita Panahi. Followed categories will be added to My News.
“You can’t have your cake and eat it too” is a concept that most children comprehend well before their tween years. They may not like it, but they understand it.
Not so the Duke and Duchess of Woke, Harry and Meghan who, after a year of virtue signalling hypocrisy, announced to the world that they were going to “carve out a progressive new role” within the royal family while “working to become financially independent”.
It’s hard to fathom the weapon-grade chutzpah required for two multi-millionaires who want to trade on their royal status for further riches while refusing to properly fulfil their duty. And, talk of financial independence is rich when the public paid $4.5 million for their house renovations and they expect even more taxpayer largesse to pay a million-dollar-plus annual security bill.
The couple claimed on their website that: “The Duke and Duchess are classified as internationally protected people which mandates this level of security”, before quietly deleting the statement.
To say Harry and Meghan misread the room would be a massive understatement. The Queen’s response, while couched in the loveliest terms, has been devastating. This week we learned just about everything the couple wanted or assumed they would receive under the new arrangement was kiboshed by the Queen. Showing negotiating skills that would shame most world leaders, she has made it clear you can’t be half royal; you’re all in or you’re out, sunshine. Harry and Meghan will not only lose their HRH titles and access to public money but they will also have to repay the millions spent on Frogmore Cottage. And they can’t represent the Queen in any capacity. Harry’s military titles are also gone, including Captain General of the Royal Marines.
This was a “Hard Megxit” deal and, after a week of negotiations, what the Sussexes settled for was starkly different from what they said on January 8. The couple wanted to continue some royal duties and expected to “collaborate” with the Queen.
Whoever is advising the pair should be sacked immediately. The term “collaborate” sounds like some vapid co-branding exercise undertaken by two fashion labels, not something you do with the monarch.
Harry and Meghan’s failure to advise the Queen before issuing that infamous press release was among their many mistakes. The disrespectful treatment of the much-loved sovereign put the public further off-side, made the pair look like ungrateful spivs and perhaps played a part in the Queen rejecting just about every request they made.
A poll published on the front page of the Daily Mail showed a clear majority of Brits thought the couple had treated the Queen “shoddily” and should be denied further public money.
In the midst of this conscious uncoupling, we’ve had a familiar narrative pushed by much of the commentariat, including politicians, academics, celebrities and journalists — in other words the usual Leftist race-baiters — who claim that Meghan has endured terrible racism in Britain — which is behind the pair’s move to North America.
We had the same simplistic, fact-free narrative pushed last year when Harry and Meghan were mocked by some for their gross hypocrisy, including giving lectures about global warming while taking four trips on private jets in only 11 days.
Of course the race-baiters can’t explain why Prince Charles receives precisely the same type of criticism over his endless bleating about global warming while he continues to use emission-spewing helicopters to take him short distances.
No one other than white supremacists and the identity-politics-obsessed Left gives a damn about Meghan’s ethnicity. Those pushing the racism line conveniently forget that even Kate (who has never done anything remotely as ridiculous as Meghan, who in 2019 wrote inspirational messages such as “you are brave” on bananas to be distributed to sex workers) was subjected to humiliating headlines such as “Waity Katie” before William finally proposed.
Princess Diana copped plenty of venom as did Sarah, Duchess of York. Indeed the media mauling Sarah Ferguson received is far worse than anything Harry and Meghan have copped.
Poor Fergie was mocked as the “Duchess of Pork” when she put on a few pounds, long before her unfortunate toe sucking pictures hit the front pages. Do we blame gingerism for the harsh treatment Fergie copped?
It’s clear Harry and Meghan are not shunning media attention; they just can’t stand coverage that isn’t always adoring. Now, unencumbered by royal duties they can pursue the lucrative speakers’ circuit, be brand ambassadors and media manage their activism and charity works.
The former HRHs, like the Hollywood A-list they like to befriend, feel entitled to lecture the masses and are adept at playing the victim despite their enormous privilege. Ricky Gervais may as well been addressing them when he told the Golden Globes crowd: “If you do win an award, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech, right? You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything.
“You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg. So, if you win, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your god and f--- off.”
Rita Panahi is a Herald Sun columnist