Not surprisingly, the Duke of Sussex’s ill-advised recent spray about US politics has prompted commentators to remind their audiences that he is a descendant of the ‘tyrant king’ George III, the Hanoverian who Americans love to hate. The analogy is unwarranted, and commenters should apologise for comparing the two.
You see, George III was an enlightened and pious man who devoted his entire life to public duty, notwithstanding he eventually succumbed to mental illness. If we are to draw accurate historical analogies with Harry, look no further than the king’s son George IV, a profligate and vainglorious sponger. “There never was an individual less regretted by his fellow creatures,” declared The Times in 1830 following his death. “What eye has wept for him? What heart has heaved one throb of unmercenary sorry?”
In 1814, George junior was Prince Regent when British troops invaded Washington DC and set fire to the White House. Harry is hellbent on doing something similar, albeit metaphorically, but this time to the US Supreme Court.
In his speech to the United Nations he lamented “the rolling back of constitutional rights here in the United States,” a clear allusion to the court’s recent decision to overturn Roe v Wade. It was, he claimed, another example of the “global assault on democracy and freedom”.
I do not suppose it occurred to Harry that the US constitution makes no reference to abortion, or that the 1973 case in question has long been criticised as judicial overreach. Or that even the late Supreme Court justice and feminist Ruth Bader Ginsburg conceded 30 years ago that Roe had been decided hastily and on questionable grounds.
Harry need not have fretted about the loss of constitutional liberties. As his speech demonstrated, his First Amendment right to make a fool of himself is unimpeded. But instead of slagging off his foreign hosts, he could have reflected on how Americans have previously reacted when a sanctimonious British blowhard presumed to lecture them about their domestic affairs.
Take for example when The Guardian initiated a campaign in 2004 to urge undecided voters in the upcoming election not to re-elect President George W. Bush. In addition to the 14,000 British readers who wrote to voters in Clark County, Ohio, the campaign featured open letters from “three prominent Britons,” that being biologist and author Richard Dawkins along with novelists Antonia Fraser and John le Carré.
As expected, the missives were insufferably condescending. “If Bush is finally elected properly, that will be the time for Americans travelling abroad to simulate a Canadian accent,” wrote Dawkins. He and the others succeeded only in angering their target audience, irrespective of political allegiance. “We have pulled your chestnuts out of the fire in two world wars that were occasioned by European diplomacy,” wrote one American in response. “Maybe you’d like a vote in which American president will oversee the next rescue.” Touché.
Not surprisingly, Clark County – which the Democrats won in 2000 – switched to the GOP.
The occasion for Harry’s speech was the observance of Nelson Mandela International Day. That great man needs no introduction, save for the fact his tribulations, while terrible and longstanding, were minuscule compared to what Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, have suffered. “I speak to you today with humility,” declared Harry as he began his speech. Now there’s a man in desperate need of a dictionary, I thought.
“In our own time … when it’s all too easy to look around and feel anger or despair, I’ve been inspired to go back to Mandela’s writings,” he said. It’s not just Mandela who Harry feels an affinity for, it’s Africa in general. “I’ve always found hope on the continent,” he said. “In fact, for most of my life, it has been my lifeline, a place where I have found peace and healing time and time again.”
I feel for him. Living in a nine bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion in the Californian super-wealthy coastal enclave of Montecito would not only be taxing but also existentially stressful. As Harry said in his speech, “Right now, the water is rising all around us – in some places, quite literally.” In these melancholy times I too would be whistling for the private jet. Africa would be an ideal location for my spiritual healing, provided of course the retreat is an exclusive luxury resort where the only locals you see are the ones waiting on you. After all, who would deny a self-appointed saviour of the planet his much-needed solitude?
Given Harry feels the need to seek solace in Mandela’s words, perhaps I can suggest a few quotes. First: “Real leaders must be ready to sacrifice all for the freedom of their people.” My interpretation only, but ‘sacrifice’ should not be conflated with abrogation of duty. For example, one does not sacrifice all by announcing his intention to “withdraw” from official duties, only to enrich himself by monetising the royal brand.
Second: “A critical, independent, and investigative press is the lifeblood of any democracy. The press must be free from state interference.” So far Harry and/or Meghan has threatened legal action against The Sun, The Daily Mirror, The Mail on Sunday, Splash News, and the BBC.
Third: “Resentment is like drinking poison and then hoping it will kill your enemies.” That includes conflated resentment, otherwise known as the golden goose for race grifters.
In his defence, Harry is just one of many bloviaters who have used the UN as a hailer for their excruciating platitudes. Mind you, even the most experienced diplomats in the audience would have had trouble keeping a neutral expression when Harry declared, “We have an obligation to give as much if not more than we take”.
Next time Harry visits Windsor Castle, the Queen should arrange for a certain Mandela quote to be displayed prominently at the entrance. How satisfying it would be to see Harry’s face when he reads the inscription “In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
More Coverage
Work needed on PS productivity
While our political leaders no doubt are focused on the potential for interest rate relief before the federal election, they should instead be preoccupied with how to lift productivity and grow the economy.
Secrecy has been a big part of problem in terror fight
Much of the concern about the rise of anti-Semitic actions is due to too much secrecy and lack of demonstrated concern, for which politicians and police must share responsibility.