Diogenes was a fourth century, BC, Greek philosopher. Alexander the Great visited Diogenes, who was then sitting in the sun. Alexander asked Diogenes what he, Alexander, the world conqueror, could do for Diogenes, a famous, but impoverished, philosopher. Diogenes replied, “Move aside. You are blocking my sun.”
In other tales about this encounter, Alexander said, “If I were not Alexander, I would like to be Diogenes,” and Diogenes replied, “If I were not Diogenes, I would like to be Diogenes.” In yet another version, Diogenes gestured to a pile of bones and said to Alexander, “I am looking for the bones of your father, but I cannot distinguish them from the bones of a slave.”
My Uncle Jan was an atheist and a member of the Communist Party. I asked him why. He said that when he was a boy in a village in Slovakia, only the nobility could go to doctors, and after the communists came in, the peasants, like him could go to the doctor. Of course there are much better routes to medical care than a Soviet invasion, but I understood his point. Uncle Jan also told me hair-raising stories about nobles abusing peasants. Janosik, the Slovak national folk hero was executed by being hung from his rib.
One day when I was six years old, I was sitting in the back of a Ford Rambler. Christine asked me which one of the Beatles I had a crush on. I said that I didn’t know or care who the Beatles were. She said that everyone had to have a crush on one of the Beatles. I realized that my best friend was parasitized by an outside force, and that force was celebrity. She probably didn’t know who the Beatles were, either, but celebrity was pressuring her to give her heart over to these strangers, in order to increase their money and power.
In January, 2019, I was scrolling through Facebook. Judy, a leftist white woman, posted a brief video clip. The video, Judy insisted, proved that white, male Trump supporters were a menace. In the clip, a teen boy stood next to an old man beating a drum. I didn’t see the cataclysmic menace that Judy saw. The boy was Nick Sandmann. Within hours, he would be hiding for his life, and leftists would be threatening to murder him.
The above anecdotes convey my hostility to the British royal family. I admire Diogenes’ self-respect. I recoil at my friend Christine’s surrender of her heart to celebrity worship, and Judy’s surrender to mob hatred of a scapegoat. I think of nobility as the people who prevented my peasant ancestors from going to the doctor, and who hung some of us up on meat hooks.
When it comes to race? I believe that the thinkers most worth listening to are those labeled “black conservatives.” Larry Elder, Shelby Steele, Jason L. Riley, Thomas Sowell, Glenn Loury, and John McWhorter all acknowledge that white supremacy is evil and has caused incalculable pain. And – not “but,” but “and” – And the best impulses of the Civil Rights movement have been hijacked to a performative white guilt that harms not helps. The best path is for blacks to adopt traditional, conservative values, and to jettison what John Ogbu called “oppositional culture.” The left’s message to black people, in contrast, can be summed up as, “You are powerless; you have no responsibility for anything; white supremacy is an omnipotent, omnipresent force that you lack any ability to resist; your only choice is to wait for a rich, white liberal to rescue you.” The left’s message paralyzes believers. It has destroyed generations.
The left’s message is buttressed by a purely performative outrage industry. The demand of white supremacy outpaces the supply, and so we have false claims from Jussie Smollett, Nathan Phillips, Bubba Wallace, Oumou Kanoute, Tawana Brawley, Yasmin Seweid, and countless others. These false claims do significant damage to civil society, hurting blacks and whites alike.
Decades ago, the left abandoned efforts to address class inequity in favor of an exclusive focus on skin color. The left invented dogma like “white privilege” and “white fragility” specifically in order to taint poor white identity, and to cast poor whites as the villains in the leftist narrative (see here and here). Rich whites typically don’t lose jobs to less qualified diversity hires; poor whites do. Poor whites are the ones victimized by violent crime. I’ve been at the sharp point of the spear of leftists’ campaign against poor whites. See here and here.
So, that’s my story and I’m sticking to it. I reject celebrity worship as a form of parasitism, of celebrities achieving their goals by injecting their images into the minds and hearts of their worshippers. I also reject online hate mobs targeted at celebrity scapegoats. I rejoice that I’m an American and I do not live in a monarchy; I am grateful to the Founding Fathers who enabled my life by authoring the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and by fighting the Revolution. When it comes to race, the left pursues a destructive path.
Having clarified my stance on monarchies, celebrity, and the left’s approach to race, I’m here to confess: I was wrong about Meghan Markle. I consciously choose not to devote much attention to the British royal family. For that reason, I didn’t know much about Meghan Markle. When I heard that she was claiming to have been a victim of racism, I snorted. “She’s not even black!” More than once, I made fun of Meghan Markle on Facebook. Whiny Meghan Markle. Obnoxious Meghan Markle. Meghan Markle imagining herself to be a victim when clearly she is not.
I was wrong. I did exactly what people like Judy did to Nick Sandmann. I joined in an online mob about something I knew nothing about. Judy was eager, metaphorically, to lynch Nick Sandmann because he was a white boy wearing a MAGA hat. I was eager to kick around Meghan Markle because she’s a pretty rich girl and I decided that I don’t have to feel compassion for someone with more money and better luck than I have.
I was wrong. Yes, Meghan Markle was a victim of racism. Yes, even rich and pretty people’s pain is human pain, and deciding to care about others’ pain based on their bank accounts is neither rational nor the best a human heart can do. More than these two points is this point: Meghan Markle’s pain actually matters in the greater scheme of things. In the same way that the Britney Spears conservatorship saga offers us an opportunity to think about the best way to address erratic relatives, the Meghan Markle story offers us the chance to think and talk about the same issues Niccolo Machiavelli wrote about in his statecraft manual The Prince. Clearer understanding of how Meghan Markle has been used offers us a clearer understanding of raw power, the human psyche, the behavior of mobs, the persistence of hate, and the impact of the internet.
No one should cede protest against real racism to leftists. Conservatives, too, recognize that racism is wrong. Conservatives, too, can feel compassion for racism’s victims. We don’t have to agree with someone’s politics, or assess a person as an immaculate saint, to care when that person receives death threats. We don’t need leftists to teach us the difference between right and wrong. We recognize that difference and can speak up about it. Conservatives have shown the exceptional courage to speak up against race hoaxes. We can show the compassion to condemn racism, even if we disagree with the victim’s politics.
Harry and Meghan have protested that press coverage was ruining their lives. Why, then, did they submit to even more coverage in a six-hour Netflix docuseries? Harry answers that question in the very first minutes of Harry & Meghan. This isn’t just our story, Harry says. This is so much bigger than us. You don’t know the full truth, he says. The royal family is supposed to be about duty and service, he says. He’s going to do his duty as he sees it; he’s offering the service he feels it necessary to offer. He plans, in this docuseries, to expose a sick symbiotic relationship between the press and the British royal family.
Further, Harry says, “My kids are mixed race. When my kids grow up and say, ‘What did you do in this moment?’ I want to be able to give them an answer. If you bring a small person into this world, you should be doing everything you can to make the world a better place for them.”
“Books are written about our story,” Meghan says. “Doesn’t it make more sense to hear about our story from us?” Yes, it does.
In Harry & Meghan, Harry comes across as a well brought up, decent guy who is working hard to do the right thing. Meghan manages to be amazingly pretty in every lighting, every angle, with or without makeup. She smiles a sunny, all-American smile as big as all outdoors and she is shown exuding warmth in one public appearance after another. I recently had to give talks about my scholarly research and I think I looked like a deer in headlights the entire time: panicked eyes, clenched jaws, fingers counting the minutes till I could slink off camera. It’s not easy to radiate warmth to strangers in public, with cameras pointing at you. Meghan does this effortlessly. Her impact is clear: crowds love her. This viewer could not help but be moved watching Meghan embracing wide-eyed, worshipful, little black schoolgirls in the U.K., and charming white Brits waiting in line for hours just to have their moment of contact with this charismatic new member of the royal family.
Further, both Harry and Meghan, as this docuseries shows, have lifelong friends who are eager, publicly, to attest to their decency and worth. Harry’s school chums and fellow soldiers, Meghan’s former teachers and friends from seventh grade step forward. Their nanny, publicists, assistants and other employees, as well as those helped by their charities, also testify. If powerful media defamed me in the way that Harry and Meghan have been defamed, I would not be able to call on such a stalwart and courageous crew of character witnesses. Would you?
There’s another impression that many viewers of this docuseries comment on. Harry and Meghan are clearly in love with each other, and they have supported each other through rough waters.
Americans are rightly tired of race hoaxes. Some insist that Harry & Meghan is just one long play of the race card. It is not. Meghan grew up in a mostly white world. Her school photos show her in racially mixed classes, where many students are white. Her close friends are majority white. As her talent agent says, casting directors assumed her to be a “sun-kissed” white actress and cast her in white roles. The docuseries shows mixed, but mostly white crowds of British people expressing love and acceptance of Meghan. Meghan says that people had always assumed her to be white so she never had to have the “race talk.” When someone called her a mother a “n—–,” Meghan was shocked. Meghan is no Angela Davis. She’s not even Michelle Obama.
Harry & Meghan does not just claim, but rather it documents, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Meghan was a victim of potentially deadly racism. Racists created a concrete trail, in the form of an overwhelming number of visible documents: newspaper headlines, tweets, text messages, and threats.
Newspapers insisted that she was “Straight Outta Compton,” when in fact she’d never lived there. Photos of skid row were used to illustrate articles; she had grown up in suburbs. Other headlines repeatedly associated Meghan with crime, terrorism, drugs, and “trash.” Meghan was called a “gangster” and a “black sheep” whose “exotic DNA” caused “niggling worry.” After she gave birth to her and Harry’s first son, Danny Baker, a BBC presenter, tweeted an image of a man and a woman with a chimp, with the headline “Royal Baby Leaves Hospital.” Meghan was referred to as a “deviation.” A tweet read, “You can never remove the ghetto in her,” though, again, she had never lived in a ghetto. Another tweet called her a “publicity seeking c—.” One social media image depicts Harry being shot in the head, blood spurting, and the caption “See ya later race traitor.” Two British men said on their podcast that Harry should be “judicially killed for treason.” They also said that Harry and Meghan’s child is “an abomination that should be put down.” Someone sent the couple a white powder along with a racist note. An ugly caricature depicts Harry, Meghan, and their children in Kente cloth, celebrating Kwanzaa. One tweet announced that Harry and Meghan prove that “interracial marriage is a no go” Tweets frequently compare Meghan to a monkey, or simply use the N word.
Hatred against Meghan reached a fever pitch when, in December, 2022, journalist Jeremy Clarkson published the following in the Sun. “I hate her on a cellular level. At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, ‘Shame!’ and throw lumps of excrement at her.”
Haters don’t revile Meghan just because they see her as black. They revile her because she is an actress, an American, and a commoner. A headline disparaged Meghan as “a ruthless social climbing actress who has landed the role of her life and is determined to milk it for all she can.” Another labeled her “the most successful social climber ever.” When she was pregnant, Meghan’s American friends threw a baby shower for her in New York City. The press called the baby shower “trashy and common.” Such British attitudes don’t just insult Meghan. They insult all Americans.
The press published disparaging family trees, comparing Harry, who descends from William the Conqueror, and Meghan, who descends from slaves. “Blood” is mentioned again and again, as if Harry and Meghan were horses or pedigreed dogs. Tweets accused Harry of putting his “genetic line in the shredder.”
In America, a former slave, Booker T. Washington, became an advisor to the president of the United States. The son of a bigamist, Ben Carson, became a noteworthy neurosurgeon and a cabinet member. The son of an alcoholic, Ronald Reagan, was elected president. A poor immigrant, Andrew Carnegie, rose to be the richest man in the world. Steve Jobs, an adoptee, changed the world. The British class-based value system would never allow the human progress that America’s worth-based system has allowed. Too many Brits are sunken in primitive, Pagan assessments of what makes us human. By the way, William the Conqueror was also known, accurately, as William the Bastard.
Yeah, well, you may be thinking. Everyone, in our tense time, has to deal with harassment. Harry himself said that his family members told Meghan just to put up with it because after all they are all harassed.
Except that’s just not true. Experts in personal security, internet bullying, and press analysis all report that attacks on Meghan broke records and were unlike anything else they’d ever seen. Steve Davies “has been providing celebrity and executive risk management services on a global basis for over 28 years.” He said that security for Harry and Meghan was the “most intense” situation he’d ever had to deal with. The threats against them “blew the meter right out of the water.”
Buzzfeed and other media compared British tabloid press coverage of Meghan with press coverage of Prince William’s wife, Kate Middleton, a white woman from an upper middle class, aristocratic background. In story after story, Kate is praised for doing exactly what Meghan is later condemned for doing, from eating avocados and touching her pregnant abdomen to carrying flowers.
Is the point of Harry & Meghan that most whites are racist? Not at all. Bot Sentinel, a company that analyzes tweets, found that a very small number of accounts were responsible for the vast majority of hateful content. Christopher Bouzy, Bot Sentinel CEO, says, “We’ve never seen anything quite like this;” however, there was a small number of accounts “that were highly coordinated and deeply networked and responsible for the vast majority of hate propaganda against the couple.” Just eighty-three accounts reached 17 million people. These eighty-three accounts were intensely active. They coordinated with each other on what to post and when. They recruited new members, and tutored those new members in use of VPNs to create multiple accounts. Who were these haters? Bouzy says that they were largely middle-aged, Caucasian housewives.
“A misogynist is a man who hates women as much as women hate one another,” H.L. Mencken said. Women’s envy is all too easy to understand, and all too sad.
Samantha Markle is Meghan Markle’s half sister. Samantha is seventeen years older than Meghan and Meghan, whose parents divorced, says that she did not grow up with Samantha. Once Meghan began to make headlines, Samantha stepped forward as a major source of anti-Meghan media. Why? One reason: tabloids pay significant sums for such material. Another possible reason. Samantha Markle was described by her daughter, Noelle Rasmussen, as a “vicious liar” and “crazy.” Rasmussen reports having been physically and psychologically abused by Samantha and her lover. Court records show that Samantha was found guilty of child abuse. Samantha’s other daughter, Ashleigh Hale, was, with her brother, removed from Samantha, and raised by her grandparents, who adopted her. Hale reports that Samantha was someone “you can’t reason with” and that Samantha felt “resentment” toward Meghan. Samantha has been placed on a list maintained by British law enforcement of dangerous persons who pose a threat to members of the royal family.
Harry & Meghan does address racism. It spends a great deal more time on another topic: the press. The docuseries presents the following paradigm. How, in this modern, more democratic era, do the British royals maintain power? The royals must allow the press to have access to their private lives, and exploit those private lives as soap opera fodder, in order to maintain popularity, money, and power.
Tim Burt, a public relations professional, says, “There’s a sort of unwritten contract between the institution and the press. The taxpayer pays for the royal family, and in return for those payments, there is an expectation that the royal family will be available to the media. ‘We pay; you pose.'”
A royal advisor says that there was a popular understanding that “Harry and Meghan had an obligation to perform, and if you didn’t you would fall out of favor, and any opportunity would be used to write negative [material] … Imagine all of these people who have published horrible things about you, have published horrible things about your family, have published horrible things about your mother, you’ve got to perform for them. It’s a real cutthroat business and with Meghan there was no limit.”
Harry says that the attitude of the press is, “This family is ours to exploit. Their trauma is our story and our narrative to control.” It’s like living through a soap opera, he says, where everybody else views you as entertainment. Much of how his family operates is based on “what it looks like rather than what it feels like.” The royals adopt this unhealthy approach because they are always on display, even in their private text messages. They do it, bluntly, for money. The only way a royal’s charities can succeed or his reputation can improve is if he is on the front page. The media are the ones who choose whom to put on the front page, so royals must dance to the tabloid’s tune.
To this American, the British power game sounds like a dressed-up form of prostitution on the part of the royals, and a sick, sad form of living vicariously on the part of royal watchers. This vicarious experience is so pathological that fans come to believe that they have the right to vet whom Harry married, and to destroy the woman he chose.
Harry describes “a dirty game,” wherein royals and their agents trade favors with the press. They may leak or invent stories to buttress their own power and diminish a competitor’s. If a negative story is about to break about a more important royal, a less important royal is sacrificed.
The agony that this “dirty game” causes royals is highlighted by the docuseries. It includes excruciating clips of reporters hounding Diana, chasing royal children, and nagging those children to smile against their will. Phones are hacked. Private conversations are revealed. Harry was given no time to recover from his mother’s death. Clips show reporters chasing him when he was only a child. It’s a wonder he’s grown into the man that he is.
Meghan’s childhood friends report being “ruthlessly” harassed by the press, and their family members being harassed as well. Later, these family members were quoted in the press saying things that “never happened or weren’t true at all.” One man was offered $70,000 to claim, falsely, that he’d had sex with Meghan. Meghan’s father and half sister sold false stories to the press.
Harry reports being “terrified” that the press would drive Meghan out of his life as they had driven out other friends and romances. And, of course, there is the lingering sense that press harassment contributed to his mother’s death in a tunnel car crash. One tweet said it would be funny if Meghan died in a tunnel. “I knew I had to do everything I could to protect my family,” Harry says.
At first, Harry and Meghan were “royal rockstars bigger than William and Kate.” Headlines declared that Meghan and Harry were voted among the world’s most influential people while Kate and William were snubbed. Another headline announced that Prince Harry was voted more popular than Elizabeth. Another headline warned, direly, “Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are Wildly Popular. That Could be a Problem.”
Every member of the royal family attended an event. Press coverage highlighted Meghan. Her picture was on the front page; her name was in the headlines. After that event, negative headlines about Meghan began to appear. Suddenly the press depicted Elizabeth calling Meghan a “diva.” A royal family advisor says, “When the institution saw that this new couple could destabilize the power dynamics, the aim was to put them in a box or make them irrelevant.”
The attacks affected Meghan’s mental health. She began to feel suicidal. The royal family refused her request to see a therapist. Her friends noted the change, and began to worry. They asked permission to speak up in her defense. “I was not allowed to say anything,” a friend said. In this void, detractors controlled the narrative. “Anything that anybody was saying wasn’t coming from anybody that knew her. There’s all this untruth. There’s all these lies.”
Harry asked his father Charles for help. Charles responded, “My darling boy, you can’t take on the media.”
“No one,” Harry says, “would have the private conversations with the editors saying ‘enough.’ … It was clear to the media that the palace was not going to protect her.” In another incident, the press published a story that Harry knew to be false, but that made his brother, William, the heir to the throne, look good. “Within four hours, they were happy to lie to protect my brother, and yet for three years they were never willing to tell the truth to protect us.”
Harry blames himself. “I dealt with it as institutional Harry as opposed to husband Harry. What took over my feelings was my royal role. I’d been trained to put the needs of the institution first. Looking back on it now, I hate myself for it.” He feels, he says, “devasted, angry, and ashamed.” When the press blames Meghan for his departure from the royal family, Harry says, “It’s misogyny at its best. Meghan was blamed for everything. It was my decision to leave. She never asked to leave.”
It’s clear that many non-white Britons understand Harry’s departure as at least partly the result of racism, and that perception will matter to British power structures in the years to come. “Their departure felt like the death of a dream,” says British author Afua Hirsch. Prof. David Olusoga says, “The royal family could not find it within themselves to protect Meghan.”
When I mocked Meghan on Facebook, I did so at least partly because I felt that I owed no sympathy to a rich and pretty woman luckier than I could hope to be. Tyler Perry, a black man, grew up in an abusive household. Not only was he beaten, but he was also sexually molested. In spite of his unfortunate childhood, he found it in himself to feel sympathy for Meghan. Perry says, “I saw my mother abused for years.” If someone asked him, “How dare you compare Meghan’s plight to the abuse of your mother?” Perry insists that Meghan was abused, as was his mother. “The institution did all the things a batterer would do. We’re going to cut off the money. We’re going to cut off security. We’re going to do all those things to make you comply and come back,” Perry says.
Though he had never met the couple, Perry offered Meghan and Harry his own home as a refuge when the two left Britain. He says that he had lived in the house for many years, surrounded by neighbors who are also celebrities. Once the British tabloids discovered Harry and Meghan’s location, Perry says, they were subjected to a round-the-clock “assault” that no one had ever seen. There were helicopters, drones, and people at night cutting the fence around the yard.
Harry & Meghan is a fascinating exposé of raw power. Harry & Meghan offers an opportunity for Americans to consider how lucky we are that we don’t have a monarchy. Thank you Founding Fathers. It says much, none of it pleasant, about modern Great Britain. Great Britain, not long ago, controlled an empire on which the sun never set. It has gotten smaller and less powerful. It is currently “a country in the grip of an increasingly deep malaise.” “Britain is undergoing a full-blown identity crisis. It is a ‘hollowed-out country,’ ‘ill at ease with itself,’ ‘deeply provincial,’ engaged in a ‘controlled suicide,'” according to concerned observers.
In the monarchy, Britons can find evidence of their own superiority. The British royal family is too good for “trashy, common” American actress Meghan Markle. Or so some-not-all Britons tell themselves, through the cruel and distasteful press lynching of a woman who only wanted to please them.
I played right into this power game. I prided myself on seeing through my friend Christine surrendering her heart, her attention, her tastes in music, and her money to the Beatles. I was too cool for that. I prided myself on refusing to join Judy’s cyber lynch mob against Nick Sandmann. I don’t share Uncle Jan’s Communist Party membership, but I do share his ownership of our identity as workers and peasants. I want to say with Diogenes, if I could not be Danusha, I would want to be Danusha, with all of her proletarian flaws.
But boy did I fall for manipulation around Meghan Markle. Powerful people wanted me to hate Meghan Markle so that they could sell newspapers, and distract my attention from Britain’s problems, and protect Elizabeth and her direct heirs, Charles and then William, from criticism, and so that my psychic energy could be harnessed to buttress Britons’ self conception as superior, in spite of their current woes.
Should conservatives care about my having been manipulated by the press? Heck, yes. In my piece on the ten reasons I left the left, I wrote, “Never, in all my years of leftist activism, did I ever hear anyone articulate accurately the position of anyone to our right. In fact, I did not even know those positions when I was a leftist.” These days, since I have learned to recognize the worth of conservative positions, I can barely stand, at times, to listen to NPR or read the New York Times, and I do both daily. They misrepresent us. We, of all people, should not surrender to manipulation when the press lies to us about a person they’ve chosen to scapegoat.
Danusha Goska is the author of God through Binoculars: A Hitchhiker at a Monastery.
Sorry but you are far too sympathetic towards this wealthy woman and her privileged husband.
We all had great respect for him and her when they first came together, but they have created the backlash themselves by pleading that the royal family were racist.
All the Twitter stuff is, without a doubt, bad, but had he and she accepted that being in the royal family means life isn’t ever going to be normal most of the name calling would have never occurred.
As for her mum being called a niger in them days it was simply a label and white people were called honkey.
Could not agree with Danusha, although I ALWAYS agree with her, LOL. I get the distaste for mob attacks! But there simply is no way of knowing which of the the he said she said they said they said are true accounts! They certainly appear the wrong sort to victimize themselves. Obviously the Monarchy, of England or anywhere is a joke, no one is “above” anyone else, and the pomp is absurd. But Markle and Henry KNEW what they were getting into. She should’ve bowed out (pardon the pun)
The bottom line for me? These individuals do not have JOBS! I mean real and productive jobs to be proud of, to keep them busy — idle hands are the devil’s workshop. They are all living off of and getting filthy rich from fluff, cotton candy, smoke and mirrors, a circus sideshow. They’re selling fame for the sake of fame and making millions from such frivolous shallowness.
They are no better than the Kardashians. Princess Diana was the same way, she would not get a REAL job! She was having too much frivolous fun in the spotlight. She was having so much fun having the paparrazi chasing her she forgot to put her seatbelt on and died having her frivolous fun.
The British Royals and the Kardahians? These are profoundly UNSERIOUS people made of vapid vanity.
Without productive, purposeful, work a man is lost. Notice how when Harry was in the military he kept out of trouble. Get a real job Harry! Get a real job Meghan!
They do have jobs to be fair to them, they represent the people of the United Kingdom and the commonwealth.
I would not want their jobs because they cannot live a normal life but as nurture is infinitely more influential than nature, they should not have expected a normal life.
The problem is they wanted their cake and eat it.
That’s not a real, productive, purposeful, job. And the Markles abandoned the monarchy.
Hey, Harry Markle, get a real effin job you ex-royal bum! Become a farmer, become a chef, become a truck driver, become a supermarket stockboy, any productive job is more admirable and respectable than being an ex- royal bum living by selling the snake-oil of a circus side-show like the Kardashians do.
The beatles were fab these two were talentless , she was a big pain bratt they should be off away counting their money
Meghan is a self-obsessed narcissist of the most contemptible sort.
ONE VERY MINOR EXAMPLE;
She flew to Uvalde in a chartered jet with an entourage of photographers to capture the earth-shattering moment when she laid flowers in homage to the slain children and teachers,
It is surprising that she didn’t bring a brass band with her.
Whilst her Dad lay in a hospital bed from a heart attack. She never visited him or called him.
What do you mean, ‘In them days.’? They got married in May 2018. That’s less than 5 years ago.
“When I feel my head start to swell, I just look at Ringo and know we’re not supermen.” — John Lennon
When I listen to Yoko Ono’s “music” I just look at John Lennon and realize he’s using Ringo as a scapegoat.
Years ago, the British satirical magazine “Private Eye” featured an imagined John referring to Yoko
as Okay Yoni.
Other than moronic endless tomes about Harry and Meghan, which I will not read, how much do I not care about this over-privileged pair of nothings.
Wow! Guess you’re a bit of a something then, huh?!?
Useless read. Only a woman would feel sympathy for this woman.
Sympathy has its place and is stronger is the female sphere. Ms. Goska excels in this, but I agree her sympathy is misplaced.
I think this is why few women make good rulers. As an extreme example, think of a convicted child rapist. A man is more likely to vote for execution. A woman is more likely to vote for rehabilitation because the perp had a troubled childhood.
Racism is a fact of life in all of history and in all multi-ethnic societies. So what? There are many things that are not right outside of heaven.
So what? Racism and tribalism are two variants of the evil of COLLECTIVISM. The only antidote for any variant of collectivism is INDIVIDUALISM.
Individualism is the actual and objective FACT of life. Only INDIVIDUALS actually and factually exist. Collectivism in all its variants is a rejection and denial of factual reality.
Sexism, feminism, masculinism, ethno-centrism, socialism, communism, fascism, Nazism, monarchy, and theocracy are some more variants of collectivism. Their only antidote? Accepting and fighting for the fact that in reality only individuals exist.
The evil of collectivism in all its variant manifestations must always be called out, must always be opposed. For evil to succeed men have only to stay silent or shrug and say “So what?”
“In the history of mankind it is EARLIER than we think” – Ayn Rand
“In the history of mankind it is EARLIER than we think” – Ayn Rand
Ms Rand’s statement is so typical of atheistic/humanism. The utopian longings of mankind can never be realized until the Creator and Redeemer of mankind has his rightful place in the minds of men. All atheistic/humanism has a desire to reach some form of a utopian society without any connection with the Creator God. The rebellion of mankind will always thwart the utopian desires of fallen man. Sinful man cannot create a true and lasting peaceful and prosperous world. Certainly he cannot overcome the consequence of sin which is death. Death is the wages of sin that God must pay out to the unrepentant sinner. Thankfully, God is now working in relation to a new heaven and new earth in which righteousness will dwell. God will allow fallen man to reach his moral and spiritual end in the great tribulation at the end of the present age. However, all those who receive Jesus Christ, the only appointed savior of mankind, the only One that could pay the price required for the forgiveness of their sins before God, will be saved and enter into eternal life,at the coming of Jesus Christ for His own. The Christ rejecting world will go on to its appointed judgement. The choice of each individual will determine their place in eternity.
“Sympathy has its place and is stronger is the female sphere. Ms. Goska excels in this, but I agree her sympathy is misplaced.”
Justice. Justice matters. Justice is a non negotiable. If you agree to powerful people doing this to Meghan Markle, you have no leg to stand on when powerful people do this to Nick Sandmann, or to you.
Justice, my friend. Justice.
I love your articles! They make me think. I wasn’t going to watch the Netflix show but your article worked to change my mind .so many “opinions” about motivation.
Question: will the monarchy ever be the same? Will it survive? Is this the point?
My sympathy was for Harry oddly enough, being separated from his family by this. But isn’t writing a tell all book drawing things? It just feeds the beast. I they wanted freedom? Wrong direction!
I can’t comment on the book, because I have not read it. I have seen the Netflix series, though, and I think he did the right thing re: Netflix. He presented his point of view, whereas before we were just hearing what so and so said someone said sometime maybe. We got to hear things from him directly.
The folks characterizing him as whining or being mean are not telling the truth. He’s not whining. He’s not being mean. He comports himself with dignity. In fact his behavior is a positive reflection on his upbringing.
A mother is not likely to let a child rapist see the light of day because he had a troubled childhood.
I’m a woman and I have zero sympathy for this one. Ms Goska is completely missing the point, and the only point here as far as I am concerned is that this pathetic pair is hurting their family. That is unforgivable,whether the family is royal or hard working coal miners. When Meghan first arrived and was recognized as Harry’s girlfriend, she was welcomed warmly. But Brits are a savvy bunch, and it didn’t take long for them to realise that Meghan wanted to be a royal superstar. The press picked up on that too.. And while it is certainly true the British tabloids are often brutal, there is often some basis for their attacks. Harry, for his part, has always been ticked off that he’s not William, that is to say, the heir. They both need to grow up and get over themselves. Harry will never be monarch. Meghan will never be a royal superstar.
Or for Harry’s appalling and equally self-obsessed mother.
The King’s most important title is “Defender of the Faith” Charles has planned an ecumenical Coronation. What the media or social media have to say, the he said she said politics of the Royal family, is all irrelevant. The world is a darker place without the Queen’s whiteness for Christ.
Queen’s witness? Or whiteness? I think you meant “witness.”
Christ was not veiled in white flesh.
Of course I meant witness. Writing is not my thing I usually leave it to the professionals.
Hi Mark, I am interested in your comment. And I am wondering in what way you feel the Queen gave a witness for Christ. I admired the way she did her job, and her dedication to it, but I don’t see her as having given a witness to the Kingdom of God, the heavenly government for whose coming Jesus taught us to pray.
And isn’t that the only government that can really help us, and restore the whole earth to the paradise of peace it was always meant to be?
Did you ever watch her Christmas address to nation, on at least one occasion she proclaimed Christ as her savior.
Absolute Monarchy and Theocracy are mutually re-enforcing.
The Attilas of the world require the Witch Doctors of the world to invent an allegedly moral justification for crushing the individual. God’s representatives on earth is the Divine Monarch and the priests who declare him the Divine Monarch.
“Every dictator is a mystic, and every mystic is a potential dictator. A mystic craves obedience from men, not their agreement. He wants them to surrender their consciousness to his assertions, his edicts, his wishes, his whims—as his consciousness is surrendered to theirs. He wants to deal with men by means of faith and force—he finds no satisfaction in their consent if he must earn it by means of facts and reason.” – John Galt, “Atlas Shrugged”
The King’s most important title is “Defender of the Faith” Charles has planned an ecumenical Coronation. What the media or social media have to say, the he said she said politics of the Royal family, is all irrelevant. The world is a darker place without the Queen’s whitness for Christ.
She is in love with money and fame. Read Revenge. It documents her life before Harry and she was ALWAYS a gold digging fame whore.
The gist of the story points out that British tabloids are trash, that non-white Britons are resentful of the exclusion of “one of their own”, and that a woman turning on her family and laying bare the secrets of the Royals better than any paparazzi on the outside ever could. is justified because Nobility in Eastern Europe once excluded peasants from going to doctors, and hugn people by their ribs
The gist of this powerful essay is that we should not judge others, or judge a situation, until we can be certain of enough facts to make an objective judgement. Don’t trust what a tabloid, book, or others tell you only because they tell you it’s true.
Did the Resurrection really happen? How about the Parting of the Red Sea? Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden? Noah’s Ark? All we have is the hearsay of that tabloid called the Bible.
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” ― the Buddha
I would trust a tabloid, before I would trust H & M. Tabloids will produce an accurate story now and then, but every word from the mouths of those two are clearly prevarications. What remains of the Royals are largely scum, and these are the worst. Listening to a Rachel Dolezal type complaining of racism is beyond the pale.
“The gist of this powerful essay is that we should not judge others, or judge a situation, until we can be certain of enough facts to make an objective judgement.” This “powerful essay” made many judgements. A better synopsis would be that we should not judge Meghan Markle.
I trust Meghans thrown out like trash family that she disowned before the wedding. Now she wants Harry to throw HIS family out like trash. The gold digging fame whore wants ALL the attention on HER.
“The gist of this powerful essay is that we should not judge others, or judge a situation, until we can be certain of enough facts to make an objective judgement. Don’t trust what a tabloid, book, or others tell you only because they tell you it’s true.”
Thank you
Very long winded article. I read half way through yawn.
I’m so sorry that you’re a victim of a public school education. Go watch the afternoon cartoons with your bowl of Super Sugar Coated Super Sugar Bombs Cereal.
For the likes of you it shoud have been a novel.
“I think of nobility as the people who prevented my peasant ancestors from going to the doctor, and who hung some of us up on meat hooks.”
Think, instead of “nobility,” of the corrupting nature of power.
Protestant, reformed Christianity (the dominant religious view of our American Founders) understood this and tried to mitigate its influence.
Actually Martin Luther was not fighting for freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, or freedom of conscience. That violent, psychotic, lunatic, rabid anti-semite, and rabid anti-peasant was fighting to PERFECT what he saw as a corrupted theocracy. Martin Luther was fighting for a perfect Christian theocracy that would crush and enslave the individual in a perfect way.
But, unfortunately, for that rabid anti-semite, and rabid anti-peasant (Martin Luther was an eletist priest who despised the peasants and demanded the State crush the peasant rebellion against the Christian feudal lords he inspired) he unwittingly opened Pandora’s Box of Reason and there was no going back to full-blown and perfected Global-Universal-Christian-Theocracy.
The American Founders were not the result of reformed Christianity but a rebellion against Christianity. Reformed Christianity is a misleading term. Diluted and weakened Christianity is more exact. Reason and faith are opposites, if you don’t examine them too closely they seem to reconcile, but in fact they always remain in an unstable un-mixed proximity, like water and oil. And Christianity is always weaponized for the tyrrany of theocracy when faith becomes dominant over reason.
This writer seems a bit confused. He should be reading and studying and trying to find the truth. I gave up reading after a few paragraphs. Does he think that communism is good because they let peasants go to the doctor? Millions of peasants have been killed by communists. Well documented. And some aristocrats have tried to make reforms. Harry and Meghan are not being persecuted by the mob. They have got rich trashing the royal family. England never had such a good monarch as Elizabeth. This author should maybe go back to the library and try to figure things out, or look for a better teacher.
You’re a bit confused your self my beautiful Danusha is a beautiful woman.
You should learn to read so that you can understand sentences more than a few words long. And how you can think the author is a “he” is beyond me.
If you were at all familiar with Ms. Goska’s previous writings, you’d know:
–She is a “she”
–She is thoroughly anti-communist
–She’s a broadly learned scholar (and a teacher)
“The best path is for blacks to adopt traditional, conservative values, and to jettison what John Ogbu called “oppositional culture.”
Cultures are distinct. They grow from people living through history together in community, sharing values and language over time. Any defined culture is itself and not another. It is THIS and not THAT. It comes into being by consensus, not opposition.
“Oppositional cultures” are defined by what they oppose. When weak, they are parasites. When strong, they are conquerors.
Blacks are legacy Americans, but they largely embrace oppositional culture. The exceptions you mention are great men, but are largely rejected by their own tribe as sellouts. The men and women who hate them advance oppositional culture that is inimical to Western Civilization its people, westernkind.
The fact that these blacks are legacy Americans points to an entrenched incompatibility that should be honored. They should be free to establish their own territories where they can create their own culture defined by consensus and shared values. Or they can live as westernkind with us and become one of us like the exceptional black men you mention.
Western exceptionalism is based on INDIVIDUALISM not racism, tribalism, ethno-centrism, or any form of collectivism.
“A genius is a genius, regardless of the number of morons who belong to the same race—and a moron is a moron, regardless of the number of geniuses who share his racial origin…. Like every other form of collectivism, racism is a quest for the unearned. It is a quest for automatic knowledge—for an automatic evaluation of men’s characters that bypasses the responsibility of exercising rational or moral judgment—and, above all, a quest for an automatic self-esteem (or pseudo-self-esteem)….
Today, racism is regarded as a crime if practiced by a majority—but as an inalienable right if practiced by a minority. The notion that one’s culture is superior to all others solely because it represents the traditions of one’s ancestors, is regarded as chauvinism if claimed by a majority—but as “ethnic” pride if claimed by a minority. Resistance to change and progress is regarded as reactionary if demonstrated by a majority—but retrogression to a Balkan village, to an Indian tepee or to the jungle is hailed if demonstrated by a minority.” – Ayn Rand
I’m trying to reconcile in my brain how the same woman wrote this
liberal-sounding article (even though Markle did suffer racism from
media) and how she wrote the spot-on and brilliant article, ‘Avatar:
The Way of Water’. Really, Ms. Goska, I just don’t get it.
Meghan Markle, like her blabbermouth Prince, is an environmental
whacko and a shill for Globalists. The Climate Change movement
is a deadly tactic to destroy individual freedom and enslave the
world. And no one espouses it more than these two as they fly
around the world in their carbon-emitting private jets.
“The royal family refused her request to see a therapist”. So why
didn’t she see one quietly on her own anyway? Strange that the
same royal family ‘allowed’ Princess Diana to consult with
astrologer Peggy Thornton for a full six years long before her
divorce but a lesser royal is not allowed to consult with a
therapist.
I have despised Meghan Markle ever since she was caught in a
whopper of a racist lie in that interview with Oprah. And Ms.
Goska’s lopsided simpering defense of her has not changed my
mind.
Agree almost fully, excepting one small issue…the racism she alleges from the media ( I don’t follow British media) emanated from her suddenly making herself *black* and alienating the media by accusing them of being the cause of her unpopularity. Her mother is biracial, I believe, and Markle herself is less swarthy than many Italians, Greeks Middle Easterners, and she considered herself white up until she infiltrated her way into the royal family. Then she devised the *black* wedge, presumably by intent and with malice to chip away at the royal family. For good, or for bad, they have been an integral part of British history.. And like it or not, for those that want to destroy the institution, the royal presence, and all the historical artifacts like castles, palaces, etc,, is a huge driver of the tourism that supports the British economy. Take that away, and the whole character of England, Wales, Scotland is erased. She is a malicious sociopath, from all indications.
I’m ashamed I invested the time to try and read this garbled, rather manipulative ode to fictionalized victimhood. No, Markle has never been the victim of *racism*. No, Harry’s kids are not biracial, as Markle’s mother is herself biracial. I know many Italians, Greeks, Middle Easterners with darker skin than her, and few of them complain of *racism* on the basis of the presence of more melanin. *Character witnesses*, presented in a Netflix docu-fiction? Huh? Vapid, functionally illiterate, wokesters who are given the opportunity to publicly virtue-signal about a self-centered, sociopathic woman who sought out the royal family and was welcomed into it. As for the public, who wouldn’t ridicule the sight of a previously married woman ( possibly twice married) pantomiming demureness in a snow white gown and veil? Her father-in-law escorted her down the aisle, since she has slandered and betrayed all her family, but her mother. She is not the victim, she is a preying opportunist and that is self-evident. We are not midless zombies who need media and social media to tell us not to believe our own lying eyes and ears.
Her extravagant demands for wedding clothing and such should have tipped poor Harry off, but he just said, “What Megan wants, Megan gets.”
If I were inclined to jump to conclusions, I’d jump to some doozies about anyone who assumes, in 2023, that white wedding gowns and veils are only for the previously unmarried (virgins??).
I have found Goska’s previous articles to be well-reasoned expositions on important topics, the only flaw being an inability to make her arguments succinctly. That flaw is evident in spades in this absurdly long-winded defense of two people that don’t merit defending — two wealthy, privileged, narcissistic whining, venal pretenders of victimhood, who have chosen to gain fame and money with nasty insider attacks on the British monarchy.
It is a pity that Goska has wasted her talents on those two. I hope she quickly regains her ability to wisely choose important issues to educate us about.
The British monarchy is a bloody tampon inside homewrecker Camilla’s vagina, the bloody monarch said so himself.
“I admire Diogenes’ self-respect…. Too many Brits are sunken in primitive, Pagan assessments of what makes us human….”
Diogenes was a Pagan. “Pagan” is a bigoted, prejudiced, insult invented by the rabid Christians to rationalize their hatred and violence against non-Christians. There were different kinds of Pagans in the ancient world but the rabid Christians considered anyone not a Christian a “PAGAN”. Pagan was the N-word Christians invented for non-Christians like the Muslim word “Kafir” for infidels. Would you dare use the word “kafir” in a serious way, Ms. Goska?
Aristotle was a Greek Pagan, he is the father of America, of the rational aspects of Western civilization. The philosopher, mathematician, Hypatia was a pagan, she was lynched and dismembered by rabid Christians for teaching Pagan mathematics and Pagan science.
Do yourself a favor Ms. Goska, read “The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World” by Catherine Nixey, and use better and more precise words than Pagan.
“The best path is for blacks to adopt traditional, conservative values… Samantha was someone “you can’t reason with”
The best path is for blacks and Samantha to embrace reason and rational values.
“The “neo-conservatives” are now trying to tell us that America was the product of “faith in revealed truths” and of uncritical respect for the traditions of the past (!).
It is certainly irrational to use the “new” as a standard of value, to believe that an idea or a policy is good merely because it is new. But it is much more preposterously irrational to use the “old” as a standard of value, to claim that an idea or a policy is good merely because it is ancient. The “liberals” are constantly asserting that they represent the future, that they are “new,” “progressive,” “forward-looking,” etc.—and they denounce the “conservatives” as old-fashioned representatives of a dead past. The “conservatives” concede it, and thus help the “liberals” to propagate one of today’s most grotesque inversions: collectivism, the ancient, frozen, status society, is offered to us in the name of progress—while capitalism, the only free, dynamic, creative society ever devised, is defended in the name of stagnation….
The plea to preserve “tradition” as such, can appeal only to those who have given up or to those who never intended to achieve anything in life. It is a plea that appeals to the worst elements in men and rejects the best: it appeals to fear, sloth, cowardice, conformity, self-doubt—and rejects creativeness, originality, courage, independence, self-reliance. It is an outrageous plea to address to human beings anywhere, but particularly outrageous here, in America, the country based on the principle that man must stand on his own feet, live by his own judgment, and move constantly forward as a productive, creative innovator.
The argument that we must respect “tradition” as such, respect it merely because it is a “tradition,” means that we must accept the values other men have chosen, merely because other men have chosen them—with the necessary implication of: who are we to change them? The affront to a man’s self-esteem, in such an argument, and the profound contempt for man’s nature are obvious.” – Ayn Rand
“I admire Diogenes’ self-respect….”
Self-respect, self-esteem, self-confidence, self-preservation, not betraying your SELF, your rationally chosen rational values, are all manifestations of RATIONAL SELFISHNESS.
“Rational Selfishness” – Ayn Rand
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/selfishness.html
I can’t believe this woman spent so much print while basically saying nothing. GET A LIFE..
Either this commenter didn’t actually read the piece (at least not with any attention), or he employs a defensive mechanism of telling himself and others that writing with which he disagrees says nothing.
Please! These two Grifters are a menace to society and especially to The Crown. They are the most ungrateful, selfish money lovers I have ever witnessed.
They lie! Did any of their stories include the fact that The Crown bought their 14.7-million-dollar mansion in California. I think not. It is officially listed as a property of the Crown.
I have only seen replays of the Netflix special as I refuse to support them, but I know there were several lies, just as in their initial interview with Oprah.
Harry is a week minded, immature, whinner who is trading stories for dollars, and we don’t even know if they are true. The so-called mental problems for both of them come from the desire to collect money rather than actually working a JOB!
Speaking of Diana, that Harry insists was killed by the press, I object. Diana was running around with euro trash, got into a car with a drunk driver and didn’t use her seat belt. This is not a woman concerned about her kids.
I would really like to NOT hear about these two any longer and am frankly surprised they have shown up on the pages of Front Page.
Got a few paragraphs in before starting to skim for an interesting take. Got several more paragraphs further before just scrolling to the comments to see if anyone got something valuable out of it.
You might consider that these articles are best received in a shorter format. If there’s some interesting take or unique perspective on the “royals”, I apologize for having too short an attention span to sift through the rest to find it. Ultimately, the article kept about as much of my attention as I’ve been inclined to spare for British crown.
I spotted a glaring flaw right away ‘A BBC presenter tweeted an image of a man and a woman with a chimp.’ The presenter’s name was not give, so I can’t follow up, on the obvious backlash.
Maybe FPM should not have thrown such a useless article at us.
A little respect for our time please.
Thanks.
i think i have OD on chewing gum for the mind . back to my MAD magazine .
I must respectfully disagree. My wife and her English friends have been following this story from day one and they don’t believe Markle because, among other things, inconsistencies and the constant changing of her narrative. They argue that she is a superb actress play the role of her life.
Historically the royals have intermarried within the same pan-European family. It is trivially a racist eugenicist practice by its nature. But it is not just the upper class that does this. I know many foreign-born professionals on Wall Street who had arranged marriages into their ethnic/racial tribe. Historically this has been the norm all over the earth. Marrying for love has become widespread since the rise of capitalism and the creation of the middle class.
The tragedy is obvious in the British royals as Queen Elizabeth’s uncle had to renounce the thrown for love, her sister Margaret was forbidden to marry the love of her life as was he son Charles. The ethos of duty has been a heavy burden. Yet this is the family Markle choose and aspired to play the role of a royal. She could have went into the sunset in a quiet and dignified manner like Wallis Simpson & the Duke of Windsor. She wanted her cake and eat it. Reality has a way of remind us that A is A.
D! Thank you for posting the battle within us all. So seductive is the siren song of pretty opinion, so lonely is individuality. Someone was abused by the press! Not news. To Stop supporting and joining that system is tough but required to free our spirit. Bravo for you, keep finding happy. You are a canary coughing while singing in the coal mine, I noticed and I hope others take note.
Who are “powerful people” ? Why would they want you to “hate” someone, and why should their view (one way or the other) have any influence on you ?
My view, Meghan is exploitative, Harry is weak. Pretty funny, people claiming to want privacy have been in-your-face with one self-publicizing, self- promoting thing after another since leaving England. I have no idea whether or not Meghan was subjected to “racism” from members of the royal family, since I wasn’t there.
Netflix proffering the unroyal a special series are as powerful as anybody in this story.
The only powerful people I was able to discern from the gist of the article were the British tabloids. They treat the royals the same as they ever did.
Ms. Goska,
Even more powerful people want me to love Meghan – but I don’t.
Surprised to see this psuedo-intellectual drivel published in FPM. Time to turn in your pen and tune into The View on Monday..
Thank you for writing this article, I felt and saw much of what you’ve seen and wondered how so few other people can see it.
I **do** think they should keep quiet though. The interviews, Netflix, books etc won’t change many people’s opinions and does more damage to themselves instead.
Trying to defend against everything just gives up more information people can pick at or ridicule or blame them for.
It doesn’t work.
As many know who have been in that kind of situation know.
Keeping quiet and letting Truth out through time takes a lot of self control and patience but works! I’ve personally witnessed situations like this correct themselves through time. Sometimes a decade though it doesn’t happen fast.
Hopefully they can just go on now and live a quiet life in happiness and find peace knowing that God knows the truth.
Thank you though, for such a thoughtful article.
Thank you for the positive feedback. I tried to just post “thank you” but the system said that that comment was too short
Here’s another viewpoint Ms. Goska, from Objectivist psychologist Michael J. Hurd. You may be right in the smaller picture of how Harry and Meghan have been treated, but there’s the bigger picture and Dr. Hurd is addressing the bigger picture here.
Like I said these individuals, the Royal Family, don’t have real JOBS. They never have and they still don’t EARN their living. They’re wealth and fame are largely and mostly UNEARNED. And much of what is “earned” is selling the snake oil of a circus side-show.
“Harry & Megan: A Couple About NOTHING”
I’m afraid I bailed on this piece. Then I bailed on the comments. So I’ll go with Dr. Grande’s videos about Harry and Whatsherface when speculating about what could be happening in a situation like this. They are not victims.
Best comment I’ve read, I also like Dr Grande.
Just saying…Meghan is also descends from Charlemagne on her father’s side, and the British press surely know this…
sheesh “also descends”