How racist was the UK towards Meghan Markle?

Scroll to see replies

How do we know this level of detail? I think this portrays the Duchess as manipulative with the interview being a carefully orchestrated attack on some things we hold dear.

She might be right and public perception might not be the same as the reality. They are the ones who have lived with these people.

I think this was totally orchestrated and manipulated like the Dimbleby and Bashir interviews of his parents.

However, I think there is a wider truth here that trescends factual accuracy. Until the 1950s the United States had a segregated system of education known as "Separate but Equal". Anyone who challenged that the education was not equal would have it explained exactly how they were entirely equal except for facors that entirely out of the control of the educationalists. However, it was patently obvious to anyone not invested in the process that they were not equal.

That is the process which the media are goig through this week. They have taken apart everything that Meghan said have tried to demonstrate that the media's actions were not duscriminatory. Every issue they raised, every article they published can individually be justified as having no racial agenda.

But stand back, and it is clear to anyone not invested in the media that they were out to get Maghan for being black or American or both and it matters not that at times in the past the press were out to get Princess Anne, Princess Michael of Kent, the Duchess of Kent, the Princess of Wales, the Duchess of York, the Countess of Wessex and the Duchesss of Cambridge for other perceived lapses from perfection.

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 281

Wired_1800

Original post by nulli tertius

I think this was totally orchestrated and manipulated like the Dimbleby and Bashir interviews of his parents.

However, I think there is a wider truth here that trescends factual accuracy. Until the 1850s the United States had a segregated system of education known as "Separate but Equal". Anyone who challenged that the education was not equal would have it explained exactly how they were entirely equal except for facors that entirely out of the control of the educationalists. However, it was patently obvious to anyone not invested in the process that they were not equal.

That is the process which the media are goig through this week. They have taken apart everything that Meghan said have tried to demonstrate that the media's actions were not duscriminatory. Every issue they raised, every article they published can individually be justified as having no racial agenda.

But stand back, and it is clear to anyone not invested in the media that they were out to get Maghan for being black or American or both and it matters not that at times in the past the press were out to get Princess Anne, Princess Michael of Kent, the Duchess of Kent, the Princess of Wales, the Duchess of York, the Countess of Wessex and the Duchesss of Cambridge for other perceived lapses from perfection.

I made the aforementioned statement because I have read, heard and engaged in many discussions with people who seem to believe that they have firsthand understanding of issues that they probably were not present or did not experience. Some people talk like the Queen is their next door neighbour and they have direct access to the happenings behind Palace walls.

For example, the skin colour topic has been attacked to be overreaching on racism allegation but nobody, except those in the room, would know whether it was and the impact of it. We also don't know what the wider discourse around their children would have been prior to that incident. We know from tabloid reporting that Prince William had allegedly initially tried to dissuade Prince Harry from pursuing any romantic relationship with the Duchess. Of course, the objective view on the question would probably be seen as not being offensive but if the person who experienced it said it was offensive, then we have to accept it as their word.

A connecting example to the above can be asking a young woman during a job interview whether she intends to have children. On the phase of it, the interviewer might not have intended to cause any harm and might have wanted to follow up with the excellent support that the company has for working mothers. However, a woman could hear that and be offended by such a question.

I agree with you that many observers are responding to this crisis from an emotional point of having a dog in the fight. If they took themselves away from that subjective notion, I would think that some would probably change their mind and find everybody wanting. It is interesting to see that some people argued that the Prince and the Duchess should not be believed but when Prince William said that his family was not racist, the same people ate it up.

To your wider point, I think there were xenophobic and, in some cases, racist undertones to some stories. However, I think the Duchess probably was not prepared for the experience and her in-laws should have probably done more to protect her.

Finally, it is also interesting that Prince Andrew did not have his titles or privileges taken away despite his own diabolical BBC interview and unanswered questions about his associations with a well-known criminal. Yet, the Prince and Duchess were stripped off theirs when they asked to take a lesser role.

Reply 282

Surnia

Original post by Wired_1800

Yet, the Prince and Duchess were stripped off theirs when they asked to take a lesser role.

They haven't been stripped of their titles, and Harry would always be a Prince by birth, same as Andrew. They've all 3 had their patronages removed. It was agreed, and announced, that Harry and Meghan would no longer be working members of the Royal Family, so Harry had his honorary military appointments removed as well.

Reply 283

Surnia

Original post by MagneticNorth

If you followed the link I hyperlinked and watched the clip. Harry does actual say "Some of the press, not all the press".
Didn't think it was necessary for me to transcribe the whole video back here :afraid:

Thought people would just take the gist of it, which is to condemn the tabloid's sub-culture of bullying, xenophobia and racism, and anyone who supports them or their opinions.

he went: "No, the UK is bigoted". Then Harry elaborated on the story by saying: "Unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt, or racist, or biased, then that filters out to the rest of society."

You are focussing on press, i on the 'rest of society' comment. 'Rest of society' is everybody, but it's not true that they are all biased etc.

Reply 284

Wired_1800

Original post by Surnia

They were stripped of their titles including the HRH and other privileges and patronages. Prince Andrew still maintains his HRH, so I don't understand what is your point. The Palace also said that Prince Andrew was no longer a working member of the family and he lost many of his patronages but kept his titles, police protection and privileges.

Reply 285

MagneticNorth

Original post by Surnia

[...]. 'Rest of society' is everybody, but it's not true that they are all biased etc.

Agreed

Reply 286

username5675736

There's been a lot of talk about the privilege and wealth of Harry and Meghan as if that negates their claims. A lot of people went straight to the defence of the Royal family, but honestly it appeared quite genuine when they spoke of feeling trapped, how they sought help but received none.
I see no problem with them stepping back as they did. I don't have an issue with their claims either.

Reply 287

Fullofsurprises

Original post by Genaro_

It's not that it negates their claims, but the way they cast themselves in the interview as if they were helpless little victims of an evil establishment clan is just so OTT that it's laughable, given Harry's role at the very centre of that establishment and the obvious openness of the royals to having Meghan as part of the family originally.

Even if they did have complaints, going on prime time with Oprah to trumpet them (along with a load of stuff they simply made up) is so cheap and so clearly self-aggrandising. It's hard to take complainants seriously when they are obviously bidding for a media career.

Reply 288

username5675736

Original post by Fullofsurprises

I believe that your position in life and in society doesn't diminish their claims. Anybody can be a victim regardless of their position.
I think that it took guts to stand up against the institution and publicly. The royal family are not untouchable nor should they be. They are clearly a large mechanism of an organisation which is set in their ways and to deviate from that is enormously difficult. What Harry and Meghan are doing is saying that they felt under intense scrutiny and that support was not administered as it ought to.

I think that the interview was a publicity stunt and at the heart of it I think it was a genuine attempt to voice their side of a difficult issue. Every man and his dog has an opinion it seems, why can they not speak out their side?

Regardless of what they do next, I think it was necessary if only to allow further discussions about the royal family and the methods and mechanisms behind them