Is it all over for the royals?
Partners:
Harry and Meghan’s Oprah Winfrey interview was seen by many as damaging for the monarchy. Portraying the royal family as out-dated, emotionally cold and even a racist institution, it made Princess Diana’s interview with Martin Bashir look like a minor family squabble.
The California-based Duke and Duchess of Sussex have fashioned a new, twenty-first-century brand of celebrity royal – one which has more in common with Hollywood A-listers than the constitutional, sovereign, head of state. The couple’s championing of causes such as environmentalism and mental health have won them lucrative business contracts, book deals, TV and film offers, as well as a global, online audience. Even William, the Duke of Cambridge and second heir to the throne, has moved far closer to royal activism than his grandmother ever did, with campaigns like Kate’s early-years centre – aimed at tackling what she calls the ‘the social equivalent to climate change’.
While the young royals might be pulling the firm woke-ward, Prince Andrew’s conduct seems to be doing the exact opposite. His association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and accusations of his own sexual misconduct, all while persistently resisting attempts to be held to account legally, hardly seems to set an example of divine morality.
Despite these modern tabloid scandals, the Queen remains a popular head of state. Many argued that her broadcast to the nation during the pandemic, and the stoicism she showed following the death of her husband Prince Philip, appear to have kept her popularity intact. Part of the success of the current monarch is that she remains above politics, taking her constitutional duty not to interfere in political issues, seriously.
But in recent times, the Queen is said to have commented on a wide range of political issues such as Brexit, Scottish Independence, Covid vaccinations and, most recently, Black Lives Matter. Why is it that we are more concerned with the behaviour of minor royals and their depravity or pet projects than these constitutional breaches in protocol? While Prince Charles’ makes no attempt to hide his views on the environment, alongside a penchant for meddling in lifestyle politics among his heirs, is it likely that the royals will remain politically neutral?
Even if the monarchy was scandal free and fastidiously unopinionated, should a modern political landscape rocked by battles over democracy in the form of Brexit continue to support an unelected family of figureheads? Or does the symbolic role of the monarchy remain important today? Do these recent trends represent a genuine threat to the old establishment – is this an important moment for republicanism? Or are we simply witnessing a modern reboot for the House of Windsor?
