Meghan Markle has recently participated in video chats in America to amplify the message, ahead of the upcoming US election, that everyone should engage in the democratic process and register to vote, and plan ahead to vote – beyond registering, it’s finding out how you can vote, where to vote, when to vote, and what kind of time to set aside to vote. This has apparently offended a few blowhards over in England and members of the media who’ve been anti-Meghan from go. 


If Meghan Markle is “actively campaigning” against anything, it is voter suppression in the United States. And EVERYONE should be against voter suppression. Anything that prohibits a citizen’s basic right to cast a ballot should be offensive to all Americans since America claims to be the global defender of democracy. Voter suppression primarily silences BIPOC and other marginalised and underserved communities who do not benefit from the status quo and who typically do not vote Republican. As is commonly believed, the more people who vote, the less likely it is that Donald Trump will remain in office. So, sure, mayyyyyyybe there’s a connection here, an implied message that when Meghan is encouraging more people to vote, and reminding people of what the “stakes” are, she means what they are accusing her to mean. But this is also a willful neglect of her main point which is that democracy requires participation. And it requires that participation be accessible. That is what the true “stakes” are, no matter who will or won’t end up in office, it won’t matter if the decision isn’t “by the people, for the people”. Not when so many people are being denied the opportunity to have a say. 


The reason the Piers Morgans of the world refuse to provide a complete and unbiased interpretation of what Meghan is trying to do though is because he doesn’t give a sh-t about the actual issue of democratic justice. He’s not interested in the people. He’s not making this point to make sure the US election is fair.  His motivation here is that he’s looking for any rationale, as bullsh-t as it is, to have a Black woman stripped of a royal title on the basis that it’s not “royal” to interfere in politics. His position is that since she and Prince Harry are not behaving “royally”, they should no longer be considered royal. 


And the thing is… not even that point stands. Because they f-cking left! They’re living in Los Angeles. The big royal story of the year is that they bounced – or, if you’re a hater, they were kicked out. But no matter which side you fall on, pro-Sussex or anti-Sussex, the fact of the matter is that they’re no longer on the senior team anyway, no longer out there officially representing the Firm. And this is precisely the kind of sh-t they wanted to get busy doing after peace-ing out of it. Also, if the concern here is actually fairness (which it’s not), then why isn’t Piers Morgan getting on board with the real message coming out of all these conversations: voter suppression is NOT democratic, the more people who vote, the more democratic the process becomes. Where is the energy in support of that?! 

But, you know, if we’re looking for royal matters to actually get offended about, as so many people have pointed out, where’s the outrage over the behaviour from another royal that is actually, without debate, universally objectionable?