That’s enough

The latest revelations about Prince Andrew, possibly ‘formerly known as Prince’ by the time this is published, have provoked revulsion in some, derision in others, and renewed focus on our post-Elizabethan monarchy.

Royal correspondents have been at pains to emphasise the leading role that Prince William is taking in dealing with his troublesome uncle. His approach, we are told, is less forgiving than that of his father, the king, whose ambivalence towards Andrew is perhaps informed by the fondness with which his late mother regarded her middle son. William, it seems, is in control.

Positing the heir to the throne as aligning with public opinion is, of course, good PR as regards the monarchy’s prospects. The king has never inspired great affection in his subjects and amongst fans of his late ex-wife, there exists a good deal of antipathy towards a man whose infidelity ruined a fairytale.

Additionally, Charles’ advocacy for the environment and, latterly, his insistence on promoting interfaith relations is out of kilter with the performatively patriotic section of society that you might expect to be his greatest supporters.

Flag enthusiasts

Increasingly, flag enthusiasts profess themselves to be for the monarchy but against the king. Almighty God might have ordered his estate, but for the new breed of ‘Christian nationalist’, that doesn’t excuse Charles as a wokelord.

So, with the king reportedly ailing, the Palace is inviting us to look past his reign to when William and Kate assume the helm. Then, it’s implied, the monarchy will be headed up by relevant youngsters who have a feel for the national mood. Dodgy Andrew and Charles the hippie will fade from the national memory as the Crown is remade for modernity once again. Long live the king!

This self-absorption, however, betrays the fundamental problem thrown up by Andrew Windsor’s dealings with Jeffrey Epstein. Whilst politicians, entertainers, and whoever else circled the depraved financier were corrupted by the experience, Andrew was born to it.

‘Birthright’

In her book, Virginia Giuffre opines that Andrew viewed her abuse as his ‘birthright’. She’s right, isn’t she? Everybody else who found themselves in this perverse, gilded lifestyle was there on account of something they had achieved in life. Andrew earned his admission by being Prince Andrew.

Being Prince Andrew is a horrifying fate for a human being. His life is defined by hierarchy, and he is so, so near the top of it he can smell the anointing oil. But, short of his brother’s death, he’d never feel it on his second-tier bonce. Once William came along, even that possibility disappeared. Over the years he has tumbled down the line of succession to eighth.

What, then, was he left with? A mediocre man, given to vanity, Andrew apparently came to obsess about his status. Former employees describe tantrums and an insistence that correct titles be employed at all times. When he has tried to make himself appear useful in envoy roles, he has found himself amongst people of achievement who are compelled to treat him as an equal despite his possessing no accomplishments to merit the courtesy.

‘Entitled’

Reports routinely describe Andrew as ‘entitled’. Well, he literally is, isn’t he? Every moment of the man’s life has been experienced from a protected, privileged vantage point so removed from ordinary lives as to preclude empathy for them. Taylor Swift can remember a time before her current status, so, even, can a rich man’s son like Donald Trump. To be born into a position that has no headroom for progression, however, is to be infantilised for life; to be hobbled and made useless.

It probably hasn’t occurred to Andrew that there is an inherent humiliation in his royal status. From what we learn of how he wielded that status, however, it acted on his psychology to the point of ruin. Man hands on misery to man and, yet more frequently, woman.

Andrew isn’t a problem for the monarchy; the monarchy was a problem for Andrew. The idea that some of us are born closer to the sunlight of grace than others has been harmful to British people throughout history.

Deference and social timidity have diminished the life chances of those who internalise their position in a wholly artificial social order that rewards complicity and mediocrity. It is, as we’ve seen, as ruinous to those at the top as it is to those they squat over.

If Prince William wishes to align his family with modern values, he should insist on the dismantling of an institution that has brought it nothing but heartbreak and shame.

Royalty victimises everyone it touches, including those wearing crowns. Enough.