[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Religion See other Religion Articles Title: The Windsors Blackmailed by their Daughter-in-Law Over the last one hundred years, the British Royal Family has generously provided the world with a parade of scandals more colorful and louder than the socks they wear with their kilts. But the Meghan and Harry rupture is fundamentally different from any previous crisis to befall the British monarchy. Prior to now, royal scandals have been cut from the same petticoats as any other public ignominies — i.e., the chin-wagging that follows uncovering some form of immoral conduct. All the throngs of poorly hidden mistresses, caddish boyfriends, toe-sucking on yachts, assignations in the deer park while the horses wait patiently, even consorting with extremes of evildoing, such as found in the company of the late J. Epstein, arose from ordinary human weakness set against an extraordinary backdrop. They have constituted straightforward disgraces that can unfold only among people with a shared religious heritage and moral code. Those days are gone. The roadside bomb in the royal family named Meghan Markle exploded not because of immoral conduct in the conventional sense. Markle is the first duchess who hails from the American left-wing, post-Christian, anti-moral belief system that worships the journey of self-directed personal actualization. Her justification after only a few months of marriage for urging hubby away from his family? "It is not enough to survive, you have to thrive." Apparently, Harry's fulfilling his role as prince prevents her thriving. For Meghan, thriving entails doing what you want, no matter if it hurts others or depreciates the generosity that has been heaped upon you. Meghan Markle's psychology is affected by well managed narcissistic rage. Narcissists seek power in relationships as a substitute for the terrifying experience of offering self-sacrificing love. Markle has two sources of power over the royal family and the millions of people who love them. She has the ordinary power of a disgruntled daughter-in-law to hurt her in-laws by controlling access to their brother, son, and grandchildren. She also has the extraordinary power to blackmail the royal family with the indictment of racism! It is widely reported that Markle has been acceding to the idea that she has been mistreated due to racism and that the royals fear being called racist in a "tell-all" interview. The melodramatic flight of Meghan and Harry is being compared to the shattering abdication of King Edward VIII in 1937. The two cases bear no resemblance. King Edward VIII faced a moral dilemma that arose from a conflict with a religiously based code of behavior. He wanted to marry his mistress. That was not acceptable to the royal family and the Church of England, so he chose to abdicate, and that was the end of it. Meghan Markle moves in a world where "organized" religion (the kind that comes with a moral code at no extra charge) is disrespected. Markle may spend a Christianish day at a baptism, but she is not guided by the teachings of any church, save perhaps the church of Oprah, whose liturgy is "What works for me?" Meghan has followed the career of all power-seeking, disruptive daughters-in-law. She could have begun her campaign of alienating her husband from his family with vague and irremediable complaints about her dissatisfactions as soon as she joined the Firm. "They don't respect you. They don't appreciate me." Wobbly Prince Harry is only too happy to be led away from his family. Meghan and Harry possess a potent psychobiological weapon: the cry of racism. Harry drops hints of the dread allegation. Meghan, just as she has no loyalty to her own family, discreetly ignores that ludicrous speculation against the family she chose to join. Markle is the kind of self-promoter who frames her stratospheric privilege and luxuries into a stand upon conscience, proclaiming she will not live in the U.S. while the current president is in office. Much noise, no sacrifice. Meghan carries narcissistic rage against the father she perceives abandoned her and against her family of origin, whom she seems to despise. Harry carries the abiding trauma of helplessness to protect his mother. Meghan married an enormously rich global celebrity who is a vulnerable, emotionally unstable man, who, despite the tragic history, lived a highly protected life and whom she could control. Harry married the opposite of his mother: an older, divorced, hardened TV actress — How brave she is, overcoming all she has suffered! — who he unconsciously senses can protect herself, thereby saving him from re-experiencing traumatic helplessness. Thus, her weaponization against his family works psychologically for them both. But not as well for Harry. Meghan is an actress, part of a business that virtually requires self-serving narcissism. Harry was not expected to develop a career independent of his royal duties. Furthermore, he appears to be a "serve or suffer" person like his mother. He draws energy from directly serving others. It is sad to see a prince shilling for his wife to Disney. It is said that when two people marry they become as one. Harry may not know it, but that one is Meghan. It has been said that Harry is "stepping away" from royal duties because he has PTSD and is protecting his family from the tragedy that befell his mother. If so, there would have been no need for the couple to behave badly. Harry may discover that a fear-driven life is a thwarted existence. They ambushed and distressed a frail 97-year-old man and his 93-year-old wife as a power tactic. They could have quietly created another home in Canada. They could have skipped the public self-congratulatory remarks about financial independence, as if hustling recently bestowed royal titles constitutes independence. Meghan did not need to complain that nobody cared about her, or that the duchess gig wasn't working for her. Above all, they did not have to promote the unjustified slander against queen and country that Meghan has been mistreated due to racism. Meghan Markle enjoys absolute melanin immunity from criticism. Any challenge, however gentle, is racist! The duchess of York was publicly pulverized for her appearance for years on end, but she's white so it was OK. A critique of Meghan's nail polish is racism! Racism! is a justification for the elite globalist kleptocracy to loot their nation state, because that is where the money is. The E.U. didn't fix up Frogmore "Cottage" for Meghan and Harry; the British people did. Such super-rich transnational lifestylers cling to a patina of virtue in their lack of loyalty to homeland, because the British, like all white people, are racist! This hoax, the rebuff of royal duties, and alienation from his royal family are being baked into Archie's life narrative. Concerned about carbon footprints, Meghan announced that Archie will be an only child. (Enforcing this one-child-to-jet conviction means that she will have to buy another jet if she becomes pregnant again.) It seems that everything is being done to diminish Archie's one-in-a-billion birthright. But he will not be able to escape it for an hour of his life once he is old enough to know who he is. So let's plan a glorious adolescent rebellion for Archie. He announces to Mom and Dad, "You people are not working for me. I am not thriving." He finally goes home to stay. The king restores Archie's titles and then some. He "Etons up," plays polo, and gets the funny socks to wear with his kilt. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#1. To: Ada (#0)
Well, I don't know why this is happening but I have never thought this marriage would work. The Royals are as narcissistic as Meghan, and who knows what they're really like ? Maybe getting away from them, the mandates of position, the publicity. invasion of privacy, and other negative aspects of simply being a Royal are the reason. Who Knows ?
Imagine if baby Archie had popped out black as the ace of spades. That would have put the royal knickers in an eternal twist.
#3. To: Lod, neoconsnailed (#2)
I've been told a child cannot be darker than its darker parent.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||