Megxit Explodes - Who’s to blame? in this week’s dubious tabloids

Originally published at:

It’s ’The Sound & The Fury’ over at Buckingham Palace these days in more ways than one, as Britain’s royals all have differing perspectives on “Megxit,” while it’s Christmas and July 4th wrapped into one for this week’s tabloids.


“This week’s dubious tabloids” sounds like the culprit.



Is it just me, or is our home and patriot land slowly settling on a consensus around the discussion that started in, oh, the 1830’s on the topic?

The discussion was not helped when Irish terrorists based in the U.S. decided to get involved. Well, at least that time, later U.S.-based terrorist incursions actually helped the case for Canadian independence…

…but I digress…

Did he pack his swastika armband?

1 Like

I’d have more sympathy for their situation and admiration for their plan to “work to become financially independent” if this were in fact the case. But she’s a successful actress and he’s a qualified helicopter pilot. Plus Harry inherited about £10 million from Diana and something north of £7 million from the Queen Mother. They’re never going to starve.

1 Like

Can we stop referring to it as Megxit? It’s pretty gross to lay the blame for a joint decision they made at her feet, especially given the issues with the horrid shit the press has hurled at her. Calling it Megxit just piles onto that grossness.


I have no problem with them coming to Canada, be independently wealthy with the money they inherited with their own two hands, but they aren’t going to be nobility here. Fuck that!

It gives the ultra-rich the wrong ideas. (Well, more of the wrong ideas.)

We took away Conrad Black’s citizenship when he wanted to be Lord Black instead.


but they aren’t going to be nobility here.

The BBC suggested (can’t find the story) that Harry could be Governor General. :face_vomiting: That certainly prompted general scorn and sharpening of metaphorical pitchforks at my household. This is where our confrères au Quebec, I think, have given us a good dose of the right general attitude to monarchy (noting that their split with the French crown predates the revolution and that the lopping off of aristocratic heads is no longer en vogue).

Don’t get me wrong, if the Sussex’s care to come over with their kids to my place for the afternoon for a beer, BBQ and dip in the pool, they are most welcome. However, folks that shy away from fairly pointed and lively discussions on a broad range of topics tend not to come over twice. :smile:

1 Like

“We want to step back from being royals, except for the part where we get to use ludicrous mediaeval titles derived from late Roman military ranks.”

What with current savings and whatever Meghan gets from suing the Daily Mail (and I wish her every success in that venture), they may only need a few years of Meghan doing panto and Harry running air tours of Niagara Falls before they can afford their own micronation, and then they can call themselves whatever they want.

Personally, I would totally be the Duke of Earl.


I’m confused. You seem to think their having skills works against their becoming “financial independent”. Isn’t her being a working actress and his being a pilot just what people do to be financially independent? Sure, the inheritance helps…

I’m going to add my 2 cents just because, well, this thread isn’t quite as long as it could be. First, the Beaverton has the best coverage so far, thanks @Keith_McClary.
Second, I suspect Harry and Meghan planned this PRE-Archie. I say this, because apparently, the comic Archie has one of the highest readerships per capita in Victoria, BC. So it must have been their plan all along! And a great choice too, Victoria, literally named after their great-great-great-great-grandmother. Close enough to Vancouver, LA, and even the far east. Australia is not too far either!
I am puzzled a bit by the timing though, as if no one told them about the kind of weather they can expect mid-winter. But coming from England, maybe they won’t mind.
I do hope Canadian media continues this style of sarcastic mockery of British tabloids, and then slowly starts to ignore their everyday life activities, giving them more of the privacy and respect they deserve. I personally hope to bump into them one day soon, and then happily ignore them, but for a slight nod or smile. It’s going to be a tough road ahead of them, wherever they go, but it will be tough for us all.

1 Like

Sorry, I expressed myself badly. There is no reason why they could not be financially independent right now: they have marketable skills, and far more money in the bank than most people could ever dream of. They could just declare “sod this, we’re off, keep your money,” and they would have my hearty support and admiration.

The only real sticking point is their security costs, which apparently could run to £7+ million a year (though I’m getting that from a Daily Heil headline in a Google search, so take with a pinch of salt). There is a moral argument that the British taxpayer should pay for that, as Harry never asked to be born into the Renaissance-Fair freakshow that we insist on keeping as part of our political system.

1 Like

Charles wanted to do that once in Australia and got told there was no chance by the government of the time. The GG (in Australia anyway) is effectively employed by the prime minister (even though the original idea and constitutional reality is the reverse).

Letting a royal be GG would take us back to the constitutional crisis of 1975. It can’t happen.

Its possible that we are more sensitive to the issue than the Canadians because of '75.


The only real sticking point is their security costs, which apparently could run to £7+ million a year

Yeah I think that talk should be kept out of the media, and prince harry, andrew, etc should just drop the security. Making a big deal out of it is a huge security problem.

Not having security people is probably better than having bad security people (see Lady Diana).


Royals at 27:50 in the podcast.


Thanks, I’ll give the podcast a listen, but I don’t think they want to live like common people. Sounds more like they DON’T want to live like pampered but constantly hounded puppets.

Thank god someone is here to defend her.

She is certainly not capable of dealing with it without peanut gallery shaming!

As I recall from reading too many Daily Beast headlines (Why do you cover that stuff, why?), the couple has heavily invested in the SussexRoyal “brand”, and the major sticking point was about the Royal part-- not about the Sussex part.

1 Like