The media and the public’s reaction to the birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor has been racist to say the least. I don’t mean “racist” in the most extreme sense of the word, but discrimination and the distinction or demarcation of race are all part and parcel of bigotry. Of course there’s been a hoo-ha about Danny Baker’s tweet featuring an image of a chimpanzee but racism surrounding Archie has been varied and the more subtle or unconventional racism hasn’t even been acknowledged. The way in which the media and public speak about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s first born is an example of liberal racism and this more understated, less hostile form of prejudice is strangely accepted and even promoted.
Racism is to see someone of another colour as different, to ignore their individuality but to focus on their skin colour, to see them as a stereotype or as a representation of their entire race, and that being the case, isn’t this exactly what the mainstream media and the public at large are currently doing? Just because Archie has the most miniscule of African DNA, according to the masses, he’s somehow gong to be “different” to all the other royals; but is that not the definition of racist? If Archibald is raised, educated, and surrounded by a family of white, racist elites, given that his skin is hardly going to be noticeably “black” and that his name is obviously posh (as well as being Germanic complete with a double-barrelled, toffy-nosed surname) won’t he grow up to be just like the rest of them? Or does a smidgen of melanin dictate personality traits?
We live in a society that survives on the pretence of liberalism and we assume that people who are left-leaning are somehow free from prejudice and yet these liberal-types use the one-drop-of-blood rule to dictate “blackness”… racist much? Let’s face facts; a white skinned, white-named, upper-class (potentially straight) royal male is hardly a flag-bearer for people of colour, and yet with all the talk of Archie being bi-racial and bi-national, it’s as though he’s automatically contrasting based solely on his mother’s ethnic makeup and nationality. Of course “bi-racial” in this case means “more white than black” so only a racist would point out Archie’s ever-so-slight black ancestry. Even if the kid turns out to be bi-polar and bi-sexual, it doesn’t mean he’ll be any different than the rest of the monarchy, who gives a fuck if he’s superficially “diverse”?
To top it all off, if you recall the conclusion to BBC’s Soon Gone: The Windrush Chronicle, it suggested that even if a person looks completely white, they’re somehow suffering all the hardships of their ancestors. The BBC’s propaganda leading up to this event wanted the population to be like “Oh, you’re great-great-great-great grandmother was from Africa, well come and join the struggle my brother!” ✊🏿✊🏾✊🏽✊🏼✊🏻 Piss off.
Don’t forget that this latest royal birth is also part of the ongoing quest of a certain white, ginger racist to be perceived by the masses as the opposite. So after he met and posed with black celebs ranging from Tinie Tempah to Usain Bolt, gave five on the black-hand side to urban youths, married a mixed race American, had the most cliched “black” embellishments at his wedding including black celebrity guests, a black bishop, and black musicians, with the news that the couple may be moving to Botswana, I guess having a mixed race baby is having all the numbers marked in a game of black bingo.
Ignoring his father’s past exploits, most news outlets and magazines rushed to say how the seventh-in-line to the throne is something to be proud of, something we minority commoners should be appreciative of. Fresh from selling out deceased black entertainers, the shit-stained Oprah Magazine said a bi-racial royal is progress; as though it matters what racial mix your oppressor possesses.
The elevation of interracial people to places of power (Barack… ahem… Obama) on the assumption that their parent’s varied skin colour will help bring the races together is an imbecilic concept. The truth is that a president, prime minister, or a prince are your leaders, your rulers, and whether elected or not, they sit atop of the social, economical, and class hierarchy, it matters not that they are tonally brown, all that matters is their position and what they do with that power. Automatically assuming that a brown baby, the great mixed-race hope will grow up to be an adult who is more loving, more inclusive, more woke than all the whites that have come before is naïve at the very least and at worst outrightly racist. The same thing applies to women, gay people, trans people and other minorities, seeing them as something unique whilst you ignore their policies, background, or opinion is the latest way the people will be kept docile. By fetishising minority identities, the powers that be make it seem like your leaders are one of you, one of the people, but look beyond this bullshit and you will see the hustle for what it is.
So mark my words: in thirty-odd years when Archie Windsor is pratting about pretending to be a refreshing, Anglo-African American, possibly when he’s running for president, you’d better recognise that he’s just as connected, just as rich, and just as two-faced as any leader who came before him. Don’t let his mixed-race facade fool you, like the rest of the royals, he’ll also be a clandestine reptilian dynast. Remember: it doesn’t matter if a snake is black or white, their bite will have the same affect on your dumb arse.