Thank you for this discussion of the trip and its value. I learned a lot about the country, its history, culture and people. I am quite glad that they went, and it appeared that each place they chose to visit highlighted another aspect of the country. Thanks, Elizabeth!
Me ghan and Harry were there to promote themselves and the work connected to their endeavors. Unfortunately, royal titles were used when this was not a royal visit. This visit was to promote themselves. The amount of money spent welcoming these two and keeping them safe for the visti was probably 10X more than any amount hoped for in response. Since the approval rating for these two is low, any visit is not seen (by those around the world) as a positive thing. Invictus games aside, I don't see the value in anything connected to the couple - together, or Me ghan, alone. Besides the visit, what did Meghan and Harry actually do for the country?
Hi Abby - I see a lot of value in these trips. I personally learned a lot about Colombia, its culture and particularly its Afro-Colombian history. As Anneke wrote, the country is fighting some negative global perceptions - a trip like this, I have to believe, help in that regard. Also, especially around the discussion of cost, please keep in mind that the vice president invited them. Lastly, their titles are their titles to use! The constant questioning of that is, at best, factually inaccurate.
Again, they were on a trip "as royals". the King asked them not to do that.
"Real reason for Meghan Markle and Harry's 'rogue Royal' tours - expert
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to step out on an international tour, despite challenges coming their way, claims a royal expert." (Express, Aug. 22, 2024);
"Harry and Meghan Enter Era of 'Two-Tier' Royal Tours: As the couple stepped down from their roles as working royals in 2020 and moved to the U.S. they no longer conduct official duties on behalf of the monarchy or the British government, meaning that any work or visits they undertake is done in a purely private capacity." (Newsweek, Aug. 16, 2024).
They are not representing the monarch in England. they are representing Harry & Meghan, and their business interests. To make it more clear, "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have entered a new era of tours, potentially becoming a second option for countries struggling to secure an official royal visit in collaboration with the U.K. government, a British news show has heard, as the couple began a four-day tour of Colombia on Thursday." The are ignoring the wishes of the King and publicizing their interests, not the monarchy - because they do not represent the monarchy, having stepped away from doing just that.
This is a royal tour because they’re literally royals, and on tour.
The Monarch is a business too, and when they go on tour they are also promoting themselves and trying to prove they are assets that deserve the 50+ million dollars they are given in tax dollars. Something I’m assuming you don’t have an issue with. There tours also don’t bring in enough revenue to pay for the cost of the host country hosting them. They also go to countries when they’re not invited by the government. Again, things that people like you, and royalist media don’t seem to have an issue with.
As far as what H&M have done for Colombia- they put them in mainstream media in a positive light. Something the country has struggled with. They also just announced they’re investing in three separate Colombian communities.
And they only have a poor approval rating among British royalist and MAGA supporters. While loud and ignorant groups, they are not the majority, but the minority.
They are royals because the King did not take away their titles, may never remove them or, perhaps, he will. Right now, they have royal titles, but only working royals represent the Monarchy. Harry & Me ghan do not. They cannot. These two have nothing to do with royal business. The tax dollars are doled out to the monarchy, not these two, who are not part of it, now - as working royals. They are private citizens.
I did have an issue with the Prince & Princess of Wales touring wales when the Welch felt the Prince & Princess should be Welch, not British. William and Katherine toured another country, as royals, where they received a very chilly reception and left days ahead of schedule. There was a significant opinon shift on the Monarchy after Queen Elizabeth II passed away.
I do not believe - having an opinion that more people are anti Harry & Meg (for what they are doing) than pro Harry & Meg. I'm not a maga, and many of us are not for the couple. It's more Me ghan than Harry, but as a unit, they have tried the patience of many in the U.S. and many follow the sentiments of the South Park parody about the two. It certainly seems that way.
I always love these essays from people on the ground. So fascinating to hear people’s takes on their visit.
Thank you for this discussion of the trip and its value. I learned a lot about the country, its history, culture and people. I am quite glad that they went, and it appeared that each place they chose to visit highlighted another aspect of the country. Thanks, Elizabeth!
Me ghan and Harry were there to promote themselves and the work connected to their endeavors. Unfortunately, royal titles were used when this was not a royal visit. This visit was to promote themselves. The amount of money spent welcoming these two and keeping them safe for the visti was probably 10X more than any amount hoped for in response. Since the approval rating for these two is low, any visit is not seen (by those around the world) as a positive thing. Invictus games aside, I don't see the value in anything connected to the couple - together, or Me ghan, alone. Besides the visit, what did Meghan and Harry actually do for the country?
Hi Abby - I see a lot of value in these trips. I personally learned a lot about Colombia, its culture and particularly its Afro-Colombian history. As Anneke wrote, the country is fighting some negative global perceptions - a trip like this, I have to believe, help in that regard. Also, especially around the discussion of cost, please keep in mind that the vice president invited them. Lastly, their titles are their titles to use! The constant questioning of that is, at best, factually inaccurate.
Again, they were on a trip "as royals". the King asked them not to do that.
"Real reason for Meghan Markle and Harry's 'rogue Royal' tours - expert
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to step out on an international tour, despite challenges coming their way, claims a royal expert." (Express, Aug. 22, 2024);
"Harry and Meghan Enter Era of 'Two-Tier' Royal Tours: As the couple stepped down from their roles as working royals in 2020 and moved to the U.S. they no longer conduct official duties on behalf of the monarchy or the British government, meaning that any work or visits they undertake is done in a purely private capacity." (Newsweek, Aug. 16, 2024).
They are not representing the monarch in England. they are representing Harry & Meghan, and their business interests. To make it more clear, "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have entered a new era of tours, potentially becoming a second option for countries struggling to secure an official royal visit in collaboration with the U.K. government, a British news show has heard, as the couple began a four-day tour of Colombia on Thursday." The are ignoring the wishes of the King and publicizing their interests, not the monarchy - because they do not represent the monarchy, having stepped away from doing just that.
This is a royal tour because they’re literally royals, and on tour.
The Monarch is a business too, and when they go on tour they are also promoting themselves and trying to prove they are assets that deserve the 50+ million dollars they are given in tax dollars. Something I’m assuming you don’t have an issue with. There tours also don’t bring in enough revenue to pay for the cost of the host country hosting them. They also go to countries when they’re not invited by the government. Again, things that people like you, and royalist media don’t seem to have an issue with.
As far as what H&M have done for Colombia- they put them in mainstream media in a positive light. Something the country has struggled with. They also just announced they’re investing in three separate Colombian communities.
And they only have a poor approval rating among British royalist and MAGA supporters. While loud and ignorant groups, they are not the majority, but the minority.
They are royals because the King did not take away their titles, may never remove them or, perhaps, he will. Right now, they have royal titles, but only working royals represent the Monarchy. Harry & Me ghan do not. They cannot. These two have nothing to do with royal business. The tax dollars are doled out to the monarchy, not these two, who are not part of it, now - as working royals. They are private citizens.
I did have an issue with the Prince & Princess of Wales touring wales when the Welch felt the Prince & Princess should be Welch, not British. William and Katherine toured another country, as royals, where they received a very chilly reception and left days ahead of schedule. There was a significant opinon shift on the Monarchy after Queen Elizabeth II passed away.
I do not believe - having an opinion that more people are anti Harry & Meg (for what they are doing) than pro Harry & Meg. I'm not a maga, and many of us are not for the couple. It's more Me ghan than Harry, but as a unit, they have tried the patience of many in the U.S. and many follow the sentiments of the South Park parody about the two. It certainly seems that way.