Bookmarks

You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

Genes! They define us in so many ways whether we care to recognize it or not. If you’re unfortunate enough to have a serious genetic disorder, they will, certainly, define your quality of life. But what of the baggage that comes with our ancestors? What if you were descended from a line of serial killers? Would you feel comfortable talking about it? Would you be proud of it? What if you were a direct descendant of British Royalty? Would this be more likely a topic of discussion and pride around polite company than perhaps the serial killers? Or, would you actively shun such discussion, seeing your ancestors as the epitome of the white patriarchy, nay, an Imperialist tyranny, no less?

Everyone knows that Prince Henry “Harry” Charles Albert David of the British Royal House of Windsor is marrying an American bride of common descent. If you didn’t know you’re obviously an Inuit hunting ringed seal or a Russian bot, busy rigging world elections. American actress (Rachel) Meghan Markle, Harry’s bride, is the daughter of Doria Loyce Ragland; an African American descendant of slaves who lived under bondage in Georgia. Meghan’s father, Thomas Markle Snr., however, is of Dutch, English, and Irish settler stock, having the distinction like so many other Americans of distant Royal blood.

Emblems-of-4-Kingdoms-1

Genes of 4 Kingdoms: Doris Sanders, the blue blood

Being an avid fan of genealogy – and somewhat of an amateur genealogist myself – I find Thomas’ particular line of royal descent to be a very interesting one. Not only does Thomas carry the blue blood of King Edward III of England in his veins, but also: Llwelyn the Great who is considered the penultimate Prince of Wales (de facto ruler) stationed in Gwynedd; Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, King of Connacht and last High King of Ireland before the Norman invasion; Robert I ‘The Bruce’, King of a truly independent Scotland reasserting itself after the coming of the Normans.

The royal blood of these four kingdoms descends to Thomas Markle Snr., through his mother, Doris Mary Rita Sanders of New Hampshire. Thomas’ descent from Robert the Bruce is through both Doris’ mother, and father; named Frederick George Sanders, his own father only migrated to the United States circa 1859, from Essex, England. Thomas’ main English, Welsh, and Irish royal lines descend through Doris’ mother, Gertrude May Merrill, in a line from a 15th century lady, Mary Clifford; daughter of John Clifford, 7th Baron de Clifford, who fought at Agincourt. This last line comes via old-stock English settlers from New Hampshire through one Reverend William Skepper/Skipper of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, who died in the 1640’s; he was originally from Boston, Lincolnshire, in England.

Five generations back from the Reverend, Mary Clifford and Sir Philip Wentworth’s daughter Elizabeth was the ancestor of the same. Mary and Sir Philip also had a son, Sir Henry Wentworth, who just happens to be a direct ancestor of both the House of Windsor and Prince Harry’s mother, Lady Diana Spencer. In both the Windsor and Spencer family trees, this line descends from Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, though through two different wives: Through first wife Catherine Filiol descends the Earl’s Spencer of Diana’s family tree, whereas through second wife Anne Stanhope, both Diana and the House of Windsor, are infused by this illustrious Seymour family.

4-Kingdoms-of-Genes-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-Royal-Genealogy-1

For a detailed one page genealogy chart in pdf from NEHGS, click here

Meghan and Harry are thus distant royal cousins. Since both Prince Charles and Princess Diana are direct descendants of the Stuart’s – through King James I of England who was also King James VI of Scotland – both of Prince Harry’s parents can claim descent from King Edward III, Llewellyn the Great, Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, and Robert the Bruce; the royal genes of the 4 Kingdoms also running through Meghan’s veins. Persistent rumors about Prince Harry’s true paternity would not alter his own descent from these important bloodlines which he shares with bride Meghan through his mother Diana.

Through the Mary Clifford line that also descends through Diana, Harry is Mary’s 17th generation descendent whereas Meghan is Mary’s 18th generation descendent. If Harry’s official paternity is correct, it also turns out that Megan and Harry’s most recent relation is only 15 generations back: An English landowner named Ralph Bowes (1480–1516) had a son George who was the ancestor of the Bowes-Lyons family of the Queen Mother, whereas Meghan is related to George’s daughter Bridget – once again through Doris Sanders. The Anglosphere is such a small world!

Royalty in makeover : The most traditional institution?

Across the Anglosphere nothing is more evocative of tradition than the concept of Royalty. Even though the United States declared its independence in 1776, many Americans are keenly aware that their nation was founded 150 years earlier by Pilgrims and Planters; builders in a freshly born system of British Imperialism seeking new footholds across the world. Without British Imperialism there would have been no United States. North America including what we now call Canada would probably be a sprawling Spanish speaking continent with a splash of Dutch; it might in fact be one large country. The USA would be worlds apart culturally from the WASP nation of its founding.

Although Sovereignty in the person of a Monarch was thrown off as a concept in America, Sovereignty was instead enshrined in a legal device known as “We The People”. The United States still chose to carry forth the torch of Anglo-Saxon-Norman Common Law inherited from its mother country, plotting a path very different from that which emerged out of the French Revolution and the subsequent Imperialism of Napoleon. This commitment to Common Law principles endows the Anglosphere with a very different character to continental Europe with its Roman/Civil Law systems.

From the days of King John, and Magna Carta, our political systems have been in a constant state of power devolution. Today, the US Congress and the various Parliaments of the English speaking world preside over an ever degenerative system of unchained democracy. Political and legal systems aside, what are the cultural ramifications of our constant quest for never ending power devolution? It’s an interesting question, always harking back to how we identify as a nation, whether our nations are considered more a cosmopolitan soup of traditions and ethnicities unified merely by the happenstance of state power, or whether we define our national identity around a core demographic; a racial/ethnic construct. Do our genes define our national identity?

It is with this question that the marriage of Megan Markle and Prince Harry happens to resonate I’m sure for many people. While some may merely see two people who love each other, it’s impossible to disregard the fact that this wedding is being celebrated as part of the most traditional institution defining the character of the United Kingdom; a nation in demographic convulsions. This is also a trans-Atlantic bond between a British male blue-blood and a multiracial American descended from both black slaves and white commoners infused with royal blood.

The black social legacy of slavery and the white founding principles which first endorsed, then denounced, slavery, are two of the most potent cultural explosives within the American left-right political milieu today. This alone should spark more than a little curiosity over what this wedding truly signifies, though I have heard many people remark “not this royal wedding rubbish again!” This particular marriage is very different from that of Prince William and Kate Middleton; both of whom are also related through royal blood, but both of whom are British and racial peers. Kate Middleton was also not a divorcee, as is Markle who had previously married Trevor Engelson in 2011, divorcing him in 2013.

Again, I remind the reader, this is the traditional institution known as the Royal Family. As the official Head of the Church of England, the Sovereign and their family are supposed to represent the traditional values passed down through the ages which define the cultural health and identity of the nation. Instead they have in the modern era: Embraced divorce; removed limitations on the marrying of non-Anglicans by heirs to the throne, paving the way for queen-consort Camilla; sanctioned homosexual ‘marriage’; sanctioned female Priests in the Church; Prince Charles refers to himself as the “Protector of the Faiths” (plural); now they celebrate morganatic marriage as a virtue. It wasn’t that long ago that King Edward VIII was forced to abdicate the throne due to his morganatic marriage to Wallis Simpson.

These changes within the royal institution have been hard and fast, but they mirror the demographic and social transformations which have been manifesting in all former British colonies; whether it is the United States, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, our cultures are convulsing, the heartbeat of national identity is flat-lining. Broken marriages, conception out of wedlock, abortion on demand, lack of fertility rates among white populations, loss of faith, drug epidemics, gender bending sickness, ethnic self-segregation and radical open-borders policies stimulating impractical immigration rates; we’re all experiencing the catastrophic results of cultural atomization mixed with unchained democracy, weighed down by bureaucracy.

Here’s a burning question: Is the Monarchy supposed to be a shining light for the people, or are they supposed to emulate the lowest common denominator, dragging down their own institution into irrelevancy?

Here’s another burning question: Why should Royalty continue to exist as an hereditary institution if there be no sacred difference between them and the public now that it’s obvious they are only interested in maintaining institutional continuity – as if they were merely a McDonald’s franchise attempting to maintain revenues?

Some might call these trends progressive; but I see them as indications of the disintegration of national identity, which always precedes the collapse of nations and empires. The Roman Empire collapsed for this same reason; it lost its identity within a cosmopolitan soup, its elites only identified government policy with their own best interests whilst feeding the base instincts of the mob – during countless games and spectacles – all the while the cultural heart of Rome was ripped out while still beating and placed on the altar of diversity.

Lessons From Barack Obama

Although the United States shunned the concept of Sovereignty residing in a single individual, there’s no avoiding the truth that since the founding of the United States the office of the President has increasingly adopted trappings akin to real sovereignty. Some might argue that the ability to exercise real power which has been removed from the British Monarch and placed instead with the Prime Minister, actually point towards the US Presidential system having become a more ‘active’ manifestation of state sovereignty than Monarchy. Hereditary trappings aside, as the head of the US Military the POTUS holds one of the key powers of a King: the Martial power; especially since wars are not even officially declared anymore by post-WWII convention.

Since 2008 when Barack Obama took office, the cosmopolitan elite and their various mobs chanting the virtues of the diversity agenda as if it were a chantry prayer, have declared a new era of ‘progressivism’. Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize before he’d even achieved anything, before he’d been in office long enough to parallel a full-term pregnancy. In fact, it’s clear from the declaration by the Nobel Committee that he was given the award merely for the expectation that he could foster peace between people’s; then came NATO/aligned interventions in Libya, Syria, Ukraine, a failed coup attempt in Turkey, followed by the beginnings of a race war in the US before he’d even left office. It would seem the “diversity=peace” mantra requires only wishful thinking, the delivery of the wish being only an afterthought.

20180411_223400_0001

Did the existence of melanin in Obama’s skin endow him with a magical power capable of making such wishes come true? It’s clear from most of the media coverage during both the 2008 and 2012 elections, which saw Obama appointed, the man had promulgated a savior cult which was race specific. Perhaps the most telling thing about Obama, however, is that his mother was of European extraction, Obama being only half black, yet he was praised as the ‘First Black President’. Upon the initiation of the Obama era, it would seem that white heritage – even though it represents the founding core demographic of the United States – had become something of a useless accoutrement wielding zero useful political capital.

Even though Prince Harry considers himself a friend of Barack Obama and Meghan is extremely socially liberal, the ex-POTUS has not been invited to the wedding despite initial reports indicating that he would attend; the couple citing a desire not to politicize the event. This wedding is, however, very political, though not directly in the partisan sense, because the Sovereign and her family are a very political institution just as the US President obviously is. Merriam Webster has the following definition for the term politics :

Politics-Definition-Merriam-Webster

The Sovereign and members of their family who attend state events – or when tacitly acting as representatives of the ruling family in their every social interaction – qualify themselves as political under definition 3.b. When acting to welcome foreign Heads of State or representatives, the royal family acts under the political practices definition 2. The Monarch as paramount representative of law and order across the British Commonwealth qualifies them as embodying the body politic under definition 5.a. Finally, under definition 5.b., including “ethnic politics”, whether Harry or Megan care to be political, or not, they obviously now are.

On a planet obsessed with globalism and neoliberalism, where more than seven billion people tussle for resources, living space, with border and exclusive economic zone disputes, where migrants are wafting like tidal waves across national borders, sovereignty has never been a more important issue. There can be no denying that ethnic tensions are increasing across the planet, or that the 2016 BREXIT vote and the 2016 POTUS election cycle were heavily influenced by immigration and identity issues boiling over; the diversity cult finally imploding under the weight of so many unrealistic wishes not founded in practicality. The dream of Obama, the savior, has ended, the alarm clock has sounded.

No matter how the Monarchy and the media spin it, the offspring of Harry and Meghan will be perceived as the ‘black’ lineage of the royal family. Let’s face the truth though: This image will be actively sought by this new ‘progressive’ incarnation of Royalty. Harry and Meghan will become the manifestation of the diversity cult within this institution. Harry, Meghan, their children, their grandchildren – no matter how white they look – will become politicized sales props for the great new program of ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’. Their every thought on racial and ethnic disputes in the UK – including the Commonwealth – will be actively sought by both themselves and the media.

The first ‘black’ royal line will be the mantra.

I know what you’re thinking; you’re thinking “Aha! Margaret of Anjou was black, I’ve seen The Hollow Crown!” No, sorry, Margaret of Anjou was not black as the apolitical BBC portrayed her, silly, this was simply a beautiful display of diversity in British television – even though the half-Nigerian half-Jewish actor, Sophie Okonedo, either can’t act or clearly felt stupid in that particular role (watch it, prove me wrong!) Besides, we’ll probably be seeing a film adaptation of Queen Aminatu of the Hausa in Sudan portrayed by a pasty white Yorkshire lass any day now; don’t hold your breath though, as Twitter user @zellieimani who tweeted the above states in his bio, All Black Everything. Teacher. Blogger. Activist. Brother. Son.”

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.” ~ George Orwell, 1984.

Wherever you are, in the Anglosphere, blackness and non-white racial identity is now clearly a useful form of political capital for such players who are very political indeed. Whether they be Monarch’s, a POTUS, a member of the Royal family or a lesser political animal, they can claim to represent the infallible diversity zeitgeist; a new Babylon within which we must pledge allegiance or be labelled a ‘racist bigot’ by people who will take specific advantage of this very attribute of race, whenever it can be used to advance their own agendas. Harry may be the smartest royal of all.

Broken-Heart-of-Patriarchy

Broken Heart of Patriarchy: Oh Father, where art thou?

Other than a racial dynamic this Royal wedding has another twist; Meghan Markle’s father, 72 year old Thomas Markle Snr., who lives in New Mexico, will not be travelling to the UK to walk the bride down the aisle of St George’s Chapel in Windsor. As the Telegraph reported a few days ago :

Mr Markle became embroiled in controversy after he allegedly staged paparazzi photographs of himself in the run-up to the nuptials at Windsor Castle this Saturday.

Celebrity website TMZ claimed Mr Markle had decided not to go to the wedding for fear of embarrassing his daughter following the fallout from the pictures.

Kensington Palace declined to confirm whether or not Mr Markle had pulled out of attending but appealed for understanding.

Meghan’s extended family, the Dooley’s, are attempting to hijack the wedding after not being invited. They flew into the UK anyways, apparently with a deal to cover the event for an American broadcasting network. The story regarding father Thomas then changed :

The American former actress's half-sister, Samantha Markle, said she hoped Thomas Markle would be at the ceremony, but that he had faced an "unbelievable amount of stress".

Samantha Markle told Good Morning Britain that Mr Markle had health issues, and had had chest pains and suffered a heart attack.

It has since been reported that the 72 year old Thomas did in fact suffer a heart attack, requiring surgery on Wednesday; an operation he survived but which will prevent him from attending the wedding he insists he did in fact desire greatly to attend. This is actually a very sad situation. I do hope Thomas fully recovers but I can’t help but see something poetic in this timeline of events. Did Thomas embarrass his daughter, then get chewed-out, then get told not to attend – or decided not to attend – weakening his health until his heart gave in? Is Thomas no longer able to attend because of a literal broken heart? If this is indeed the case, this wedding is almost a billboard advertising the dire state of family health, and patriarchy, in the modern Anglosphere.

Just as Thomas had initially excluded himself from the wedding as a self-professed embarrassment, society as a whole has done the same to the concept of patriarchy. Fathers are portrayed as buffoons in the modern media and children are taught that only new ‘progressive’ social customs will be tolerated in the future. The days are nigh where a father giving his daughter away on her wedding day will be considered antiquated and perhaps politically incorrect. Megan is no stranger to this progressive crusade having been an avid feminist, since the age of 11, when she waged a successful campaign to change a national television commercial she viewed as sexist.

Thomas Markle is a Daytime Emmy Award-winning retired lighting director. It was through his work that Meghan sought out a career in acting; she having frequently visited her father’s Married With Children television set many times as a young girl. Here we find another irony as this show features a dysfunctional modern family where the patriarch, Al Bundy, is persistently disrespected by his wife and children to harangues of laughter from the studio audience. Thomas will be absent on the most important day in his daughter’s life. The single donor, Thomas, of the genes of 4 Kingdoms his daughter inherited – which she also shares with Prince Harry – will be absent, replaced perhaps in the long walk down the aisle by Meghan’s African American mother. There’s a Greek tragedy written here, between the lines.

God willing, may Thomas recover soon. May patriarchy also revive.

Choróin Ó Ceallaigh

by Choróin Ó Ceallaigh

Aussie Conservative Anglo-Irish Baptist yearning for a little sanity in a world obsessed with globalism and cultural atomization. Please comment on my articles, I look forward to feedback.

Australia