The Duchess of Sussex, Megan Markle, is rumored to run for president in 2024. Markle is a former actress and recent addition to the British Royal Family. Although “former” might be a smokescreen, as most US politicians of today are actors of some sort. Just take a look at Ronald Reagan, a famous Hollywood actor before he got into politics, who by the way was one of the first advocates of gun control during his term as governor of California.
In 1967, he signed the Mulford Act which was meant to disarm members of the Black Panther Party. Our last president, Donald J. Trump, hosted reality TV shows like “The Apprentice” and “Celebrity Apprentice” and even had several cameo appearances in film and TV shows.
Therefore, Meghan Markle has a comfortable precedent that she can draw from. Of course she would have to give up her royal title in order to qualify to throw her hat in the ring. As a close friend of hers stated in a Vanity Fair article back in September 2020, “One of the reasons she was so keen not to give up her American citizenship was so she had the option to go into politics. I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles she would seriously consider running for president.”
Quite a few questions immediately come to mind: Why on Earth would Markle want to run for President of the United States of America? What’s in it for her? And despite the tensions between the Markle and the rest of the Royal Family, could the British Monarchy seize this opportunity to use her presidency as a way to enact their Eco-Malthusian views and policies?
What is Eco-Malthusian? In order to understand this concept, we must first look into Thomas Malthus, his infamous theory of “over-population,” and the Marxist response. Thomas Malthus was a British economist and demographic theorist whose most infamous work, An Essay on the Principle of Population, theorized that food production cannot keep up with the growth of human population. In his book, Malthus theorized that in order for disease, famine, war, and calamity to be quelled, the human population must be controlled. This theory has been formulated into a philosophy called “Malthusianism.” It advocates “preventative checks” of overpopulation, such as late marriage, self-control, simple living, (emphasis on simple living in an industrialized society), and the decrease of living standards among the poorest of society. It also advocates the displacement of poor communities in cramped environments which may be conducive to disease, therefore decreasing the surplus population, so to speak.
Thankfully, there has been much push-back against this anti-human philosophy. Many criticized Malthusian thinking in Western Europe, while the population was rising at a rapid rate. At the same time, the food supply had also increased due to technological developments. Many times, food production has increased more than the population. For example, 2% of the total population is working in the agricultural sector in the US while total GDP is more than 14 trillion dollars. Malthus’ theory stated that one of the reasons for a limited food supply is scarcity of arable land. However, the food supply in various countries has increased due to increased globalization. Estimations for geometric and arithmetic growth of the population were completely neglected by Malthus, as it has been stated that the rate of growth does not coincide with Malthus’ theory.
One of Malthus’ harshest critics, Karl Marx, wrote, “The hatred of the English working class for Malthus—the ‘mountebank-parson,’ as Cobbett rudely called him…—was thus fully justified and the people’s instinct was correct here, in that they felt that he was no man of science, but a bought advocate of their opponents, a shameless sycophant of the ruling classes.” Marx correctly points out that Malthusianism is a deeply unscientific philosophy predicated on anti-worker hostility. Malthus himself said the proletariat should be the first to be purged from an overpopulated world, as there are “too many workers.” The late Prince Philip and his surviving son, Prince Charles, seem to share Malthus’ sentiment.
Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, and Royal Consort to the Queen of England, was a notorious Nazi sympathizer, as well as one of the ideological founders of Eco-Malthusianism. Philip’s depraved statements are featured in his foreword to the 1987 book, If I Were an Animal by Fleur Cowles; “I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers that it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist…. I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.” The idea of the “reincarnated virus” could come to fruition in the form of the Green New Deal. It is typically thought that the Green New Deal was an invention of AOC and Ed Markley in 2017, in order to combat the real dangers of global climate change. However, Richard Freeman reveals its true origins in his article from the Executive Intelligence Review, “Prince Charles Invented and Runs the ‘Green New Deal’”
According to Freeman, The Green New Deal was developed in the United Kingdom by Prince Charles and his policy networks. “Two of the most important men in developing the Green New Deal in Britain, under Charles’ supervision, are Tony Juniper and Jonathan Porritt, two of the more murderous environmentalists in the world. Juniper and Porritt have both served as Special Adviser to Prince Charles on the environment, and have been in his inner circle for decades. They created the Green New Deal in 2008, and exported it to the United States.” The Green New Deal is one of the core policy initiatives of the Biden administration, which includes, but is not limited to, a carbon tax on automobile drivers. A similar carbon tax was implemented by French President Emmanuel Macron of France, which intensified the frustration of France’s working class and ultimately became sparked the Yellow Vest movement.
The Green New Deal, as proposed by the Prince’s cronies and the European Union, seeks to drive down global living standards. In America, it would continue to deindustrialize the Midwest, as carbon emissions are more of an immediate concern than the livelihoods of working families for Malthusians. Such a world would begin the first stages of The Great Reset, with massive deindustrialization and a decrease in human prosperity, as advocated by Klaus Schwab of the WEF (World Economic Forum). Eric Heymann, senior economist at Deutsche Bank Research, criticized the EU’s Green New Deal on population control, as it “would not be feasible without a substantial portion of eco-dictatorship.” Is it possible for the Royal Family’s trump (no pun intended) card to fulfill Prince Philip’s dreams of eco-Nazism in the United States with a Meghan Markle presidency?
With Donald Trump’s possible return in the 2024 presidential election, the Democratic Party, if it seeks victory, would need a candidate that could match his energetic base. After all, Joe Biden’s mental competency is clearly declining and his vice president, Kamala Harris, has proven to be even less popular than he is. Her inappropriate laughter in response to genuine concerns connected to Biden’s policies is only part of why she has demonstrated an acute inability to connect with the masses. On the other hand, the Democrats may very well choose to nominate Markle, as Biden’s sister, Valerie Biden-Owens, who has been influential in Markle’s humanitarian persona, said that “we welcome her to come in and join the Democratic Party.”
Why not? She’s the All American Woke Disney Princess that the Democrats have dreamt of for so very long. The GOP had Donald Trump as their dream candidate and the Democratic Party shall have Maghan Markle, while the rest of us can eat cake. While we are destined to enjoy nothing in a future dictated by medieval royals, those who are worthy in their eyes will be more than happy to enjoy the fruits of our stolen labor and lives.
Get the latest news and analysis, plus special commentatory from Editor Donald Courter.
