Richard Elgar: Pomp surrounding royal family helps it thrive despite scandals

By Richard Elgar

On Saturday, millions of people around the world witnessed the coronation in London of King Charles III. Despite my previously strong anti-monarchist position, I do hope he doesn’t suffer the same fate as his namesake, Charles I, executed in 1649 for treason.

Growing up in a London society that didn’t question the royal family, we enjoyed the street parties and celebrations for Queen Elizabeth’s Silver Jubilee in 1977, the pageant of Charles’ wedding to Diana, and yes, I also remember where I was when I heard about Diana’s car crash in Paris.

But today, the case against them is highlighted for republican groups in the United Kingdom by the opulence of an event costing tens of millions, even as up to a third of Britons struggle to pay high and rising energy costs. This adds to the economic cost of Brexit, estimated by Bloomberg at around $125 billion a year. The pain of this has not been shared equally, helping to fuel economic disparities.

Meanwhile, the scandals surrounding the Windsors linger. Diana’s 1997 death casts a long shadow, and Prince Harry’s recent book, “Spare,” has shed light on a deeply fractured family. Prince Andrew has faced a series of allegations connected to his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, and the royal household faces accusations of unconscious racial bias.

Over time, the popularity of the royals has ebbed and flowed. Although Elizabeth was remarkably loved at the end of her reign, she was also seen as out of touch in her reactions to the death of Diana and to the marriage of Harry to Meghan Markle. Charles and Camilla have both become more popular over the past decade, and Charles’ popularity increased significantly on inheriting the crown. This compares to a poll in 2010 showing that a majority of Britons would have preferred William to Charles as their next king.

So how has the House of Windsor continued to thrive? How have they retained both their standing and their popularity when compared to other European countries, where royal families have slowly been fading from relevance? The cheaper Swedish monarchy costs Swedish taxpayers around $15 million annually, while the Dutch royals appear to be a more approachable, millionaires-next-door kind of family. Is something like that in the British royal family’s future?

I don’t think so, and maybe there is no need.

Firstly, there doesn’t appear to be much political will from either of the two main political parties to change the current situation. There is still broad public backing for the institution, even if that support skews toward the older generations. There is also a perception that even though they are obscenely wealthy, the working royals, those that receive public money, do put in time for the country, carrying out thousands of public events between them. They support many charities, and act as ambassadors for the UK while also being seen as generally neutral and above the political fray.

And there is an enduring fondness for the family, perhaps best represented by the countless stories of how Queen Elizabeth, the queen mother, stayed in London throughout the blitz in the Second World War. The family also demonstrated awareness of their role as an embodiment of Britishness when changing their family name from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to Windsor during the First World War.

The pomp and circumstance of the British royals also does not work against them. The view of them waving from the balcony of Buckingham Palace is endlessly replicated, and it provides a distraction in times of challenge. Also, the sense of continuity should not be discounted. At the time of the queen’s recent death, there was barely anyone around who could remember the world without her, a constant in a changing world.

And at a time when the UK’s influence in the world is reduced, especially in the post-Brexit environment, maybe that relic of past glories (although not forgetting countless terrible actions during the colonial period about which ardent monarchists may prefer to remain consciously ignorant) provides many with a sense of their Britishness, and of their shared history. That version of national pride is not for me, but as they live their lives in the full glare of the public eye, the royal family appear to be able to weather all suggestions that it’s time for Britain’s constitutional monarchy to be retired.

Richard Elgar was born and raised in London. He is assistant professor of political science and associate director of the Thomas S. Foley Institute for Public Policy and Public Service at Washington State University in Pullman.