If you mean specifically; i don't know. I am a monarchist, not a royalist - and therefore entirely disinterested in the private lives of the royal family.
If you mean generally; then i laugh at meghan's failed attempt to to bring american PR and 'personality' into british distance - and disappointed that Harry lacks the capacity to realise the inevitability of this failure.
Either way, i'm not sure how it relates to UK political governance.
We have an adversarial political system; it is explicitly the role of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition to hold the gov't to account.
Labour cannot perform this role if people won't vote for them, and yet they seem incurious about what the electorate actually wants.
They need to be relevant!
I agree - no-one wants a dysfunctional and unrepresentative system of governance.
Looking at your graph leads me to be both surprised and delighted that despite; the financial crisis, brexit, covid, the cost of living crisis, less than half of britons believe that the political/economic systems need complete or major reform - similar to germany.
I contend that the system is evidently flexible in a way that america and france seem not to be.
And insist the Labour party take an interest in being relevant - if for no other reason than to prevent the further coarsening of political norms and institutions.
If they don't then they will be displaced, eventually. As happened a hundred years ago when the liberals ceased to be relevant to the demands and expectations of the electorate in a previous episode of revolutionary fervour.
Bookmarks