Harry and Meghan have been out-victimed
Sophie Chandauka, who was appointed chairman of Sentebale in mid-2023, has accused the charity's board of bullying, harassment, misogyny, and misogynoir – a form of prejudice directed at black women – in an official complaint sent to the Charity Commission.
A source close to the trustees, who resigned en masse this month alongside the Duke of Sussex and his co-founder Prince Seeiso of Lesotho, claimed Ms Chandauka, a Zimbabwe-born lawyer, alleged racism when she realised things were not going her way.
'She's definitely playing the race card and openly,' the source said.
'This is her plan. As soon as anyone turns against her, she brings the race card in and she comes for you.'
Sound familiar? Didn't Harry and Meghan use exactly the same tactic when faced with criticism?Not only did the couple allege that the royals themselves were racist but that headlines that didn't cast the Duchess, particularly, in an overwhelmingly positive light, must have been fuelled by 'unconscious bias'?
This false narrative was given rocket fuel by social media trolls, known as the Sussex Squad, who accused journalists like me of being 'racist', 'white supremacist' and 'a Nazi' simply for questioning Meghan's 'truth'. There was no evidence whatsoever to back up allegations of racism – but they were cast around like confetti, anyway.
Even former Commons speaker John Bercow jumped on the bandwagon, insisting in 2020: 'I want to say that I believe unequivocally that Meghan has been the victim of explicit and obnoxious racism. I am crystal clear about that. She has been subjected to racism, sexism and misogyny.'
Neither Ms Chandauka nor the Sussexes are the victims here. The real victims of this unseemly war of words are the AIDS and HIV afflicted children of Lesotho who rely on Sentebale's support. Harry and Meghan are in no position to decry the fact that we now live in a world where, if a woman of colour is called out she is automatically a victim of 'misogynoir' and anyone who disagrees is a racist.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Approval Rating Surges After Putin Summit
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. U.S. President Donald Trump's approval rating surged after his summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. According to polling by InsiderAdvantage, 54 percent of voters said they now approved of the president while 44 percent disapproved. Trump's net +10 percent approval rating is an increase from the publication's last poll in July, which gave him a net +2 percent approval rating—with 50 percent of respondents approving and 48 percent disapproving. Why It Matters Approval ratings are useful in providing a snapshot of the electorate's response to key policies and developments in Trump's presidency. During his presidency, Trump's popularity has fluctuated. Maintaining broad support will be important for the president and the Republican Party more widely, particularly when voters head to the polls for the November 2026 midterms. Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump talk at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, on August 15. Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump talk at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, on August 15. AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson What To Know Trump hosted Putin in Alaska for a summit on Friday during which they spoke for two and a half hours to try to broker a ceasefire deal to end Russia's war with Ukraine. Critics have said Trump conceded too much to Putin and took umbrage with the talks ending without an agreement. Despite this, the new polling indicates the talks have boosted Trump's approval rating. InsiderAdvantage's survey was conducted between August 15 and 17. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.09 percentage points. The poll also suggests Trump is faring better than in other recent polls, which showed declining support for the president. According to a YouGov poll for British newspaper The Times, the proportion of people who disapproved of Trump's job performance increased from 52 percent in April to 57 percent in July. Newsweek analysis also found that Trump's approval rating was positive in 18 of the states he won in the 2024 election and negative in 13. What People Are Saying InsiderAdvantage pollster Matt Towery said in his analysis: "Donald Trump now has an advantage among every age group other than the most senior of voters. He has improved his numbers among African-Americans and Hispanic-Latinos. White voters are at a near record 64 percent. Voters under 65 years of age now approve of his job performance by wide margins. Only the nation's oldest voters disapprove of his job performance, which is consistent with our prior surveys. Overall, his approval numbers are surging upwards post-summit." U.S. President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social after the summit: "The Fake News has been saying for three days that I suffered a 'major defeat' by allowing President Vladimir Putin of Russia to have a major Summit in the United States. Actually, he would have loved doing the meeting anywhere else but the U.S., and the Fake News knows this. It was a major point of contention! If we had the Summit elsewhere, the Democrat run and controlled media would have said what a terrible thing THAT was. These people are sick!" What Happens Next Trump's popularity is likely to continue oscillating throughout the remainder of his presidency. Meanwhile, he has discussed plans to secure a trilateral meeting with Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He is also meeting with European leaders, including Zelensky, at the White House on Monday.
New York Post
17 hours ago
- New York Post
The rizz kid: How a campus Communist turned conservative kingmaker put the ‘social' in ‘social movement'
Gen Z calls it 'rizz.' Conservative theorist Frank Meyer radiated it. Rizz is what Donald Trump exudes and Kamala Harris lacks, and this je ne sais quoi quality, at least to all who came before Gen Z brilliantly put a name on it, explains not just one's success on Hinge but whether a political figure can pull a crowd. Advertisement Marble-mouthed mumblers and shoegazers take note: It turns out people follow the very individuals in mass movements they follow around in social situations. Frank Meyer's 3D, pops-off-the-page life illustrates this truth. After the Newark-born Meyer acted as the pied piper of campus Communism in 1930s England, he remarkably became in America during the 1960s, as the title of my new biography puts it, the man who invented conservatism. Advertisement British intelligence conducted a black-bag job on his apartment, placed a mail cover on his correspondence and noted the bars he frequented, the tweed he wore and the frequent female company he kept as they tailed him. Nowhere in the 161 pages of the declassified Meyer files do agents memorialize on paper that the revolutionary they followed — described therein as 'the founder' of the student Communist movement — dated the big boss' daughter. The most Frank Meyer thing Frank Meyer ever did was enter into a relationship with Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald's youngest child as he conspicuously called for the violent overthrow of the British government the man led. Che, Lenin and Mao never pulled off such a brash caper. 'Come here at 7.0 — or if you don't like the idea of Downing Street — even though I am the sole occupant at the moment — fix any other place you like,' Sheila MacDonald wrote Meyer in one of their letters I discovered in an Altoona, Penn., warehouse during research for 'The Man Who Invented Conservatism: The Unlikely Life of Frank S. Meyer,' out Aug. 19. Predictably, the British government sought to deport Meyer (and, predictably, Miss MacDonald volunteered to intervene). The same rizz that placed the prime minister's daughter in his arms brought a phalanx of famous Brits to his defense. Advertisement Clement Attlee, future prime minister, pleaded his case in Parliament. A petition signed by philosopher Bertrand Russell, 'Howards End' and 'A Passage to India' author E.M. Forster and Labour Party leader (and Angela Lansbury's grandfather) George Lansbury called the deportation 'discrimination' prompted by the cause célèbre's 'left-wing politics.' Students marched about London chanting, 'Free Frank Meyer!' Women desired his romantic attention. Rizz meant men wanted his company, too. In 1930, an unknown Pottstown, Penn., prep-school teacher plaintively petitioned Meyer for more 'scintillating conversations' and 'provocative' letters. He wished to again drink with Meyer and 'to take a Cook's Tour of this particular part of the world with you.' Without Meyer's company, he confessed, he inhabited an 'intellectual desert.' The sycophantic missive came from the typewriter of James A. Michener long before he won a Pulitzer Prize for 'Tales of the South Pacific.' Advertisement By 1949, when Meyer testified against former comrades in the Foley Square trial — the longest, most expensive court case in US history to that point — he had witnessed much evil. He knew that Prince Mirsky, the force who pushed him to join the Communist Party, had disappeared in a Soviet gulag; his protégé, Charles Darwin's great-grandson John Cornford, had died fighting in the Spanish Civil War; his boss on 'peace' activism, Walter Ulbricht (who later built the Berlin Wall), went about making the lives of East Germans hell; and his American idol, longtime party chief Earl Browder, had transformed overnight in Communist rhetoric from a brilliant, courageous leader into a perfidious enemy of the people. Slowly, he embraced a very different outlook. Quickly, and characteristically, the conservative convert became conservative pope. Present at the creation of National Review, the Conservative Party of New York, the Philadelphia Society, the American Conservative Union and Young Americans for Freedom, Meyer helped erect the skeletal structure of the conservative movement. Going to Woodstock meant something very different for 1960s young conservatives. Those making the obligatory pilgrimage to his farmhouse there included Joan Didion, who credited him as the editor who first published her freelance work, Garry Wills, who said he spent more time with this mentor in the late 1950s and early 1960s than anyone outside his family, and Heritage Foundation founder Ed Feulner. His philosophy, fusionism, became the default outlook of the American right from Barry Goldwater well through Ronald Reagan, who cheered that Meyer had 'fashioned a vigorous new synthesis of traditional and libertarian thought — a synthesis that is today recognized by many as modern conservatism.' What made conservatives so easily follow a former Communist? Rizz. Those doubting the power of rizz may wish to apply this test to every presidential election in their lifetimes: Did the winning candidate also win the rizz contest? Advertisement Undertaker-face John Kerry lost to George W. Bush in 2004. John McCain, who looked like he walked off the set of a black-and-white television show, lost to Technicolor Barack Obama in 2008. Monotone Gerald Ford lost to Jimmy Carter with his ear-to-ear grin and mellifluous diction in 1976. And a fist-in-the-air, 'Fight'-shouting Donald Trump — far from the cranky, complaining COVID case of 2020 — triumphed over word-salad chef Kamala Harris in 2024. Frank Meyer understood the power of rizz long before Twitch streamer Kai Cenat popularized the term. They don't call them social movements for nothing. Daniel J. Flynn is the author of 'The Man Who Invented Conservatism: The Unlikely Life of Frank S. Meyer' (Encounter/ISI Books), an American Spectator senior editor and Hoover Institution visiting fellow.
NBC News
a day ago
- NBC News
Even at 1%, new tax will burden African immigrants who send money back home
A new remittance tax set to begin in the new year has one university student reeling from the implications it will have for her family in Nigeria. Edidiong Chrys, a second-generation Nigerian American, said she thinks the 1% tax passed as part of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill ' would directly affect the financial lifeline she sends overseas. This tax will be applied to anyone in the U.S. who sends money abroad. 'We regularly send money home to support loved ones, including our elders, children in school, newborns and others in need,' she said. Chrys, 38, said some of the funds sent home have gone to new parents in her family, helping ease the cost of food and traveling to doctors' appointments. The funds also help her uncle, who has a job but also must pay for his five daughters, who are all in school. He and his wife work, but it's still not enough 'to accommodate all the things that need to hold the household down,' Chrys said. And then there's Chrys' 80-year-old grandmother, who was weathering back pain when Chrys visited in January. 'We are paying for the live-in nurse to help her during the week,' she said. 'That's an additional expense that we need to have for her so that she's not bending over.' The tax applies to anyone in the U.S. who sends remittances to their home countries. In 2023, remittances from the U.S. totaled $98 billion, according to the World Bank. Chrys contributes to the $56 billion in remittances sub-Saharan Africa received from people around the world last year. In fact, she said she regularly remits cash — more than 50 times a year — to family and friends. The Center for Global Development, a nonpartisan think tank that focuses on reducing global poverty through economic research, published an analysis last month that listed the tax as yet another financial setback for many nations, given the recent reduction in American aid. Liberia is highly dependent on foreign aid as well as remittances. In 2023, the U.S. accounted for a quarter of the country's foreign aid, and remittances surpassed Liberia's bilateral foreign aid by three times, according to the report. The African Union's outgoing ambassador to the United States, Hilda Suka-Mafudze, said hindering such funding 'threatens to reverse gains in financial inclusion and development across the continent of Africa.' Witney Schneidman, a nonresident senior fellow with the Africa Growth Initiative at the Brookings Institution's Global Economy and Development program, said, 'To put this tax on is just a further constraint on the U.S. effort to work with our partners on the continent.' 'It's not transformational. ... It's just another obstacle to partnership, and it's another obstacle to development,' he said. Schneidman, who also served as deputy assistant secretary of state for African affairs in the Clinton administration, condemned the Trump administration for building barriers and not bridges. 'When you add it up with the visa blockages, with the end of the [African Growth and Opportunity Act] AGOA, with the end of USAID, it's just building a wall,' he said. 'The U.S. is building a wall between itself and the world and certainly between itself and Africa.' Suka-Mafudze, whose focus will turn toward the Southern African Development Community region, said that beyond hurting diplomatic ties, blocking remittances is also 'a human issue, because diaspora remittances are lifelines for millions of African families and these remittances often cover essentials, which are food, school fees, medical care and a lot of things. And to impose a tax on that is deeply unjust.' Chrys said the financial burden of sending money home is already heavy, with some stretching limited resources to make ends meet. 'Some people are not making as much to be able to try to support their family back home,' Chrys said. 'When I do get a chance to send money home, sometimes I'm spending it from my refund check.' Democratic Reps. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick of Florida and Jonathan L. Jackson of Illinois introduced new legislation called the African Diaspora Investment and Development Act, or AIDA, aimed at reversing the tax's impact. It would also create more transparency in money transfers, among other things. Suka-Mafudze backs the legislation, warning the new tax 'could push people toward informal or unregulated channels, making transactions riskier and less transparent.' Cherfilus-McCormick, the only Haitian American member of Congress right now, warns that a remittance tax would unfairly burden families already struggling to support their loved ones overseas. 'I strongly oppose any effort to tax remittances and will continue fighting for policies that protect immigrant and diaspora communities,' she said in a statement. 'H.R.4586 — AIDA intends to reverse course and instead focus on incentivizing and leveraging on the nearly 100 billion of dollars that Haitian, African and Caribbean Americans send home each year to build sustainable partnerships and strengthen economic development.' Schneidman said the tax has the potential to impact education, health care and families because the bulk of the remittances are family-to-family. That reality is felt most by those sending the money, who see firsthand how even small amounts can make a big difference. 'In the U.S., it might feel like, 'Oh, that's nothing.'' Chrys said. But in Nigeria, 'It's everything because every little money counts.'
