The Allusion of Royal Titles: Judge Them By Their Actions, Not Their Birthright

We don’t care about Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, and Meghan Sussex and the debate over who should retain or relinquish royal titles. Why? Because these titles mean nothing—they aren’t a badge of honor in our society, nor are they worthy of respect. Judge people by their actions, not the empty symbolism stitched into their names.

The royal institution’s atrocities, scandals, and outright criminality should make every citizen burn with embarrassment and shame for tolerating such a nakedly corrupt system. If we are to praise and admire someone, let’s do so because of their honest contribution to society—not because they were born into privilege or persuaded others to commit acts of violence in their name, securing a steady stream of stolen wealth.

A title change achieves nothing for victims. Taking away Prince Andrew’s dukedom or princely title does absolutely nothing for his victims. Nor does it address the rot within the royal institution, the false sense of power and privilege, the transgressions, both past and present, that have been shielded by tradition. Removing a title is an empty gesture that changes nothing for those affected by the illusion of power inherent in titles and birthright privileges, while real accountability remains elusive.

The Allusion of Royal Titles: Judge Them By Their Actions, Not Their Birthright

The problem isn’t the title; it’s the lack of consequence. Prince Harry wrote in his memoir Spare, “Never. Not in this climate of hate. Not after what happened to my mother. Also, not in the wake of my uncle Andrew. My Uncle was embroiled in a shameful scandal, accused of the sexual assault of a young woman, and no one had suggested that he lose his security. Whatever grievances people had against us, sex crimes weren’t on the list.” Is our outrage misdirected? Are the public and the royal institution more upset by a prince marrying a mixed-race woman than by alleged sexual abuse at the heart of the monarchy?

For decades, no one called for Prince Andrew and his access-selling wife to lose titles or give up their royal privileges, but everyone became a royal expert when it comes to calling for Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry to give up their titles simply because their call out abuse and mishandling of power within that family that is supposetely sit at the top because of birthright. No, they are in their position because they were able to build a bigger army to steal wealth from Africa, the Caribbean, and India than the rest of the world.

Recent calls from the SNP for the UK government to formally strip Prince Andrew of all titles only serve to highlight how cosmetic these actions are. The Labour government claims any move would be guided by the monarch himself, further showing how these symbols hold meaning only when it is convenient for those in power. If the government is the power governing our society, why does it need guidance from the monarchy? This isn't very clear. First, the monarchy doesn’t have any political power, but an act of parliament can remove the peerage system. Yet, the government looks to the monarchy for direction. What is holding the government back from acting with due process, given the growing evidence about a duke who had been embroiled in allegations about the sexual trafficking of victims?

Stripping Andrew of his remaining titles is only a formality—the underlying problems persist. The issue is that ongoing support for birthright titles is a disadvantage to society, not an advantage. As Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger noted in The Invention of Tradition (1983), “royal titles, rituals, and much of royal tradition are consciously invented symbols designed to legitimize power rather than convey real, essential meaning or merit.” The ceremonies and titles that seem so grand are not timeless; they are constructed to serve the ruling class.

David Cannadine expands on this, writing, “the ceremonial and performative nature of royal titles is more about spectacle, social ordering, and the perpetuation of hierarchy than substantive personal qualities.” The meaning is “more symbolic (an allusion) than real.”

Marina Warner, in Monuments and Maidens (1985), puts it plainly: these titles are “allegorical devices that serve to uphold existing social power structures, not intrinsic measures of character or worth.”

Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities (1983) highlights that the rituals and titles of monarchy are “mythological rather than meaningful, essentially allusions that unify but do not inherently confer virtue or competence.”

In Distinction (1979), Pierre Bourdieu underscores that status symbols, including titles, are “markers of distinction but lack intrinsic value.” They are tools for constructing social boundaries, not for measuring real merit.

Actual justice, not ritual shaming. If Prince Andrew has committed crimes, he should be prosecuted, tried, and—if found guilty—sentenced as the prince and duke he is, not shielded by those very titles. Or face justice as Andrew, but not the princely title he so enjoyed all these decades at the expense of the British public. Why do the privileges of royalty remain relevant when it comes to taking from the public, but evaporate when it’s time to reckon with justice? There should be no separate code for the titled elite. If found guilty as a prince and duke, Andrew should face justice in those very roles because no one is above the law, not a king, queen, or prince.

Royal titles ultimately reflect nothing but hierarchy, empty ritual, and constructed power. They have no meaningful role in a society aspiring to justice, equality, and integrity. Let us strip away the illusions and demand substantive action—not mere symbolism—when faced with wrongdoing.

Sources:

• Hobsbawm, E. & Ranger, T. (Eds.). (1983). The Invention of Tradition.

• Cannadine, D. (1983). “Rituals of Royalty.” In The Invention of Tradition.

• Warner, M. (1985). Monuments and Maidens.

• Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities.

• Bourdieu, P. (1979). Distinction.

• BBC News. “SNP calls for UK government to strip Prince Andrew of royal titles.”

• Reuters. “Renewed scrutiny for Prince Andrew amid new allegations.” Oct 20, 2025.

• Prince Harry (2023). Spare.

---

LJ Louis is an enthusiastic traveler, aspiring artist, and passionate writer of both fiction and non-fiction who loves exploring new cuisines. She is also a dedicated advocate for women's rights. With an impressive educational background, she holds a double major in psychology and criminology (BA), a Bachelor of Laws (Hons LLB), and an advanced diploma in fitness and health promotion. LJ shares her insights through engaging content on topics such as human sexuality, sex positivity, health, psychology, and even Meghan Markle.