Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

The King's duty to protect diversity depends on our finding common ground

The King's duty to protect diversity depends on our finding common ground

IF this was the end of an era - the Elizabethan age - what an ending it was. The scale of global attention for the Queen’s funeral renewed the sense that nobody does tradition quite like the British. It was broadcast magnificently too. Sweeping shots of Westminster Abbey combined with a merciful absence of commentary, after 12 days of sober mourning talk had left almost nothing left unsaid.

The Queue filled the vacuum as the public turned our most cherished national cliche into a tribute fit for a Queen. Vanessa Nathakumaran, 56, from Harrow via Sri Lanka many decades ago, was the very first to queue. I admired those who stoically endured the 12-hour shuffle for the sublime silence in Westminster Hall to end their secular pilgrimage. I did not queue myself: my ten-year-old declared herself pro-Monarchy (unlike her teenage siblings) and said she would have been willing to queue for up to three hours, but not longer.


If the Queue was the very best of British for many, it was unfathomably eccentric or excessively deferential for others. Broadcasters could risk conflating several hundred thousand who took part with “the public”. Coverage accurately reflected broad goodwill for the new King, but exaggerated the scale of blanket consensus. Our system acclaims a new Head of State, by automatic hereditary succession, at a moment of death, grief and mourning. It would be impossible to strike these balances without upsetting somebody. I understand why the BBC took no risks. Having reminded conservative audiences of the value on great occasions of state of our broadcasting traditions too may be of long-term benefit.

But it is possible to project too much unity - and so fall short of how to cover a constitutional monarchy in our liberal democracy. Two-thirds of people want the monarchy to continue. Republicans should accept it is a democratically legitimate institution, while they can only convince a fifth or a quarter of people of their case. But this argument depends on giving a fairer share of voice to that sizeable minority too. The police had to be reminded that “Not My King” is free speech. Disrespect is not disorder. We need to show this year and next how we can disagree better about the monarchy’s constitutional role.

LEAD Comment INSET Monarchy GettyImages 1243276193 A person sticks a leaflet promoting an anti-monarchy protest for the day of Queen Elizabeth II's funeral, to a lamp post in Brixton, south London on September 16, 2022. (Photo by OLI SCARFF/AFP via Getty Images)

That matters for making the coronation year a shared national moment. That will be a happy sequel to this week’s solemn events for the pro-monarchy majority.

But the Coronation activities should aim to reach more than two-thirds of people, so should be ambitious about breaking through to invite fence-sitters, even critics, to engage in the national occasion too.

LEAD Comment Sunder Katwala byline pic 2 Sunder Katwala

Let us hear more efforts to engage, respectfully, with different views of why monarchy matters, how its civic role might evolve, and with alternative Republican visions for the symbolism and substance of the British state too. That could promote some constructive reforms. It would help to square this circle of the democratic legitimacy of a constitutional monarchy. Local events can celebrate our many connections. The 75th anniversary of the NHS and the Windrush remind us of our journey to get here. Heritage and culture, sport and voluntary Britain can all help us to connect and imagine this new era.

The King recognises his constitutional role is fixed, but he may reinvent the monarchy’s civic mission. His first big idea is his duty to protect Britain’s diversity. Seeing Britain as a “community of communities”, Charles III emphasises too that a collective commitment to “freedom of conscience, generosity of spirit and care for others” are essential to make diversity work.

Disturbing clashes in Leicester show why that common ground matters. Over several weeks, angry young men have seized on cricket results, south Asian politics and inter-faith tensions to stir “them and us” clashes. Social media now contains two parallel victimhood narratives. Thuggish factions deploy the old tactic of claiming to be counter-extremists needed to “protect” their community through vigilante action. Deplorable real incidents - a march to intimidate Muslims; a flag pulled down outside a Hindu temple - are mixed with exaggeration, rumour and myth to push simplistic narratives where only Hindu, Muslim or Sikh grievances count. Outside agitators stir things up too. Anyone claiming all the thuggish behaviour has only come from any one direction now contributes much more to problems than solutions.

Unlike outside voices, Leicester’s civic leaders, Hindu temples and Muslim mosques recognise their shared responsibility to put the pieces back together. Dilwar Hussain of New Horizons in British Islam, a Leicester resident for 23 years, says Leicester’s bridgers must step up together. “We earned this city’s reputation for good relations. The rest of the country had looked to Leicester. We need to act together to defend the values we share” he says.

A duty to protect diversity must champion the common citizenship that can defuse competing grievances.

More For You

Will government inaction on science, trade & innovation cost the UK its economic future?

The life sciences and science tech sectors more widely continue to see out migration of companies

iStock

Will government inaction on science, trade & innovation cost the UK its economic future?

Dr Nik Kotecha OBE

As the government wrestles with market backlash and deep business concern from early economic decisions, the layers of economic complexity are building.

The Independent reported earlier in January on the government watchdog’s own assessment of the cost of Brexit - something which is still being fully weighed up, but their estimates show that “the economy will take a 15 per cent hit to trade in the long term”. Bloomberg Economics valued the impact to date (in 2023) at £100bn in lost output each year - values and impact which must be read alongside the now over-reported and repetitively stated “black hole” in government finances, being used to rationalise decisions which are already proving damaging.

Keep ReadingShow less
Deep love for laughter

Pooja K

Deep love for laughter

Pooja K

MY JOURNEY with comedy has been deeply intertwined with personal growth, grief, and selfdiscovery. It stems from learning acceptance and gradually rebuilding the self-confidence I had completely lost over the last few years.

After the sudden and tragic loss of my father to Covid, I was overwhelmed with grief and depression. I had just finished recording a video for my YouTube channel when I received the devastating news. That video was part of a comedy series about how people were coping with lockdown in different ways.

Keep ReadingShow less
UK riots

Last summer’s riots demonstrated how misinformation and inflammatory rhetoric, ignited by a tiny minority of extremists, can lead to violence on our streets

Getty Images

‘Events in 2024 have shown that social cohesion cannot be an afterthought’

THE past year was marked by significant global events, and the death and devastation in Ukraine, the Middle East and Sudan – with diplomatic efforts failing to achieve peace – have tested our values.

The involvement of major powers in proxy wars and rising social and economic inequalities have deepened divisions and prolonged suffering, with many losing belief in humanity. The rapid social and political shifts – home and abroad – will continue to challenge our values and resilience in 2025 and beyond.

Keep ReadingShow less
Values, inner apartheid, and diet

The author at Mandela-Gandhi Exhibition, Constitution Hill, Johannesburg, South Africa (December 2024)

Values, inner apartheid, and diet

Dr. Prabodh Mistry

In the UK, local governments have declared a Climate Emergency, but I struggle to see any tangible changes made to address it. Our daily routines remain unchanged, with roads and shops as crowded as ever, and life carrying on as normal with running water and continuous power in our homes. All comforts remain at our fingertips, and more are continually added. If anything, the increasing abundance of comfort is dulling our lives by disconnecting us from nature and meaningful living.

I have just spent a month in South Africa, visiting places where Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela lived, including the jails. They both fought against the Apartheid laws imposed by the white ruling community. However, no oppressor ever grants freedom to the oppressed unless the latter rises to challenge the status quo. This was true in South Africa, just as it was in India. Mahatma Gandhi united the people of India to resist British rule for many years, but it was the threat posed by the Indian army, returning from the Second World War and inspired by the leadership of Subhas Chandra Bose, that ultimately won independence. In South Africa, the threat of violence led by Nelson Mandela officially ended Apartheid in April 1994, when Mandela was sworn in as the country’s first Black president.

Keep ReadingShow less
Singh and Carter were empathic
leaders as well as great humanists’

File photograph of former US president Jimmy Carter with Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh in New Delhi, on October 27, 2006

Singh and Carter were empathic leaders as well as great humanists’

Dinesh Sharma

THE world lost two remarkable leaders last month – the 13th prime minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, (September 26, 1932-December 26, 2024).and the 39th president of the US, Jimmy Carter (October 1, 1924-December 29, 2024).

We are all mourning their loss in our hearts and minds. Certainly, those of us who still see the world through John Lennon’s rose-coloured glasses will know this marks the end of an era in global politics. Imagine all the people; /Livin’ life in peace; /You may say I’m a dreamer; / But I’m not the only one; /I hope someday you’ll join us;/ And the world will be as one (Imagine, John Lennon, 1971) Both Singh and Carter were authentic leaders and great humanists. While Carter was left of Singh in policy, they were both liberals – Singh was a centrist technocrat with policies that uplifted the poor. They were good and decent human beings, because they upheld a view of human nature that is essentially good, civil, and always thinking of others even in the middle of bitter political rivalries, qualities we need in leaders today as our world seems increasingly fractious, self-absorbed and devolving. Experts claim authentic leadership is driven by:

Keep ReadingShow less