Ethics Of A Collective Good
In 2021 when Meghan Markle and Prince Harry had an interview with Oprah Winfrey, the couple shined a light on the racism in the British royal family by talking about the racism that some family members allegedly had towards their son, Archie.
The royal family tried to play down the claim — with the queen (RIP) choosing to treat it as a “private” family matter. This was in contrast to how the royal family treated the bullying claims against Meghan Markle.
In the bullying case, the royal family chose to publicly condemn bullying and open an investigation into the claims. You can read more here.
The treatment of both incidences had a lot of people asking the royal family to make a public condemnation of racism as well.
The Labor MP at the time Bell Ribeiro-Addy said;
“There should be a public condemnation of racism. They did it with bullying, why not do it with racism?”
To say that the royal family didn’t do what people like Bell asked would be false ~ but they also did not give a satisfactory condemnation of racism choosing to skirt it with some short, light criticism.
The queen just called it “concerning.”
The way the British royal family treated these two incidences is an excellent point of exploration of what I’ve chosen to call the ethics of a collective good.
Here we have the British royal family and its decision in confronting two evils — Bullying and racism.
In looking at bullying first, it’s easy to see that bullying is bad.
Bullying often comes from a place of insecurity and immaturity and for these reasons, it’s even a sign of regression in people or a sign of low self-worth. Its main intention is to harm another in some way and often the bully is the only beneficiary.
Racism is a bit different though. From its inception, racism has always sought to rank human races relative to one another. But its intentions don’t stop there. Those that perceive themselves as superior do not just live with the title alone, they enjoy the privileges that this delusion gives them.