Why Harry and Meghan’s two-child policy simply smacks of eco-posturing
Keen to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry expand their brood? Well, you probably shouldn’t hold your breath — Harry says he and his wife want two children “maximum”, and he’s not for turning.
Speaking to activist and chimpanzee expert Jane Goodall for the Vogue special edition that his wife guest-edited, Harry explained that the arrival of baby Archie in May has made him more concerned about the future of the planet.
“I view it differently now, without question,” he said. “But I’ve always wanted to try and ensure that, even before having a child and hoping to have children.”
“Not too many!” said Goodall with a laugh.
“Two, maximum!” replied Harry.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
(right) aren’t the first couple to consider the environmental toll of having children. Family size used to be the elephant in the living room of the climate change debate. In more recent years, however, the topic has moved front and centre.
A 2017 study, which found that the best way to fight climate change is to have fewer children, got people thinking. The BirthStrike movement — whose members have pledged not to give birth because of the rise of climate change — got people talking.
The once taboo topic is now the subject of growing discussion, especially since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez entered the fray.
Back in February, in a Q&A live-streamed on Instagram, the congresswoman asked her 3.9m followers a “legitimate” — albeit highly controversial — question: “Is it okay to still have children?”
It’s clearly a question that Harry and Meghan have asked themselves, yet how they arrived at their answer of “two, maximum” is another question entirely.
Having fewer children can help fight climate change — that much is inarguable — but what kind of carbon calculations did Harry perform to arrive at the figure of two?
The inference of duty and sacrifice might make sense if he talked about adoption or voluntary childlessness — or
even stopping after one child. But what’s remarkable about having two children in a country where 1.7 is the average, in a family where two children is very much the norm and in a relationship where the tyranny of the biological clock is unavoidable?
Context considered, their two-child policy begins to look like convenient ideology at best, and liberal fascism at worst.
Harry and Meghan believe they have a shared mission to usher in a woke new world, yet in their rush to make an impact, they don’t always make the smartest moves.
They are outspoken about climate change, using their platform to remind us that “every choice, every footprint, every action makes a difference”. Unfortunately they don’t always practice what they preach — Meghan took a private jet back to Britain after her lavish baby shower in New York; Harry chartered a private helicopter to carry out royal engagements a couple of days before he made a speech about climate change. His and Her Royal Wokeness talk about doing their part, but as yet they don’t appear to have made any meaningful lifestyle changes beyond the eco-posturing that we have become accustomed to.
Let’s take their wardrobes as an example. Much has been written about the ethical fashion labels that Meghan favours but just how much impact is she making when it’s coupled with Imelda Marcos-level spending on luxury designers?
Indeed, what kind of message is she sending about sustainability when she showcases a new handbag at just about every public engagement?
She talks a big game but the truth is that she wears her eco-credentials like the latest accessory. Her sustainable Veja trainers negate her extravagant shoe collection; her choice of vegan-friendly wall paint offsets the £2.4m spent on renovations at Frogmore Cottage.
Like her husband, and his “two, maximum” policy, she seems to be working off a curious carbon calculator that cancels out personal environmental impact with buzzwords, gimmicks and Instagram motivational maxims.
Be the change you want to see in the world — that’s what these two preach from on high. Yet when it comes to the environmental changes that really matter, it seems they aren’t willing to change a thing.