Along with The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Harry is a London 2012 Paralympic Ambassador.
The following video message was recorded for the Paralympic Torch Relay, which was played during the first Flame Festival at Trafalgar Square.
These are troubled times, but I guess monarchists have something to say and something to offer as a possible solution for many problems that shake the world. That's why I call myself "radical royalist" because I am unashamedly in favour of a monarchy - anywhere! Omnis regis fautor sum: Regalis nihil mihi alienum est
"Royalism seems to have reached across the social spectrum from the richest to the poorest elements of society. Evidence from both Mexico and South America suggests, for example, that Indian communities tended to remain loyal to the Spanish monarchy. Their reasons no doubt include both genuine commitment to a system into which they had been firmly incorporated as Christians subjects of the crown, alongside a preference for a paternalist system in which the „republica de indios‟ enjoyed the protection of the king and, through its direct relationship to the crown, some degree of autonomy.McFarlane, Anthony (2012) Princess Carlota Joaquina and the Monarchist Alternative in Spanish American Independence. In: Liberalism, Monarchy and Empire: Ambiguous Relationships, 10 February 2012, Senate House, London.
"Examples of Indian fidelity abound. In southern Peru, most Indian communities remained faithful to the royal cause. The Indian nobles of Cuzco was a particularly firm bastion. Despite loss of wealth and status after the Túpac Amaru rebellion, they remained committed to the Spanish monarchy on which they depended and did not rebel against Spanish government until 1814. In New Granada, the Indians of Pasto and Santa Marta played important roles in defending enclaves of royalist government, while Indian communities in coastal Caracas and Cartagena also favoured the royalist side against its republican enemies. This loyalty usually reflected the importance of traditional leadership and its ability to sustain a following, as well as political calculations arising from local disputes over resources."
"The princes [William and Harry], however, evidently felt no conflict of interest; it was clear who they were cheering for, as it is when they attend England v Australia rugby matches at Twickenham. They are, after all, English. And although the Queen might have been less exuberantly partisan in her behaviour if she had been present at the regatta, it is inconceivable that she would have wanted any crew other than the British pair to win."Isn’t it fantastic how The Age’s commentator could exactly say, what the Queen of Australia would want to happen? They should leave the media business and start an astrology firm if they know so well what other people have on their mind and what they would do.