Who do you think you are?

For some, now we know better. We have acknowledged the wrongs of the past and so it is the time to recreate everything, according to the novice philosophical assumptions that we deem as true and inevitable - how blind were we all these years?

It has now come to our knowledge that classical music is a "patriarchical" product of "white supremacy", not a jewel in our music history, much cherished from the time of its first audition to date - not as the archtype of modern pop, rock or jazz music. Moreover, we have now found out how "racist" William Shakespeare was and thus we might consider to cancel all of his emblematic work, which has immensly contributed in the formation of contemporary drama. Time has come to also debunk the likes of Plato or Aristotle, who certainly would be considered by some in the public as "elitist mansplainers", despite the pivotal importance of their thought in the formation of our most vital institutions.

Similarly, political figures have not escapted the Spanish Inquisition of our days: George Washington, the legendary founder and first president of the United States is labelled as a "slaveowner" or Winston Churchill, the victor of the Second World War and steward of the western civilisation, when it was most ferociously attacked, as "a bigot" etc.

In the recent course of events, this historical revisionism and rebranding has reached out to the Royal Family. Following the unprecedented interview given by the Sussexes and subsquent to the death of Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, the politically correct nullifiers have outdone themselves. They call out the "inherent racism" of the royal institution, its "hierarchal structure" etc., downgrading the Monarchy to the likes of their own and attacking an institution that by definition is unable to answer back, due to its apolitical, graceful, pious and ethnocentric nature. It is sad to imagine what these same people would say, hadn't it been for the queen being so old and popular.

The British Monarchy is the oldest and most stable institution in the history of Western civilisation. It has been the generator of once inconceivable political and economic reforms, dating back to the Magna Charta or the Habeas Corpus Act. It has been the institution that lead Britain into modernity and oversaw its great progress and technological advancements. It was the military powerhouse of the world for more than a century, establishing an empire extending to a fourth of the globe, influencing trade, style, architecture and music for decades.

The contribution of the Windsors in sustaining British patriorism, national stability and projecting immense cultural and political influence around the World via their example of modesty, discipline and sense of duty and service to their people and through their contribution in the creation and success of the Commonwealth. Having lead the country through two triumphant World Wars, remaining firmly at the helm each very time, having granted independence to scores of nations and helped them in their struggle against poverty, leading the way in Britain's response to climate change and ecological sustainability, since the time it wasn't even in fashion and having reformed Britain's old institutions in a way that are fit to the contemorary world order whilst retaining their traditions and their stability, the Royal Family is an exemplary institution of its kind. It is hard to find such a pioneering royal house in history - one that has such a close link with its people and is not afraid of modernising. They have deeply understood the role of a Royal Family as a role model, a national figurehead and a diplomatic asset. The devotion of the family to their country can be perfectly summarised in Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother's response to whether she considered to leave Britain for a safer place during the war: "The kids would go nowhere without me; my place is beside the King - and the King never leaves his country."

All countries and civilisations have skeletons in their closets, but triumphs as well: Britain has a dark past in India but it produced the likes of John Locke, Adam Smith, Newton, Hobbes, Darwin, Bentham, Elgar and so many more. France also has a dark past in Algeria and elsewhere, yet she gave us Rousseau, Moliere, de Tocqueville or Montesqieu. Germany had Hitler but she also had Kant, Beethoven, Bismark or Marx. Russia had Stalin but also Tolstoy, Tchaikovsky, Kadinsky or Kasparov. China had Mao, but also Confucius and America maintained slavery for too long but it is a country that lead so many technological breakthroughs, developped economic thought and in the end became the protagonist of a liberal world order of personal freedom and prosperity.

People learn from past mistakes and evolve, endorsing the highs and lows of their countries; they rationalise and reconcile with their past. They do not erase nor intimidate it; they keep record of their national life as do with their personal one - as far as I know, only the Pope is considered infallible. There is no infallible civilisation and no infallible person as well. What now may seem correct, in a century it may be condemned or rejected. A man in his fourties sees back in his twenties and remembers his old scars, he endorses his fallen self and moves on. To have the arrogance to believe that your time, your country, your identity or your ideology is "the chosen one", the one who "came to heal all wounds" and fix "everything inherently broken", is to adhere to the most firm dogma, one that, after all, disables your compassion and empathy.

At the end, the good of our legacy shall prevail: Prince Philip, for example, a man of his time, was straight-forward and had a somehow sharp and witty sense of humour; nonetheless, he was the consort of a Head of State for seven decades, a brave and decorated war veteran, a person that through his Duke of Edinburgh Award has given opportunities to millions of youngsters in Britain and abroad. How about you?