The couple’s sanctimonious Facebook diatribe shows how far they’ve fallen — now a cringeworthy parody of their own virtue-signalling.

If you want to know how far the Sussexes’ star has fallen in America, consider this. The other day, Harry and Meghan visited Pasadena in LA to offer hugs and sympathy to survivors of the wildfires. Surely even the couple’s sternest critics, you might have assumed, would give them credit for that.

Far from it. “Meghan Markle and Harry are no better than ambulance chasers,” fumed the Hollywood film-maker Justine Bateman, in a social media post that has been enthusiastically shared by thousands of other users. “What a repulsive ‘photo op’ they achieved. They are ‘touring the damage’? Are they politicians now? They don’t live [in Pasadena]; they are tourists. Disaster tourists.”

Yes, that’s how badly tarnished the Sussexes’ reputation is. Even when they show compassion for the victims of a devastating catastrophe, people assume it’s just a self-serving PR stunt. If Harry and Meghan washed the feet of a beggar, their critics would doubtless suspect they were only doing it to promote a new range of Sussex-branded sandals. It almost makes me feel sorry for the poor things. After all, if they hadn’t visited survivors of the wildfires, they’d have been called aloof and uncaring. They can’t win.

Then again, whose fault is that? Sadly, it’s their own. By publicly trashing the Royal family in that nauseating Oprah interview and Harry’s money-spinning memoir, they created, in millions of minds, the irreversible impression that they’re a pair of insufferable, sanctimonious, hypocritical prigs.

Which, unfortunately for them, is an impression that will only have been reinforced by their other big public intervention this week. On Tuesday, Harry and Meghan grandly issued a lengthy joint statement about Facebook. And it shows they’re now even more out of touch than ever.

Essentially, the statement is a haughty, huffy, 631-word whine about Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to end censorship of conservative views on his platform. And, in their indignation, the Sussexes resorted to all manner of shriekingly melodramatic liberal clichés. Apparently, this attempt to promote free expression risks “normalising hate speech”, sowing “division”, undermining “diversity and equity”, endangering “marginalised communities”, and even “destroying democracy”.

Not long ago, this type of shrill hyperbole was effective. It helped progressives get their own way, by cowing the rest of society into meek compliance. But not any more. These days, most people have had quite enough of lofty Lefty scolding. They’re sick to the back teeth of being lectured. And anyway, they can see right through it.

They know modern progressivism is not really about kindness. It’s about control. Control of the words ordinary people are allowed to use, and the opinions they’re allowed to express. And they know that such an approach is not just bossily officious, it’s dangerous. Think of the grooming gangs scandal. It was the widespread terror of sowing “division”, upsetting “marginalised communities” and being accused of “hate speech” that enabled the gangs to get away with it for so long.

If the Sussexes were remotely in touch with public feeling – in either Meghan’s country of birth or Harry’s – they would have realised this. They would recognise that times have decisively changed. The mood has shifted. The world has moved on.

But the Sussexes haven’t even noticed. They’re still mindlessly parroting outmoded slogans, and cluelessly clinging to yesterday’s trends. To borrow one of the Left’s favourite phrases: they’re on the wrong side of history.