As someone who is half English and grew up in the UK, I know several people expect me to write this weekend’s column on the Royal Wedding. But I don’t want to. Not because I am particularly anti-royalist. It just seems there are more important things to be concerned about this week.

As someone who is half English and grew up in the UK, I know several people expect me to write this weekend’s column on the Royal Wedding. But I don’t want to. Not because I am particularly anti-royalist. It just seems there are more important things to be concerned about this week.

Any person of democratic persuasions will have some concern about the idea of an unelected, hereditary head of state. I also feel uncomfortable about the British government slashing social programs while one over-privileged family continues to live in astounding luxury.

But, those issues aside I don’t have a major axe to grind with the British royal family. They serve a social function of sorts – a reminder of tradition and history. They are relatively harmless – a thousand years of politicking by both non-royal elite and ordinary people has boxed them in and dwindled their power to symbolic state functions. In a way, keeping a powerless monarch around helps remind the British people not to let them, or any other person, get too much power.

Ultimately though, despite the pomp, circumstance and palaces, I don’t find the royals very interesting. Since they are not allowed to get involved in politics, they don’t do very much of interest in the public sphere. Since they are not well known for their intellectual contributions, I don’t find them expressing interesting ideas.

And while there is the occasional scandal, I don’t worry about them. They have access to the best health and probably therapeutic care there is – they’ll be fine.

I am more interested in my students at the university who are learning about who they are, what they will become and what to think. I am more fascinated by their papers, which tell interesting personal stories of migration, conflict, city politics and discerning identities in a changing world.

On a more global scale, I am more concerned about the fact that Alabama and several other southern states have been devastated by tornadoes. I am worried about my friends in Uganda, as the country has faced political trouble this week. I am both hopeful and troubled by the great waves of change in the Middle East.

I do not resent Prince William and the new Duchess of Cambridge – I wish them all the best in their married life together. But at the risk of sounding like a curmudgeon, I find it somewhat odd that in the last 30 days, the New York Times has run 1,322 articles mentioning “Prince William.” By contrast there were 906 articles mentioning “Obama,” 231 for Egypt, 55 for Haiti, 34 for Sudan, 15 for Bolivia and five for the Central African Republic. It just seems that our priorities might be a little skewed.