William Shakespeare’s birthplace is set to be “decolonised” over fears his achievements “benefit the ideology of white European supremacy.”
The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, which owns the historic site in Stratford-upon-Avon, has announced plans to create a “more inclusive museum experience,” that won’t perpetuate the notion of British superiority.
The move follows criticism from a 2022 study by Dr Helen Hopkins of the University of Birmingham, which argued that portraying Shakespeare as a “universal” genius reinforces harmful Eurocentric worldviews.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated event.
In 2019, the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists underwent a rebranding, changing its name to the International Society for the Study of Early Medieval England. The move was driven by debates around the use of the term “Anglo-Saxon,” which critics argued is “racist” for its inherent whiteness.
In May 2021, Oxford University considered phasing out imperial measurements (such as miles and pounds) in its math, physics, and life sciences departments as part of efforts to “decolonize” the curriculum. Critics argued that these units were “racist” due to their links to the British Empire, despite the fact that the alternative metric system has ties to the French Empire.
Reports from 2023 revealed that Cambridge University educators claimed Anglo-Saxons did not exist as a distinct ethnic group in their efforts to undermine nationalism. A year later, the University of Nottingham announced the removal of the term “Anglo-Saxon” from its curriculum as part of a broader decolonization effort.
The discourse around these changes often centres on the claim that terms like “Anglo-Saxon” and “Viking” perpetuate sentiments of “White nationalism,” otherwise known as what every European subscribed to up until five minutes ago when the Globalists started pulling the strings. However, many rightly argue that this narrative only serves to displace traditional historical contexts and fosters an anti-White sentiment that detaches English heritage from its ethnic roots.
Such initiatives have correctly been described as forms of ethnic, cultural, and historical vandalism. Academia’s role should be to preserve history, not alter it to fit an anti-White political agenda. By reframing English history to discount. undermine, or dilute the individuals and families foundational to the nation’s development, these so-called academics are effectively engaging in ethnic erasure.
It’s undeniable. These efforts are not concerned with academic or historical integrity, but are driven by an anti-White political agenda. This is not about addressing supposed past injustices; it reflects a systematic effort to rewrite history in a way that diminishes the contributions and significance of White Europeans from their homelands.
Supporters of these initiatives may argue they are fostering “inclusivity,” “anti-racism,” and “diversity,” but these are merely euphemisms to cloak a much more sinister effort. The underlying message seems to suggest that the preservation of White European history is inherently problematic, and must be denied.
In essence, White Europeans are being guilt-tripped into torching their own cultural legacy because its preservation might suggest to the hordes of non-White immigrants flooding White European countries that their new home is superior to the countries they fled. Ironic.
So, White Europeans have two options before them: they either embrace foreign cultures and risk accusations of “racism” and “cultural appropriation,” or uphold their own heritage and be branded as proponents of “racism” and “white supremacy.” Either way, they lose–and that is the point.
