In an era when culture has been deemed a resource and like all resources it competes for market positioning, than market dominance and supremacy.
Give this cultural competition, why is it that some cultures can compete while others are prevented to do so.
Why is self preservation restricted by the domestic population? While outside cultures are given access to expansionary efforts?
Why would those who stand in defence of history, heritage and identity, have their efforts of self preservation be labelled hate or discrimination? While the outsiders ill intent and actions are hidden from the general population?
It is as if these leaders are now owned by a foreign entity and they are working in the name and interest of that foreign entity. Do these leaders think they will lead when the nation has been taken by the outsider?
Do leaders, like King Charles III, this that an outsider culture will on conquer his land following them complete their task of: "Islam cleaning the west of its ills" (Guardian, 1997). I have to ask, what ills is Islam intended to cure?
That is why King Charles III is labelling British self preservation has hate. These are the people who stand in defence of you yet you applaud those who seek to displace you.
It is time for me to share my research with the people and explain who and what is behind this socio-political suicide march, being done by many western leaders.
Join me at idiomradio.com and come to understand what woke culture is on The Why Perspective. Join me for Theory and Practice as I reveal that most of these protest are by and for governments, seeking to exploit the spontaneous and reckless behaviour of the collective.
Lets work together in understanding the distinction between our issues on at a core level and the expressions of our issues. So that we can anticipate outcomes with a readiness to respond.
Never get mislead my a marketing gimmick like rebranding or a bait and switch routine, as we will be armed with principle understanding.
Comments