Globo-Mojo: Minority Rights Will Not Apply to Whites

Globo-Mojo: Minority Rights Will Not Apply to Whites
Image Source

You could pronounce it in Welsh: HWWTYL. You’d say something like “hoo-till.” But it isn’t a Welsh word, it’s an English acronym. What does it stand for? HWWTYL = “Heads We Win, Tails You Lose.” It’s the supreme principle of leftism, supplanting all others and governing all aspects of reality.

Simultaneously smarmy and sinister

In other words, leftists have no genuine principles. They have only a pursuit — the pursuit of power. Once they have power, they use it to privilege their pets and punish their enemies. The principle of HWWTYL is central to privileging and the punishment. It means that Whites can do no right and non-Whites can do no wrong. For example, if non-Whites enter a White district, that’s “enrichment,” which is good and glorious. But if Whites enter a non-White district, that’s “gentrification,” which is wrong and racist.

How HWWTYL works: Everything Whites do is racist (meme from Dranklestein)

There you have HWWTYL in action. But there’s a much more important example of HWWTYL currently ripening among leftists. It centers on a term that’s simultaneously smarmy and sinister: “global majority.” How is it sinister? That’s what I’ll try to explain. First, let’s look at the definition given by the leftists at Wikipedia:

“Global majority” is a collective term for people of Indigenous, African, Asian, or Latin American descent, who constitute approximately 85 percent of the global population. It has been used as an alternative to terms which are seen as racialized like “ethnic minority” and “person of color” (POC), or more regional terms like “visible minority” in Canada and “Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic” (BAME) in the United Kingdom. It roughly corresponds to people whose heritage can be traced back to nations of the Global South. […] The term was used as early as 2003 as a way to challenge the normativity of a white majority or Eurocentric perspective, through Rosemary Campbell-Stephens’ work on leadership preparation within the school sector. Its proponents argue that terms like “ethnic minority” marginalize the skills, the ways of thinking, and the lived experiences of those from African, Asian, indigenous, or dual-heritage backgrounds. Collectively, these groups are said to constitute 85 percent of the global population. Therefore, terms like ethnic minority, person of color, visible minority, and BAME were criticized as racializing ethnicity. (“Global Majority” defined at Wikipedia)

If you’re naïve, you might suppose that the term “global majority” is even more open to criticism on core leftist principles than terms like “ethnic minority” and “person of color.” After all, “global majority” seems to be an horrific example of erasure and Eurocentrism. How can the hugely diverse “skills,” “ways of thinking” and “lived experiences” of Somalis and Sinhalese, Tibetans and Tongans, Inuit and Indonesians, be crammed together in such a reductive, complexity-crushing way? Plainly, the only thing that the “global majority” have in common is that they aren’t stale pale Europeans. They are being defined and homogenized purely by reference to Whites, which is repulsively wrong and rebarbatively racist.

Rise of the righteous: usage of “global majority” has soared in recent years (graph from Google nGrams)

Except that it isn’t. To the pure in heart, all things are permitted. Nothing is wrong when leftists do it to advance the cause of leftism. They can delete difference and crush complexity to their hearts’ content. And that’s exactly what they’re doing when they use the term “global majority.” If you thought that leftists believed passionately in minority rights, you need to think again. When Whites are the minority, they will have no rights at all. Up till now, leftism has justified the privileging of non-Whites and punishment of Whites on the basis that Whites are the oppressive majority and non-Whites are vulnerable minorities. The term “global majority” represents a shift to a new way of thinking. In the past, non-Whites have had mojo as minorities. In the future, they will have mojo as the majority. Non-Whites will be privileged not because they are vulnerable minorities but because they are the virtuous majority. Simultaneously, Whites will shift from the oppressive majority to a villainous minority. And they will continue to be punished.

Virtuous votes and true democracy

In short, there will be no minority rights for Whites. No, Whites will be a global minority who will have to accept the orders of the global majority — as interpreted by leftists. If Whites vote in their own interests within a Western nation, their votes will be over-ridden by the interests of the non-White majority outside the nation. And that will be true democracy at last. In the past, leftists have had to circumvent false democracy, when the White majority has tried to defend itself. For example, White majorities across the West have consistently opposed non-White migration, but non-White migration has inexorably increased. In Britain, millions of White working-class voters switched their votes in 2019 from the overtly leftist Labour party to the covertly leftist Conservative party, because the Conservatives had promised, hand on heart, to reduce immigration and control the borders. Once they were in power, the Conservatives increased immigration even further and abandoned control of the borders. That might seem anti-democratic, but it wasn’t. Not in the slightest. In true democracy, votes count only when they are cast in the right way. And the right way is, of course, the leftist way.

HWWTYL in action: the Indigenous Irish are vilified for resisting invasion and colonization by non-Whites

The same applies to language. Words have to be interpreted in the right way, namely, the leftist way. Recall the Wikipedia definition above. It says that the term “global majority” includes all people who are  “Indigenous” (with a sacralizing capital I). But the adjective “indigenous” is an excellent example of HWWTYL in action. Leftism regards non-White Maoris as fully indigenous to New Zealand, even though they’ve inhabited those islands only since about the 1300s. But leftism does not regard Whites as indigenous to any part of Europe, even though Whites have inhabited Europe for 10,000 years and more.

In short, “global majority” isn’t an honest term. It’s yet another rhetorical weapon in the leftist campaign to privilege non-Whites and punish Whites. But the privileging of the global majority and punishment of a global minority won’t apply to groups like homosexuals and particularly not to the transgender community. Those groups have been and will continue to be sacred. Yes, “transwomen” are much more of a global minority than Whites are, but “transwomen” are virtuous and will retain full privilege at the top of the leftist hierarchy. Whites are villainous and must have no rights either as the majority or as a minority. “Heads Non-Whites Win, Tails Whites Lose.” That’s all implicit in the increasingly popular term “global majority.” But suppose that the Hollow Earth hypothesis turns out to be true and that 100 billion Whites reveal their presence next week from a vast underground world. In that case, Whites would become the undisputed “global majority” and leftists would instantly convert the term from positive to pejorative. HWWTYL — “Heads We Win, Tails You Lose.” Leftists don’t have principles, only the pursuit of power. George Orwell satirized this leftist power-lust more than seventy years ago:

Oceanic society rests ultimately on the belief that Big Brother is omnipotent and that the Party is infallible. But since in reality Big Brother is not omnipotent and the party is not infallible, there is need for an unwearying, moment-to-moment flexibility in the treatment of facts. The keyword here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. (Nineteen Eighty-Four, 1949, Part Two, Chapter 9)

The term blackwhite still applies to modern leftism, but to capture other aspects of the ideology you’d have to add two new terms: blackbless and whitevice. Modern leftists believe that whatever Blacks do is virtuous and whatever Whites do is villainous. All apparent failure by Blacks is the fault of Whites, all apparent success by Whites represents theft from non-Whites. That’s why the term “global majority” is simultaneously smarmy and sinister. It clearly proclaims that Whites will never have rights and that Whites will always be punished. As I pointed out in “The Yoke of Woke,” leftists are preaching equality even as they plan to practise enslavement and extermination. When a leftist uses the term “global majority,” you can see the egalitarian mask slip and a tyrant peep out with bloodlust in their eyes.

Afterword: I’d like to thank Jack Antonio for first drawing my attention to the sinister significance of the term “global majority.” If you enjoy good writing, good stories and good jokes, then believe me: you’ll find plenty of all three in Jack’s memoir Boy Outa Brooklyn.

Original Article

Author