Globalism vs. Nationalism: The Most Important Issue of our Time

Those are the biggest issues we have in America and would be a good place to start.

Globalist Rebumblicans are ignoring this issue at their own risk; if the trend continues, Bernie Sanders socialism is one election away.

The reason the politicians don't care is that the multi-national corporations are lining their pockets.

 

Don't doubt me. I've been following politics and world events for 30 years. I've been a liberal like you thirty years ago in my 20's. I've been a conservative. After learning more and seeing more things I am a nationalist now.

Why does the MSM report on white on black crime and not black on white crime?

Why does the MSM provide the home address of a white officer who justifiably shot a unarmed black man who was reaching for his gun and NOT REPORT ON THE SHOOTING DEATH OF MIRIAM CAREY, AN UNARMED BLACK WOMAN (who was no threat to anyone) SHOT TO DEATH BY THE CAPITOL POLICE WITH HER CHILD IN THE BACK SEAT OF HER VAN?

The answer is because if you want to remake America, you have to create the environment for the people to want to remake it (i.e. hate and discontent).

Instead of criticizing right wing radio, grow up an listen to it. You might learn something from it. You don't have to agree with everything they say (I surely don't) but you will know more.

 

Maybe. But with technology, globalism is here. And it won't go away. Commerce is demanding it. Commerce rules the world. See large financial institutions.

 

We must consider that globalism which has a slightly different shade of distinction than globalization is not compatible with our constitution because it requires a rejection of the concept of individual rights by way of an iron-handed submission to central authority. It's almost a hive mentality predicated on the slave/slave master relationship of the individual to the tiny nucleus of planners who administer a plan that is hostile to human rights in favor of the success of the plan as a greater good. Sound familiar? The Soviets tried it for seven decades and the Chinese are still trying it. A society that sees human rights as the gold standard has faith that the people will preserve their freedoms and liberties by doing the right thing to recognize the rights of all citizens. A society that fosters globalism has no faith in the individual and so sees a world where what is right must be dictated to the individual by central authority. America escaped this and fought a revolution to stay free of it. This gave rise to what has been called American Exceptionalism, a paradigm where a good welder can live a more comfortable lifestyle than a college professor.

The Soviets failed because they could not compete with a capitalist system that housed a middle class of upwardly mobile individuals who realized the value of hard work and saw it as way to improve their existence. The globalist planners have taken a different tact and use the mechanism of envy as a propaganda tool to incite the multitudes to attack success itself and so corrode the concept of individuality. It's the same book with a different cover.

 

It's a tough row to hoe, but only if the people let commerce rule.

 

Amen, brother. Well written. Marx said the middle class must be destroyed. While globalism is not communism it will look essentially the same. A small elite class and a multitude of individuals who do what they are told and look and act alike.

 

So I will inevitably turn into you, eh?

 

So how do you know what globalism will look like? It hasn't happened or taken shape yet/
With the world shrinking, don't you think some form of globalism will happen?

 

...snip
Do you know how the media makes their money? Selling ads to stories. So they hype the stories that will generate the most reads/clicks/etc.
It's not to give a fair and balanced report of world happenings.

But conspiracy folks think they are only trying to manipulate the masses.
Maybe, for the owners of news media has been shrinking.
But now we have phones and video cameras in possession of most every person. Recording and reporting their daily lives.

 

If you think Trump is a nationalist than take a look at his business. I'm a nationalist, of course, and I'm definitely against both Trump and Hillary.

 

Yea but true Marxism is an absence of class. Globalism is really more socialism, which isn't all that great either. It just so happens that, because Marxism sucks, a small elite class ends up ruling over everyone else oppressively. But that's because humans need to have some kind of elite. And with Marxism, the fact that they abolish any kind of elite makes the small elite people able to control everyone.

 

I did even better; I wrote in my name for President rather then vote for any of those clowns.

 

An all powerful central government always has and always will be a tyrannical oligarchy. And tyrannies always have a small elite group running things and everyone else close to identical.

 

Your point is well taken but Globalism will not work without strong central government and strong central government always leads to tyranny and tyranny always leads to an elite oligarchy dictating to close to identical masses. The path is different from Marxism and it might look a little different but not by much.

 

Oh of course, yes, you need to have a strong central government. Something pure Marxism has an absence of. Which means that, to satisfy their needs, Marxists invent a tyrannical government. To be fair, technically speaking, the US government is a strong central government too. But the difference between our government and that of Marxists is that our government was designed to be strong and centralized. We wanted that, and we built safeguards in to make sure idiots like Stalin couldn't destroy our country. Marxism, because of its absence of strong government, doesn't have anything preventing people like Stalin from being unchecked political leaders.

 

You're right. Let's pick something else to villainize:
I know -- racists!

 

Where is the rule that globalism will be 1 gov't?
And if it is, how do you know how it will be formed?
You seem to be living in what was done in the past.

 

Who says globalism won't work without a strong central gov't. And why?
Why can't it be many countries wanting the same capitalistic outcome? But each have their own country laws?

 

Same question.

 

Are you suggesting that racists should not be villainized?

 

central global government

No system works without a government, and there is no way a global-wide society works without an all controlling global central government. If you are thinking globalism only in economic terms someone has to set the rules of economics and if economics is global then the rule setters are global in scope. See the ECU for a prime current example. If you're meaning just open economic exchange between countries we have that now -- called trade, but based on independent decided actions.

 

Yes and no. Marxist theory does not have a strong centralized government as you say, but it never works. Marxist/communist societies always have a strong central government. Strong central government is a relative term. Communism and to a large degree socialism the government runs everything. Our government was set up as a republic with the states having the real detailed power and the federal government having strong authority in only limited (but necessary) areas. The framers went to great lengths to keep it that way.

 

You cannot have globally controlled economy without a global central government. If it is not globally controlled then it is called independent trade, what we have now and have had for millennia.

 

It's called trade, what we have now and have had forever. What if some countries do not want the same capitalistic outcome? If you force them (like ECU) then that is a tyrannical global central government.

 

The true definition of communism, is no state. IE, no gov't. Run by the commune/community.