First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
Post Reply Is Globalism Going To Be Shoved Down Our Throats?
82330 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M
Online
Posted 15 days ago

Morbidhanson wrote:

Meh. Too much of a smell of tinfoil hats than I like. Whether you like it or not, globalization is going to happen. Probably not one world government or anything dramatic like that, but not many countries, especially one as influential as the US, can simply tear out all the strands on its network and become totally self-sufficient. That's not realistic. Or possible.

The more resources are used, the more you will have to look toward neighbors to provide. As more and more people require care, more people will do dumb crap, and more individual liberties will be lost for greater overall protection for all. We see that in individual countries and it's no different than what will happen with globalization. Naturally, you will then have to consider your neighbor's rules if you want them to help you. It's not an absolute determination of what you will do, since nobody is forcing you to make that choice, but it is definitely a powerful point of consideration when you need to run an entire country. There are more people on this planet than there ever have been before, natural resources reserves and natural environments are increasingly threatened despite our best efforts, and the globe is warming. This is essentially a new situation never before encountered by humankind.

People might pull away now and try to go back to some romantic era where their country is manly and independent and leaderlike, but that's not likely to stay that way for long even if it somehow happens for a while.

I'm fairly sure WW3 is coming soon as tensions rise as some nations strive to pull away from dependence from other countries. Or others want help from a neighbor who refuses to assist. Still, others will try to take land to get more resources and territory and poke the sleeping tiger to see how much they can get away with before war begins. The scary part will be that there is no villain figure painted red; everyone will have some valid reasons for doing as they do. Tensions will spiral into conflict, and conflict into full-blown war. I feel like we're overdue for another bloodbath. Big wars have always happened and there's no indication that they will stop.


So, you are saying that globalization is inevitable and that with globalization we will lose our individual liberties, but since it is inevitable we shouldn't fight for them. That would be an interesting message to pitch to the people of the US. Fighting for individual liberties is what the country was founded on and has been a cornerstone of the nation since it's existence. I think that message would get shut down rather hard. Also, the moment that you sacrifice your individual freedoms for the "greater good" is the moment you give yourself to the greatest evil. Things have already gone much to far in the freedom vs security spectrum. Freedoms have been lost and despite the claim of it being for security, there has been no increase in safety.
2074 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / F
Offline
Posted 15 days ago , edited 15 days ago

ishe5555 wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

Meh. Too much of a smell of tinfoil hats than I like. Whether you like it or not, globalization is going to happen. Probably not one world government or anything dramatic like that, but not many countries, especially one as influential as the US, can simply tear out all the strands on its network and become totally self-sufficient. That's not realistic. Or possible.

The more resources are used, the more you will have to look toward neighbors to provide. As more and more people require care, more people will do dumb crap, and more individual liberties will be lost for greater overall protection for all. We see that in individual countries and it's no different than what will happen with globalization. Naturally, you will then have to consider your neighbor's rules if you want them to help you. It's not an absolute determination of what you will do, since nobody is forcing you to make that choice, but it is definitely a powerful point of consideration when you need to run an entire country. There are more people on this planet than there ever have been before, natural resources reserves and natural environments are increasingly threatened despite our best efforts, and the globe is warming. This is essentially a new situation never before encountered by humankind.

People might pull away now and try to go back to some romantic era where their country is manly and independent and leaderlike, but that's not likely to stay that way for long even if it somehow happens for a while.

I'm fairly sure WW3 is coming soon as tensions rise as some nations strive to pull away from dependence from other countries. Or others want help from a neighbor who refuses to assist. Still, others will try to take land to get more resources and territory and poke the sleeping tiger to see how much they can get away with before war begins. The scary part will be that there is no villain figure painted red; everyone will have some valid reasons for doing as they do. Tensions will spiral into conflict, and conflict into full-blown war. I feel like we're overdue for another bloodbath. Big wars have always happened and there's no indication that they will stop.


So, you are saying that globalization is inevitable and that with globalization we will lose our individual liberties, but since it is inevitable we shouldn't fight for them. That would be an interesting message to pitch to the people of the US. Fighting for individual liberties is what the country was founded on and has been a cornerstone of the nation since it's existence. I think that message would get shut down rather hard. Also, the moment that you sacrifice your individual freedoms for the "greater good" is the moment you give yourself to the greatest evil. Things have already gone much to far in the freedom vs security spectrum. Freedoms have been lost and despite the claim of it being for security, there has been no increase in safety.


The fact that we have anime and Sony products is because of globalism, and backing out of it will lead to greater restrictions to those items if not total elimination in the markets for being too expensive, et cetera. Not to mention slow the US economy, overall.
37377 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 14 days ago

MopZ wrote:


ishe5555 wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

Meh. Too much of a smell of tinfoil hats than I like. Whether you like it or not, globalization is going to happen. Probably not one world government or anything dramatic like that, but not many countries, especially one as influential as the US, can simply tear out all the strands on its network and become totally self-sufficient. That's not realistic. Or possible.

The more resources are used, the more you will have to look toward neighbors to provide. As more and more people require care, more people will do dumb crap, and more individual liberties will be lost for greater overall protection for all. We see that in individual countries and it's no different than what will happen with globalization. Naturally, you will then have to consider your neighbor's rules if you want them to help you. It's not an absolute determination of what you will do, since nobody is forcing you to make that choice, but it is definitely a powerful point of consideration when you need to run an entire country. There are more people on this planet than there ever have been before, natural resources reserves and natural environments are increasingly threatened despite our best efforts, and the globe is warming. This is essentially a new situation never before encountered by humankind.

People might pull away now and try to go back to some romantic era where their country is manly and independent and leaderlike, but that's not likely to stay that way for long even if it somehow happens for a while.

I'm fairly sure WW3 is coming soon as tensions rise as some nations strive to pull away from dependence from other countries. Or others want help from a neighbor who refuses to assist. Still, others will try to take land to get more resources and territory and poke the sleeping tiger to see how much they can get away with before war begins. The scary part will be that there is no villain figure painted red; everyone will have some valid reasons for doing as they do. Tensions will spiral into conflict, and conflict into full-blown war. I feel like we're overdue for another bloodbath. Big wars have always happened and there's no indication that they will stop.


So, you are saying that globalization is inevitable and that with globalization we will lose our individual liberties, but since it is inevitable we shouldn't fight for them. That would be an interesting message to pitch to the people of the US. Fighting for individual liberties is what the country was founded on and has been a cornerstone of the nation since it's existence. I think that message would get shut down rather hard. Also, the moment that you sacrifice your individual freedoms for the "greater good" is the moment you give yourself to the greatest evil. Things have already gone much to far in the freedom vs security spectrum. Freedoms have been lost and despite the claim of it being for security, there has been no increase in safety.


The fact that we have anime and Sony products is because of globalism, and backing out of it will lead to greater restrictions to those items if not total elimination in the markets for being too expensive, et cetera. Not to mention slow the US economy, overall.


That's a load of crap. Before globalism, there has always been world trade. Wooden ships have traveled where ever a new trade route had been discovered, and trade had been initiated. Globalisation is not just about trade, but about creating a new world order. This new world order is just a euphemism for world government, or one world government. This is what the fight against globalism is about. It's not against world trade, which has existed since before medieval times, but against an attempt to take from sovereign states, and from the people of those sovereign states, their rights of self rule.

In other words, in the case of the United States, our Constitution will be replaced with the globalists' charter for world governance. Instead of voting for a President that oversees the governance of a sovereign country, we will elect a "President" that oversees the governance of a "member state," and our "member state" will be subject to the laws and regulations of the world governing body.

Well. We like our constitution an awful lot in our country. What if we don't want to give it up? Are we going to have to be conquered to have it taken from us? We just caught Obama, the Clintons, and the Bushes trying to trick us into giving it away. Now that Americans are starting to wake up to the reality of what "New World Order" really means, they are rejecting it and all it entails. Trump is going to be in the White House, soon.
Gets It.
24719 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Raleigh, North Ca...
Online
Posted 14 days ago
I think, especially during and after Trump's election, people have a misinformed (or at least, misconstrued) understanding as to what "globalism" means on a fundamental level. I believe this is mostly in part due to the fact that the election was covered horribly by mainstream media (we all can agree to that, no matter who you voted for) and people began to go to the Internet for more information. With sites like "INFO WARS", "Truthseeker", and the likes - people began to believe that Trump was "Anti-Globalist" and that he needed to win for the sakes of our country.

Here's something that's quite shocking to hear but... Donald Trump is not Anti-Globalism. While some of his statements have been quite nationalist in the way that he wants to focus on breaking trade agreements to renegotiate to make them appear more generous for the United States of America, he has made various more statements that show that he's still quite fond of "globalist policies". What Trump actually wants is what would be considered freedom on the national level; freedom from agreements that have been made that have compromised the American trade community (in his eyes). While, on a political level, Donald Trump has outsourced most of his labor work and believes that Russia should take care of Syria (these are "globalist" actions/statements).

Sorry, but those who have been crying out about "globalist scum" for the past year and a half clearly haven't a clue what globalism means on the overall level. On the bare bones level, it just means that we're trying to allow other countries to determine the progress of another ("my rule is greater than your rule" kind of logic). On the conspiracy theorist level, there's some "New World Order" that's trying to police the world under one government system/one regime. Sorry, but Obama only negotiated trade deals and never took on another country's policy or laws. The closest thing we've ever got to "globalism" is probably the United Nations. Fortunately, the UN basically has laws/requirements that indicate that human right and a sense of security/peace (between those who are part of the UN) are mandatory. The US has actually betrayed the decree of the United Nations a handful of times; especially when spreading our so-called "democracy".

The OP is "Will globalism be shoved down our throats?" -
My TL;DR response is: No, not by the definition of "globalism" in your mind.
46651 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 14 days ago



That's a load of crap. Before globalism, there has always been world trade. Wooden ships have traveled where ever a new trade route had been discovered, and trade had been initiated. Globalisation is not just about trade, but about creating a new world order. This new world order is just a euphemism for world government, or one world government. This is what the fight against globalism is about. It's not against world trade, which has existed since before medieval times, but against an attempt to take from sovereign states, and from the people of those sovereign states, their rights of self rule.

In other words, in the case of the United States, our Constitution will be replaced with the globalists' charter for world governance. Instead of voting for a President that oversees the governance of a sovereign country, we will elect a "President" that oversees the governance of a "member state," and our "member state" will be subject to the laws and regulations of the world governing body.

Well. We like our constitution an awful lot in our country. What if we don't want to give it up? Are we going to have to be conquered to have it taken from us? We just caught Obama, the Clintons, and the Bushes trying to trick us into giving it away. Now that Americans are starting to wake up to the reality of what "New World Order" really means, they are rejecting it and all it entails. Trump is going to be in the White House, soon.


From what website did you get this understanding of globalism? It's mind blowing how ridiculous these conspiracy theories are with the whole "New World Order" thing. I honestly can't even take you guys seriously. It reeks of a complete misinformation provided by some alt-right conspiracy site. You nailed globalism on the head when you talk about trade via wooden ships. Before trade spread in that fashion most populations were isolated, and through trade they were able to experience other cultures and expand trade routes. It's about technology and advances in technology go hand in hand with real globalization. The internet makes it possible to see whats happening around the globe and buy products from just about anywhere. So we feel more aware of other people and are able to swap products and cultural ideas; then there are established shipping and trade networks that allow us to get these products.

The world is headed in a globalized direction, not the "New World Order." No country will willingly give their sovereignty over to some all controlling world power, especially not a country as powerful as the U.S.A. New companies want to be able to compete on a global scale, not just in the U.S.A. That's why all our biggest corporations expand. You're beloved Donald Trump is involved in business and tied to business partners all over the globe, because of globalization. You conspiracy guys like to think you are so ahead of everyone else, with their stupid traditional educations and need for silly "facts." In the end most of what I've been reading is just an example of a gullible mass of people readily swallowing BS from conspiracy sites that have no need for the truth.
46651 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 14 days ago , edited 14 days ago



That is me in the picture, I'm of Asian and European decent, and my culture is predominantly Western/American culture. My parents grew up in the Netherlands, and then moved to the US where I was born so Western culture is dominant in my upbringing (my first language was Dutch and learned English i kindegarten).

The part of Chinese Culture I did experienced was martial arts. My dad is a practitioner of Haka style Shao Lin, and have practiced the style since I was very young. This I'm very grateful of, because I never really got bullied growing up. On the one occasion I did get bullied (ironically, by an Asian) I quickly and embarrassingly ended it. I got suspended, but the principal told my parents that I wasn't in any real trouble

My ancestral culture is safe in China and the Netherlands and I can visit it at any time. The Great Wall is still there and so are the windmills, tulips, wooden clogs and damned good cheese. And as long as no one tries to destroy those cultures, I'm perfectly content.

Since, I'm in agreement with American culture, I don't think I'm destroying it, rather, I'd look to defend it. Seeing the effects of mass immigration in the EU scares me, and I would never want that for America.


Globalization is the reason your parents even got together and then were able to move to the U.S.A. In an isolationist society these things would never happen. You said yourself you don't feel your culture has been affected at all. You still feel connected to your Chinese and European heritage, despite living the U.S.A. That's part of the living in the U.S., we are the most multicultural country because people come here from all over and become a part of our culture. It's so silly to see people who are of other ethnic backgrounds panic because of immigrants, I cant even begin to understand your position. I can only think you've been misguided by slanted news.
41671 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26
Offline
Posted 14 days ago , edited 14 days ago
People don't get it... The main benefactor of globalization has been and is the U.S. it's what lead the U.S. to become the most powerful country in not only the world but history. I love this country and I think you can have a sovereign country while reaping the benefits of globalization. It's what lead to the rise of this country, it's whats made the U.S. the economic power house that it has become.

Not only are we powerful but we are influential, the U.S. for good or bad is the leading force of the world bank, and the U.N. They both where founded on our ideals and values. People just don't understand the benefits globalization has given us. Yes we now import a serious amount of goods but its a scale that is self balancing. What we pay $5 would cost considerable more. If we kept this idea that U.S. = good everything else = bad. So we import who benefits the most from that may I ask? The lower and middle class, it lowers the prices for everyday items most of us would be forced to buy anyways. A little amount of that money goes to the country that made said item but nothing more then would have went to that country threw investments if we would have been forced to pay $10-$15 if it was made in the U.S.

You could argue that if the job said in the U.S. it would increase pay which would make the lower classes wealthier but most of that money would go away in the form of higher prices on other every day items that would cost substantially more. Higher costs would also raise the price of our exports. A strong Dollar may be good for the every day man but its not good for the people who depend on their job for goods exported. The world is more then black and white there is many shades of grey in between but the scale will always balance. If you forget about the U.S. for a moment ask yourself what is the second most powerful country in history? I'll give you a second...... The British Empire, who through their will shaped the landscape of this world for the better part of 300 years and has had a significant impact our world history. They where the first real country to give women rights, the arguably ended slavery in 3/4th's of the world as well.

The British Navy had this thing, it was called the power of two. The idea was if Britain's Navy was as strong as the next two countries then if they decided to go group together and go to war it gave Britain a good fighting chance from the start. Back to the U.S. after all we where built form a colony of theirs . We share many ideological views as well, the U.S. has a similar rule as Britain's power of two. However it goes far beyond that. China, followed by Russia together if they ally would you consider that a pretty strong adversary right? Consider this a conventional war (which all wars pretty much have been) and ignore the fact that nuclear weapons exist. The U.S. Navy would still be twice their size militarily. Our Navy is twice as large as China's and Russia's combined, you may see this as a rational person for what it is or simply laugh at it and say its just numbers. We also have many allies who know this and would side with us because of it. If you want to make a fair comparison then on a naval level it would be. China, Russia, U.K., France, and India they combine would match the U.S.'s navel power.

We however go far beyond that, our Air Force, our Army, our Marines. It's all the same .... It's such an uneven level... I do not say this boasting as a personal ego. It is what it is.

So what did we get out of this partnership?
-Become the most powerful country in history
-Become the wealthiest county in history
-Become the leading force behind Democracy

It has cost us tho, we do have a shrinking middle class with each year people are either becoming more wealthier or poorer. We are reverting back and slowly falling into the middle income trap that only a few countries have been successfully able to pass.

However weighing the good and the bad we are by far the beneficiaries of globalization. Between the World Bank, and U.N. we can ruin countries without lifting a finger. Do all understand this? We have become so economically powerful that we can ruin countries just by writing rules. We are the beneficiary and naturally spoils go to the victor.
qwueri 
16462 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 14 days ago

rawratl wrote:

From what website did you get this understanding of globalism? It's mind blowing how ridiculous these conspiracy theories are with the whole "New World Order" thing. I honestly can't even take you guys seriously. It reeks of a complete misinformation provided by some alt-right conspiracy site. You nailed globalism on the head when you talk about trade via wooden ships. Before trade spread in that fashion most populations were isolated, and through trade they were able to experience other cultures and expand trade routes. It's about technology and advances in technology go hand in hand with real globalization. The internet makes it possible to see whats happening around the globe and buy products from just about anywhere. So we feel more aware of other people and are able to swap products and cultural ideas; then there are established shipping and trade networks that allow us to get these products.


The hilarious part is that during the era of wooden ship trading, 'New World Order' was the name of the game. Well that name was colonialism, but still the same concept. Large European governments imposing their style of government, trade, and power across the globe. Comparing the UN or Nato to colonialism is absolutely hilarious. Countries may side with the US, Russia, or China on those councils depending on the policies being pushed, but it's not even close to ceding sovereignty like the force of arms that occurred during colonialism.
Posted 14 days ago , edited 14 days ago

ninjitsuko wrote:

I think, especially during and after Trump's election, people have a misinformed (or at least, misconstrued) understanding as to what "globalism" means on a fundamental level. I believe this is mostly in part due to the fact that the election was covered horribly by mainstream media (we all can agree to that, no matter who you voted for) and people began to go to the Internet for more information. With sites like "INFO WARS", "Truthseeker", and the likes - people began to believe that Trump was "Anti-Globalist" and that he needed to win for the sakes of our country.

Here's something that's quite shocking to hear but... Donald Trump is not Anti-Globalism. While some of his statements have been quite nationalist in the way that he wants to focus on breaking trade agreements to renegotiate to make them appear more generous for the United States of America, he has made various more statements that show that he's still quite fond of "globalist policies". What Trump actually wants is what would be considered freedom on the national level; freedom from agreements that have been made that have compromised the American trade community (in his eyes). While, on a political level, Donald Trump has outsourced most of his labor work and believes that Russia should take care of Syria (these are "globalist" actions/statements).

Sorry, but those who have been crying out about "globalist scum" for the past year and a half clearly haven't a clue what globalism means on the overall level. On the bare bones level, it just means that we're trying to allow other countries to determine the progress of another ("my rule is greater than your rule" kind of logic). On the conspiracy theorist level, there's some "New World Order" that's trying to police the world under one government system/one regime. Sorry, but Obama only negotiated trade deals and never took on another country's policy or laws. The closest thing we've ever got to "globalism" is probably the United Nations. Fortunately, the UN basically has laws/requirements that indicate that human right and a sense of security/peace (between those who are part of the UN) are mandatory. The US has actually betrayed the decree of the United Nations a handful of times; especially when spreading our so-called "democracy".

The OP is "Will globalism be shoved down our throats?" -
My TL;DR response is: No, not by the definition of "globalism" in your mind.


I love this tripe... so all the ill effects of globalism are incidental Toonces the Cat accidents...*facepalm*....globalism is just global trade, see he just wants to give you a ride in the car!


countries are not determining the fates and laws of others - a consortium of rich internationalists that are beholden to no country are doing this.


but go ahead and keep telling yourself its just about being able to trade with other countries, then go look in the mirror and tell yourself a few more times that you're not naive, you're NOT naive!
3109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Online
Posted 14 days ago , edited 14 days ago
Think of anime like Kimi no na wa your name
3109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Online
Posted 14 days ago
I meant to say Full Metal Alchemist, ignore my previous post thanks
18491 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Los Angeles
Offline
Posted 14 days ago , edited 13 days ago

rawratl wrote:




That is me in the picture, I'm of Asian and European decent, and my culture is predominantly Western/American culture. My parents grew up in the Netherlands, and then moved to the US where I was born so Western culture is dominant in my upbringing (my first language was Dutch and learned English i kindegarten).

The part of Chinese Culture I did experienced was martial arts. My dad is a practitioner of Haka style Shao Lin, and have practiced the style since I was very young. This I'm very grateful of, because I never really got bullied growing up. On the one occasion I did get bullied (ironically, by an Asian) I quickly and embarrassingly ended it. I got suspended, but the principal told my parents that I wasn't in any real trouble

My ancestral culture is safe in China and the Netherlands and I can visit it at any time. The Great Wall is still there and so are the windmills, tulips, wooden clogs and damned good cheese. And as long as no one tries to destroy those cultures, I'm perfectly content.

Since, I'm in agreement with American culture, I don't think I'm destroying it, rather, I'd look to defend it. Seeing the effects of mass immigration in the EU scares me, and I would never want that for America.


Globalization is the reason your parents even got together and then were able to move to the U.S.A. In an isolationist society these things would never happen. You said yourself you don't feel your culture has been affected at all. You still feel connected to your Chinese and European heritage, despite living the U.S.A. That's part of the living in the U.S., we are the most multicultural country because people come here from all over and become a part of our culture. It's so silly to see people who are of other ethnic backgrounds panic because of immigrants, I cant even begin to understand your position. I can only think you've been misguided by slanted news.


Actually Colonization is why my parents got together. And legal immigration is why they came to America. If that was globalism back then, then fine, so be it. But these days, mass immigration and open borders are attributed to globalism.

And I never said anything about being an isolationist. The country was built on immigrants. I'm just not for mass immigration or open borders. Just look at the EU, the place is a mess. Radical Islam is rampant and I don't want to see protests advocating Sharia Law to replace our laws here in the US. After the Brexit, 8 more countries want to hold referendums so they could leave the EU also, including Holland.

The reason why I called Chinese culture my "ancestral culture", is because even though I recognize it is part of my heritage, it is foreign to me.

And what does my ethnicity have to do with this? Does being a different ethnic background mean I can't value American culture and want to preserve that way of life?

Again, my point is that American culture IS my culture and want it to remain the dominant culture in America and want to preserve that.
17077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / Verginia
Offline
Posted 14 days ago
I believe I stated this before in this thread but, to reiterate; the US is becoming more isolationist. This trend started in the later half of dubba's second term. Obama was elected in part because he promised a withdrawal from foreign affairs and a focus on issues at home. He lied and to some extent that is why the voters rejected a third Obama term via Hillary.

Trump is an isolationist so no worries, globalism is effectively a moot point, as is the trans Pacific trade agreement. Honestly, odds are NATO might face a major rebalance as far as the US involvement goes. And Trump has never been a big fan of the United nations either. Hell he might even require the UN to pay rent and US taxes on what the UN building is worth in Manhattan. (The latter I fully endorse).
5016 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M
Offline
Posted 14 days ago
There is no obligation to support President-Elect Trump. If he signs something into law, and he enforces that law, so be it, that's what the Constitution says we are bound to do, so long as the law passes Constitutional muster. But support is a decision left freely to citizens. As for globalization and all that? Jesus, folks, you are watching part of the result of that. There is good and bad to it, smart ways and dumb ways to organize it, but if you want lots of jobs and lots of markets for American goods, then some kind of globalized trade is necessary to do it. We don't have to ship jobs overseas, that was a choice that some scumbag politicians and businesspeople made, but we can't maintain America as some sort of pure isolated economic paradise. It's a question of whether we stand up for our interests as Americans in the global economy, or whether we let the Rich exploit the world market to just make themselves richer.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.