• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why do you want to trust with your future? Globalists or Nationalists?

Nationalism or Globalism

  • I like nationalism

    Votes: 9 39.1%

  • I like globalism

    Votes: 12 52.2%

  • I don't know

    Votes: 2 8.7%
  • Total voters
    23
  • Poll closed .
chuckiechan said:
I'd like some bright soul to come up with a list of changes made to NAFTA because they were disadvantaging the USA. I won't hold my breath.

Because of our leadership's relationship with the "swamp" and an inability to make difficult decisions that won't get you "likes", you accept cheating and hope no one notices until you are gone. Every wrench turner, hammer swinger, and keyboard banger knew we were being taken for a ride by our trade agreements. The only people who benefited are investors who's assets increased in value, while wage earners buying power shrunk to zero when they got laid off.

People were forced to train their replacements in exchange for severance pay. What did our leadership say? A lot. What did they do? Nothing.
Click to expand...

But, you got cheaper goods to buy...same up here. We lost jobs too. People learned to do different things. That will happen. The rate of that change is something trade agreements can do better, but streamlining economies is one of the benefits of trade agreements...at least, in theory. When you add corporate greed and lobbying, you of course change the game. Sadly we only have votes to offer, and there are only so many directions we can offer them in. Corporations have huge budgets for buying policy and politicians, and until certain segments of our society stop demanding corporate deregulation, which will never be nearly as beneficial to them as to the corporations who have them convinced it's in their best interest, we won't be able to change things.

Trade agreements, like guns, are not to blame, but rather the people that use them. It's always back to people. The good news is, with different people we can have different outcomes. It's just a matter of how many people we have to swap out. :)
 
chuckiechan said:
That actually was a response to the crushing conditions put on them after WW1 and yes, that led to nationalism of the worst kind.
Click to expand...

but don't you see, the same thing is happening right here in America.

Americans have felt slighted by the rest of the world because of economic factors involving trade, lower wages, jobs fleeing the US, and now we see a populist POTUS turning the US against the rest of the world, on a nationalist agenda, isolating the US.
See; there you have a similar contempt of the rest of the world by (some within) the US that the Germans had post WWI.

Maybe you cannot see it happening but it is none the less occurring.
If it is allowed to go on unchecked where do you think it will end?
 
chuckiechan said:
Who do you want to trust with your future? Globalists or Nationalists?

Since as a group we have little control over our nations destiny, yet we are the people in it. So having accepted that, what system do we want to head towards to determine our future as individuals. Globalization of trade in my mind is a good idea it tariffs are used to equalize imbalances at home. Globalism can be "capitalism on steroids" where efficiency takes a back seat to labor. Near slave labor processing fish in the holds of ships in the ocean have a lower cost of manufacturing than a prevailing wage ship with inspections, rules, and rights. But if you have nothing to begin with, near slave labor is a step up if you get paid at all.

A nationalist doesn't want to compete with the lowest cost of foreign labor, be it slaves or free land or free energy from the government for example. Why? Because to meet that price he will have to take a cut in pay. Not a happy choice for your average worker. So he is going to demand his government stop cheap imports made with advantages his government won't give him. To make him happy you will need to give him subsidies, deletion of environmental overhead, regs, rules, etc. that his competitors don't have. But he still can't get it all. It's too expensive and creates it's own imbalances.

In short:
A nationalist leans toward control at the national level.
A globalist leans toward control at the world level.

So who do you trust with your national destiny?

Globalists:
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalization/globalization-of-politics.html


Nationalists:
Click to expand...

I didn't see "Fruitopians" as an option so I did not vote...
 
cuban smokes said:
but don't you see, the same thing is happening right here in America.

Americans have felt slighted by the rest of the world because of economic factors involving trade, lower wages, jobs fleeing the US, and now we see a populist POTUS turning the US against the rest of the world, on a nationalist agenda, isolating the US.
See; there you have a similar contempt of the rest of the world by (some within) the US that the Germans had post WWI.

Maybe you cannot see it happening but it is none the less occurring.
If it is allowed to go on unchecked where do you think it will end?
Click to expand...

Resist the temptation to hijack the thread into nationalist systems that we won't have here.

Stick to economics.

The world "leaders" are trying to polarize the world into globalism with the people doing all the work and getting scant rewards.
 
chuckiechan said:
Resist the temptation to hijack the thread into nationalist systems that we won't have here.

Stick to economics.

The world "leaders" are trying to polarize the world into globalism with the people doing all the work and getting scant rewards.
Click to expand...

so, you do agree with my post but you only think it's an attempt to derail. LOL ................................
 
chuckiechan said:
Resist the temptation to hijack the thread into nationalist systems that we won't have here.

Stick to economics.

The world "leaders" are trying to polarize the world into globalism with the people doing all the work and getting scant rewards.
Click to expand...

The United States is at risk (if we continue in our current direction) of indeed becoming a nationalist based economic system if not eventual cleptocracy....the fundamentals are coming into place. Our system has already become in essence a class based financial, corporate owned (including the body politic) reality and may end badly for most citizens. Our current Administration is an example of what slipping down this slope looks like.
 
Our economy is interconnected. It is kind of at tragedy that globalism has become something of a dirty word right now. I get that people are feeling that they are being forsaken in favor of people from another country which is why we are seeing a wave of national populism right now. When people think of globalism, they often think of the global elite which is trying to instill the new world order or that they are holding them back in favor of people in relatively backwater countries. However, globalism isn't innately elitist. While is is true that the UN isn't democratically elected, being against tariffs and for immigration also qualify as globalist policies. Personally, I think that the anti globalist movement is just a fad and that in a decade or so, it'll die off.
 
Who in their right mind wants to follow Europe, no freedom of speech, police kicking in your doors arresting you for offending someone, no guns, Muslim no go zones, women being beaten and raped....


No thanks!
 
Neither will work in a finite world with a system that is trying to grow forever.

Since the world is already global. Maybe the question is what kind of globalism is needed.
 
One of the ways to answer this question, is to look at sci-fi movies about alien invasions/zombie apocalypses. In those movies, aliens come and invade the planet, burn down our biggest most revered monuments without a care about whether the person who built them was an American, or a Chinese guy named Fong. When zombies attack, they don't care whether your skin type black, red or white. These movies have one thing in common: humanity's survival depends on endorsing unity and moving away from paradigms which purposely separate us.

All that to say that through trade agreements, cooperation between states, and destabilization of tensions, we country very well make it into the 22nd century. Through nationalism (not all kinds, but the political kind) we are more than likely going to end up exterminating each other.
 
Marco Montana said:
Who in their right mind wants to follow Europe, no freedom of speech, police kicking in your doors arresting you for offending someone, no guns, Muslim no go zones, women being beaten and raped....


No thanks!
Click to expand...

Were we talking about globalism or authoritarianism?
 
chuckiechan said:
Who do you want to trust with your future? Globalists or Nationalists?

Since as a group we have little control over our nations destiny, yet we are the people in it. So having accepted that, what system do we want to head towards to determine our future as individuals. Globalization of trade in my mind is a good idea it tariffs are used to equalize imbalances at home. Globalism can be "capitalism on steroids" where efficiency takes a back seat to labor. Near slave labor processing fish in the holds of ships in the ocean have a lower cost of manufacturing than a prevailing wage ship with inspections, rules, and rights. But if you have nothing to begin with, near slave labor is a step up if you get paid at all.

A nationalist doesn't want to compete with the lowest cost of foreign labor, be it slaves or free land or free energy from the government for example. Why? Because to meet that price he will have to take a cut in pay. Not a happy choice for your average worker. So he is going to demand his government stop cheap imports made with advantages his government won't give him. To make him happy you will need to give him subsidies, deletion of environmental overhead, regs, rules, etc. that his competitors don't have. But he still can't get it all. It's too expensive and creates it's own imbalances.

In short:
A nationalist leans toward control at the national level.
A globalist leans toward control at the world level.

So who do you trust with your national destiny?

Globalists:
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalization/globalization-of-politics.html


Nationalists:
Click to expand...

Neither.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom