• 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!

Can someone please tell me what a "globalist" is?

You don't understand. This isn't about the US being a world power. This is about international corporations and their financial systems using politicians from EVERY country for THEIR power. Those Globalists don't care about the US or the people of the US. They only care about their own power and money.

You can think of it as a kind of reverse form of Fascism. Instead of governments controlling corporations for their own purposes, it's the corporations that are controlling governments.

And this form of Globalism hasn't been around since the late 30's. It's been around since the early 80's.
 
Simpletruther said:
Tariffs are always a net negative, unless they're used strategically to enhance national security.
Click to expand...
Even then they are bad. Working towards not “needing” national security is the only permanent solution.
 
The solution for that is in post 50. It’s the only way forward. We now have nukes. If we keep going the way we are some asshole will use one. The only reason global corps want “access” to countries is because there is “opportunity” there. If there were no opportunity there, they’d do something else.
 
Post #50 also misunderstands what Globalism is.
 
It is something people like Mycroft say to sound smart, when in reality it does the opposite.
 
Assuming the validity of your argument, it seems that a counter strategy, probably politically impossible, would be to eliminate corporate personhood, their ability to donate to political campaigns, and other measures.
 
Nickyjo said:
Assuming the validity of your argument, it seems that a counter strategy, probably politically impossible, would be to eliminate corporate personhood, their ability to donate to political campaigns, and other measures.
Click to expand...
For sure...impossible...since what you want is the very government politicians that benefit from the globalists to end their gravy train. You also run into the 1st Amendment issues that the courts have already ruled on.

No...the best way to deal with globalism is to elect politicians who won't take part in it and who will support a President who wants to shift trade issues to benefit Americans...especially Main Street Americans.

Right now there is only one group who is doing this: Trump and his supporters. They face an uphill battle because there are still a LOT of Globalist politicians in the US government.
 

Wiki has a good take on it:

Globalism refers to various patterns of meaning beyond the merely international. It is used by political scientists, such as Joseph Nye, to describe "attempts to understand all the interconnections of the modern world—and to highlight patterns that underlie (and explain) them."[1] While primarily associated with world-systems, it can be used to describe other global trends. The concept of globalism is also classically used to distinguish the ideologies of globalization (the subjective meanings) from the processes of globalization (the objective practices).[2] In this sense, globalism is to globalization what nationalism is to nationality.

But, that's academic, below is what it has become, and I think this nails it, of late (which is Steve Bannon's idea of it):

The term is now frequently used as a pejorative by far-right movements and conspiracy theorists. False usage in this way has also been associated with anti-semitism, as anti-semites frequently appropriate the word globalist for Jews.[3][4][5]
 
Yeah, so don’t stop there go deeper. Take away what global corps want. They’ll go somewhere else, and what I mean by that, is their “talent” and “drive” will go somewhere else. They don’t want some nebulous power. That’s a fantasy. They want power because it’s a way to “do a better job” at something they find interesting. They are businesses. They aren’t just lying cheating control freaks, mad and power hungry. Sure there are those people too, but most global corps are just doing business. But they’re doing it more and more efficiently.

Capitalism had a good fast run, but in its current form, it won’t make it much longer. In a hundred years the people will laugh at us when the historians tell them what we thought.
 
Give me a break. Somehow I think trade issues - especially with the Third World - have benefitted Americans for quite a while. And a crook like Trump is not to be trusted with anything.

What has Donald Trump actually achieved on trade?

The self-styled "Tariff Man" uses tariffs for negotiation, but how successful has he been?
www.bbc.com

How Trump’s Tariffs Really Affected the U.S. Job Market

carnegieendowment.org

Trump has been all hat, no cattle, for years.

And tariffs are generally a losing proposition for a country. Look up Smoot-Hawley. Or simply listen to "I am a Rock" by S & G: "I've built walls, a fortress deep and mighty, that none can penetrate." Sound familiar? Applies to countries as well as people.
 
Last edited:
Ask real Realestate developers from the 80’s and 90’s what they thought of Trump then. Once a clown…
 
True... There's globalism and critical race theory, both used to frighten conservative children. (The left has its own bogeymen, tho a bit less ominous.) Before that we had birtherism and immigrants. Sigh. Life was much simpler when right-wing nonsense just meant fear of Commies and flouridation.
 
Mycroft said:
Regardless your spin and nonsense, Trump is not a Globalist.

You didn't even read the definition, did you?
Click to expand...
He appears to be a Russian nationalist.
 
Real globalism instead of the artificially manufactured “meritocracy” we have now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…