The past five years may have been the last hurdle on the path towards globalism. Donald Trump won in 2016 by appealing to more nationalist policy and that was a problem for the larger Washington entrenchment that seeks the more universal view. A vote by Britain to leave European Union slightly before the US election was a shocking display of nationalistic sentiment. The results of Brexit will likely be largely symbolic in the end to the pleasure of the globalist movement. Other smaller nationalist political movements took hold but are now fizzling. Moving to a truly global political structure becomes more likely in the aftermath of Trump as our ruling political class realizes that they almost lost their grip. The US is the biggest piece to the puzzle given our economic size and strength.
The end of World War II brought on the foundation of the modern globalist movement. Forming global organizations, largest among them the United Nations, was a mechanism against experiencing another conflict. Bringing nations together through diplomacy and building relationships would create non- violent avenues of resolution. The devastation of the Great War was massive in it’s own right and the global powers mostly only united around punishing the German state. The League of Nations ultimately failed to bring the global community together. The fire of the First World War was never put out and the next conflict burned hotter and spread much further. Really the 1930’s and 1940’s were the last decades of empire building efforts, which were carried out significantly by the German and Japanese. After seeing the Holocaust, fascist aggression and the bomb, the world needed to ensure that we could not ever see a similar tragedy.
Stability on the world stage is certainly a strong argument for the globalist approach. Proponents of globalism also argue that bringing countries together brings mutual benefits of economic gain, larger scale ability to solve problems facing all nations and that the entirety of mankind will be able to elevate their prospects in life. Connecting people from all areas of the globe should allow ideas to flow openly and we will also create a kinder, more tolerant community. At face value, all of these things are good reasons to participate in the globalist society. The downside is that this does have a cost. America and a handful of other nations will subsidize the cohesion that we seek to achieve. Not all countries will comply or participate in the way that the globalists prefer. Globalism requires a lessened sense of pride in your own nation’s achievements and also requires a sacrifice of quality of life for those citizens of the subsidizing countries (Americans). Really this idea of a globalist utopian society leans more towards a political socialism and against the unique American way of life.
Going back to the 1940’s, the United States really rose from a mid- sized power on the world stage to the preeminent super power status that we enjoy today. Before the two world conflicts, America was not necessarily seeking a globalist society. We were better known for keeping to ourselves and did not even want to participate in either war. The resulting destruction of Western Europe was a leading factor in building our economic strength. Through this new strength, we were able to lead in establishing the post- war era and then eventually lead the fight against communism. The latter half of the 20th century was a time of great pride in our country and our freer way of life. We helped win the war against the Nazis, became a beacon of freedom that starkly contrasted autocratic tyranny and were leading western civilization forward.
Nationalism is viewed in a distorted manner as a political styling of autocrats, either on the far left or far right of the spectrum. It is a policy that is viewed in terms of isolation and an uncooperating nature. Oftentimes the extreme association is with race – white nationalism – and the connotation is that we should reject that thinking. Clearly in terms of race, we should reject that policy but political nationalism is different. The nationalist view seeks to enhance the prospects of one’s own domestic community. A nationalist viewpoint promotes having patriotic exuberance. This does not mean that a state is closed off to the world community and a nationalist can still be a leader on the global stage. The nationalist sentiment should seek to ensure that a nation’s own citizens have rights to a prosperous life and promote the same for other nations. This means being a leader by example and setting a path by which other nations can enact similar policies to lift their own tide.
There are many nations on Earth where they clamour for the globalists. This system will greatly improve the lives of their people, bring them into the modern age and stabilize their society. Raising literally billions of people into a middle class over the span of a few decades is incredibly attractive to political leaders who know that they would never be able to do so domestically. The changes China has seen in the decades since Richard Nixon broke bread with Mao in the 1970s is a really good case for the powers of globalist policy (also a case against as they continue to claim developing nation status). An incredibly poor population led by one of the strictest authoritarians of the 20th century emerged to its current place as the second largest economy on Earth.
The other side of the benefits of globalism is that they must be subsidized by the prominent countries, of which there are few. This shift occurs not only in direct monetary investment. The countries playing benefactor do so also by shifting jobs to other countries, provide defense and security, redirect private financial investment towards foreign opportunities, dissolving the inherent ideals of your land and accepting that your domestic corporations will serve the global environment above your own. The economies required to power the development of other nations must wage a successful campaign to convince their citizens that the global wellbeing supersedes their domestic values and rights. Over the past few years we saw this campaign kick into another gear as the United States halted their march toward globalism.
The globalism ideal of placing international development and equity above individual states’ requires a lessening of domestic importance and pride. Globalism requires political leaders to serve a larger set of stakeholders, not just their electorate body. The subsidizers must convince constituents that our global issues – climate, energy policy, international economic prosperity, human migration- are more important than their own domestic issues. A ruling class of prominent societies must convince the domestic population that they should adopt ideals more suited to the global community and not those on which your country was founded.
The campaign towards the globalism movement and its disruption were highly demonstrative during the past four years. Donald Trump favored policies that protected the economic security of domestic citizens. He favored domestic energy independence, fair trade with international partners and enabling industries that are seen as unimportant – see manufacturing. There was a realization that our people deserve to have careers that pay well and that there was still a need for a healthy middle class. In the UK, people were tired of being dictated to by the European Union. The Britons wanted to be free of a bloc that holds these globalist views whereby a group of a couple dozen countries pushed policy that seemed to leave them behind. These views will be steamrolled in both countries over the long term.
In America, there is a campaign to devalue the belief system we hold and shift toward the globalist view. Americans have unique individual freedoms – speech, press, firearms, religion- and states rights (federalism) that do not meet the modern global viewpoints. There is a cultural movement where the American academy are cramming down reasons why we should not be proud of our heritage. A narrative is emerging that goes like this: America was founded by slave owners and colonizers who established a racist institution that swept across the continent and resides among us today in exactly the same way. The ideas are being pushed that we should not be proud of our founding, we should not have the rights we established and that nothing can be changed in our land other than tearing down our current system. We are being told that our country is filled with hatred, intolerance, white supremacy, inequality and most importantly inequity. Americans should not salute the flag and sing the national anthem- racist, we should not say the pledge of allegiance- also racist, we should also not protect our borders- incredibly racist.
Americans are being told that our founding tenets are really just outdated and that we should modernize to conform more with the global community. Political leaders would like to take away gun rights, curb the qualifications of accepted speech and let us know that we are racist in a way that we can never heal. That definition of racism is not the kind that we once knew in the time of Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement. The new racism is an ideal founded on Marxist theories of oppressor and oppressed – this time it’s white vs. black instead of factions of the economy. Americans are never going to be able to fix their ills when half of the country is racist and white supremicist based on their preference of political affiliation. American political figures push ideals of equity of outcome not equality of opportunity. All of these arguments are the reflexive outrage of a ruling class and economic elite that find their globalist plans infringed upon.
America is a place where the most successful businesses in the world are rooted. The only other competitors in recent times are propped up communist party champions from China. The United States offers the most efficient and influential financial market in the world. Our country offers a legal system that protects property rights at an unrivaled level. America also has a competitive corporate tax policy. All of these factors make this country the most fertile ground for innovation and wealth on the planet. Our workers are some of the most skilled and well educated. Many of our country’s businesses go on to expand into international markets to find continued growth. There is no problem with successful business ventures but these corporations take advantage of our domestic market then become beholden to globalist values. Once multinational corporations serve the global market, they act on behalf of values that are prominent in the global community. No doubt China, India and the European Union are valuable expansion points but the cost is abandoning the date that brought them. The leaders of these corporations largely keep their headquarters domestic but move operations to the cheapest labor markets and now lecture Americans about their values. These executives do the bidding of the globalist movement after amassing billions – if not trillions- in market capitalization on the backs of American capital and labor.
With America marching toward the globalist society, the workers of our country will suffer. Industries that employed millions will fall by the wayside. People in other countries will be the beneficiaries of this shift as they learn new skills and earn higher wages. People in international communities will succeed in ways that were previously unimaginable. I don’t blame these international communities that seize the opportunity to advance economically and stabilize. But I do question the leaders here in America willing to sacrifice their own middle class. I also understand that corporations have a mandate to maximize shareholder value but at what long term cost? We need to retain these industries because miners in West Virginia cannot simply “learn to code.” We cannot abandon millions of skilled workers in our country to appease the globalist agenda.
When we do not have a middle class able to work and earn an honest living due to globalism, technology will come to bury them once and for all. America is also a leading incubator of technological advancements that have a serious impact on society. We will be automating everything from manufacturing to back office functions. The rest will be outsourced to the beneficiaries of globalism where the cost of human labor does not warrant automation. The creative visionaries that develop these technologies will still be rewarded handsomely as they generate untold value for the economy. The outcome that results is a very poor class that provides tasks locally where they can and an incredibly wealthy class (much smaller in scale) that develop valuable technology. Globalism and technological development hollow out a once vibrant core of the American economy to the benefit of the masses in developing nations.
We had a political leader that the establishment never thought we would have and never wanted. The UK political establishment did not want Brexit. This brief period of time may be a tiny final nail in the coffin of nations. The prominent western world pushes toward globalism. We push toward diminishing the values and beliefs that hold nations together and the replacement is a global unitary order. The globalist future actually resembles a lot of what we have seen in socialist nations. Most of us will suffer from the equity of outcome that cultural figures seem to think is of utmost importance. There will be a very small elite political class and an equally small corporate elite conspiring to allocate resources globally. Economic resources will spread as equally as possible amongst the other seven billion global citizens. Rights will also be allocated along this global initiative as well. The voice of those equally less privileged will be equally silenced by their globalist leaders. Borders will be meaningless and there will be no real reason to migrate elsewhere. Welcome to the globalist utopia.
