For People Who Are Against Globalism - Why?

Waterwerx

Well-Known Member
Jul 14, 2016
656
255
38
Hazleton, PA
✟56,259.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Single
That isn't what globalism is or does. But don't let me get in your way.

Globalism - Wikipedia

It should be pointed out that globalism has never been successful. It's been tried and failed on multiple accounts to lesser and greater extents. When you look at the footsteps headed towards globalization, you can't help but see a pattern. Triple Entente--->WW-I, League of Nations--->WW-II, United Nations--->? That's in the 20th century alone. History follows the same pattern.

You can give everyone on earth everything they desire and they will still find some reason or other to fight with someone else. Nations likewise. The only successful globalization will be by Christ when He returns, and even then, nations will rebel after 1000 years, which goes to show that you can put man in a utopian environment, and he will still find a reason to wreck it because of his sinful nature.
 
Upvote 0

PollyJetix

Well-Known Member
Feb 15, 2017
1,128
1,241
Virginia
✟35,433.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Globalism means consolidation of power in the hands of fewer and fewer people.
Which means giving more and more power to the few... and eventually the One... at the top.

Power corrupts.
And absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The move toward global governance is the setup for the Antichrist.
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
For the record: there is no reason why globalisation would absolutely require a "one world government" and a single "world president".

Globalisation can just as well be a massive collaboration among all the sovereign nations.
It doesn't mean at all that we all need to forfeit our own nationalities and become "world citizens" etc.

The internet, global trade, global travel, intercontinental stuff,... all are aspects of globalisation.

Globalisation means primarily that we deal with certain things on a global scale, through central organisations much like the UN etc. There's no need to appoint a single person as "world leader" or to abolish sovereignity of any single country.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,975
64
✟333,152.00
Faith
Pentecostal
For the record: there is no reason why globalisation would absolutely require a "one world government" and a single "world president".

Globalisation can just as well be a massive collaboration among all the sovereign nations.
It doesn't mean at all that we all need to forfeit our own nationalities and become "world citizens" etc.

The internet, global trade, global travel, intercontinental stuff,... all are aspects of globalisation.

Globalisation means primarily that we deal with certain things on a global scale, through central organisations much like the UN etc. There's no need to appoint a single person as "world leader" or to abolish sovereignity of any single country.
Exactly why it won't work. Because people are inherently selfish and wicked. There will always be nations and people who will not collaborate because they want more and want to withhold from others. There will always be governments who seek power and control over people. There will always be people who demand more. There will always be those who want to kill and subjugate other who they seem less than them.

The heart of man is exceedingly wicked who can know it.

It's a utopian view that will never happen.
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Exactly why it won't work.

That is demonstrably wrong.

Just look at this global network that we are using to communicate right now.
The internet isn't the property of any single country.
The internet is, quite literally, the result of a global effort/collaboration to interconnect the world.

Because people are inherently selfish and wicked. There will always be nations and people who will not collaborate because they want more and want to withhold from others.

And the countries who take that stance end up like North Korea.

It's a utopian view that will never happen.

It's already happening. And in some area's, like the internet, it's already happened and done.
 
Upvote 0

mindlight

See in the dark
Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
13,596
2,659
London, UK
✟816,690.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Globalism takes many forms and I am not sure that the OP really clarified which one was being addressed.

1) Muslims want a one world Caliphate under Sharia law (False Prophet)
2) Multinationals want a global marketplace where skills and profits flow easily across borders. The economic consequence seems to be a consolidation of wealth in fewer and fewer hands and a growing disparity between rich and poor. (harlot of Babylon)
3) Various dictators from Roman Caesars through Napoleons, Hitlers & Stalins have dreamed of totalitarian global rule but none have achieved it - we are waiting on the AntiChrist for that one. (The Beast)
4) The UN and various idealists postulate the idea of global unity dealing with global issues like poverty, migration, climate, international crime where humanity can over come its differences and live in peace with each other. I call that one the John Lennon vision. ( False Prophet II)
5) Various other visions that come and go like global Marxism for instance and its vision of the triumph of socialism (False Prophet III +)

All of the above are in effect versions of the Tower of Babel instinct to unite the world without the One true God being involved. Such efforts are cursed and ultimately doomed to fail.

The Christian answer began at Pentecost where peoples from every nation were brought by the Spirit together into one church - the Kingdom of God united in their testimony to Jesus Christ. But most people are not in this community and most indeed will never be members. The global unity that Christians expect and are waiting for comes with the return of Christ and the removal of those who oppose him.
The achievement of this vision will involve terrible judgments and enormous pain for those who do not accept Christ and great joy for those who do accept him.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Sabertooth
Upvote 0

Vyrzaharak

Active Member
Jul 8, 2017
201
52
40
Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy
✟18,738.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I am a globalist and it is because true globalism is capitalism, and nationalism is always communism. We're not seeing a push for (global) capitalism, so there is no globalism to oppose. What we are seeing is a push for a globally-restricted hegemony.

However, between a one-world government and a bunch of geographically-restricted governments, I still can't hep but choose the former. It is utterly ludicrous that anyone ought obey a series of laws solely on the basis of their geographical location.
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟186,371.00
Marital Status
Private
I am a globalist and it is because true globalism is capitalism, and nationalism is always communism. We're not seeing a push for (global) capitalism, so there is no globalism to oppose. What we are seeing is a push for a globally-restricted hegemony.

However, between a one-world government and a bunch of geographically-restricted governments, I still can't hep but choose the former. It is utterly ludicrous that anyone ought obey a series of laws solely on the basis of their geographical location.
If it is their rules governing their chosen self-identity, why would you oppose it?
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,975
64
✟333,152.00
Faith
Pentecostal
That is demonstrably wrong.

Just look at this global network that we are using to communicate right now.
The internet isn't the property of any single country.
The internet is, quite literally, the result of a global effort/collaboration to interconnect the world.



And the countries who take that stance end up like North Korea.



It's already happening. And in some area's, like the internet, it's already happened and done.

It's not that type of globalism we are discussing. Yes global communication and trade and cooperation is occurring. But each country is still a country with borders and governments that look out for their own interests. People will always look for advantages over other people. Some people will always look to control other people. True globalism only will work when one man or group of men amass enough power and force in order to force everyone to capitulate or die. Because man is wicked and selfish.
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
It's not that type of globalism we are discussing. Yes global communication and trade and cooperation is occurring. But each country is still a country with borders and governments that look out for their own interests. People will always look for advantages over other people. Some people will always look to control other people. True globalism only will work when one man or group of men amass enough power and force in order to force everyone to capitulate or die. Because man is wicked and selfish.

That is indeed not the type of globalism I am discussing, nore is it what people generally refer to when using that word.

No, globalism does not mean or imply a global authoritarian dictatorship.

It rather refers to international collaboration efforts and a centralisation of certain aspects of government. Yes, certain aspects thereof will also include things like international law etc.

I don't see how any of this can be called "impossible", as it is exactly what the world is engaged in today and has been for the past several decades.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Globalism takes many forms and I am not sure that the OP really clarified which one was being addressed.

1) Muslims want a one world Caliphate under Sharia law (False Prophet)
2) Multinationals want a global marketplace where skills and profits flow easily across borders. The economic consequence seems to be a consolidation of wealth in fewer and fewer hands and a growing disparity between rich and poor. (harlot of Babylon)
3) Various dictators from Roman Caesars through Napoleons, Hitlers & Stalins have dreamed of totalitarian global rule but none have achieved it - we are waiting on the AntiChrist for that one. (The Beast)
4) The UN and various idealists postulate the idea of global unity dealing with global issues like poverty, migration, climate, international crime where humanity can over come its differences and live in peace with each other. I call that one the John Lennon vision. ( False Prophet II)
5) Various other visions that come and go like global Marxism for instance and its vision of the triumph of socialism (False Prophet III +)

All of the above are in effect versions of the Tower of Babel instinct to unite the world without the One true God being involved. Such efforts are cursed and ultimately doomed to fail.

The Christian answer began at Pentecost where peoples from every nation were brought by the Spirit together into one church - the Kingdom of God united in their testimony to Jesus Christ. But most people are not in this community and most indeed will never be members. The global unity that Christians expect and are waiting for comes with the return of Christ and the removal of those who oppose him.
The achievement of this vision will involve terrible judgments and enormous pain for those who do not accept Christ and great joy for those who do accept him.

It's kind of disturbing how your speech is similar to the speech of muslims talking about a global caliphate.

ie: any and all efforts of globalisation of any type are "evil" - while only the (religious) version YOU happen to adhere to, is the good one.
 
Upvote 0

CrystalDragon

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2016
3,119
1,664
US
✟56,251.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
"Tower of Babel" anyone...?


The "Tower of Babel" problem wasn't that the people were united. It's that they were trying to get to heaven by building a tower tall enough to reach it (We now know that's impossible, but...)
 
Upvote 0

Vyrzaharak

Active Member
Jul 8, 2017
201
52
40
Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy
✟18,738.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If it is their rules governing their chosen self-identity, why would you oppose it?

Nothing but the individual governs identity. You don't have the right to force an identity upon others just because they decide to move in next door, so neither does any collective.
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟186,371.00
Marital Status
Private
Nothing but the individual governs identity. You don't have the right to force an identity upon others just because they decide to move in next door, so neither does any collective.
What about centralized laws/rules that infringe upon that self-identity?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,975
64
✟333,152.00
Faith
Pentecostal
That is indeed not the type of globalism I am discussing, nore is it what people generally refer to when using that word.

No, globalism does not mean or imply a global authoritarian dictatorship.

It rather refers to international collaboration efforts and a centralisation of certain aspects of government. Yes, certain aspects thereof will also include things like international law etc.

I don't see how any of this can be called "impossible", as it is exactly what the world is engaged in today and has been for the past several decades.

Well maybe my understanding is off. When I hear globalism I here international law that subordinates individual countries laws. I hear international government. I hear no borders. I hear control over economies.

We don't have equal trade because every country produces differently and wants the best deal for them and their people. Money is not equal across the world because if economies. All economies are not equal because of how countries are run.

I certainly to not think about free flow of information like the internet(which is controlled in some countries) Or business because business is controlled by individual countries. That is what I am talking about. True globalism doesn't work and never can because mankind is evil and selfish.
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Well maybe my understanding is off. When I hear globalism I here international law that subordinates individual countries laws. I hear international government. I hear no borders. I hear control over economies.

Well, I surely agree that that is a logical development for the future of mankind. With international trade comes international mixture of cultures - even if only through products and media.

I don't expect it to happen for several centuries though. But I figure it's the only possible future, if mankind is going to have a future.

But I agree it has to be a natural development. I am completely opposed to "enforcing" such extreme centralization. If that were done today, it would be disastrous and turn into all out war. Most humans are still far to "tribal minded" for such a big step.

We don't have equal trade because every country produces differently and wants the best deal for them and their people. Money is not equal across the world because if economies. All economies are not equal because of how countries are run.

I certainly to not think about free flow of information like the internet(which is controlled in some countries) Or business because business is controlled by individual countries. That is what I am talking about. True globalism doesn't work and never can because mankind is evil and selfish.

It could work perfectly in some sort of secular democratic federal world. A "united states of the world", if you will.

But idd, the world is not ready for that. Far to much tribalism, far to much radical beliefs systems, far to much ring wing nationalists masquarading as mere patriots, far to much authoritarian regimes still out there.

I am relatively optimistic that all these backwards and counter productive belief systems, ideologies and tribal mentalities will slowly, but surely, fade away over time.

Today, the biggest obstacle for that development is, imo, islamist terrorism. And it's literally their strategy as well. They rejoice when a right wing neonazi nut has success in western elections. Because they know it further fuels the "us versus them" feelings, it gives them extra propaganda fuel and at the same time, the west weakens itself due to putting nationalistic, borderline-racist, protectionists in power.

These terrorists are nuts, but they aren't that stupid. None of them think they are going to conquer western countries by detonating the occasional bomb wich at best kills a few dozen people. Instead, they seek to destabilize the west, to weaken it, by causing inner strife and stirring such protectionist, right wing, racist ideologies.

People like Le Pen's popularity is literally feuled by islamism.

It sounds like incredibly naive hippy talk, but believe you me, NOTHING would anger islamists more then to respond to a terror attack with nothing but love. :)
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,975
64
✟333,152.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Well, I surely agree that that is a logical development for the future of mankind. With international trade comes international mixture of cultures - even if only through products and media.

I don't expect it to happen for several centuries though. But I figure it's the only possible future, if mankind is going to have a future.

But I agree it has to be a natural development. I am completely opposed to "enforcing" such extreme centralization. If that were done today, it would be disastrous and turn into all out war. Most humans are still far to "tribal minded" for such a big step.



It could work perfectly in some sort of secular democratic federal world. A "united states of the world", if you will.

But idd, the world is not ready for that. Far to much tribalism, far to much radical beliefs systems, far to much ring wing nationalists masquarading as mere patriots, far to much authoritarian regimes still out there.

I am relatively optimistic that all these backwards and counter productive belief systems, ideologies and tribal mentalities will slowly, but surely, fade away over time.

Today, the biggest obstacle for that development is, imo, islamist terrorism. And it's literally their strategy as well. They rejoice when a right wing neonazi nut has success in western elections. Because they know it further fuels the "us versus them" feelings, it gives them extra propaganda fuel and at the same time, the west weakens itself due to putting nationalistic, borderline-racist, protectionists in power.

These terrorists are nuts, but they aren't that stupid. None of them think they are going to conquer western countries by detonating the occasional bomb wich at best kills a few dozen people. Instead, they seek to destabilize the west, to weaken it, by causing inner strife and stirring such protectionist, right wing, racist ideologies.

People like Le Pen's popularity is literally feuled by islamism.

It sounds like incredibly naive hippy talk, but believe you me, NOTHING would anger islamists more then to respond to a terror attack with nothing but love. :)

It sounds like we are kinda on the same page then. You pointed out very well why globalism like I was referring to won't work. Man is too selfish and evil as a whole to be able to make it work on a global scale.

Any extremism is a hazard, whether it be Nazis or Islamists or Communists. But for as long as mankind has been around we have had extremism and tribalism and selfishness and evil. A few more centuries isn't going to change that because unfortunately that is in our soul. There will always be men who want to control other men, there will always be men who want anarchy and there will always be men who are more reasoned. But in the end we will always be men (as in mankind).
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
44
Brugge
✟66,672.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
It sounds like we are kinda on the same page then. You pointed out very well why globalism like I was referring to won't work. Man is too selfish and evil as a whole to be able to make it work on a global scale.

Well, in all fairness, that's not really what I said. I didn't blame "selfishness" or "humans are evil". Nore did I say that such far reaching globalism won't work.

I said it wouldn't work today and I didn't blame it on "evil" or "selfishness". I blamed it on a lot of cultures around the world not being ready for such a reality. I blamed it on mentalities of tribalism.

The only way such "united states of the world" could work, is if secular democratic values are valued everywhere. I claim that secular democracy as a form of rule is vastly superior to any extant other form of rule or any form of rule that has been tried in the past.

A multi-cultural world can only be united if all invidiual cultures / groups / parties recognize the right of each other culture / group / party to exist and live their life as they see fit, within the borders / limits of a secular constitution that guarantees this right to all citizens.

In short, and in the words of Matt Dilahunty: "The freedom to swing my arm, ends at your nose".

So yeah, we have an extremely long way to go before such becomes a reality. Essentially, it would require all the nations of the world to become some sort of secular democracy which recognise the validity and importance of international law, universal human rights etc.

Again, I'm rather optimistic about that. It's really only a matter of time. I'ld even dare to say that the only way that such a future will not become a reality, is if humanity destroys itself before that, by means of war or whatever.

Any extremism is a hazard, whether it be Nazis or Islamists or Communists.

Yep!

But for as long as mankind has been around we have had extremism and tribalism and selfishness and evil.

And as we progress further through time, we see it moving to the background.
This is a trend that can't be denied.

Tribalism makes way for unity as we go forward.
The US, the EU, NATO, UN, .... all these are entities which are formed by a bunch of "tribes" working together towards a common goal.

As time goes on and as technology improves and gains more and more global reach, it's almost inevitable that we grow more and more "towards" eachother. The lines are being blurred.

I'm only 37 and I remember a time where I couldn't cross the Belgian borders "just because". I didn't have that freedom. And when I did, I was by every means of the words "in another country". I was definatly not home. I had to deal with other money, other rules, other languages, ...

That's not the case at all anymore. If it wasn't for that sign next to the road "Welcome in Germany", I wouldn't even realise I just crossed over into another country. I pay with euro's everywhere. I can communicate in english in the vast majority of places.

Driving 1500 km's south no longer makes me feel I am 1500km's away from home. 300 - 1500, it's not all that different.

A few more centuries isn't going to change that because unfortunately that is in our soul.

Unlike you, I guess, I don't consider humans to be "rotten" by default.

There will always be men who want to control other men, there will always be men who want anarchy and there will always be men who are more reasoned. But in the end we will always be men (as in mankind).

I don't see how that would be more of a problem in a "united states of the world" then such currently is a problem in a "united states of america".

Power-hungry people with bad intentions will likely always exist, yes.
This is why secular democracy is a good thing. You get to not vote for the bad guys.
And if by accident a bad guy happens to be elected anyway (*cough* Trump *cough*), then there are also methods to remove him from power if and when (s)he crosses a line. And if for some reason no clear line gets crossed - you'll still get to vote someone else in power 4 years later.


But as said, all this is future talk.
And it's something that the world is moving towards, gradually.
Such a thing can't be installed overnight, nore can it be imposed.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,637
59
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Problems with globalism
1. Who leads? Which government will be the model for all others?
2. One currency. Who's will it be?
3. Back to #1, who will police and judge every nation?
4. What about the citizens? Maybe they don't want to lower standards to let the third world catch up.
 
Upvote 0