For People Who Are Against Globalism - Why?

[Percivale]

Globalism means several different things, so one can't say simply for or against. I am more interested in the well-being of the whole world than just my nation and couldn't be called a nationalist. But I am opposed to free trade, favoring moderate across-the-board tariffs, because I think free trade only benefits the wealthy whether in rich or poor countries, and motivates poor countries to ignore the environment and labor laws rather than working to build up an internal, service based economy. International economic systems are less resilient; if there were a major disaster the closer your food supply, especially, the better. I don't like a lot of fossil fuels being spent on shipping things back and forth that could be produced in the country they are used in.
I don't think it good that walmart junk is cheaper than it used to be. It's got to where in my area you can tell who is poor because they have more stuff in their yard. That stuff is not making them happier. I'd like to see the cost of housing, education, and healthcare come down and that of manufactured goods go up.
I also believe it good that different nations have different laws, especially if they are small nations or states or communities; That gives people more freedom to choose a place to live that suits them. Freedom of association is important. But in every nation one should be free to leave, and to learn about other nations. I value diversity, and so I oppose the homogenizing effect of globalism. Different places should have different cultures, so that travel continues to mean visiting places that are new to you, not just copies of where you came from.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Off the top of my head, I can think of two considerations: slavery and pollution.

In the USA, we have an infrastructure that polices these two possibilities. Along with social protections, it adds overhead costs to our final products.

Countries that do not have such protections in place can undersell us, undermining said infrastructure (and tax revenue). From our POV, it lowers the standard of living on many fronts (and guts the middle class).

It also adds to the war chest of sworn enemies, like China.

That assumes that "globalism" is only an economic thing.
I disagree. I think there's also political globalism. And countries should do more about that.

Taking your specific examples, perhaps it shouldn't be so "easy" for a western corporation to have its products manufactured in foreign factories where social rights, safety, etc are completely in opposition to our western standards.

Sure, that might hurt productivity of these corporation or just increase prices of the products.
But it will also hurt those factories. Probably also a lot harder. They will have no choice but to change their ways.

I think globalism is definatly the way forward. But indeed, it can't be just restricted to "economic" globalism. Because in that case, it rather becomes nothing more or less then having your jobs exported to countries where they can exploit workers. That's not globalism. That's exploitation. I don't see why a western government should allow a western corporation to exploit workers - no matter where those workers are located.

The human rights are, in the end, universal

 

[DogmaHunter]

We can never have globalization in the way people really want. It's a utopian ideal that will NEVER work due to the nature of man.

People said that 300 years ago as well.
Except it wasn't about a "united world" but about the "united states".

 

[DogmaHunter]

I reject it because, like socialism, it promised to raise the poorest and weakest up, but in practice tears the strongest or better off down*.

You feel like the poor and the rich should each stay in their own "cast"? Or even that the distance between them should become even bigger?

I reject it because of the massive failure of the EU, and that their response to this failure is to call for even more power to be given to them.

I always chuckle when people call the EU a "massive failure".
The Brits are only now learning just how much the EU meant for them.

People who call the EU a massive failure, should do the exercise of how life would change in each member state, if the entire thing was dimantled.

Is it a perfect set-up? Far from it. It can be improved in lots of ways, and it will be. But these things take time. It's also a lot harder to organize as opposed to a united states, even if only for the sheer fact that most of us speak different languages.

Also, each state's histroy is FAR FAR bigger then any of the US states. The US actually has almost NO history. Only indians, mayans, etc lived there up until just a few centuries ago. Today's US is populated by descendants of Europeans.

European countries have histories that go back THOUSANDS of years. Such countries are much harder to "unite" then a couple of almost artificially drawn-up states populated with mostly like-minded immigrants.

I reject it because I am an individualist, and globalism is just another form of collectivism.

That, I don't get at all. How does, for example, open trade with country X diminish your "individualism"?

I reject it because it is founded on the same folly of all utopias: that man can be made perfect, or at least those at the top are close enough to be given nearly unlimited power.

I wasn't aware that globalism is an inherently authoritarian system and that it can't be democratic.

 

[Mare Liberum]

Globalism has nothing to do with diversity, globalism is not the united colors of Beneton. The USG, their cronies in the G 8, and the international financiers greasing the cogs of empire are the only beneficiaries of globalism; the rest of the world is just their real estate. Imperialism by any other name...

 

[Sabertooth]

Only one Person can (and will) make globalism work correctly...

 

[rjs330]

People said that 300 years ago as well.
Except it wasn't about a "united world" but about the "united states".

And we had a civil war too. Force was used to keep the states united. But look at the trouble we had putting things together with people who were relatively like minded. It's not going to happen with a world that had such huge opposite thinking.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Globalism has nothing to do with diversity, globalism is not the united colors of Beneton. The USG, their cronies in the G 8, and the international financiers greasing the cogs of empire are the only beneficiaries of globalism; the rest of the world is just their real estate. Imperialism by any other name...

Ow dear.

How's that internet device working out for you?
Do you realise you wouldn't even have that thing (or would pay it 10x more), if it wasn't for global trade and the ability for a company of country X to install branches and factories around the world?

Again, it's pretty clear that people who complain about this, are seriously deluded when it comes to the benefits they have as a direct result of globalism / international cooperation.

 

[DogmaHunter]

And we had a civil war too. Force was used to keep the states united. But look at the trouble we had putting things together with people who were relatively like minded. It's not going to happen with a world that had such huge opposite thinking.

Your civil was was not among like minded people.
Very simplisticly put... it was a war between democratic forces on the one hand, and full blown racists on the other.

 

[Mare Liberum]

Ow dear.

How's that internet device working out for you?
Do you realise you wouldn't even have that thing (or would pay it 10x more), if it wasn't for global trade and the ability for a company of country X to install branches and factories around the world?

Again, it's pretty clear that people who complain about this, are seriously deluded when it comes to the benefits they have as a direct result of globalism / international cooperation.

Ow dear.

How are the social and environmental costs of globalization working out for you? Keep your eyes peeled to the short-term benefits of the Usurious Kingdom's economic colonialism. We musn't allow the Queenie's utopia between your stopped ears to burst.

I live in the US, and my ISP is a - can you guess - US media corp; globalization hasn't opened the service provider flood gates in my country, nor driven down data costs in my region. There is no chance I could contract with a Canadian or Japanese ISP in Indiana, USA, for a competitively priced and favorable data plan. I'm no means free in this corporatist, "free" market.

Again, its pretty clear that people who defend technocracy are seriously deluded, when it comes to the maluses they accept as a direct result of globalism / international usurpation.

 

[DogmaHunter]

How are the social and environmental costs of globalization working out for you?

It's not about me personally. That's your first mistake. It's about all humans.
And for all humans, it's working out pretty fine (in the sense of a growing trend towards "better"). Life today is better then life 50 years ago.

And, if you must know, pretty great, for me personally as well.

Keep your eyes peeled to the short-term benefits of the Usurious Kingdom's economic colonialism. We musn't allow the Queenie's utopia between your stopped ears to burst.

"short-term" benefits? It took almost a century of hard work and investment to get all this done....

I live in the US, and my ISP is a - can you guess - US media corp; globalization hasn't opened the service provider flood gates in my country, nor driven down data costs in my region. There is no chance I could contract with a Canadian or Japanese ISP in Indiana, USA, for a competitively priced and favorable data plan. I'm no means free in this corporatist, "free" market.

I was talking about your device. Not your ISP. Not sure why you think that globalization means that you should be able to get anything from any country at all times.

Again, its pretty clear that people who defend technocracy are seriously deluded, when it comes to the maluses they accept as a direct result of globalism / international usurpation.

Such as?

 

[Adstar]

I have a few questions if you don't mind, I'm trying to understand your position, but I can't quite wrap my head around it. I'm not so much talking about the current affairs of the country or world, but more in the general idea of globalism.

Why are you opposed to globalism?
Are you opposed to all of it, only certain aspects?
Do you see it as Anti-(Insert your nationality here)? If so, why?

I am opposed to Human ( which is really satan inspired) lead globalism. why because it will bring about persecution.. Once you form a global governance that central authority will seek to have one law over all mankind and part of that conformity will be in the realm of religion.. They will seek to combine religions into a compromised mixed doctrine world religion.. As a Christian i will not compromise any of the doctrines of Christianity.. Nor will i ever embrace any doctrine derived from any other religion.. Christianity by it's very teachings separates Christians spiritually from the larger world community.. Christians can function and work in this world just fine in the sense of economic activity and so forth.. But when it comes to our Faith we cannot compromise anything in regard to the Gospel of the LORD Jesus Christ..

For me, I was never really exposed to the idea that an interconnected world with free trade not only goods and services but culture and ideas, the economy is a worldwide market, open borders, seeing yourself as both your own nationality and global citizen as well was a bad thing. When I read the Left Behind series for the first time, one of the biggest issues I had with the series was truly seeing all nations united (not the totalitarian anti-Christian part, just the uniting of all nations into one worldwide country, if you will) or a global currency as something inherently evil.

I have no problem with the world being united under one Leader.. I believe the day is coming when Jesus will return and rule the entire earth. So globalism under the LORD Jesus Christ is what i support So Christ lead Globalism will be Perfect..

So globalism itself is not the problem.. The important thing is who is the leader of it.. Who has their hands on the power leavers..

 

[mark kennedy]

I have a few questions if you don't mind, I'm trying to understand your position, but I can't quite wrap my head around it. I'm not so much talking about the current affairs of the country or world, but more in the general idea of globalism.

Why are you opposed to globalism?
Are you opposed to all of it, only certain aspects?
Do you see it as Anti-(Insert your nationality here)? If so, why?


For me, I was never really exposed to the idea that an interconnected world with free trade not only goods and services but culture and ideas, the economy is a worldwide market, open borders, seeing yourself as both your own nationality and global citizen as well was a bad thing. When I read the Left Behind series for the first time, one of the biggest issues I had with the series was truly seeing all nations united (not the totalitarian anti-Christian part, just the uniting of all nations into one worldwide country, if you will) or a global currency as something inherently evil.


If I think of any more questions, I'll add them in the thread. Thank you for your time.

I think these trends ebb and flow. When the Soviet Union fell apart it left eastern Europe in need of being modernized and effectively rebuilt. Nixon had normalized relations with China but in the wake of the rise of globalism there was a need to include China in the WTO (World Trade Organization). The bane of globalism has long been cheap labor, NAFTA and GATT along with open boarders immigration have drained jobs from the west. I think there is a movement now in the US and Europe to stave off a flood of immigrants and a strong tendency toward a more nationalistic world view.

 

[The~Cerberus~Infinite]

That isn't what globalism is or does. But don't let me get in your way.

Globalism - Wikipedia

Get a better source if you want to be taken seriously. He is correct in what the result of globalism is, even if it not stated in a wiki that anyone can edit

 

[saffron park]

I am in favor of an economic globalism, where anyone in the world can trade with anyone else without restrictions. Larger markets result in greater prosperity for everyone.

I am in favor of a sort of cultural globalism. The internet has made it easier to build communities based on mutual interests and similar worldviews and ways of thinking rather than communities that are based on the fact that you happen to live close to someone.

I am not not in favor of political globalism, or the centralization of power. This sort of globalism is antithetical to my goals of human freedom and prosperity.

I want politics to become more local as the market becomes more global.

 

[Brotherly Spirit]

The only problem with globalism is politics as others said. People have competing interests either benefiting or hurting from certain conditions. For those initially or indefinitely affected negatively, it's necessary to mitigate losses and somehow positively include them. If not, the trade-offs will be weighed as to whether it's worth the gains. So the self-interests of many different people will always make it difficult to maintain any system (governance and trade etc.)

I think economically globalism is mostly beneficial for people. But it favors big businesses and rich people disproportionately. Also the problem of geographical politics of competing interests, certain nations are more protectionist and authoritative while others open and democratic. Then we have questions of is it right or safe, even fair, to have closer relations and some cases more so unilaterally.

Ideally we'd all agree to freedom of self-governing, open trading, and border-less communities. We'd all live in peace with similar-minded people and trade with others. But I don't know if that's possible in the long term.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I can already trade over the internet... So what do I need globalism for? Anyone..?

 

[Landon Caeli]

...Because Europe opened their borders and dived into the pool head first, so now everyone is expected to follow?

Open borders is part of globalism, no..?

 

[Landon Caeli]

People said that 300 years ago as well.
Except it wasn't about a "united world" but about the "united states".

I honestly believe Europe has allowed mass migration due to their idolization of the U.S.

...But what they had there was nothing wrong with. Oh well. It's too late now, might as well just keep the flow ongoing, and go all the way. We'll see if it works out the same as what we have here in the U.S.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I can already trade over the internet... So what do I need globalism for? Anyone..?

Errrrrrr....

That *is* an aspect of globalization.