In the field of economics, "globalists" are those who analyze economic systems in terms of how they interact with other such systems around the world.
In politics, "globalism" used to mean acknowledging that the Atlantic and Pacific haven't been effective moats for Fortress America since the invention of long-range air travel; now it's used as "dog-whistle" coding for, shall we say, certain ethnoreligious groups.
"Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"
In Canada we're more used to thinking in globalist terms, as jonsills defines them above. "Fortress anyplace" really isn't practical any more. Way we figure it we can either learn to work together, or sink separately (and probably literally).
Globalists advocate against the interest of their home nation and her people in favor of foreign interest and foreign people. This includes the push for more refugees or economic migrants and open borders, trade deals that favor foreign nations over their own, presumably to create a One-World Nation, or Global Nation.
The above has nothing to do with the Flat-Earth people, who I think are calling their opponents something similar, since a globe has been used to depict a 3D model of the Earth for a long time.
Describing globalists as people who just advocate against the interests of their own nation in favor of other nations' interests, and exclusively using that to define globalists and globalization in general, ignores the economic benefits that come with globalization.
By no means is it a perfect economic model to follow, but compared to what the other side of the fence is selling? I'd go with the former.
EDIT: I used "economical" in place "economic". Derp.
Real globalists just believe that greater international economic and political integration benefits everyone in the long term, including their home countries.
Evil conspirator globalists belong to comic-book worlds, where our PCs can beat them up!
Globalists advocate against the interest of their home nation and her people in favor of foreign interest and foreign people.
Humans are tribal animals by nature, so I can see why someone might think this way. This is when you have to stop and ask yourself how big your "tribe" is: yourself only, your immediate family and friends, your neighborhood, your city, your state, your country, or the world?
Personally, I choose the world. "Us vs them" is simplistic thinking because there are in fact both good and bad actors among "us" as well as "them."
Besides, the better the rest of the world does, the better off you'll be as well:
Then you have the UN with the politician's version of Globalism(this is the bad one). IE more unity means more political influence for whoever is on top.
Cooperation for mutual benefit is good... IF it's actually mutual benefit.
Globalism, nationalism... you'll always get people in power everywhere who try to exploit any prevailing trends for their own selfish purposes. No political or socio-economic philosophy is intentionally and inherently all bad or all good; it really depends on how they're applied. Although some are more vulnerable to exploitation than others; and some are better suited to the times.
Then you have the UN with the politician's version of Globalism(this is the bad one). IE more unity means more political influence for whoever is on top.
Cooperation for mutual benefit is good... IF it's actually mutual benefit.
This is implying that "politicians" are somehow different from everyone else, like they're some sort of special class of not-quite-people or something. That belief not only isn't true, but is dangerous for democracy because it disenfranchises voters. For every politician given a corporate wishlist and a briefcase full of money every time they check something off that wishlist, there's also a politician who got involved because they genuinely want to bring about some sort of positive (based on their values) change.
As for the UN, it's not perfect, but as a whole, the nations of Europe are a lot stronger because of it. I mean, if Putin wants to see it broken up, it must be doing something right. The challenge for the EU's member nations is to fix the broken parts while still preserving what works. That's certainly better than smashing the whole thing and trying to start over from scratch.
Globalism, nationalism... you'll always get people in power everywhere who try to exploit any prevailing trends for their own selfish purposes. No political or socio-economic philosophy is intentionally and inherently all bad or all good; it really depends on how they're applied. Although some are more vulnerable to exploitation than others; and some are better suited to the times.
I'd be curious to see an example of "good" nationalism being implemented somewhere. I realize this has become something of an opinion A vs opinion B topic, but if you wipe away all of the labels, all nationalism really says is, "I want my tribe to be smaller." Unfortunately, a smaller tribe is more easily defeated by a hostile actor.
I get that part of the fear behind globalism is that the "global government" would certainly attract the wrong type of people. This fear is actually good, and if channeled correctly and many people sharing this concern get involved in building a global economy, they're more likely to create something that's harder for an aspiring dictator to gain control over. However, if people who fear the possible negative results of globalism do nothing, then while they're sitting on the sidelines and complaining about globalism, the aforementioned aspiring dictators and corporations most certainly are working toward their version of a global economy--one that's good for them and bad for everyone else.
Who would you rather have ushering in the (very much inevitable) global age: The people against a global autocracy or the people who want a global autocracy?
(Hopefully) Useful CO Resources: HeroCreator (character planner), Cosmic Timers/Alert Checklist, Blood Moon Map, Anniversary Cat Map, and more (eventually, anyway).
Nationalism inherently favors the nation's majority ethnicity while marginalizing the minorities present in that nation, on the basis that the nation's cultural heritage exclusively belongs to that majority, and that they should take precendence when it comes to matters of employment and access to public services, or any other government policies made to benefit the country's residents. I sure as heck wouldn't be comfortable living in a nationalist-run country if I belonged to the ethnic minority there even if I was born in that country, no matter how much I try to be a productive citizen by working hard and paying my taxes.
The more extreme brand of nationalism inherently treats immigration as objectively bad and destructive in the absolute sense, even though immigration (when vetted properly without opening floodgates) contributes to a nation's economic well-being by strengthening commerical and industrial workforces when the country has a problem getting enough locals with the skillsets needed to strengthen those workforces to begin with. Heck, it doesn't even have to be actual immigration, foreign people with temporary work visas also get the negative label.
I find it really hard to accept the possibility of "good" nationalism being a thing.
Nationalism promotes the idea that particular groups should exercise sovereignty over their own homelands, and is thus linked to self-determination. It was one of the main driving forces bringing an end to European colonialism in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Some scholars consider the American Revolution to be an example of nationalism, e.g. see Nationalism in Europe and America by Lloyd S. Kramer, University of North Carolina Press.
Nationalism promotes the idea that particular groups should exercise sovereignty over their own homelands, and is thus linked to self-determination. It was one of the main driving forces bringing an end to European colonialism in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Some scholars consider the American Revolution to be an example of nationalism, e.g. see Nationalism in Europe and America by Lloyd S. Kramer, University of North Carolina Press.
This. It's not about sticking a sign saying "Keep Out!" in your yard. It's about having rules in place to ensure the rights of your citizens are respected.
And no. illegal immigrants should NOT have the same rights as citizens. That's kinda the whole point behind BEING a citizen. If you're an illegal immigrant, you have the right to be deported. Seriously, if you want to live here badly enough to be a "law abiding" non-citizen for 20 years then you want to live here badly enough to become a citizen.
Why do I mention this? Part of the globalism debate is about whether citizenship laws should be drastically re-written.
Nationalism inherently favors the nation's majority ethnicity while marginalizing the minorities present in that nation, on the basis that the nation's cultural heritage exclusively belongs to that majority, and that they should take precendence when it comes to matters of employment and access to public services, or any other government policies made to benefit the country's residents. I sure as heck wouldn't be comfortable living in a nationalist-run country if I belonged to the ethnic minority there even if I was born in that country, no matter how much I try to be a productive citizen by working hard and paying my taxes.
Well, society can't cater to the minority. I can't think of any actual example of what you describe when you say "cultural heritage" though.
The more extreme brand of nationalism inherently treats immigration as objectively bad and destructive in the absolute sense, even though immigration (when vetted properly without opening floodgates) contributes to a nation's economic well-being by strengthening commerical and industrial workforces when the country has a problem getting enough locals with the skillsets needed to strengthen those workforces to begin with. Heck, it doesn't even have to be actual immigration, foreign people with temporary work visas also get the negative label.
Immigration is bad more often than good. Where are they going to go and what are they going to do after they immigrate? It's a large part of why so many people get turned away. They try to immigrate for no reason other than they're broke and jobless. Which is part of that "vetting" thing you described. The thing you mentioned about work force skills is already part of what they look for, but people who do have such skills are not the sort of people who immigrate often.
This is implying that "politicians" are somehow different from everyone else, like they're some sort of special class of not-quite-people or something. That belief not only isn't true, but is dangerous for democracy because it disenfranchises voters. For every politician given a corporate wishlist and a briefcase full of money every time they check something off that wishlist, there's also a politician who got involved because they genuinely want to bring about some sort of positive (based on their values) change.
Yeah... idealistic politicians tend to be in the minority. and of course politicians are different than everyone else. they actually want to do that sort of thing as a job.
As for the UN, it's not perfect, but as a whole, the nations of Europe are a lot stronger because of it. I mean, if Putin wants to see it broken up, it must be doing something right. The challenge for the EU's member nations is to fix the broken parts while still preserving what works. That's certainly better than smashing the whole thing and trying to start over from scratch.
If it's only good for Europe then the UN is a failure.
Who would you rather have ushering in the (very much inevitable) global age: The people against a global autocracy or the people who want a global autocracy?
hurrying to unify everything is probably going to benefit whoever is most power hungry, and least likely to have everyone's welfare in mind. It takes time to come up with solutions that actually work for everyone.
Well, society can't cater to the minority. I can't think of any actual example of what you describe when you say "cultural heritage" though.
How about Nazi Germany. Apartheid South Africa. Ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. The Rohingya right now in Myanmar. Or segregation in the southern United States barely half a century ago. Just to name a few.
Immigration is bad more often than good. Where are they going to go and what are they going to do after they immigrate? It's a large part of why so many people get turned away. They try to immigrate for no reason other than they're broke and jobless. Which is part of that "vetting" thing you described. The thing you mentioned about work force skills is already part of what they look for, but people who do have such skills are not the sort of people who immigrate often.
The demographic evidence is that immigrants to industrialized countries mostly take on jobs that most natives to those countries aren't willing to do: heavy labor, cleaners, field hands, food-service, nannies, etc. Many companies depend on those people for their labor force because they're willing to do that unpleasant work for less than natives would demand. Those companies would take a serious financial hit if that labor pool dried up.
If it's only good for Europe then the UN is a failure.
The UN hasn't had a European focus in generations. It's the primary venue for countries from Africa, Asia, Latin America to have a voice in international affairs, to some extent offsetting the wealth and power of the industrialized world. Of course, every country in the world would like international institutions to benefit them more than everyone else. But that's the nature of compromise -- it doesn't completely satisfy anyone, but everyone gets something out of it.
hurrying to unify everything is probably going to benefit whoever is most power hungry, and least likely to have everyone's welfare in mind. It takes time to come up with solutions that actually work for everyone.
Who said anything about hurrying? If the current state of the world demonstrates anything, it's that "unifying everything" is a long way down a very rocky road. Even long-standing economic or political associations such as the UN, NATO, OPEC, the EU, can't get everyone onside for many major issues. OTOH hurrying to tear everything down is also going to benefit whoever is most power hungry, by emphasizing distrust and fear of "them" so they can cast themselves as the defenders of "us."
hurrying to unify everything is probably going to benefit whoever is most power hungry, and least likely to have everyone's welfare in mind. It takes time to come up with solutions that actually work for everyone.
And yet, those who crave power for their own selfish interests are going to be rushing things to ensure they're the ones running the show from the ground up. Saying "it takes time, take it slow so we can do this right" is all well and good, but why should the "wrong" type of people care?
Globalism is heading toward us like a freight train whether we like it or not, and has been picking up speed with every new innovation we create. The only way to make sure the globalism train heads down the right track instead of running over everything we hold dear is to become a part of this newly-emerging global world and do your part in shaping it. Merely standing on the side of the tracks, waving your arms while shouting, "stop pls we don't want you" isn't even going to slow it down.
(Hopefully) Useful CO Resources: HeroCreator (character planner), Cosmic Timers/Alert Checklist, Blood Moon Map, Anniversary Cat Map, and more (eventually, anyway).
Well, society can't cater to the minority. I can't think of any actual example of what you describe when you say "cultural heritage" though.
I'm sure certain minority groups who have had the misfortune of being born in their home country and born to circumstances that they face that involve segregation, denial of basic citizen rights and at worst, ethnic cleansing, would love to hear you say this.
Society can cater to both the majority and minority ethnic groups who are part of the legal citizenship. Complete harmony between majority and minority groups obviously won't be perfect due to human nature, but it doesn't mean they can't co-exist and work together for the benefit for the nation. It also doesn't mean that the minority can't be treated on equal terms with the majority by the state.
There are more than enough examples in history and present when it comes to the majority's nationalistic agenda seeking to preserve a cultural heritage they perceive as exclusively being their own by engaging in discriminatory acts against the minority who are no less legal citizens than they are. Bulgarex has mentioned very notable examples. I'd like to throw in former Yugoslavia as an example of how mutiple ethnic nationalistic groups can royally screw a once thriving nation over and how so many people have greatly suffered for it.
Immigration is bad more often than good. Where are they going to go and what are they going to do after they immigrate? It's a large part of why so many people get turned away. They try to immigrate for no reason other than they're broke and jobless. Which is part of that "vetting" thing you described. The thing you mentioned about work force skills is already part of what they look for, but people who do have such skills are not the sort of people who immigrate often.
If economic and social factors from an immigrant's home country make it so that they want to seek greener pastures elsewhere, and if they are willing to work and contribute to the emigrating country's social and economic well-being, I hardly see it as it being "bad more often than good", especially when the country has a shortage of workers needed for certain sectors that can't be adequately fulfilled by the local populace.
The vetting I'm referring to is doing it in moderation to prevent an immigrant workforce from overtaking those sectors at the expense of the locals.
No intention of throwing shade at you, Spinny. Your intent in your OP was quite clear. But we can't control thread drift, and it quickly became clear the implications of the thread title would evoke conflicting opinions. That's not necessarily even a bad thing -- intelligent, respectful debate is healthy.
I always find it interesting, some peoples insistence that we can only think/do one thing at a time. I mean, I can eat a salad with a slice of cheese pizza, so I'm sure we can coordinate international interests while ensuring that national interests are not compromised. In fact, just like the salad and pizza, I think this would be the healthiest way to proceed. Trying to shrink the world back to a time of closed borders and complete self-interest is just a pipe dream; even if governments wanted to enforce such a policy, corporations would continue their steady march towards globalism. The smart thing for governments to do is to keep up with them and introduce regulations as needed to ensure they aren't abusing people with their ability to cross borders, and to do that effectively will require more far-spanning international governing bodies composed of representatives from all countries concerned.
Trying to chase the nationalist ideology at this point is basically just sticking your head in the sand. Corporations have a vested interest in making governments and people do that, so they can evade regulation, so naturally those who profit greatly from international corporate endeavors put a lot of money into getting people to hate and fear the government, the press, and anything else that might threaten to reign them in or inform people of what's going on. They want you to adopt the idea that governments should not be involved in globalization; not to prevent globalization from occurring, but to ensure that it can proceed unchecked.
We do live on a(n almost) globe in the vast void of space. Kinda hard to deny that at this point... srry flat earth guys. Some guy pouring toxic chemicals into the river upstream of me is going to cause me problems. It doesn't really matter if he is on the other side of an imaginary line or not.
But, like most things.. extremes tend to suck. A hypothetical world government in some distant land probably wouldn't be very aware of my local needs. But, I think we already have some pretty out-of-touch politicians doing dog tricks for the lobbyists... so guess it would just be a difference of scale.
Eh... it is a complimacated topic. Hard to just dip a toe in.
Imagine if the cells of our bodies behaved within us as we do in the world. You can evolve or you can go extinct. This is evolution.
My lvl 40 champs in random order.
=Pieces of Stuff=Knock Dead=Cruel Yule=Cremator=Toys from the Attic=
=Gnosis Arcanum=Twenty Seven=Kama D=Critic=Creep Freeze=
=Mangled Man=G.I. John Doe=2D.=Lung the punch drunk monk=
=By the sword=Scild Truma=Shadow Puppet=Lu-7=Erysichthon=
=Nimravid=Buzzard Kill=Lorenzini=Schema=
We do live on a(n almost) globe in the vast void of space. Kinda hard to deny that at this point... srry flat earth guys. Some guy pouring toxic chemicals into the river upstream of me is going to cause me problems. It doesn't really matter if he is on the other side of an imaginary line or not.
But, like most things.. extremes tend to suck. A hypothetical world government in some distant land probably wouldn't be very aware of my local needs. But, I think we already have some pretty out-of-touch politicians doing dog tricks for the lobbyists... so guess it would just be a difference of scale.
Eh... it is a complimacated topic. Hard to just dip a toe in.
This is a good summary. The question isn't black or white, it's about what the proper shade of grey is.
This is a good summary. The question isn't black or white, it's about what the proper shade of grey is.
And that is the most reasonable approach to take when divergent views are at play. Unfortunately the politics in many countries today is following an increasingly polarized course, with each side casting themselves as "white hats" and anyone opposed to them as "black hats." Spotting a grey hat is getting harder all the time.
A hypothetical world government in some distant land probably wouldn't be very aware of my local needs.
For some reason some people assume we would scrap everything and just have one world government where all members of that government sit in the same building somewhere. I'm not sure why that's their assumption. To me world government has never meant that, and there's no logical reason why it would mean that. It seems far more logical to assume that there would be a global governing body that coordinates continental governing bodies, and those in turn coordinate national governing bodies, and then the chain continues further and further with governing bodies of smaller and smaller scope until we arrive at city/town halls. You know, the way government generally works in the real world, and not in dystopian future scifi novels. Your local town hall worries about your local needs, and the global government worries about global issues, each in their own scope with communication moving up and down the chain.
I've seen two visions of future world governments that seem to be working, even if only by author fiat (and in one case, it's specifically not going to work forever) - Heinlein's Terran Federation (as seen in the Future History stories, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress and its semi-sequels, The Rolling Stones and The Cat Who Walks Through Walls), and the United Nations in Niven's Known Space tales.
(Star Trek doesn't count, because we've never gotten any idea how United Earth works, it just does.)
Both the Terran Federation and the UN are organized as governing bodies, with member nations being required to meet certain minimal criteria, but otherwise being permitted to carry on their own self-identification. (In Starship Troopers, Juan and Carlos joke about their families' differing folk history - "Johnny" is from the Phillipines, Carlos from Argentina.) The version of the Terran Federation in the Future History becomes rather more dictatorial a couple of centuries after the overthrow of the theocracy that overtook the US (cf "If This Goes On-", and "Methuselah's Children"). By the (unspecified) time of the settling of New Beginnings, Earth was pretty badly used up, due to indiscriminate use of life-extension technology coupled with the fact that only so many people can even fit onto an emigration starship, and a fair number of folks don't want to move in the first place.
Niven's UN is a bit better off, in large part because of the Fertility Laws. By the 22nd century, Earth's population had stabilized at around eighteen billion; people unable to stand that crowding would often move to the Asteroid Belt and take up the life of a miner, or get aboard one of the slowships to one of Earth's colonies. For those remaining, the Fertility Laws at first allowed each person to reproduce once. A person might earn more birthrights by having some exceptional characteristic (genius inventor Raymond Sinclair, the victim in the story "A.R.M.", had an unlimited breeding license due to his intelligence), or lose it entirely due to a genetic issue (one of the suspects, Bernath Peterfi, had Type 1 diabetes and lost his license). At some later point in history, the Fertility Board was found (unsurprisingly) to have grown corrupt; the inevitable reorganization changed the laws slightly. After that, each person, regardless of genetics, could reproduce once. An exemption was still granted for exceptional ability, of course. And if someone wanted a second Birthright, they could enter the Lottery. Each year, the emigrations from Earth were subtracted from the birth rate, and any leftover capacity given out by lot.
(Spoiler alert, for a plot twist in a novel published in 1970 - the Birthright Lotteries were engineered by agents of the puppeteers. They had learned of Earth, observed the Man-Kzin wars, and decided they liked humans better, so they arranged for an outsider ship to drop by We Made It and sell the mayor a hyperdrive shunt, and also began the Birthright Lotteries in an attempt to make humans luckier. One of the characters in Ringworld, Teela Brown, was a product of six generations born as a result of their parents winning the Lottery. She was also the only one of that class of people the puppeteers could reach - one subject was always coincidentally one step ahead of the puppeteers until the point at which he boarded a ship for Jinx; in another case every time they called that subject every phone in South America would ring; but Teela just showed up at Louis Wu's 200th birthday party, as did Nessus, a puppeteer who was also regional director for General Products and one of the few of his species still remaining in known space (all the rest had fled after the discovery that the core of the galaxy was exploding, and in 20,000 years this region would be uninhabitable. Puppeteers take the long view of survival).)
So yeah, in the "successful" views, the world government has been more federal than unitary in nature. The UN had a police force, the Amalgamated Regional Militia or ARM, and enforced certain laws across the planet (mostly having to do with the Fertility Laws and unregulated technological advances), but there was no concentrated attempt to make any one spot on Earth exactly like any other. (However, the invention of the teleport booth did tend to have an evening-out effect, as Louis was reflecting while teleporting around the world in an attempt to extend his 200th birthday. There were certain cultural differences from region to region, but as far as he could tell downtown LA was downtown Beijing was downtown Moscow was downtown Morocco was downtown Berlin - cities with slidewalks that moved at 10 mph, with shopping and other tourist stuff near the core. "San Francisco and San Diego were just two ends of a massive megacity, and who knew which was which? Tanj few, these days.")
"Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"
Fiction is fun o3o I prefer the future where a giant space cylinder comes flying on into our solar system and carries off a bunch of people who live inside of it with squid and bird people. Now that is a government that I can get behind ^_^
Globalism is a way of living a collective lifestyle, like in china. No longer a bunch of countrys but a one world system. Law, money, taxes, and a bunch of other things we cant speak of...well, i cant anyways.
Flat earthers are people who have a narrow perspective of their point of view. ^^ ^but their eclipses are beautiful
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
Globalism is a group of ideologies that advocate the concept of globalization.
And globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology.
Look we are all one people, we are all the same race. We are all human beings. I support globalism.
But we arent going to be the ones in charge....
And if you are easily offended I would ask that you pass this by, i dont know how to fold the page for (spoilers option) ...while it always sounds good on paper, and im sure the magically word globalization, todays mythical utopia promises a fair portion for everyone, we all hold hands and get along. But, this is the real world here, I love to make happy endings in the books i write, because we all love them. I would love be able to walk up to someone like Zenith for instance, and ask him to join me for a teamup, but even in a game, would that hand in friendship be welcome or will our personal encounters from he past or difference in beliefs always make that nothing more then a setup for disaster? Think of what life is like in those situations where two cultures who dont agree are forced upon each other! Didnt they so politely call it ethnic cleansing when a group of people occupied a space not in their best interest? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMI_26oljqs Plus what if the tide changes into something that isnt in your favor, if your people, your habits, lifestyle, beliefs become outlawed? If your life no longer fits their vision of utopia or in the best interest for the whole, too old, too fat, too sick, not educated enough, believes in something the state disproves of!! And if they control the media and public opinion, how would you even know if they set aside their "escape from new york" penile colonies to remove the undesirables.
...no, what little bit of freedom i have left in this world i wish to keep! If i want to dress a certain way, watch or not watch something...if i feel like working at petting zoo instead of steel mill, or having a chance to become a popular author and visit comic cons to meet my readers, i should have that choice, and be able to use the money how i see fit. I was born into freedom and its what i enjoy, to be forced to follow someone elses way of life or worship their beliefs would be enslavement, im not a Borg! I know there is much distaste for me when i tell the truth, im not a fan of the hard truths ether but they are still there, we can only silence so many people before the only ones left wonder who is left to speak up for them.
It always feels good to be able to have the ability to speak what is on my mind, even if no one else agrees with me.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
And if you are easily offended I would ask that you pass this by, i dont know how to fold the page for (spoilers option) ...while it always sounds good on paper, and im sure the magically word globalization, todays mythical utopia promises a fair portion for everyone, we all hold hands and get along. But, this is the real world here, I love to make happy endings in the books i write, because we all love them. I would love be able to walk up to someone like Zenith for instance, and ask him to join me for a teamup, but even in a game, would that hand in friendship be welcome or will our personal encounters from he past or difference in beliefs always make that nothing more then a setup for disaster? Think of what life is like in those situations where two cultures who dont agree are forced upon each other! Didnt they so politely call it ethnic cleansing when a group of people occupied a space not in their best interest?
Not sure what "utopia" has to do with it. Also I'm not sure what you and Zenith teaming, or not teaming up in game has to do with it? Maybe you have a problem getting along with people who have different beliefs than you, but it seems like a lot of people don't. People who become problematic in those situations seem to be a minority. Also not sure what ethnic cleansing has to do with it. You're just kind of throwing a bunch of extra stuff in here that has nothing to do with globalism. In fact, most of the issues you're raising are what would be associated with nationalism.
Plus what if the tide changes into something that isnt in your favor, if your people, your habits, lifestyle, beliefs become outlawed? If your life no longer fits their vision of utopia or in the best interest for the whole, too old, too fat, too sick, not educated enough, believes in something the state disproves of!! And if they control the media and public opinion, how would you even know if they set aside their "escape from new york" penile colonies to remove the undesirables.
Again, you're bringing up utopia when that really has nothing to do with it. You're talking a lot about "what ifs" and that's something you could do forever. I find it's better to stick to things that have some basis in reality rather than letting your imagination run wild.
...no, what little bit of freedom i have left in this world i wish to keep! If i want to dress a certain way, watch or not watch something...if i feel like working at petting zoo instead of steel mill, or having a chance to become a popular author and visit comic cons to meet my readers, i should have that choice, and be able to use the money how i see fit. I was born into freedom and its what i enjoy, to be forced to follow someone elses way of life or worship their beliefs would be enslavement, im not a Borg! I know there is much distaste for me when i tell the truth, im not a fan of the hard truths ether but they are still there, we can only silence so many people before the only ones left wonder who is left to speak up for them.
It always feels good to be able to have the ability to speak what is on my mind, even if no one else agrees with me.
And again, not sure why you're equating globalism with the removal of personal freedom. I don't see why a global political structure would be interested in preventing you from visiting cons. It seems that what you consider "hard truths" are just "what ifs", the kinds of things conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones like to scream about. Again I'm more of a factual person, not really big into what ifs. And also again, historically the things you're bringing up have been associated with nationalism, and have actually been countered by globalist efforts.
Im not alex jones, and im certainly not screaming. They are my thoughts on the matter, nothing more.
Question: But do you believe I or anyone else should be forced to participate in it?
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
Question: But do you believe I or anyone else should be forced to participate in it?
I'm not sure what you think that means. Do you think you have enough control of your surroundings that you're not participating in it already? Because you are. You've been participating in globalism your entire life. You were born into a globalist world, every single one of us was.
Question: But do you believe I or anyone else should be forced to participate in it?
I'm not sure what you think that means. Do you think you have enough control of your surroundings that you're not participating in it already? Because you are. You've been participating in globalism your entire life.
India has already stopped using their paper money, its all digital now, you have to have a chip implanted into your skin. That is one example of a change I will not adhere to! When you guys are being plugged into the WiFi grid, i will just drop everything and grab my backpack.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
Considering that India issued a new 100 rupee banknote in August 2017 -- see the Reserve Bank of India's Website -- and new 500 and 2000 rupee banknotes in November 2016, I don't think India is giving up paper money any time soon. If that's an example of your source for global information, perhaps you should consider diversifying it.
India has already stopped using their paper money, its all digital now, you have to have a chip implanted into your skin.
I happen to know more than a handful of Indian nationals who go back to their home country from time to time and they certainly do not have RFID chips implanted beneath ther skins. I could direct any of them to this assertion of yours including the claim that they no longer use printed money. I'll let you have a guess at what their reaction will be. I certainly won't need to.
That is one example of a change I will not adhere to! When you guys are being plugged into the WiFi grid, i will just drop everything and grab my backpack.
So which conspiracy theory source are you referencing now that paints such a hi-tech dystopian future?
India has already stopped using their paper money, its all digital now, you have to have a chip implanted into your skin. That is one example of a change I will not adhere to! When you guys are being plugged into the WiFi grid, i will just drop everything and grab my backpack.
Catstar you're doing it again >.> if you're just joking then say that here.
Comments
Flat-Earthers are just nuts.
And playing by myself since Aug 2009
Godtier: Lifetime Subscriber
In politics, "globalism" used to mean acknowledging that the Atlantic and Pacific haven't been effective moats for Fortress America since the invention of long-range air travel; now it's used as "dog-whistle" coding for, shall we say, certain ethnoreligious groups.
- David Brin, "Those Eyes"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
The above has nothing to do with the Flat-Earth people, who I think are calling their opponents something similar, since a globe has been used to depict a 3D model of the Earth for a long time.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
By no means is it a perfect economic model to follow, but compared to what the other side of the fence is selling? I'd go with the former.
EDIT: I used "economical" in place "economic". Derp.
These are the people that faked the moon landings!
*shakes fist*
Click here to check out my costumes/milleniumguardian (MG) in-game/We need more tights, stances and moods
Evil conspirator globalists belong to comic-book worlds, where our PCs can beat them up!
Personally, I choose the world. "Us vs them" is simplistic thinking because there are in fact both good and bad actors among "us" as well as "them."
Besides, the better the rest of the world does, the better off you'll be as well:
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Cooperation for mutual benefit is good... IF it's actually mutual benefit.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
As for the UN, it's not perfect, but as a whole, the nations of Europe are a lot stronger because of it. I mean, if Putin wants to see it broken up, it must be doing something right. The challenge for the EU's member nations is to fix the broken parts while still preserving what works. That's certainly better than smashing the whole thing and trying to start over from scratch.
I'd be curious to see an example of "good" nationalism being implemented somewhere. I realize this has become something of an opinion A vs opinion B topic, but if you wipe away all of the labels, all nationalism really says is, "I want my tribe to be smaller." Unfortunately, a smaller tribe is more easily defeated by a hostile actor.
I get that part of the fear behind globalism is that the "global government" would certainly attract the wrong type of people. This fear is actually good, and if channeled correctly and many people sharing this concern get involved in building a global economy, they're more likely to create something that's harder for an aspiring dictator to gain control over. However, if people who fear the possible negative results of globalism do nothing, then while they're sitting on the sidelines and complaining about globalism, the aforementioned aspiring dictators and corporations most certainly are working toward their version of a global economy--one that's good for them and bad for everyone else.
Who would you rather have ushering in the (very much inevitable) global age: The people against a global autocracy or the people who want a global autocracy?
The more extreme brand of nationalism inherently treats immigration as objectively bad and destructive in the absolute sense, even though immigration (when vetted properly without opening floodgates) contributes to a nation's economic well-being by strengthening commerical and industrial workforces when the country has a problem getting enough locals with the skillsets needed to strengthen those workforces to begin with. Heck, it doesn't even have to be actual immigration, foreign people with temporary work visas also get the negative label.
I find it really hard to accept the possibility of "good" nationalism being a thing.
And no. illegal immigrants should NOT have the same rights as citizens. That's kinda the whole point behind BEING a citizen. If you're an illegal immigrant, you have the right to be deported.
Why do I mention this? Part of the globalism debate is about whether citizenship laws should be drastically re-written. Well, society can't cater to the minority. I can't think of any actual example of what you describe when you say "cultural heritage" though. Immigration is bad more often than good. Where are they going to go and what are they going to do after they immigrate? It's a large part of why so many people get turned away. They try to immigrate for no reason other than they're broke and jobless. Which is part of that "vetting" thing you described. The thing you mentioned about work force skills is already part of what they look for, but people who do have such skills are not the sort of people who immigrate often. Yeah... idealistic politicians tend to be in the minority. and of course politicians are different than everyone else. they actually want to do that sort of thing as a job. If it's only good for Europe then the UN is a failure. hurrying to unify everything is probably going to benefit whoever is most power hungry, and least likely to have everyone's welfare in mind. It takes time to come up with solutions that actually work for everyone.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
And yet, those who crave power for their own selfish interests are going to be rushing things to ensure they're the ones running the show from the ground up. Saying "it takes time, take it slow so we can do this right" is all well and good, but why should the "wrong" type of people care?
Globalism is heading toward us like a freight train whether we like it or not, and has been picking up speed with every new innovation we create. The only way to make sure the globalism train heads down the right track instead of running over everything we hold dear is to become a part of this newly-emerging global world and do your part in shaping it. Merely standing on the side of the tracks, waving your arms while shouting, "stop pls we don't want you" isn't even going to slow it down.
Society can cater to both the majority and minority ethnic groups who are part of the legal citizenship. Complete harmony between majority and minority groups obviously won't be perfect due to human nature, but it doesn't mean they can't co-exist and work together for the benefit for the nation. It also doesn't mean that the minority can't be treated on equal terms with the majority by the state.
There are more than enough examples in history and present when it comes to the majority's nationalistic agenda seeking to preserve a cultural heritage they perceive as exclusively being their own by engaging in discriminatory acts against the minority who are no less legal citizens than they are. Bulgarex has mentioned very notable examples. I'd like to throw in former Yugoslavia as an example of how mutiple ethnic nationalistic groups can royally screw a once thriving nation over and how so many people have greatly suffered for it. If economic and social factors from an immigrant's home country make it so that they want to seek greener pastures elsewhere, and if they are willing to work and contribute to the emigrating country's social and economic well-being, I hardly see it as it being "bad more often than good", especially when the country has a shortage of workers needed for certain sectors that can't be adequately fulfilled by the local populace.
The vetting I'm referring to is doing it in moderation to prevent an immigrant workforce from overtaking those sectors at the expense of the locals.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Trying to chase the nationalist ideology at this point is basically just sticking your head in the sand. Corporations have a vested interest in making governments and people do that, so they can evade regulation, so naturally those who profit greatly from international corporate endeavors put a lot of money into getting people to hate and fear the government, the press, and anything else that might threaten to reign them in or inform people of what's going on. They want you to adopt the idea that governments should not be involved in globalization; not to prevent globalization from occurring, but to ensure that it can proceed unchecked.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
But, like most things.. extremes tend to suck. A hypothetical world government in some distant land probably wouldn't be very aware of my local needs. But, I think we already have some pretty out-of-touch politicians doing dog tricks for the lobbyists... so guess it would just be a difference of scale.
Eh... it is a complimacated topic. Hard to just dip a toe in.
=Pieces of Stuff=Knock Dead=Cruel Yule=Cremator=Toys from the Attic=
=Gnosis Arcanum=Twenty Seven=Kama D=Critic=Creep Freeze=
=Mangled Man=G.I. John Doe=2D.=Lung the punch drunk monk=
=By the sword=Scild Truma=Shadow Puppet=Lu-7=Erysichthon=
=Nimravid=Buzzard Kill=Lorenzini=Schema=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
Nepht and Dr Deflecto on primus
They all thought I was out of the game....But I'm holding all the lockboxes now..
I'll......FOAM FINGER YOUR BACK!
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
(Star Trek doesn't count, because we've never gotten any idea how United Earth works, it just does.)
Both the Terran Federation and the UN are organized as governing bodies, with member nations being required to meet certain minimal criteria, but otherwise being permitted to carry on their own self-identification. (In Starship Troopers, Juan and Carlos joke about their families' differing folk history - "Johnny" is from the Phillipines, Carlos from Argentina.) The version of the Terran Federation in the Future History becomes rather more dictatorial a couple of centuries after the overthrow of the theocracy that overtook the US (cf "If This Goes On-", and "Methuselah's Children"). By the (unspecified) time of the settling of New Beginnings, Earth was pretty badly used up, due to indiscriminate use of life-extension technology coupled with the fact that only so many people can even fit onto an emigration starship, and a fair number of folks don't want to move in the first place.
Niven's UN is a bit better off, in large part because of the Fertility Laws. By the 22nd century, Earth's population had stabilized at around eighteen billion; people unable to stand that crowding would often move to the Asteroid Belt and take up the life of a miner, or get aboard one of the slowships to one of Earth's colonies. For those remaining, the Fertility Laws at first allowed each person to reproduce once. A person might earn more birthrights by having some exceptional characteristic (genius inventor Raymond Sinclair, the victim in the story "A.R.M.", had an unlimited breeding license due to his intelligence), or lose it entirely due to a genetic issue (one of the suspects, Bernath Peterfi, had Type 1 diabetes and lost his license). At some later point in history, the Fertility Board was found (unsurprisingly) to have grown corrupt; the inevitable reorganization changed the laws slightly. After that, each person, regardless of genetics, could reproduce once. An exemption was still granted for exceptional ability, of course. And if someone wanted a second Birthright, they could enter the Lottery. Each year, the emigrations from Earth were subtracted from the birth rate, and any leftover capacity given out by lot.
(Spoiler alert, for a plot twist in a novel published in 1970 - the Birthright Lotteries were engineered by agents of the puppeteers. They had learned of Earth, observed the Man-Kzin wars, and decided they liked humans better, so they arranged for an outsider ship to drop by We Made It and sell the mayor a hyperdrive shunt, and also began the Birthright Lotteries in an attempt to make humans luckier. One of the characters in Ringworld, Teela Brown, was a product of six generations born as a result of their parents winning the Lottery. She was also the only one of that class of people the puppeteers could reach - one subject was always coincidentally one step ahead of the puppeteers until the point at which he boarded a ship for Jinx; in another case every time they called that subject every phone in South America would ring; but Teela just showed up at Louis Wu's 200th birthday party, as did Nessus, a puppeteer who was also regional director for General Products and one of the few of his species still remaining in known space (all the rest had fled after the discovery that the core of the galaxy was exploding, and in 20,000 years this region would be uninhabitable. Puppeteers take the long view of survival).)
So yeah, in the "successful" views, the world government has been more federal than unitary in nature. The UN had a police force, the Amalgamated Regional Militia or ARM, and enforced certain laws across the planet (mostly having to do with the Fertility Laws and unregulated technological advances), but there was no concentrated attempt to make any one spot on Earth exactly like any other. (However, the invention of the teleport booth did tend to have an evening-out effect, as Louis was reflecting while teleporting around the world in an attempt to extend his 200th birthday. There were certain cultural differences from region to region, but as far as he could tell downtown LA was downtown Beijing was downtown Moscow was downtown Morocco was downtown Berlin - cities with slidewalks that moved at 10 mph, with shopping and other tourist stuff near the core. "San Francisco and San Diego were just two ends of a massive megacity, and who knew which was which? Tanj few, these days.")
- David Brin, "Those Eyes"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Flat earthers are people who have a narrow perspective of their point of view. ^^
^but their eclipses are beautiful
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
And globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology.
Click here to check out my costumes/milleniumguardian (MG) in-game/We need more tights, stances and moods
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
And if you are easily offended I would ask that you pass this by, i dont know how to fold the page for (spoilers option)
...while it always sounds good on paper, and im sure the magically word globalization, todays mythical utopia promises a fair portion for everyone, we all hold hands and get along. But, this is the real world here, I love to make happy endings in the books i write, because we all love them. I would love be able to walk up to someone like Zenith for instance, and ask him to join me for a teamup, but even in a game, would that hand in friendship be welcome or will our personal encounters from he past or difference in beliefs always make that nothing more then a setup for disaster? Think of what life is like in those situations where two cultures who dont agree are forced upon each other! Didnt they so politely call it ethnic cleansing when a group of people occupied a space not in their best interest?
Plus what if the tide changes into something that isnt in your favor, if your people, your habits, lifestyle, beliefs become outlawed? If your life no longer fits their vision of utopia or in the best interest for the whole, too old, too fat, too sick, not educated enough, believes in something the state disproves of!! And if they control the media and public opinion, how would you even know if they set aside their "escape from new york" penile colonies to remove the undesirables.
...no, what little bit of freedom i have left in this world i wish to keep! If i want to dress a certain way, watch or not watch something...if i feel like working at petting zoo instead of steel mill, or having a chance to become a popular author and visit comic cons to meet my readers, i should have that choice, and be able to use the money how i see fit. I was born into freedom and its what i enjoy, to be forced to follow someone elses way of life or worship their beliefs would be enslavement, im not a Borg! I know there is much distaste for me when i tell the truth, im not a fan of the hard truths ether but they are still there, we can only silence so many people before the only ones left wonder who is left to speak up for them.
It always feels good to be able to have the ability to speak what is on my mind, even if no one else agrees with me.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
And again, not sure why you're equating globalism with the removal of personal freedom. I don't see why a global political structure would be interested in preventing you from visiting cons. It seems that what you consider "hard truths" are just "what ifs", the kinds of things conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones like to scream about. Again I'm more of a factual person, not really big into what ifs. And also again, historically the things you're bringing up have been associated with nationalism, and have actually been countered by globalist efforts.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Question: But do you believe I or anyone else should be forced to participate in it?
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My characters
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Courage is doing what is right even when it isn't popular or safe. Honor is retaining the dignity and virtue in one's self, so it can light the way for others in the darkest of times. Compassion is showing patience and mercy towards others, even when it isn't returned or deserved. A hero is defined by these 3 words, they set him apart from others as a beacon of hope and excellence.
Click here to check out my costumes/milleniumguardian (MG) in-game/We need more tights, stances and moods
My super cool CC build and how to use it.