The Elephant In The Room: Globalism

a reply to: The GUT

The more consolidated and centralized the power is, the fewer hands the power is in. That means any real power is that much farther away from you personally and thus that much less directly accountable to you.

This is why they say you'll own nothing and be happy.

They're making you a commodity they buy and sell no less different than anything else they hold power over, and right now, they hold a vast surplus of us.

Cryptocurrency will usher in a form of globalism that will inevitably make every person on planet earth a consumer. It's the Trojan horse. Richard Brand has been making videos about big tech wanting to get into 'third world' agriculture, where a global currency like some form of Cypto will make a huge difference. They want to to control data on the movement of everything down to the food we eat.

a reply to: Serdgiam

Globalism in the form of realizing we're all human beings is one thing, but this isn't that. This is subsuming the vast majority of humanity to a commodity with little worth.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: The GUT

Opposing globalization is like opposing a snow storm. You can oppose it all you want, it isn’t going to stop it from happening. Globalization is the natural evolution of our globally connected worldwide society. It isn’t some thing that’s on it’s way either, it’s been reality for the better part of a century at this point.

This isn’t a “new normal” it’s just how things are. And have been. Denying that is denying reality.

Patently false and flawed reasoning.

All it would take is another more severe pandemic, another Carrington Event (for which we are due for), a large meteor impact in a key area, another large-scale global conflict like WW2/WW1, and we will be back in the Stone Age.

This is not a matter of IF but WHEN such an event will come along and disrupt "global commerce".

Globalism is a formula for stripping away self-sufficiency from industrialized nations and creating unnecessary, politically motivated dependencies among various peoples around the globe.

Forward-thinking and responsible leadership would be finding ways to make every corner of the globe able to be self-sufficient and not susceptible to the dozens of ways that global trade can (and will) be disrupted.

I thought you hipster far-leftists were all about sustainability and "green" living? How does allowing China license to keep accelerating its coal burning footprint contribute to that? How does manufacturing everything in China and lugging it around the world using diesel ships or aircraft further that goal?

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

Exactly this.

There was a survival show aired on National Geographic back during the height of the 2012 scare where they had a bunch of survival experts analyze different massive disaster scenarios.

The single most important thing they all mentioned for any area surviving any one of those events as how self-sufficient it was. In other words, globalism does not work for survival in those scenarios. We got an idea of that during the shutdowns from COVID. Supply chains that depended on things from different countries were disrupted creating shortages throughout the chain. This would only be much, much worse had the disaster been real and not merely a government imposed, man-caused disaster.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yes. The ONLY way to protect civilization against collapse is to promote a distributed, cluster-based approach to industrialization and commerce.

Forward thinking visionaries and scientists have foreseen this, and even applied that thinking on a cosmological scale (i.e. the need to spread humanity beyond Earth, beyond even the Solar System).

Foster the ability for a region to operate independently in the face of a global crisis.

Set up redundancies.

Prepare for what would happen should China or the US or Japan or Europe or name the country gets wiped off the map.

I would think the CHOP/CHAZ acolytes we have on this site would be all for that reasoning (start your own new society! "Build back better!"), but unfortunately they are too caught up in the social and political agendas of globalism to understand why it breaks down logistically.

a reply to: The GUT
Have you read the article mentioned in that tweet?

Author's note: Some people have read this blog as my utopia or dream of the future. It is not. It is a scenario showing where we could be heading - for better and for worse. I wrote this piece to start a discussion about some of the pros and cons of the current technological development. When we are dealing with the future, it is not enough to work with reports. We should start discussions in many new ways. This is the intention with this piece.

So, while it always seems to kick off a fear mongering circle jerk, the message seems to be that people need to get involved in order to get globalism traveling in a direction that hopefully benefits everyone, much like this thread.

Globalism's fundamental currency has always been the practical value of the human worker. In what way does the worker contribute to the globalist society? Clearly, by what skill sets and experience they bring to the work role they do, but today, the skilled and experienced worker is no longer valued as they were in the past. To be rewarded on merit has long been superseded by rewarding ideology, by simply rewarding toeing-the-line, and not rocking the boat. The 'yes' men and women are far more rewarded today than anyone with high-end skill sets and experience, who are now merely employees and workers.

In the past, managers had to have relevant knowledge of the job, its systems and how they work. They had to be good at organization and logistics, but all of this has been passed down to the bottom level management such as supervisors and team leaders. Middle to higher-management need only to organize people today, and no longer need to know the mechanisms of the work place, they only need to control the people who do know the mechanisms. It is your typical globalist pyramidal corporate structure, and it is one that is quite fragile, because it requires the bottom levels to function optimally to remain in place.

You can tell how important to a corporate system a person is in the way they are missed when they take a holiday or sick leave. For most management today, no one need bat an eyelid, because they will not be missed, but when a so-called bottom-layer worker is off, you can bet they will be missed in some way by the inconvenience their absence causes.

In some respects, the globalist idea at face value carries one or two noble principals and ethical morality, but the way it is being implemented is far from noble or moral, which is why I cannot accept the ideology, and irrespective of how I think or feel, globalism has already been cemented into place and will come to a completion of some form, and it will reward many having no merit for reward, and ignore and trample all over those who do. It will be selective and tyrannical, and that is something I will never allow to be reconciled within my own principals and philosophies.

Nevertheless, I am still alive and I have to make my station in life work and function if I want some level of quality to it to continue, so I play the game within and amongst groups of people I would consider to be enemies of opposing ideology on the same level that I cannot reconcile certain cultures. It's an uncomfortable position, but I am in the twilight of my life and can put up with things until I draw my last breath. I look at the future with disgust, disappointment, and despair for those who will have to live it, and I am glad I won't need to.

a reply to: The GUT

We can't even trust our current respective governments to run individual countries without lying, cheating and enriching themselves while the common folk get the poopy end of the deal.
A global government would just be guards in a giant concentration camp.

Until we get honest leaders on a small scale, I see no possible way of it being any good for anybody except the criminals who want to rule.

If there was an instant death penalty for politicians who are corrupt for a generation or two, they may eventually learn that they can't get away with the stuff they do now.

I think it’s the inevitable.

And the natural progression.

a reply to: Tulpa

I think we need to let go of the idea we need leaders.
Humans suck given big opportunities they suck more.
Even if you had the best intentions the concept of making decisions for others is just not working.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

Globalism is a formula for stripping away self-sufficiency from industrialized nations and creating unnecessary, politically motivated dependencies among various peoples around the globe.

Huh? What's self sufficiency? Name one nation that's been practically self sufficient AND kept up with the curve the last 300 years.... Lol it's CHYNA isn't it?!!

The US was built on British rails until you made your own, those forges designed by British ingenuity, it's ok though we steal things too. What about Nazi Germany and their need for oil and they always said nien to those globalist bankers. I can go on but my point is 'self-sufficiency' is a joke unless you're plowing the field with an oxen and enjoy 50 turnip recipes a week... And even then! Lol

Forward-thinking and responsible leadership would be finding ways to make every corner of the globe able to be self-sufficient and not susceptible to the dozens of ways that global trade can (and will) be disrupted.

Same sh## different day? Self sufficiency IS good and all, I support it. Though I highly suspect we've got different interpretations on how you get there. A peasants life is hard work and I'm not even sure I know how to build a well... That's a lie, I've been educated and fully understand England doesn't own the monopoly on potable water, nor did old McDonald invent the wheel. I hear Arabs breed good horses though... Must be all that sand.

I thought you hipster far-leftists were all about sustainability and "green" living? How does allowing China license to keep accelerating its coal burning footprint contribute to that? How does manufacturing everything in China and lugging it around the world using diesel ships or aircraft further that goal?

It doesn't.

What do you want though? A world that attempts to work together or to just nuke some paddy fields?

I'm not entirely sure we live in a world where people can lavishly spend on bespoke green sandles every weekend, damn things just rot off your feet! People want things the can't really afford. China makes em cheap. Corporatism and consumerism naturally go hand in hand but don't ask me about rampant capitalism I didn't live under Thatcher or Reagan.

Lugging it around the world is the cheap way, yeah the tin openers are cheap but at least less people are starving because they can't open a tin of beans, yeah the beans were probably grew on another continent too.

Necessity and exploitation go hand in hand too, apologies for being an ass but what currency does the world mostly trade in?

Globalism has been a reality since man worked out there's no more continents to exploit and even then a few of us had a good pop at Antarctica. You're acting like the kid who took his ball home then campaigned to ban football.

Flawed reasoning indeed.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Tulpa

I think we need to let go of the idea we need leaders.
Humans suck given big opportunities they suck more.
Even if you had the best intentions the concept of making decisions for others is just not working.

That's because the current model only attracts subhuman criminals to the position of leadership.
If they knew they'd be strung up for their behaviour they may move along and let someone honest and decent have a try.
Term limits so there's no career criminals (I mean politicians) and a set wage would be a good start. If just one penny over their allocated allowance was enough to get them executed it might help sharpen their focus on the job at hand and not trying to scam more for themselves.

a reply to: elysiumfire

You can tell how important to a corporate system a person is in the way they are missed when they take a holiday or sick leave. For most management today, no one need bat an eyelid, because they will not be missed, but when a so-called bottom-layer worker is off, you can bet they will be missed in some way by the inconvenience their absence causes.

I hear that, at the same time though many don't like unions, workers rights or living wage ideas. I've personally always liked the idea of community owned enterprise. Not your run of the mill communism but something akin to the success industrial Quakers achieved.

Morality is a subjective thing isn't it? I imagine some people in China love Mao despite the hardships he created for them, because they're no longer peasants. One of them leads the nation. There's no real enemies just misinformed allies and your voice could be the one to reason with people who are unreasonable to others.

I can agree with the French when we're hating on the Dutch you get nowhere with no dialogue and we're not all that different.

a reply to: The GUT

I have a little bit different of a take on this. We have all been participating in globalism our whole lives. Well, except for the remaining WWII generation anyway.

Being part of that global entity is simply producing something of value the rest of the entity needs that can be exchanged for other valued products we can not or do not produces ourselves. Few nations are capable of being truly independent in every way. Understand, many could be if they focused on what they need as opposed to what they want or have become accustomed to. Globalism began with the first trade between two cultures and has expanded ever since.

Globalism is a motive force that will not be stopped. It is the next logical step in the evolution of a society tired of war and want. What I am opposed to is the exploitation of globalism. There are people in a position to profit at the expense of others as globalism expands. These are the same people who profit at the expense of others now. The only people potentially free of their grasp are isolationists - which the elite have conveniently rebranded as terrorists.

This is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. When you take in all the variations of this theme in all its grandeur and glory you realize this was not an overnight coincidence. This is not a knee-jerk reaction by opportunists. This has been unfolding before our very eyes for decades. And we stay distracted by the smoke and mirrors of the media, completely controlled by the same elite profiting off our carefully crafted obedient ignorance.

And if you are wondering what can be done about it, that ship sailed long ago. We are arguing about whether men and women even exist in this society. We are arguing about the gender of a plastic potato toy FFS. Do you honestly believe a society this far removed from common sense can fight against the monster that is globalism? Maybe - if we can ever agree on whether testicles are male reproductive organs or symbols of toxic masculinity that need to be removed from society.

Globalism has been in affect for years now. They TPTB do everything incrementally so most wont notice. They are in no hurry though there seems to be an uptick in activity due to Trump getting in the way.. They also work within Satanic numerology so be aware of times and dates.a reply to: The GUT

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

What I am opposed to is the exploitation of globalism. There are people in a position to profit at the expense of others as globalism expands. These are the same people who profit at the expense of others now. The only people potentially free of their grasp are isolationists - which the elite have conveniently rebranded as terrorists.

Yeah, sadly, the direction it's unfolding is pretty much out of our hands it seems.

Not even sure this a discussion worth having at this point on my glass-half-empty side.

Then again, I think there's common ground here to be had. Maybe that's still important. On a social level if nothing else.

Most of the folk discussing it here--no matter the artifice of current labels--seem to have the commonality that those who are ushering this system in are pretty see-through and (largely) don't have the common good as a leading principle...no matter how much they scream they do.

Farming & Food Supply anyone?

a reply to: The GUT

Yes. But we probably need to keep reminding people that the last group of people who wanted a global government ended (allegedly) in 1945.

I see no difference between them and the current group. It may help if this was more widely understood.

originally posted by: The GUT
Farming & Food Supply anyone?

We were discussing this in another thread, the title of largest individual farmland owner really just means that Gates owns less than .03% of the farmland in the US. He has no say in 99.7% of the land and therefore is nowhere near controlling the food supply.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

Globalism is a formula for stripping away self-sufficiency from industrialized nations and creating unnecessary, politically motivated dependencies among various peoples around the globe.

Gonna have to disagree here. Globalism is the product of feeding industrialized nations expropriated resources and labor. Nations that become de-industrialized are just a used up tossed to the side labor force / consumer economy. If a nation doesn't transition from a heavily industrialized to something more in line with tech, niche, and streamlined industrial production or service, they start to suffer.

I think the term "globalism" has been used far too loosely by those who simply don't like certain aspects of it, like mass migration, global currencies, immigration, foreign company's not paying their tariffs and such.

It's usually always been about people calling out globalism as a product of corporate / state imperialism and consolidated capitalist ventures. A company I used to work for the owner built an entire new facility down in Alabama, and made it sound like he was opening up just another facility to bring some industry to that area and expand the company, it was a lie, he used union money and Alabama tax payer money to build it, and wanted to move EVERYTHING down there except the workers who would be left behind. Cheaper labor, cheaper shipping, etc. he was caught red handed and arrested by the FBI. That's globalism, where the corporate elite can take their interests anywhere they want to exploit literally everything as long as it turns a profit, and control .