Is it too late to wind back globalization?

The way i see, its the only way for the world to save itself. We need to wind the clock back to before all of our governments signed all of these treatys which commit us all to buying of others. almost everything that we buy these days comes from overseas. we need to start manufacturing again. this brings jobs. this brings prosperity.

BUT....is it too late? can we undo the damage that has been done. maybe when we all talk about our governments and taking them back, it needs to start from the top. maybe our governments need to start backing out of deals that have been proven to be bad for THEIR own citizens. everyone on here no matter where you live or what country you are from must have been heartbroken at the threads showing the pictures of cities like detroit in america who have gone to rack and ruin since the motor manufacturers went overseas. maybe, we could put a super import tax on things that companies import, that can be manufactured in ones own country?. maybe a limit on the amount of profit a company can make before they have to reinvest in their own country?

***what are your thoughts?***** all i know is that there is only one country thats going forward and thats china. and what the hell happens to the rest of us if they decide to pull up stumps and stop exporting. we will all be standing around like an emperor without clothes.

reply to post by punterdeb


Yes, it's to late!

Everything all humans have achieved over time is for all of us in advancement.

Go Saints! Another premiership coming this year with Bennett!

I think it is too late by far. You can't just roll the clock back willingly and expect everyone to like it. It seems we have dug a hole too deep to get out of. All we can hope for is we keep digging and unearth a ladder.

The world has concentrated on advancing in the fastest possible way, unfortunatly not the best possible way.

all i know is that something has to happen. i saw on cable news the other day how in debt all the states in america are. one state was planning on closing 1/2 of their public schools. another took all work related mobiles of their empoyees, another was even planning on cutting back on transplant surgery.

it hasnt hit here in australia yet as bad as it has in the rest of the world. i just keep looking and looking for a way for the world to get out of it and i just dont see it happening.

and to the tragic dragons supporter...dont you know its the chinese year of the rabbit..... go the bunnies.

Originally posted by punterdeb
all i know is that something has to happen. i saw on cable news the other day how in debt all the states in america are. one state was planning on closing 1/2 of their public schools. another took all work related mobiles of their empoyees, another was even planning on cutting back on transplant surgery.

it hasnt hit here in australia yet as bad as it has in the rest of the world. i just keep looking and looking for a way for the world to get out of it and i just dont see it happening.

and to the tragic dragons supporter...dont you know its the chinese year of the rabbit.....

go the bunnies.

All countrys are now out for the international dollar and require products from different countrys for diversity. This forces certain countrys to trade agreements with others to boost their economy!

China are excelling due to the fact that all products are made cheap in labour and material!

Just like the Bunnies! You need more help than Inglis and what the chinese new year has to offer. I must admit though you finally don't have a cheap team so you might be in for a good year. Does this mean because it's the year of the rabbit on the chinese calander that you will have cheap labour and material to work with! Ha Ha

It's amazing what money does when a private investor like Crowe assists a club. This happens in all business!

I have given this a lot of thought in the grand scheme of things and I can only see one way to stop and maybe reverse the course we've been on.

We all know change doesn't come easy or with acceptance but in all my years of research/conspiracy hypothesis, I have come to the conclusion that to truly have a peaceful society without wars, a society without being indebted to bankers from birth, and a society where people are truly equal would require one major addition, free energy.

I'm not talking about solar or wind energy by actual "free energy" where one could draw limitless power from whatever source for their own use (think Mr. Fusion from Back To The Future). Think of the concept; raw materials cost would be virtually nil, transportation of materials would be nil and production costs would be nil. The world would have an excess of production and a surplus of consumers.

Free energy has the power to transform the world we know, into the world we could be. Of course this free energy would be fought tooth and nail by TPTB because they would be the ones who stand to loose it all. Free energy would globally transform us from 'consumers' into 'producers' on a global scale. Can you imagine a more peaceful form of coexistence with other humans on the planet?

Just my two cents.

It seems now countries are nothing more than companies competing in a global market place. We are the employees. The idea of a nation state is to look after and protect the citizens not exploit them for financial gain.

I think one issue that might help you is the difference in economic development regimes used over the years by countries faced with the dilemma of being coerced/forced into the global economy. If you look at the case history of the World Bank and IMF, you'll see they bring countries into the global slave system when they are economically desperate and insist on export-oriented, trade liberalization models as the only way to salvation. Instead, many have argued ISMs (import substitution models) are what really work but of course the International Institutions don't like this as its one less national economy strongly dependent on the global.
This dichotomy has been played in several economies especially in South America but limited mostly to developing countries. I think ISMs are something developed countries need to attempt on a large scale. But the problem with that is in order to participate in the global rat race you must liberalize trade barriers with China and the lot and the WTO will punish companies or governments who don't play along.
But yeah, institute robust import tariffs and repeal NAFTA and several of the many other FTAs and you're on a good start.

Originally posted by punterdeb
The way i see, its the only way for the world to save itself. We need to wind the clock back to before all of our governments signed all of these treatys which commit us all to buying of others. almost everything that we buy these days comes from overseas. we need to start manufacturing again. this brings jobs. this brings prosperity.

The goal of globalization should have been to bring the entire world upto the standards of living and wages in the Western world. Instead it seems the goal is to bring the Western world down to 3rd world status, living standards and wages.

BUT....is it too late? can we undo the damage that has been done. maybe when we all talk about our governments and taking them back, it needs to start from the top. maybe our governments need to start backing out of deals that have been proven to be bad for THEIR own citizens. everyone on here no matter where you live or what country you are from must have been heartbroken at the threads showing the pictures of cities like detroit in america who have gone to rack and ruin since the motor manufacturers went overseas. maybe, we could put a super import tax on things that companies import, that can be manufactured in ones own country?. maybe a limit on the amount of profit a company can make before they have to reinvest in their own country?

Your assuming the role of government and politicians is to do whats good or right for you, the citizen. This is just not so, they serve the corporations and banks, this is what group will benefit most from globalization.

***what are your thoughts?***** all i know is that there is only one country thats going forward and thats china. and what the hell happens to the rest of us if they decide to pull up stumps and stop exporting. we will all be standing around like an emperor without clothes.

China, India, Philippines and other countries are benefiting from this, but for how long? If the Western world can no longer afford the cheap crap on the market today, then the whole system will collapse.... Just look around and see.

reply to post by punterdeb


I agree entirely!

It's never too late.
But there would be a lot of problems associated with it.

The question is whether we are prepared to have a period of chaos as a result of rolling it back, or continue on the path we're on. In my opinion, we should start to remove the machine in place and risk the instability.

The current situation is not helping a global population. The WTO and the IMF are continuing to do damage. The UN is useless, the EU is pretty much doomed.

All of the treaties and pacts are designed to support governments and corporations, yet they suggest they are for the betterment of a population. Clearly, this is not the case. We are still seeing regional conflicts, still seeing government corruption, still seeing the unfair distribution of medicine, still seeing the need for aid, still seeing corporate interests trumping public interests... where are all the improvements the WTO, IMF and other organizations suggest they offer?

If a government has any real interest in improving the lives of their people, they would be supporting the rebuilding of manufacturing and agriculture. They should be promoting home farming and energy conservation while pumping money into science and research into new energy sources - off the grid.

Education needs to change. We need to be teaching kids about social responsibility. We need to be educating them about reproduction and the importance of being able to support your child completely. We need to bring agriculture and traditional skills of basic survival back into the classroom.

During the second world war, Britain went through a massive change and did roll back to a healthier lifestyle. People were farming for themselves, being economical, living within their means, supporting their communities, providing opportunities to their fellow citizens... They had to. Since then, we have moved even further away from the basics of life and survival than we were before that war. If we had a similar situation now, hundreds of thousands would die because they don't know how to grow a carrot!
Crime would be uncontrollable because the youth have an expectation that shouldn't have ever been met. They live in a world where they can get whatever they want for next to nothing, and they don't even have to work for it. If it isn't supplied by the state (ie, the rest of us) then it's imported cheap from China. If those two avenues are cut off, they'll turn to theft and crime rather than doing without or being self-sufficient.

We also need to sacrifice this idea that banking and retail is the lifeblood of any economy. London would not collapse if the banks left. The scum who feed off that industry would leave with it. The real economy would still exist, but government would have to prioritize the people over corporate interests.
There will always be a market here for banking, and there will always be a business model ready to fill it. If the banks left for a tax haven, their branches here would be closed and we would operate as a truly Independent economic system - as it should be.

But, before we do any of that, we need to all stand up against censorship of the internet. Almost every government in the world now has its sights on controlling the internet in one way or another. They all know that they have control of the traditional media. The papers you buy and the TV news you watch is controlled either directly or indirectly by a small minority of government and corporate mix. They'll tell you what they think they need to, and silence the rest.
The internet is the only place where true freedom of the press still exists, and that goes for the UK, the USA, Europe, everywhere. We cannot and must not ever allow them to inflict any restriction on the ability to share news on the internet.

maybe this whole new wikileaks thing with the swiss banks might be the start. maybe if it exposes leaders who are raping their countries using these trade agreements, foreign government grants and treaty's - maybe that will make others sit up and take action. it will also bring untold heat on current leaders if their countries have been donating billions of their own tax payers dollars to these countries only to see it going into swiss bank accounts.

I put forward some thoughts on your main question : Is it too late to wind back globalization?

Yes, it is too late. Globalization as a phenomenon has been happening since we began keeping records. Certain national factions will reign supreme for 100's of years in globalization... they will each carry the torch of globalization for a while... Greeks, Romans, Chinese, Turks, Germans, Brits, Americans, Persians, Indians, Russians, and keep listing!

When one group becomes tired of carrying the torch another faction will pick it up and go for another 100's of years. History is replete with waxing/waning empires. Nations can also lose the torch by becoming distracted by internal affairs; or nations can become disabled from the global leadership position because of the impossible demands of the economics which go with the maintainence of globalist empires.

OP, there are basically 2 messages on the subject of globalization/civilization. Just be aware that you must differentiate between "mainstream globalization is good" message and "anti-thesis of globalization is scare mongering" message. These are the extreme messages we always hear from corporations and the critics of civilization. Way too many people on ATS are using the 2nd "scare" message when in fact globalization has been happening for thousands of years.

Here is a Frenchman who was travelling in the middle east around the time of 200 years ago. It's long winded prose comes from a different era but the existential angst is clearly evident: he is looking at vast ruins and wondering "where did all these empires go"? This book was written when European civilization was at it's apex and beginning to wane. In 100 years time the next great empire would rise up (the United States) to carry the torch of globalization for awhile. See:

"The Ruins, or, Meditation on the Revolutions of Empires: and The Law of Nature" by C.F. Volney. This is a fascinating tome. en.wikipedia.org...çois_Chassebœuf

I don't believe it possible to wind back globalization. Because firstly, one would necessarily have to destroy the internet. And there are lot of people who would be against you doing that. Secondly, it would be contra productive to reduce civilization to ashes. People will rebuild it. If it takes a thousand years they will do it.

Therefore, globalization is unstoppable. The only way to live your life in a world without globalization is to push the global process forward now with maximum efforts and to expedite the completion of the program. Then at least one could say that humanity has gone "post-globalization" and entered into a new world order. That new world order is still up for grabs. Our collective future begins with your personal choices. What will you do?

That's only my perspective. 7 billion other perspectives out there.

Rather than repeat all of the arguments repeated here fo why globalisation cannot be stopped I would prefer to look at what will happen once Globalisation comes to full fruition.

Once people are united by a common understanding, a common system of fair exchange and a common system of intelligence gathering, eventually the need for administritive powers will fall away like a cocoon from a butterfly. The power structures we have today have arisen over hundreds if not thousands of years to keep these developing systems in check.

Over time one system assimilates another and so on and so on until finally you are left with one system. It will be up to the people of that point to go through the required cycles of revolution that we see in history and to take back control from the people who have spent their lives building and maintaining these social structures ( which is all the PTB are) and to then deploy it for the benefit of the mass population.

However, even when we reach this ballanced system after a while there will arise elements that are not comfortable with the accepted norm and the whole thing will begin to shatter and reform again because of the introduction of competiting ideals and values.

The speed at which this process happens depends on the level of awareness of its participants which is why you see societies slowly advance for so long and then suddenly explode when knowledge and access to knowledge has reached a critical mass.

This process has happened for as long as there has been communities and will continue to happen through out time.

The best we can do is to recognise that we are part of a living and evolving system and to try to ensure that what little of it we can control that we do control to the best of our abilities while leaving other people free to do the same.

reply to post by punterdeb


Interresting topic (and if there is any solution, it would not be easy...)
Read some books on cultural anthropology,ecology, and psychology/humanethology/ethology (at least the basics)! If you put this five fields together, you will see that the so called human culture is a domestication process. Not just plants and animals are domesticated. Human masses also.
Ancient human hordes were egalitarian and non-centered, they lived in a balance with their niche just like any predator.
Accidentally a totalitarian system started its evolution, first the tribes, later states, with variable structures but the main point is: the ruler classes want more goods than their needs. Statistics has it that the 20%of Earth's population has the 80% of Earth's values. Nice, isn't it? I'm not a communist, but I prefer pandas to multimillionaires.
Ethology researches were made to check the similarities and differences between dogs and wolfes. One of the motivations was, that human requirements for an ideal pet is similar to that of a human friend. So the difference between dog and wolf can show us what we expect from each other. Wolf: more independent, better in solving problems. Dog: 'better' in indoctrination (it searces the object when the man orders him, even if it doesnt smell anything there), and better in communication with humans
Summerizing it:
1. Wild animals and plants are healthier (Both phisycally and mentally. Psychosomatic and psychic illnesses are the 'inventions' of culture...) than the domestic ones, wild animals has a bigger brain than the domestic forms
2.Wild animals are agile and cautious, not docile and trusting like domestic ones(a man would'nt milk a bison...so we made a weaker version. And -parallel with this-think about the cult of patience and pacifism in culture, world religions, etc.)
3. Mimicries exist in nature, too, so a wild creature can be p...d off, too. But a herd of bisons are not indoctrinated, all of the specimens sees the full reality, it's not the matter of their 'rank'
4.Evolution of beasts: they get better and better, according to their needs(or get extincted, if they fail). Breeding of domestic animals: according to human needs...it doesn't matter if they suffer and the eco system injures, They (20%) need profit and power. Would you live in a pug's body or in a wolf's one, if you had to choose?
5.The essential problem that human race is not that fit predator as it was in ancient times (lack of natural selection). In our recent form we are dependent of agriculture. Agricultural system excludes predators that could select us. (And agricultural technologies are more and more intensive, which decreases biodiversity. Role of biodiversity: the more diverse a biotop is, the more resistant it is to any harm. Biophilia: scientists proved it many ways, that natural surroundings has a healing power on psyche.) Cultural system (bigger 'herd'= bigger profit, plus pacifism=UNNATURALLY strong social instinct) excludes limiting the population boom. What will limit it? Starvation? War? Physical or psychical diseases?

reply to post by survivalstation

I have come to the conclusion that to truly have a peaceful society without wars, a society without being indebted to bankers from birth, and a society where people are truly equal would require one major addition, free energy.

Why the heck do you think the Rockefellers were behind the Nuclear Protests. Heck the Boston Globe had ads in 1984 - Nuclear Protesters - $10.00/hour. I think I even saved some.

Thorium Nuclear power is much safer and can not be turned into bombs. For thirty to forty years, a community could have FREE power (well almost) for an initial investment of $2,500. Heck my YEARLY electric bill is a LOT more than that!

Mini nuclear plants to power 20,000 homes
£13m shed-size reactors will be delivered by lorry

Nuclear power plants smaller than a garden shed and able to power 20,000 homes will be on sale within five years, say scientists at Los Alamos, the US government laboratory which developed the first atomic bomb.

The miniature reactors will be factory-sealed, contain no weapons-grade material, have no moving parts and will be nearly impossible to steal because they will be encased in concrete and buried underground.

The US government has licensed the technology to Hyperion, a New Mexico-based company which said last week that it has taken its first firm orders and plans to start mass production within five years. 'Our goal is to generate electricity for 10 cents a kilowatt hour anywhere in the world,' said John Deal, chief executive of Hyperion. 'They will cost approximately $25m [£16m] each. For a community with 10,000 households, that is a very affordable $2,500 per home....

Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative

The Basics
...thorium fuel cycle carries with it a number of important natural properties some of which contrast sharply with the uranium fuel cycle:

-At no point in the thorium cycle – from mining to waste – can fuel or waste products be used as bomb material in any way;

-The thorium fuel cycle is inherently incapable of causing a meltdown according to the laws of physics; in nuclear reactor parlance, the fuel is said to contain passive safety features;

-Thorium-based fuels do not require conversion or enrichment – two essential phases of the uranium fuel cycle that are exceedingly expensive, and create proliferation risk;

-Thorium fuel cycle waste material consists mostly of 233-uranium, which can be recycled as fuel (with minor actinide content decreased 90-100%, and with plutonium content eliminated entirely);

-Thorium-based fuels are significantly energy efficient;

-Thorium fuel cycle waste material is radiotoxic for tens of years, as opposed to the thousands of years with today’s standard radioactive waste;

-Thorium fuel designs exist today that can be used in all existing nuclear reactors;

-Thorium exists in greater abundance and higher concentrations than uranium making it much less expensive and environmentally-unobtrusive to mine;

These facts have many serious implications for the efficiency and security of energy delivery in the United States, and the world....

Now all we have to do is get the Whores in the District of Criminals to allow it instead of continuing to transfer our wealth into the pockets of the Rockefellers and their friends... GOOD LUCK with that. The politicians will not even stop the thieves from the wholesale defrauding of nations by the central bankers invention "Fractional Reserve Banking" A practice that collapsed the world's economy in 1929 and again just now.

reply to post by punterdeb

The way i see, its the only way for the world to save itself. We need to wind the clock back to before all of our governments signed all of these treatys which commit us all to buying of others. almost everything that we buy these days comes from overseas. we need to start manufacturing again. this brings jobs. this brings prosperity.

BUT....is it too late? can we undo the damage that has been done. maybe when we all talk about our governments and taking them back, it needs to start from the top....

The big problem is those behind the idea of a global government have been at it for over a hundred years. Like a cancer they have spread the disease to our politicians, educators and political Activist groups.

A fairly good look at what is happening is found on THIS website go half way down and click to go to the pdf "Part 3: Days of Infamy" That should open your eyes enough to want to start at Part 1 and read all the pdfs. I do not claim G.Edward Griffin has all the truth or that I do, but at least Griffin has a solution.

There is enough independent research and facts to show there is a group of wealthy families who have cooperated to control the world for more than one generation. Also see www.modernhistoryproject.org...

An ATS Thread on the subject

As independent verification, I came to this SHOCKING realization when the Organic Consumers Union, Food & Water Watch, La Vida Locavore all sided with MONSANTO on the issue of Draconian Farm Regulation aka Food Safety Laws. Further research showed either the organization had close ties with the United Nations and/or funding from the Rockefeller foundations.

My second significant discovery was a very well researched article by Nicole Johnson. She traced the demise of US farming all the way back to 1942 and the detailed plans of the Committee for Economic Development.

....In its 1945 report "Agriculture in an Expanding Economy," CED complained that "the excess of human resources engaged in agriculture is probably the most important single factor in the "farm problem'" and describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs....

A report published in 1962 entitled "An Adaptive Program for Agriculture"[3] is even more blunt in its objectives...

""The essential fact to be faced, argues CED, is that with present high levels farm productivity, more labor is involved in agriculture production that the market demands -- in short, there are too may farmers. To solve that problem, CED offers a program with three main prongs."

Some of the report's authors would go on to work in government to implement CED's policy recommendations. Over the next five years, the political and economic establishment ensured the reduction of "excess human resources engaged in agriculture" by two million, or by 1/3 of their previous number....

CED members were influential in business, government, and agricultural colleges, and their outlook shaped both governmental policies and what farmers were taught. Farmers found themselves encouraged to give up on a farming system that employed minimal outsourced inputs and capital and get "efficient" by adopting instead a system that required they go into debt in order to purchase ever more costly inputs, like fossil-fuel based fertilizers, chemicals, seeds, feed grain, and machinery.

CED's plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers' lives ended in suicide... www.opednews.com...

A Pew Report notes the "Green Revolution" was the brain child of the Rockefeller and the move from independent farmers to Corporate farming destroys rural economies. It further states the multiplier effect for independent farm dollars is seven since the money is spend in the community.

By the By ever look at WHO controls Monsanto???

85% of Monsanto is Mutual Funds/pensions. The OWNERS are every day people who are completely ignorant of the fact they have paid for Monsanto stock, and would probably be horrified if they ever found out. The stock is VOTED by people like the Edward C. Johnson 3d, his family who owns, the Megellan Fund, Fidelity and a number of other mutual funds. The Johnson family votes a total shares: 39,127,443 or 7.15% and that is only the stuff I could find in a quick look.