So Your Voting For The Globalization Presidents?

Globalization presidents 1989-????

I have edited the years respectfully in the bottom quote

* George H. W. Bush 1989–1993
* Bill Clinton 1992-1996
* George W. Bush 2000-2008
* Barack Hussein Obama 2008-2016

And just what do these former and the current presidents and president have all in common thats Globalization, look at the site miller center and look at each eras and tell me did 300 million Americans really vote for all these globalists presidents?

Obama says he knows he will win the election so why bother voting at all? so i have to ask did you really vote for a globalist and will you be voting for a globalist president again?.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


I agree with your opposition to globalists. But those years are really screwy.

The only potential candidate I have seen who wants to even slightly reduce globalism is Ron Paul. Unfortunately, he will probably be ridiculed and scoffed at just like in '08, and I don't realistically see him getting the GOP ticket.


What I'm about to say is going to be really unpopular here on ATS:

Globalization is the inevitable future of mankind. It's the unavoidable byproduct of mass-communication, widespread global transportation and the developing global economy. It simply is the future of Earth, and even if we reversed all of our policies, withdrew all foreign aid, and pulled our military out of every single overseas base and brought them all home, it wouldn't do anything to stop Globalization.

The people of the world are no longer isolated, and in fact even the very idea of a standalone nation-state is anachronistic in today's world. If the US suddenly became radically isolationist, we would only fall behind other countries that are willing to globalize, and that would guarantee our downfall. For better or worse, the world is going to someday be ruled by a single governing entity.


Personally, I think the best thing we can do is penalize outsourcing, drastically reduce the defense budget, and minimize foreign aid. We still need to maintain some sort of global presence if we wish to remain viable in the 21st century.

No point, so never mind......

reply to post by drwizardphd


Agreed. Those who fear the globalization of the rule of law are the varied Corporatists.

We have two choices for moving forward; Global rule of Law, or nation states making their own rules. Most on ATS think they prefer the Nation State, but I doubt they understand the ramifications and where they actually fit in all that (ie NOT the winning end).

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by drwizardphd

 

Agreed. Those who fear the globalization of the rule of law are the varied Corporatists.

We have two choices for moving forward; Global rule of Law, or nation states making their own rules. Most on ATS think they prefer the Nation State, but I doubt they understand the ramifications and where they actually fit in all that (ie NOT the winning end).

edit on 25-5-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)

nice insults so your saying we are the varied Corporatist? i guess you didn't know that globalization is destroying south america.

basically if you support globalization you then support the Corporations.

What's wrong with Globalization? Globalization is good.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by drwizardphd

 

Agreed. Those who fear the globalization of the rule of law are the varied Corporatists.

We have two choices for moving forward; Global rule of Law, or nation states making their own rules. Most on ATS think they prefer the Nation State, but I doubt they understand the ramifications and where they actually fit in all that (ie NOT the winning end).

edit on 25-5-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)

nice insults so your saying we are the varied Corporatist? i guess you didn't know that globalization is destroying south america.

basically if you support globalization you then support the Corporations.

It's like you dont actually read what you respond to.

I said that there are two choices, the globalization of LAW, or the continuation of rogue nation states like the UK and US have been for centuries.

The globalization of law would limit those sorts of corporate activities you refer to, because it would give equal voice to people in those South American and other third world and 'developing' countries. The continuation of the current paradigm where countries like the US continue to push their own agenda in bold and proud defiance of international law is what benefits corporations, because it promotes a lawless ness they take advantage of. Your example is actually an extension of that.

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
What's wrong with Globalization? Globalization is good.

"Globalization' can mean many things and take many forms. It is neither good nor bad. Globalization of human rights is obviously good (for people in, say Africa, not good for, say DeBeers). Globalization of the McDonald's template is bad (for the environment, people's diet. Good for McDonald's stock)

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Obama says he knows he will win the election so why bother voting at all? so i have to ask did you really vote for a globalist and will you be voting for a globalist president again?

Ron Paul might win and Texas might secede.

Originally posted by drwizardphd
The only potential candidate I have seen who wants to even slightly reduce globalism is Ron Paul.

Or he was given the task to destroy whatever left of the democratic system more quickly so the multinationals elite can form a new global government. The ultimate control of sheeples is money not politics. With money, you control everything, politics, media, technology. RP policy is about letting the money control tighten.

Remember, the ultimate control is money, any politics or law will always follow the money if you let it.

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
What's wrong with Globalization? Globalization is good.

"Globalization' can mean many things and take many forms. It is neither good nor bad. Globalization of human rights is obviously good (for people in, say Africa, not good for, say DeBeers). Globalization of the McDonald's template is bad (for the environment, people's diet. Good for McDonald's stock)

Well, I meant Globalization of Capitalism. The Globalization of Capitalism is good, poor countries that have liberalized their economies have increased their living standards and life expectancy and drastically lowered their poverty rates. I see nothing wrong with that, anti-globalization people are just ignorant and selfish.

reply to post by Rockdisjoint


Capitalism isnt anything but good Capitalism destroyers everyone's lives

I see nothing wrong with that, anti-globalization people are just ignorant and selfish.

So we are just ignorant and selfish, i wouldn't say something as ignorant and selfish as that.

poor countries that have liberalized their economies have increased their living standards and life expectancy and drastically lowered their poverty rates.

No countries have liberalized the economies look at south america and eupore, and even Asia democracy and Capitalism is sure doing a great job of destroying nations and peoples lives, homes, jobs.

Democracy=Slavery but it looks like you dont mind been a good slave to the system.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

Capitalism isnt anything but good Capitalism destroyers everyone's lives

Really? Tell that to all of the people who now have homes, private property, jobs and wealth thanks to capitalism, tell that to the people who can now afford to send their children to school and provide for them, instead of selling them into human slavery. It might not be too pretty right now, but even Marx admitted that this transitory period was necessary.

So we are just ignorant and selfish, i wouldn't say something as ignorant and selfish as that.

Yes, most of you are. Westerners don't want Capitalism to spread to 3rd world countries, simply because they want to keep their vacation spots cheap. I see no other logical reason for the anti-globalization movement. Is it really harmful that these people can now live in homes and afford homes instead of huts? Or is it just because they're not white? Do they not deserve the same luxuries that we get in the West, just because they look a bit different?

No countries have liberalized the economies look at south america and eupore, and even Asia democracy and Capitalism is sure doing a great job of destroying nations and peoples lives, homes, jobs. Democracy=Slavery but it looks like you dont mind been a good slave to the system.

Just because the West thinks that Capitalism is an out-dated concept does not mean that other countries should not embrace the ideals, philosophies and economic systems that once made our nations great. Even Cuba is starting to embrace Capitalism (a little). Hopefully one day it will spread to Africa too.

reply to post by Rockdisjoint

Really? Tell that to all of the people who now have homes, private property, jobs and wealth thanks to capitalism, tell that to the people who can now afford to send their children to school and provide for them, instead of selling them into human slavery. It might not be too pretty right now, but even Marx admitted that this transitory period was necessary.

What wealth? america is broke, eupore is broke, so what wealth are you speaking of?

Tell that to all of the people who now have homes, private property, jobs

What about those who had the same dreams and lost there homes,property jobs thanks to capitalism?
look at eupore, look at those cities in america that have became GHOST Towns, should be they be thanking capitalism for such a nice life? and what ever happened to those people you know? i didn't think so.

Just because you dont want to blame the finical crisis we are still in on Capitalism and democracy, you have to put the blame on both of the system, not just on the system, but on the elites who are pushing these agendas

Just because the West thinks that Capitalism is an out-dated concept does not mean that other countries should not embrace the ideals, philosophies and economic systems that once made our nations great. Even Cuba is starting to embrace Capitalism (a little). Hopefully one day it will spread to Africa too.

Cuba isnt embracing Capitalism, its only changing parts of its Communism system structure

Hopefully one day it will spread to Africa too.

For the love of god, i pray that doesn't come to pass, if it does, why not and call the earth planet democratic while the elites are at it.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

What wealth? america is broke, eupore is broke, so what wealth are you speaking of?

They are broke because of their careless governments. Other countries are beginning to rise. China, India, Brazil, etc are all amassing wealth. They use to be extremely poor, but now they are working their way out of poverty, soon they will have a middle class that will rival Americas.

What about those who had the same dreams and lost there homes,property jobs thanks to capitalism?
look at eupore, look at those cities in america that have became GHOST Towns, should be they be thanking capitalism for such a nice life? and what ever happened to those people you know? i didn't think so.

Just because you dont want to blame the finical crisis we are still in on Capitalism and democracy, you have to put the blame on both of the system, not just on the system, but on the elites who are pushing these agendas

How did capitalism make them lose their homes, property and jobs? Please explain that.

Cuba isnt embracing Capitalism, its only changing parts of its Communism system structure

They are strengthening Capitalism to prop up Communism.

For the love of god, i pray that doesn't come to pass, if it does, why not and call the earth planet democratic while the elites are at it.

What are you talking about? You want them to live in poverty forever, simply because you think Capitalism is evil? Oh noes! Non-westerners are now going to have jobs too! We're not special anymore \o/ Give them welfare, give them aid, give anything, but not jobs!

reply to post by Rockdisjoint


I am not going to reply you seeing how your always supporting the elites

but i will respond this one last time.

What are you talking about? You want them to live in poverty forever, simply because you think Capitalism is evil? Oh noes! Non-westerners are now going to have jobs too! We're not special anymore \o/ Give them welfare, give them aid, give anything, but not jobs!

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

I am not going to reply you seeing how your always supporting the elites

How am I supporting the elites? I am simply looking for a logical reason as to why you are against businesses going to 3rd world countries and creating jobs? Wouldn't you like it if a business decided to come to Canada and create jobs?

Your comments reek of emotion. I never said that there was no poverty in those countries, I said they were working their way out of poverty and that will take time, plus many Western countries have strict trade restrictions and that hinders their growth. Maybe if the anti-globalization, anti-free trade crowds would look at the facts and stop running on pure emotions their countries would be more open to free trade and the 3rd world countries would rise out of poverty faster.

reply to post by Rockdisjoint

How am I supporting the elites

You are, by supporting Globalization and the destruction of poor class, just so you know there will be no more middle class and there is no middle class now, only the rich and wealthy rule over us, seeing how that you support the elites agenda, its clear you dont understand the difference between elites,poor.

Globalization is part of the elites agenda to eliminate the poor.

Your comments reek of emotion. I never said that there was no poverty in those countries, I said they were working their way out of poverty and that will take time

The rich and wealthy dont care about the poverty, oh i am sure it will take time to create more poverty, rather then solving it and fixing it, i will repeat my statement, the elites dont a give a dam fuss about the poverty.


So you believe obama that Brazil is just doing fine and super great with its unemployment rate? i guess you didn't know that unemployment rate numbers can be easily manipulated.

Wouldn't you like it if a business decided to come to Canada and create jobs?

this statement is hilarious,what jobs in canada? canadas unemployment rate and poverty is going and getting worse,worse each passing day, and who would risk and go to Alberta to work in the mines or the oil industry? only the 5 to 10% of Canadians.

Where i am i see alot of people on the streets looking for scraps and trash so they could sell! and if you dont think thats not poverty thanks to Globalization i think you need to see the real reality here and why not visit the Balkans? and see what kind of destruction globalization brought to them, people have no jobs,no higher education, if you want education your going to have pay it.

And you cant blame the jobless rate of the balkans on the war, just look at the rest of eupore.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


How is Globalization eliminating the middle class? Globalization is eliminating the poor, yes. But eliminating the middle class? No. It seems to me that Globalization is the only reason that many people in the West kept their jobs and lifestyles. Western governments are killing off their own middle classes, basically impoverishing their populations through uncontrolled spending, regulation and inflation.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

this statement is hilarious,what jobs in canada?

Can you even read?

This is what I said:

Wouldn't you like it if a business decided to come to Canada and create jobs?

Why can't you just answer my question? Why try to put words in my mouth?

So you believe obama that Brazil is just doing fine and super great with its unemployment rate? i guess you didn't know that unemployment rate numbers can be easily manipulated.

I answered this in my previous post, most of Brazil's problems come from U.S trade restrictions with Brazil. If the U.S just dropped all trade restrictions with Brazil it would open up the second largest market for U.S exports and get cheaper imports for all of us.