I'm a globalist. Lay it on me.

Post Reply New Topic

I understand we people who believe in international trade and corporation aren't very popular right, and that some other people might have a beef with us.

Very well.

If there is anything anyone would want to get off there chest about me and my globalist beliefs please do so here. I don't mind being insulted. I will read all post, though I wont respond to any of them except the ones that ask me non-rhetorical questions.

So anyway, say what you got to say.

What kind of globalist are you? Do you believe in one world government, one government to rule us all?

I should be able to deposit my wealth in a "global" bank, and withdraw it anywhere and anytime I want without facing questions or suspicion.

For instance, I want to deposit $50,000 in a Los Angeles branch, and withdraw it as needed in Seoul, Tokyo, and Manila. But no, that would get me arrested "on suspicion" and held while the authorities investigate my every move and motive for the last ten years to find something that would justify arresting me and confiscating all of my money and property.

As it is, I have to get creative if I want to take more than $1000 in cash with me out of the country.

Welcome fellow globalist.

Do you agree that the only thing wrong with Hillary Clinton's dream for "a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere" is that it wasn't a full sphere?

I agree with the dream of a global society ...
my question would focus on resources - to have 7 billion humans live like europeans, we'd need 3 globes, to live like Americans, 7. And we'll travel everywhere because we are free to do so - except, transcontinental flights have an abysmal co2 output. That is the promise of globalism, isn't it - that everyone will end up living like Americans, or at least Europeans. I guess that won't be possible. So.... what globe are you talking about?
The globe, as it appears to Americans/Europeans - as a place to use for our pleasure - or the globe as it is for, say, a poor Indian, for whom the globe is the thing that is used for American/European pleasure?

I wonder if people would appreciate where they live more if they had to get on a ship and sail for weeks to get to the other side of the world instead of flinging themselves there in a few hours by plane as they can now? Not that I think it's realistic that we go back to ships for intercontinental travel, there's no way people would go for that. It's much more likely they will try to develop planes/fuel that have less of a carbon footprint. Still, I wonder what cultural/sociological effects it would have if we did have to go back to a slower form of long-distance travel.

I agree with some aspects of Globalism.

But I also believe in nations maintaining their peculiar (not weird, I mean "unique" in this instance) aspects. I've always loved the full fruition of many cultures revealing themselves, rather than the potential for cultures melding into one "world" culture.

I like the fact that the UK has the Pound, rather than the Euro......But I wasn't for Brexit.

I think globalism is inevitable, and is mostly a good thing. There are some issues with globalism, but there are issues with everything.

What I think is a mistake is to artificially force globalism where people are not ready for it.

Isolationism is more dangerous than Globalism, in my view.

I would like there to be 250 or so countries, rather than one "world" government."

But, ideally, nations should complement each other, rather than think of other nations as business opponents (a la Trump).

It would be nice if I were able to travel to a place like Ghana without having to obtain a visa.

It would be nice if I were able to travel to a place like New York without having to obtain a visa.

Arevelion, can you define what you mean by Globalism? Like Crimadella, I'd like to know more specifics. "Free trade" and "open borders" and stop there? Abolish national sovereignty and have the UN or some other global body govern all people on the planet? I just don't know what you mean specifically.

Well...

When daddy's boss yells at daddy daddy comes home and yells at mom.

And then mom yells at me.

And then I yell at the family dog.

And then...my dog goes out and finds the nearest "Globalist" whose leg he can chew on!

So...SICK 'EM Fido!

Last edited by naturalplastic on 21 Mar 2019, 7:01 am, edited 2 times in total.

But by coincidence I just saw this news thing on U Tube minutes ago. One of the farmers happened to have blamed the problem on "globalism".

Hold on. This isn't about setting up a "brave new world" or a "1984" type dystopia, and even if I was out to do that, I am alone and powerless so don't worry.

Anyway, the answer to your second question is...sorta. Right now there are a few people who have alot of influence over what happens in the world. For instance central bank heads, CEOs of transnational corporations and the heads of some IGOs (intergovernmental organizations), and I don't think these few people should be able to determine the fate of the global economy on their own. I think other people, ideally all people, should be brought into to discussion of what happens to the global economy. How to do this...(winces) I'm still a little sketchy on details. I'm sorry for that.



Ha! I would say I agree. Still, in her defense she would have been able to only so much if she were president of the U.S.




There's only one globe. I know that's hard to believe with such wide income disparity, I did visit a third world country myself. Want to see income disparity in the capital of Macedonia? Just walk a block. It will be like you went back in time 200 years. But what me and my fellow Americans do has a big impact on what happens to people in India, and vise versa. So we're one globe.

But to the bigger point. How do we distribute the worlds limited resource, and determine global economic policy when we have such wide income disparities in the world? I am a globalist precisely because I don't know. The fate of the world shouldn't be determined just by a few rich Americans like me. Other people in the world deserve a say as well. I won't always like other people in the world have to say, and they won't always like what I have to say. But it's important that we all talk.



Like most anyone calling themselves a globalist I do believe in free trade and free movement of people, with some restrictions. For instance trading of endangered/invasive species and human trafficking should be illegal. Unlike other globalist, who are happy having a few elites having vast influence on the global economy, I think the rest of humanity should have some say as well. I am not for abolishing national sovereignty. Honestly though it seems to me nations are losing sovereignty naturally to globalization and we as a species should have a serious discussion about what we should do when national sovereignty is gone. The details of how to have this discussion...well admittedly I am sketchy at best on those. It might be just as well though. I don't think I should be determining these things on my own.

Magz….Is it difficult to get a visa for America in Poland?

I'm a free-trade advocate, and I would like free movement of people----but I also would like a situation where we can account for all those people, and not let certain people (like terrorists) just run willy-nilly around the world.

I wouldn't like a "one-world government" at all.