It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Globalization is a good thing

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 06:51 AM
link   
After the Brexit some woke up with a severe hangover: what went wrong? Or perhaps nothing went wrong at all - you certainly would think so given the cheers of the leavers, that could literally be heard in the streets last June. Had - finally - the will of the people prevailed?

But - is what we saw 'the will of the people' - a well educated, civil society that decided to leave the EU only after much delibration and truth-seeking, and deciding that this was the best thing to do to help the global society - or is it merely the result of an accumulation of civil unrest, caused by misinformation, disinformation, plain ole political lies about the Brits being special and some xenophobia? Was there really a NEED for an exit?

After some analyis it is clear that the root causes for the decision are fear of globalisation and fear of losing autonomy.

Surelly globalization is not a Good Thing™ - and handing over your autonomy neither, right?

It would be hard to believe - we all were brought up to believe otherwise. We are all part of "nations" and we are all taught to be "proud of them" (hence all to often creating a sense of superiority). Many of us even "served our nation" - we were in armies, fighting for what we thought was a Good Thing™ too - and we feel that despite this often caused loosing life or limb, and deprived families on all sides from their beloved ones - we still should be proud of it.

Proud to be British. Proud to be French. American. Stuff like that.

Is that really the way we think we should move forward - by falling apart?

A very well thought-out talk about this topic was given by social scientist Alexander Betts. "We are embarrassingly unaware of how divided our societies are, and Brexit grew out of a deep, unexamined divide between those that fear globalization and those that embrace it. How do we now address that fear as well as growing disillusionment with the political establishment, while refusing to give in to xenophobia and nationalism? "

So, ATS, what do you think - how indeed?



edit on 1-10-2016 by ForteanOrg because: he clarified and removed some typos



+6 more 
posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 06:57 AM
link   
I think you guys fear Independence.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk

The problem of independence is one of scale. It could be said that those that are against globalisation are against nations too - why not, what's the difference? Is the EU really a good representative of my interests? Is a nation? Is a city council? Or a major and his staff? What is the correct scale - the individual or the world?


+10 more 
posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

We can have global trade without global Authoritarianism.

I refuse to swear fealty to some global government.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: ForteanOrg

We can have global trade without global Authoritarianism.

I refuse to swear fealty to some global government.


The argument is somewhat flawed - global trade can be had without any nations at all. Also, as part of some nation, you surely underwrite their laws and rules, don't you? Still, any nation is divided in areas with their own subgovernment and autonomy, up to the personal level (you decide what colour your sofa will be). So, what's the difference?



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

What I mean to say is that your personal autonomy does not really suffer much from being part of a global community, unless the global government - which we WILL have, rest (un)asssured - does too much. Such a govnerment should merely be there to prevent wars, to facilitate local governments and decide what the lowest common denominator would be.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:16 AM
link   
I am all in favour of a world council where all nations and tribes are represented
Where world issues affecting the Human Race can be discussed
Does that count as Globalism

Or is Globalism the efforts a few with their own agenda of rule by tyranny
The waters certainly are muddy

Like I said I am all for a world council
I did not vote on the EU referendum because of unforseen circumstances
I know many voted leave to stick two fingers up at the establishment
Because the establishment is failing them and is greedy callous and self centred
Which is a part of or choice regarding Human Nature

Why just a European group of nations doing favours for each other
That is tribalism when considering all the nations of the Earth

We do need a vision of a United World for the world
Not the plans of a few centred psychopaths



edit on 1-10-2016 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-10-2016 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: artistpoet
I am all in favour of a world council where all nations and tribes are represented [...]
Why just a European group of nations doing favours for each other
We do need a vision of a United World for the world
Not the plans of a few centred psychopaths


I agree. But what is better: the plans of a few centred psychopaths that decide to break up a unity, hence preventing it to grow into the aforementioned global community - or the plans of other psychopaths to create a global dictatorial state? Neither, I'd say. We need the Russian Federation, the United States, the EU, China, India and other unions of states to work towards a federation of nations - the world. What we see today is that people feel we should re-establish states, sovereignty etc. - while they are still totally united on the Internet. We now live in 2 worlds, let's make it one!



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
But - is what we saw 'the will of the people' - a well educated, civil society that decided to leave the EU only after much delibration and truth-seeking, and deciding that this was the best thing to do to help the global society - or is it merely the result of an accumulation of civil unrest, caused by misinformation, disinformation, plain ole political lies about the Brits being special and some xenophobia? Was there really a NEED for an exit?


This is not a British phenomenon. Lots of other European are increasing becoming anti-EU, and rightly so.

And yes there was a NEED for Brexit.
Though this is only the first step in a long road ahead...
First we actually need to leave the EU. Then we need to change our voting system to proportional representation and scrap or massively cut the House of Lords, especially getting rid of hereditary peerage.
Then we need to have more referendums on major decision making and bring back power to the people.

And that's just the tip of the ice berg we have in front of us.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Totally agree with this vision of a United World working together for the benefit of the entire HumanRace

Which means taking power away from those with opposite plans
In what ever way we are able

A daunting task indeed

I guess it starts with the consideration
That we are soveriegn over our selves and as such take responsibility and govern oursleves
In the knowledge that other like minds will do the same

As Dante said a great flame starts with a spark/idea





edit on 1-10-2016 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
And yes there was a NEED for Brexit.


I don't agree - there was, and always will be, a need to scrutinize the current system, to improve it. Making federations fall apart and replacing them with nations is a step BACK, not forward.

You clearly illustrate this by pointing out:



Though this is only the first step in a long road ahead...
First we actually need to leave the EU. Then we need to change our voting system to proportional representation and scrap or massively cut the House of Lords, especially getting rid of hereditary peerage.
Then we need to have more referendums on major decision making and bring back power to the people.


.. may I point out that, for example, the EU does not HAVE a House of Lords nor hereditary peerage - so actually you choose to leave a better system than your own merely to improve your own flawed system - that does not make much sense to me.


And that's just the tip of the ice berg we have in front of us.


If you are facing such a daunting task, is it not better to get some help form other nations / peoples?



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:48 AM
link   
First put all the Bilderbergers and banker cartel, media spinners in insane asylum where they belong and when the power pyramid is crushed we can talk about how to create a global humanity united based on mutualism instead of parasitism thru power pyramid ponzi schemes.




posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Only because the EU doesn't have a House of Lords nor a hereditary peerage, doesn't mean it's a "better system".
I believe in bringing back power to the people and direct democracy.

If you want true globalization why do you want to shackle yourself to an inward looking, anti-democratic political union? It is causing more divide between people and nations than ever before and I'm glad we jumped ship before it's eventually collapse and potential civil war.

edit on 83100bAmerica/ChicagoSat, 01 Oct 2016 08:00:38 -05003116 by 83Liberty because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

You also fail to explain in your OP how "Globalization is a good thing", especially when the people in charge/law makers are mostly corrupt and self-serving just like most parts of our society from banking, to sports, big business/corporations and charities to name a few.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
Only because the EU doesn't have a House of Lords nor a hereditary peerage, doesn't mean it's a "better system".


Agreed. But the system that you like better has undeniable flaws - why go back to that at all? Why not improve the much lesser flawed, more efficient and not historically burdened EU government? And later: the United World government?



I believe in bringing back power to the people and direct democracy.


Amen to that. Nope, that can't be done on a global scale. But not even on a national scale - go and talk to the Scots or the Londoners - or on a regional scale. It can only be done on a personal scale - but that would require that all people, dumb or smart, would be willing and able to participate. If not, you would end up with just another new "elite". I am part of the current elite, my friend, and I can tell you that we very much WANT participation of citizens! Alas, truth is that citizens can't really be bothered, unless they need a scapegoat.

In the Netherlands just roughly 2 percent of our people are members of a political party. Roughly half of them is member of a party that governs our nation. Of that 1 percent, roughly 1 percent is actively engaged in local or national government. We are talking about say 10.000 people in a nation of 17 million+ .. and even these people don't always really care! It's infeasible and impossible to have 17 million people vote an everything, it will not work. Only the enlightened few will vote - the current state of affairs being a consequence.

Don't tell me that you want direct democracy. Tell me how we can do it!

edit on 1-10-2016 by ForteanOrg because: he removed some typos



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: 83Liberty

I need to visit someone urgently now - but I will return to this thread later on to answer your valid question (or better: to give my opinion on it).



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Hi ForteanOrg,

Back when the YourJobisGoingtoIndia.com website was up, an "esteemed" official from one of India's enormous outsourcing companies, posted his predictions about the transition to full globalization. He stated that the only remedy, for US workers, for offshoring jobs to India, will be full globalism.

His predictions included...

That full globalization will happen, and that there will be a great equalization of global wages and living standards.
That US workers should prepare for a great "leveling-down" of income and lifestyle, to that of the dalits of India.

The YourJobisGoingtoIndia.com website is gone so specific links aren't possible.

As Hillary transitions us to globalization under a Communist dictatorship, individual ownership of things will go away; our houses will be rezoned multi-family, to make room for Mexican nationals. The entire US constitution will be replaced by the one that Cass Sunstein wrote while a czar for barry hussein soetoro. Keep in mind, that Hillary was trained by the late Stalinist, Saul Alinsky.

Scholars and experts, of this, the ATS website, should probably amend these predictions, as they will.

Recommendation for reporters (who never see this website): Ask Hillary about her visit with The Dear Leader, Kim Jong IL, back during her co-presidency.


edit on 1/10/16 by Adonsa because: Spelling correction last line



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:21 AM
link   
if national leaders are already not representing their constituents well and THEY are democratically elected, what hope is there that an even MORE enveloping overarching UNELECTED political system will do a better job?

normally before you graduate to the next level of something you have to prove mastery over certain domains which are of lesser importance than those you will be responsible for after graduation.

Can you honestly say that world leaders have proven themselves to be so exceptionally brilliant at managing the affairs of their own house that they are now ready to take on even MORE responsibility than they already have?

Im not opposed in principle to world governing bodies....but we already have a bunch of them and they dont seem to be doing one bit of good.....you know...in the real world...not on paper or in the flowery speeches their hacks give to exclusive fund raiser dinners and such.


i think youre living in utopian fantasy land.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Adonsa
That full globalization will happen, and that there will be a great equalization of global wages and living standards.


True, and this is what has been going on in Europe as well. But the bright side is that most of our planet does not suffer from hunger anymore, there is a elementary form of education availble to all, we have hospitals and doctors everywhere and we reduced the number of wars greatly. We even fought acid rain - with success!



That US workers should prepare for a great "leveling-down" of income and lifestyle, to that of the dalits of India.


Well, apart fromt the US still being a "very proud independent nation" - it is also the main engine behind world trade and world economics, leading to poverty. A free market does not provide freedom to the people that are employed within it!



As Hillary transitions us to globalization under a Communist dictatorship, individual ownership of things will go away; our houses will be rezoned multi-family, to make room for Mexican nationals. The entire US constitution will be replaced by the one that Cass Sunstein wrote while a czar for barry hussein soetoro. Keep in mind, that Hillary was trained by the late Stalinist, Saul Alinsky.


Yay! Now, if that only would be so, my dear man, I could live with that. But nope, that's not what will happen. What will happen is that the American business leaders will not be forced by any (communist) state to hire Americans - nope, they will simply hire cheap labour anywhere. It weren't the communists that created your economic nightmares for you..

Scholars and experts, of this, the ATS website, should probably amend these predictions, as they will.

Recommendation for reporters (who never see this website): Ask Hillary about her visit with The Dear Leader, King Jong IL, back during her co-presidency.


edit on 1-10-2016 by ForteanOrg because: he forgot to unquote again



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

No, nope, nada, not happening. We have enough problems, we don't need the rest of the worlds too. Although we do stick our noses where they don't belong. Really wish we would quit doing that. Just say no........too globalization.






new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join