The Trump-like candidate is the better candidate. Freedom and national focus go together. It makes the globalist collectivists angry and they exploit that freedom to protest it.
What freedom? Globalism among other things is about cooperation and integration between nations, including spreading more individual freedom globally. Globalism is against collectivism while nationalism is a type of collectivism
It is the opposite. Globalism and collectivism go hand in hand and they require increasing rules and rules enforcement because the natural state and behavior of people is to want independence to pursue their own interests.
This is not really that hard to understand. The hierarchy of human interest is self, family, neighborhood, community, state, nation... and then maybe world. It is always a lie that the globalist are in it for global humanity. They push globalism because of the benefits they expect to farm directed the previous hierarchy... especially their own selfish interests.
Not all cultures are created equal. However, the people in various places have fealty to their own home country and home culture. There is no "global village" holding hands and singing Kumbaya. Today national sovereignty with reasonable open and fair economic competition is really the only model that works with respect to globalism. But each country gets to make its own rules. When the attempt is to try and aggregate power and control to a central global authority, then the competition just shifts to be of administrative and political moves and not who is building the better mouse trap.
And when this happens anyone trying to build a better mouse trap will be shot.
Try The End of the World is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization, by Peter Zeihan. It’s going down Vlad. It was never meant to last… given mistakes made like Allowing China into the WTO. Your globalism is rising global antisemitism again… because it benefits some nations. Even the EU cannot hold it together. Ukraine joining NATO causes another European war. Just like a buyer and seller, both have their own interests and independently negotiate to make a deal or not. That is called trade. There is no central overseer to puppet their actions. Collectivist authoritarian administrators keep trying, but buying and selling goes on without them. Until and unless they start imprisoning and killing then for not following those administrative rules. We saw what the globalism project would look like from the pandemic. No thanks.
In federations as the USA there are federal, state, and local rules. Such rules can be both synched and integrated, and the can also be in conflict with each other. It is similar with globalism as regarding markets, trade, standards, cooperation etc. Globalism is about nations having common rules because 100% national sovereignty exists only in "isolated" places as North Korea. If you do not want a society where every individual can disobey common rules and just do what they want to do, so why do you want nations to behave in a similar way?
You don’t get it. The larger the control group, the more difficult to govern. If large contingency collectivism worked we would see historical example and current examples. We don’t. Two families living next each other will demand their family autonomy. Two countries will demand their autonomy. Even territories within a country demand their autonomy. We see the conflict with the US states today. Countries like Spain where the Basques still want autonomy. Brexit was a finger to the collectivist globalists in Brussels. So was Trump. I don’t fucking care about Germans and Turks and they don’t fucking care about Americans. The US is supposed to be different as a federation because we live in communities we care about, and states we care about, but we also care about our country. At least that is how it worked until malcontent leftist and greedy Wall Street corporatists sold the WEF 2030 Agenda bullshit.
Fuck the common rules outside of my family, my community, my state and my country. No global WEF talentless looting administrator of the collective is gonna tell me how to live. And the climate crisis cult is and example of the global collectivist rot. The human harm being done by the elite luxury belief virtue signaling policies to force energy scarcity is massive. China ignores it while Western elite idiots pray to their globalist scripture of climate change religion.
Centralization of a country is fine except in the cases where they country is culturally divided like Spain.
I have a long corporate career where there had been a constant centralization and decentralization strategy to fix the problems of the previous. Governance is difficult the larger the population of governed. Making it work requires the population to have a basis of shared values. The reason that the US has show the rest of the world how a diverse nation can thrive is because of multi ethnicity but not multiculturalism... or in the case where immigrants bring their own cultural practices and beliefs, they are put second to American cultural practices and beliefs.
It is hard enough to make that all work within a country. The design of the American Republic was based on centuries of seeing what did not work... a Great Experiment in governance that has proven flawed, but the best in the history of humans.
Extending governance outside of a ubiquitous culture isn't feasible because there is a lack of care for the parties of different cultures. Or more specifically, the interests to benefit the home culture will supersede any and all considerations for the interests of the other culture. It is human nature. We have not had time to evolve past our tribal impulses.
So nationalism is real, and globalism is a fake manufactured unicorn state by the elite managerial class that only supports it for the greater Wall Street returns it would provide.
Governance of a place requires a constant balance and conflict resolution for competing interests. But love of country, that is the same as love as home culture, is a required ingredient. Free trade is good and each country should be encouraged to develop trade agreements. However, we should never allow global administrators to set and enforce the rules. That is irrational utopian thinking that has no basis in feasibility to result in anything better for all but a few people at the top of the managerial class hierarchy.
Effective governance requires a level of local autonomy and centralized rules and enforcement, but cannot be effective outside of tribal boundaries unless it becomes too authoritarian.
I subscribe to a set of principles that are best described as libertarian paternalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_paternalism It is that balance of individual freedom within a basic set of rules that best matches the human condition. We don't want to be told what we can or cannot do, but we also need constraints on our behavior that is harmful to others. But the rules need to be made and enforced by ourselves... or peers... people that share our values and ideas. Because otherwise there will not be enough care in the rules and rules enforcement. Someone with authority claiming the rules and rules enforcement are for the the greater good will tilt the advantage to themselves and their tribe. It is just human nature.
There is no such thing as a global village. It is a myth.
The US after WWII created globalism only to prevent another world war. It worked but it was only duck tape... we could never keep bleeding off our own prosperity to make other cultures comply. China sucked the lifeblood out of us and now we have to shrink back to ourselves. This gets us back to the normal state of things of national tribalism. That is ubiquitous and natural and we need to work within that reality to create as good as a world as we can. There will be some winner countries and loser countries, but the game is one of producer power... economic innovation and self-reliance... not one of maneuvering looter administrators.
We already have enough problems within our own nation with this sickness... just look at DC being the most well-off territory in the country. Brussels too. Globalism rewards the rule makers and enforcers and not the producers. And it supports too much corporate consolidation as big business and big government go hand in hand. This cuts out way too much economic opportunity for average people... eliminates paths for them to produce and earn their own way.
This debate about centralization and decentralization is very ubiquitous. Hamilton the federalist and Jefferson the anti-federalist. Dreamers dream of The Giver... the vision of same, same, egalitarian, utopia. It ends up collectivism or authoritarianism or totalitarianism... likely all three by the end. The optimized structure is one that favors individual freedom within a limited government that stays out of people's business except those that need it... and yes it results in winners and losers. But the losers need to emulate the winners and thus there is a constant spiral upward in greater capability and production. When you go centralized then the creative power of the individual human gets squashed because the state legislates equal outcomes... except for the administrators and their family and friends... who get the spoils.
China would still be a 3rd world country without the US to loot from. The US would be a better and stronger country today without China.
I do not think that you understand what globalism and collectivism are. Therefore, you are writing arguments and opinions that are in contradiction and inaccurate. You do realise that you are promoting collectivism in practice since you do not see humans as individuals and because you are seeing nations as some highest point of moral and social order?
I have followed fiscal affairs in Argentina, since at least 2000. Argentina is a failed state. For better or worse (worse), Argentina gives Democracy a bad name. Of course, the military in Argentina is no better. The ‘solution’ is probably some version of foreign rule. Of course, Argentina is hardly alone in those respects.
There are many political problems in Argentina. And one of the problems is that politicians are promising impossible things. In the case of Milei, he is trying to promote economic liberalism and individualism with social collectivism and conservatism. That is actually impossible in practice since social conservatism and populism often go hand in hand with economic issues as well. The more a person is negative towards pluralism, lifestyles and social change, the more one will demand government intervention against lower taxes, privatisation and global economic openess.
The Trump-like candidate is the better candidate. Freedom and national focus go together. It makes the globalist collectivists angry and they exploit that freedom to protest it.
What freedom? Globalism among other things is about cooperation and integration between nations, including spreading more individual freedom globally. Globalism is against collectivism while nationalism is a type of collectivism
It is the opposite. Globalism and collectivism go hand in hand and they require increasing rules and rules enforcement because the natural state and behavior of people is to want independence to pursue their own interests.
This is not really that hard to understand. The hierarchy of human interest is self, family, neighborhood, community, state, nation... and then maybe world. It is always a lie that the globalist are in it for global humanity. They push globalism because of the benefits they expect to farm directed the previous hierarchy... especially their own selfish interests.
Not all cultures are created equal. However, the people in various places have fealty to their own home country and home culture. There is no "global village" holding hands and singing Kumbaya. Today national sovereignty with reasonable open and fair economic competition is really the only model that works with respect to globalism. But each country gets to make its own rules. When the attempt is to try and aggregate power and control to a central global authority, then the competition just shifts to be of administrative and political moves and not who is building the better mouse trap.
And when this happens anyone trying to build a better mouse trap will be shot.
Have you ever read a book or similar about globalism?
Many. Have you read the WEF Agenda 2030?
Sure, but not via conspiracy theory websites
Try The End of the World is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization, by Peter Zeihan. It’s going down Vlad. It was never meant to last… given mistakes made like Allowing China into the WTO. Your globalism is rising global antisemitism again… because it benefits some nations. Even the EU cannot hold it together. Ukraine joining NATO causes another European war. Just like a buyer and seller, both have their own interests and independently negotiate to make a deal or not. That is called trade. There is no central overseer to puppet their actions. Collectivist authoritarian administrators keep trying, but buying and selling goes on without them. Until and unless they start imprisoning and killing then for not following those administrative rules. We saw what the globalism project would look like from the pandemic. No thanks.
I think that you are mixing up different things. But I agree that many things presented as globalist can be bad.
Frank, with your type of argument style you could argue for the USA to disintegrate x)
You do realise that openness and competition at the global level demand globalism as global rules?
In federations as the USA there are federal, state, and local rules. Such rules can be both synched and integrated, and the can also be in conflict with each other. It is similar with globalism as regarding markets, trade, standards, cooperation etc. Globalism is about nations having common rules because 100% national sovereignty exists only in "isolated" places as North Korea. If you do not want a society where every individual can disobey common rules and just do what they want to do, so why do you want nations to behave in a similar way?
You don’t get it. The larger the control group, the more difficult to govern. If large contingency collectivism worked we would see historical example and current examples. We don’t. Two families living next each other will demand their family autonomy. Two countries will demand their autonomy. Even territories within a country demand their autonomy. We see the conflict with the US states today. Countries like Spain where the Basques still want autonomy. Brexit was a finger to the collectivist globalists in Brussels. So was Trump. I don’t fucking care about Germans and Turks and they don’t fucking care about Americans. The US is supposed to be different as a federation because we live in communities we care about, and states we care about, but we also care about our country. At least that is how it worked until malcontent leftist and greedy Wall Street corporatists sold the WEF 2030 Agenda bullshit.
Fuck the common rules outside of my family, my community, my state and my country. No global WEF talentless looting administrator of the collective is gonna tell me how to live. And the climate crisis cult is and example of the global collectivist rot. The human harm being done by the elite luxury belief virtue signaling policies to force energy scarcity is massive. China ignores it while Western elite idiots pray to their globalist scripture of climate change religion.
I agree with you that the USA needs more federalism and decentralisation
Wait, you think that Brexit was about more autonomy and decentralisation? The UK was and still is one of the most centralised states in Europe
Centralization of a country is fine except in the cases where they country is culturally divided like Spain.
I have a long corporate career where there had been a constant centralization and decentralization strategy to fix the problems of the previous. Governance is difficult the larger the population of governed. Making it work requires the population to have a basis of shared values. The reason that the US has show the rest of the world how a diverse nation can thrive is because of multi ethnicity but not multiculturalism... or in the case where immigrants bring their own cultural practices and beliefs, they are put second to American cultural practices and beliefs.
It is hard enough to make that all work within a country. The design of the American Republic was based on centuries of seeing what did not work... a Great Experiment in governance that has proven flawed, but the best in the history of humans.
Extending governance outside of a ubiquitous culture isn't feasible because there is a lack of care for the parties of different cultures. Or more specifically, the interests to benefit the home culture will supersede any and all considerations for the interests of the other culture. It is human nature. We have not had time to evolve past our tribal impulses.
So nationalism is real, and globalism is a fake manufactured unicorn state by the elite managerial class that only supports it for the greater Wall Street returns it would provide.
Governance of a place requires a constant balance and conflict resolution for competing interests. But love of country, that is the same as love as home culture, is a required ingredient. Free trade is good and each country should be encouraged to develop trade agreements. However, we should never allow global administrators to set and enforce the rules. That is irrational utopian thinking that has no basis in feasibility to result in anything better for all but a few people at the top of the managerial class hierarchy.
Ok, so you agree on that the solution is in world federalism?
Effective governance requires a level of local autonomy and centralized rules and enforcement, but cannot be effective outside of tribal boundaries unless it becomes too authoritarian.
I subscribe to a set of principles that are best described as libertarian paternalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_paternalism It is that balance of individual freedom within a basic set of rules that best matches the human condition. We don't want to be told what we can or cannot do, but we also need constraints on our behavior that is harmful to others. But the rules need to be made and enforced by ourselves... or peers... people that share our values and ideas. Because otherwise there will not be enough care in the rules and rules enforcement. Someone with authority claiming the rules and rules enforcement are for the the greater good will tilt the advantage to themselves and their tribe. It is just human nature.
There is no such thing as a global village. It is a myth.
The US after WWII created globalism only to prevent another world war. It worked but it was only duck tape... we could never keep bleeding off our own prosperity to make other cultures comply. China sucked the lifeblood out of us and now we have to shrink back to ourselves. This gets us back to the normal state of things of national tribalism. That is ubiquitous and natural and we need to work within that reality to create as good as a world as we can. There will be some winner countries and loser countries, but the game is one of producer power... economic innovation and self-reliance... not one of maneuvering looter administrators.
We already have enough problems within our own nation with this sickness... just look at DC being the most well-off territory in the country. Brussels too. Globalism rewards the rule makers and enforcers and not the producers. And it supports too much corporate consolidation as big business and big government go hand in hand. This cuts out way too much economic opportunity for average people... eliminates paths for them to produce and earn their own way.
This debate about centralization and decentralization is very ubiquitous. Hamilton the federalist and Jefferson the anti-federalist. Dreamers dream of The Giver... the vision of same, same, egalitarian, utopia. It ends up collectivism or authoritarianism or totalitarianism... likely all three by the end. The optimized structure is one that favors individual freedom within a limited government that stays out of people's business except those that need it... and yes it results in winners and losers. But the losers need to emulate the winners and thus there is a constant spiral upward in greater capability and production. When you go centralized then the creative power of the individual human gets squashed because the state legislates equal outcomes... except for the administrators and their family and friends... who get the spoils.
China would still be a 3rd world country without the US to loot from. The US would be a better and stronger country today without China.
I do not think that you understand what globalism and collectivism are. Therefore, you are writing arguments and opinions that are in contradiction and inaccurate. You do realise that you are promoting collectivism in practice since you do not see humans as individuals and because you are seeing nations as some highest point of moral and social order?
I have followed fiscal affairs in Argentina, since at least 2000. Argentina is a failed state. For better or worse (worse), Argentina gives Democracy a bad name. Of course, the military in Argentina is no better. The ‘solution’ is probably some version of foreign rule. Of course, Argentina is hardly alone in those respects.
There are many political problems in Argentina. And one of the problems is that politicians are promising impossible things. In the case of Milei, he is trying to promote economic liberalism and individualism with social collectivism and conservatism. That is actually impossible in practice since social conservatism and populism often go hand in hand with economic issues as well. The more a person is negative towards pluralism, lifestyles and social change, the more one will demand government intervention against lower taxes, privatisation and global economic openess.