Globalism [Ron Paul]

House.Gov ^ | 16 July 2007 | Ron Paul

[BGHater]

The recent defeat of the amnesty bill in the Senate came after outraged Americans made it clear to the political elite that they would not tolerate this legislation, which would further erode our national sovereignty. Similarly, polls increasingly show the unpopularity of the Iraq war, as well as of the Congress that seems incapable of ending it.

Because some people who vocally oppose amnesty are supportive of the war, the ideological connection between support of the war and amnesty is often masked. If there is a single word explaining the reasons why we continue to fight unpopular wars and see legislation like the amnesty bill nearly become law, that word is “globalism.”

The international elite, including many in the political and economic leadership of this country, believe our constitutional republic is antiquated and the loyalty Americans have for our form of government is like a superstition, needing to be done away with. When it benefits elites, they pay lip service to the American way, even while undermining it.

We must remain focused on what ideology underlies the approach being taken by those who see themselves as our ruling-class, and not get distracted by the passions of the moment or the rhetorical devices used to convince us how their plans will be “good for us.” Whether it is managed trade being presented under the rhetoric of “free trade,” or the ideas of “regime change” abroad and “making the world safe for democracy” -- the underlying principle is globalism.

Although different rhetoric is used in each instance, the basic underlying notion behind replacing regimes abroad and allowing foreign people to come to this country illegally is best understood by comprehending this ideal of the globalist elite. In one of his most lucid moments President Bush spoke of the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” Unfortunately, that bigotry is one of the core tenets at the heart of the globalist ideology.

The basic idea is that foreigners cannot manage their own affairs so we have to do it for them. This may require sending troops to far off lands that do not threaten us, and it may also require “welcoming with open arms” people who come here illegally. All along globalists claim a moral high ground, as if our government is responsible for ensuring the general welfare of all people. Yet the consequences are devastating to our own taxpayers, as well as many of those we claim to be helping.

Perhaps the most seriously damaged victim of this approach is our own constitutional republic, because globalism undermines both the republican and democratic traditions of this nation. Not only does it make a mockery of the self-rule upon which our republic is based, it also erodes the very institutions of our republic and replaces them with international institutions that are often incompatible with our way of life.

The defeat of the amnesty bill proves though that there is no infallible logic, or predetermined march of history, that forces globalism on us.

[ken21]

interesting, thanks.

the old republican party of the tafts of ohio

was not globalist.

[ovrtaxt]

Right. Keep on ignoring it! You’re doing a splendid job.

I’m a Hunter supporter, but you have to admit this essay makes perfect sense.

[Paperdoll]

>Hunter needs a right wing version of Soros!

LOL! Would that we could! All we can do is send as much as we can part with in checks made out to ‘Hunter for President’, and mail to:

9340 Fuerte Drive, Suite 302, La Mesa, CA 91941-4164

If you send a contribution of $100 or more, ask for a handsome Hunter Ranger cap, made in USA with USA materials by LEGAL labor!

In any case, request some bumper stickers and brochures to pass out. Offer your volunteer services, and tell them Paperdoll sent you.

Wear your cap with pride, and thank you so much! :)

[Puddleglum]

In an age where a nuke can be handed off to a terrorist organization and our borders are wide open it is simply not feasible nor is it safe to elect someone that believes that it is a good idea to WAIT for an American city to go up in a mushroom cloud rather than acting to prevent it.

It's crucial to define what constitutes national defense then, I guess. I admit it's harder to support a purely reactive posture when one mistake/slip-up can be so costly. That said, we can't let fear infringe on our civil liberties, and we must do something to A) get other nations to police their own crackpot breeding grounds (Saudi, Pakistan), and B) we must make every attempt to isloate the terrorists from the general populace by making them unsympathic to the general populace. It will be harder for them to "melt into the shadows" if the shadows want nothing to do with them. Stage B is where diplomacy comes in. Also, we must not prop up tyrants unless we expect those subjugated by the tyrants to someday get really, maybe even murderously, enraged.

This ties back into the "fair trade" discussion here or somewhere else (busy day). When you keep a tyrannical ruling class in power through trade and or economic or military support, and they fall from power, you have a whole generation of folks who think the USA more or less spreads evil throughout the world. Look at the list of folks we used to support in the ME: Iran, Iraq, the Mujahaden (al qaida). If it weren't so sad I'd call it the revenge of the bad dates.

[MarcoPolo]

Ron Paul has been opposed to the war in Iraq since way before it ever even started. He started opposing at least as early as 1998 when the Congress passed a resolution for regime change in Iraq, and has been consistently opposed to it ever since.

[pissant]

Good work, doll!

[Dead Corpse]

Just opposed to the way it was being done. Dr. Paul himself drafted a Constitutional bill to officially Declare War on Iraq for reasons that had nothing to do with UN mandates.

[B4Ranch]

> But anyone who holds court with Alex Jones and engenders the support of flakes and/or nuts like the “truthers” is not to be trusted.<

Please tell me that you believe everything that you hear on TV from the Big Three news services. That would make it so simple for me to call you a nut. What about the events that the Big Three news services seems to glide over and not make a peep about. What would you call that? Discretion or censorship?

Whackos like Alex Jones are the guys who make sure there is as little censorship as possible because they are willing to permit their guests mention subjects that the Big Three news services refuse to even approach, such as anti globalism discussions.

Art Bell is another one but if your interest is with UFO’s, he’s got the people there who have the most knowledge and are willing to share it.

I’ll listen to the nutcakes every once in a while just to find out what the Big Three aren’t talking about.

[George W. Bush]

In an age where a nuke can be handed off to a terrorist organization and our borders are wide open it is simply not feasible nor is it safe to elect someone that believes that it is a good idea to WAIT for an American city to go up in a mushroom cloud rather than acting to prevent it.

Ron Paul is quite clear about a president's obligation to act unilaterally against imminent threats.

You know, some of you verge on the need for a dictator to protect us. And to accord ourselves the right to invade and topple any country that merely makes some CIA nelly a little nervous.

Nobody likes a bully. In the end, they band together for self-protection to defeat the bully.

[dforest]

Thank you for your thoughtful post. It helps. You would agree that we cannot go back. We can only move forward.

Militant Islam is in a struggle with the globalists as to who is going to be in control. Globalists or them. The average guy would choose neither.

As a result, all western people are in militant Islams grasp, even though we didn’t ask for it. The people vying for control of humanity are the one’s duking it out.

Most people would not start war, and haven’t, what people are worried about is where we go from here, and save what we have known in the process.

We, as US citizens are under assault from two fronts, neither being what we would want.

In otherwards we need protection from globalists and from militant Islam at this time. Both are really irritating me and most people.

[MarcoPolo]

Yes, he drafted it only to try to force the Congress to take its responsibility to declare war if they thought we should go. He showed however that he himself was actually opposed to going to war at all in Iraq in the fact that he didn't even vote for his own bill.

He's never been for this invasion, period, that I'm aware of.

[Grunthor]

“Is that as bad, worse or better than “holding court” with LaRaza?”

YES.

[Paperdoll]

>I mention the shameful squirming we did before the criminally corrupt and incompetent United Nations because the topic of this threat is globalism.<

Duncan Hunter is 100% pro-America in every sense of the word. I don’t know if he would have invaded Iraq initially, but I agree with him that as long as we are there, we should allow our troops to finish the job without interference from Congress. To make public any pull out date whatsoever is an aid to the enemy.

Because of Rep. Hunter’s cool head, steady hand and clear eye, not to mention his extensive military experience, unmatched by any candidate, our country definitely needs the likes of Duncan Hunter at this time in our history.

[lormand]

Alex Jone's phone interview

Alex Jones: “Congressman, just out of the gates. Cindy Sheehan yesterday on my show went further than anybody has ever gone. She said, ‘a distinct chance of a staged terror attack or the government allowing that to happen it to happen.’ Bush is saying he doesn’t care what the people want the war will continue. They’ve set up the military commissions act; they’ve set up the John Warner defense authorization act. He signed PDD 51, making himself literally dictator…he ‘gave himself that power.’ How much danger are we in now, with the Homeland Security head feeling in his gut we are about to be hit. Republican memos saying they need terror attacks, they need Al Qaeda hit us to be able to continue the war, top military strategists saying it. How much danger are we in of some new Gulf of Tonkin provocation?”

Ron Paul: “Well, I think we are in great danger of it. We are danger in many ways - the attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that is in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment, which endangers our troops and our national defense. So everyday, we are in worse shape. And right now there is an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq. And we’re quite concerned, many of us, that the attack will be on Iran and that will confuse things and jeopardize so many more of our troops, so I would say that we are in much greater danger than we have been even 4 or 5 years ago. Whether it is overseas or even by terrorists here at home, because I just think the policies are seriously flawed.”

Note: Alex Jones is a wacked out 911 "inside job" conspiracy lunatic. When you lay with dogs, you get fleas.

[dforest]

I do believe he is the person we need to fight both of our enemies at this time.

We can’t change what has happened, we can only change the outcome and future that has been planned for US citizens without our approval.

[lormand]

"...but Jefferson clearly did not launch a "global war on piracy" on a promise to attract all of the world's pirates to one place, wipe them out, and bring to the world a pirate-free utopia

I'm thinking that a military run by libertarians would bring us back to the days of Thomas Jefferson. A small fleet of wooden ships and some powder kegs of gun powder.

[Paperdoll]

Your tag line is great!

[lormand]

"You know, some of you verge on the need for a dictator to protect us."

Where does this belong, in the BS, or hyperbole bucket? Does it matter?

[Paperdoll]

>We can’t change what has happened, we can only change the outcome and future that has been planned for US citizens without out approval.<

You are very insightful. I agree with you completely.

[dforest]

Whats kind of nice, is that I feel good about it. I have kept myself from jumping on to anyones band wagon before I checked out all the things that troubled me.

A good thing, I believe.