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.

[cinives]

The red flags on Fred are, to me: he’s a member of Council on Foreign Relations, he’s supported by the Cheneys and Howard Baker, a good Bush family friend, and other Washington power brokers, and he likes and worked closely with McCain on Campaign Finance Reform.

[cinives]

I’m in your same boat.

[cinives]

I have to say Iran, North Korea and Syria were/are far more “imminent” threats than Iraq.

Not that Iraq wasn’t a problem, but Iran has been for years a bigger problem. Same with Syria.

[BlackElk]

If the Iranians nuke an American city, then and only then will paleoPaulie constitutionally don his Minutman outfit, load his blunderbuss and fire the shot heard 'round his neighborhood (in DC) in the direction of Iran. That'll show them that paleoPaulie is a force to reckon with!

When Palestine was partitioned, the overwhelming majority of it was assigned to the "palestinian" Arabs and that part is known as "Jordan." They should go there.

[cinives]

Repealing an amendment has little to do with Congress; it depends for ratification on the states.

[nicmarlo]

At least we’re not in a sinking boat....some are and it hasn’t even cast off yet. : )

[Iwo Jima]

I truly believe if we hadn’t stood up in Korea and Vietnam, I would be eating communist rice this morning.

Now that's just plain silly. Vietnam and Korea were not a threat to us. We should never have fought either of those "wars."

[George W. Bush]

I don't like to talk like an unprincipled partisan but I think we have to do our best to support our party's candidate. After all, we do expect the same from all the other folks here if Ron Paul gets the nomination.

Me, I'll do my best to vote for any non-transvestite GOP nominee. Even McStain (though that's tough because he is a known enemy of the First).

[BlackElk]

He’s not a Bircher, right?

[Iwo Jima]

The reason most voted for the amnesty bill was to get a political advantage with Hispanics. Again it had nothing to do with Globalism.

Baloney. Bush and the Republicans KNOW that the new citizens under the amnesty bill will vote overwhelmingly Democrat. THEY KNOW THAT and want it anyway because it will weaken America and hasten One World Government/New World Order/Globalism.

[George W. Bush]

If the Iranians nuke an American city, then and only then will paleoPaulie constitutionally don his Minutman outfit, load his blunderbuss and fire the shot heard 'round his neighborhood (in DC) in the direction of Iran. That'll show them that paleoPaulie is a force to reckon with!

You're having such a fun paleo-time on these threads, aren't you? LOL.

When Palestine was partitioned, the overwhelming majority of it was assigned to the "palestinian" Arabs and that part is known as "Jordan." They should go there.

Well, the residents of that area of the British empire, having never been part of any cohesive country or empire since the Ottoman days, hardly even merit that much territory.

I favor Israel's Biblical boundaries with only Jews inside that area except for such other persons they alone decide to admit to it.

[MEGoody]

I have to say Iran, North Korea and Syria were/are far more “imminent” threats than Iraq.

North Korea and Iran both have nuts leading them, so I'd agree they are a threat. Syria's leadership doesn't seem as insane as the other two. Saddam was an outright psycho.

[Designer]

"He’s not a Bircher, right?"

So who are you asking about?

Reading upthread, I see cinives talking about Fred Dalton Thompson.

Is that who you are asking about being a Bircher?

[Iwo Jima]

Continue fighting in Iraq until the new government is stable

That will never happen, not in our lifetime. And that is why choosing to define victory in those terms guaranteed failure.

We should have gone to Iraq, kicked their butt good and hard, and left within a year, telling them in no uncertain terms "Don't make us have to come back again," or you'll get your butt kicked even worse.

[PeterPrinciple]

Now that’s just plain silly. Vietnam and Korea were not a threat to us. We should never have fought either of those “wars.”

------

You prefer the wars at our door step? The communist/socialistic ideology was strong then and the front was large (Asia, South America, Central America and domestic). Evil will never be stopped but but it can be confronted. You are going to have a confrontation with the school bully, you can avoid it for a time, but it will come.

If we had not been in Korea and Viet Nam, the fight would have been later but much bigger and MORE devasting. The lesson was fresh in our leaders minds then. If only they had stopped Hitler earlier and taken a stronger stance against Stalin. I am thankful for leaders who will make tough decisions and also God's providence that I do live in a free nation.

With a name like Iwo Jima, you should know better

[Iwo Jima]

If we had not been in Korea and Viet Nam, the fight would have been later but much bigger and MORE devasting.

I disagree. The domino theory was never valid and has been thoroughly disproven.

If we had not been in Korea or Vietnam, there would not have been a war in Korea or Vietnam. Communism would not have gotten on whit closer to our door step and would have likely crumbled sooner.

Your comment about my screen name left you wide open about yours. But I'm not going there.

[BlackElk]

What with cinives carping about the Council on Foreign Relations and similar Bircher themes, I was suggesting that cinives was complaining that Fred is not a Bircher. Our next nominee certainly won’t be a Bircher or an Objectivist or a libertoonian eccentric. And a good thing too.

[BlackElk]

Yes, I am.

Jordan was part of the deal. I can live with it.

[MEGoody]

That will never happen, not in our lifetime.

I guess that depends on how one defines the term 'stable'.

We should have gone to Iraq, kicked their butt good and hard, and left within a year, telling them in no uncertain terms "Don't make us have to come back again," or you'll get your butt kicked even worse.

That sounds good, but you know we'd have to go right back since we would have left without leaving behind a trained Iraqi police force and military. No sense leaving in the first place.

[George W. Bush]

Jordan was part of the deal. I can live with it.

Well...okay. But I'm reserving the right to call you a U.N.-lover in the future. LOL.