What is Globalism and Why is it Bad?

The Christian Constitutional Society ^ | 4 August 2007 | Mark Moore

[Hail Spode]

From the dept. of connecting the dots....

[RightWhale]

Globalism is a bundle of theories: untried philosophy of state, speculative, with zero record of success or failure.

[mnehring]

Very good article, but I think for many people, we need to step back and define Globalism (& Globalists) vs. Globalization. I see many people mistake the latter being related to the former, most often, when someone makes a comment about Globalization and saying they are a Globalist..

[mnehring]

BTW, Welcome to Free Republic.. remember to keep it civil (as you have)..

[EagleUSA]

Nobody WANTS globalism, EXCEPT those with an alternative agenda which would be brought about by globalism. And the agendas and not of the choosing of the peoples involved.

Fight globalism. Nobody has shown ANYONE why it is a benefit, and then and only then, it should be appproved BY THE PEOPLE. Not a bunch of corrupt elitists.

[mnehring]

Uno Mas...
Just an FYI, Blog articles aren’t considered Breaking News (News/Current Events)

No biggie, just some information for the future.

[processing please hold]

Welcome to FR.

You've hit on one of my most favorite topics.

Wait for those to show up offering you aluminum foil, ignore their moronic replies. Denial is their shield.

[TheBattman]

bump for later...

[Blake#1]

I have an invention recognized by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. I hope to sell in other countries beside the USofA. Thanks to international agreements (globalism) I am protected in other counties just as I am in the USofA. Foreigners must get my permission to use my patent. There are millions of such arrangements on the plant. Where is the threat to your freedom?

[mnehring]

Your situation is more closely related to globalization, not globalism. Globalization is an economic principle that involves the ease of international trade (mostly based on technology improvements) and agreements that improve the legal security of those trades. Globalism involves relinquishing national sovereignty to a global authority.

The first item (globalization) is good and is a natural result of technological progression.

The second item (globalism) is not good.

The problem is (as I mentioned in a previous post) is far too many people don’t understand the difference and interchange the first for the second.

[Hail Spode]

I don’t see any threat to your liberties by a reciprocal patent agreement, nor do I see reciprocal trade agreements with another sovereign nation as globalism.

Now, if your next patent was held up for ten years so that it could be checked against not only existing U.S. patents but also the patents of other countries because of the regulations promulgated by some “international patent committee” over which Congress has no authority, then THAT would be globalism. I hope this helps.

[Diogenesis]

Pray for America and its helpless citizens and their children, who remain at risk
from murder, rape, manslaughter, and terror, due to the incompetence of a traitorous Congress
and a uncaring President who remains steadfastly dedicated to giving Mexico what it could not
obtain previously via the Zimmerman telegram urged from Germany before WWI.

[Hail Spode]

Thank you for the welcome. A question of posting etiquette, if articles on blogs are not breaking news then what about articles that are posted on websites with no print newspaper attached to the site? That is, the article is posted on a website, such as, I dunno, OneNewsNow or Townhall, without an opportunity for reader response rather than as a blog article.

[divine_moment_of_facts]

Not to mention it could give the UN way too much power.

[mnehring]

The key point to keep in mind when using that category is the 'breaking' or 'current event' part. The other categories are good to specify what the topic is. Another thing that a lot of people are picky about is, if this is an article you wrote, put (vanity) in the title.

[Paperdoll]

>Very good article, but I think for many people, we need to step back and define Globalism (& Globalists) vs. Globalization.<

And just who are you attempting to protect by your gobbly gook? A Globalist embraces Globalism with the goal of Globalization. It is as simple as that.

[Blake#1]

You should quickly get out a new dictionary with your "new" definitions. Your superior intellect is what the world's population (globalists) are waiting for! I think you want to return to the middle ages where the USofA would have a wall around its border with a large moat in front. World cooperation is coming and it does not need to be communist/socialist. You must think that the French, Germans, Poles, etc., have given up their national pride to the European Union. How did the French vote in the conservatives under your definition?

[mnehring]

See post #10.. Globalization is an economics term that is often misused when referencing Globalism...

Globalization is a simple principle that trade and communication is easier because of technology improvements. For example, you can go on line right now and buy something directly from Ireland, using US dollars because technology has improved trade to the point that transactions can be ‘global’.

Unfortunately, so many people have interchanged the terms that, just as your reaction shows, the economic principle that has nothing to do with political sovereignty is too often mistaken for that.

[RightWhale]

It is as simple as that.

Is it? If it is so simple, then where does the good/bad enter into it? Must be more to it.

[mnehring]

I'm not sure what you were reading, but it definitely wasn't my post #10.. all I am doing is making sure that people understand the difference between the economic term and the political term.. Too many people are spooked of economic globalization and any reference to that because they falsely associate it with globalism.