[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.

[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?

[hedgetrimmer]

Globalization is an economic principle that involves the ease of international trade (mostly based on technology improvements)

Globalization is a tool that advance globalism. 'Easing international trade' involves disempowering the citizens of a country from making decisions about who they want to trade with, and the circumstances under which they want to trade. 'Easing international trade' means giving transnational corporations the ability to bypass borders and inspections because they are all 'barriers to trade'. This is globalese for saying erase the border,and give supranational trade organizations the power to make all trade related decisions. It means "Don't stop us and don't impose any of your national rules on our operation".

This is not theory or speculation, it is demonstrated in FTA after FTA.