oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Anyone who has any understanding of what g*******ts want must be a nationalist. They want one nation crap just like all the UN people and although they like to talk about oligarchy it seems to me that they tend to be just that, oligarchists. Why would any American who has been nationalist all their lives and fought two major wars to keep some of the worst of the g*******ts free go along with George Soros or that Frenchman, Macron? I have been a nationalist most of my life and won't be changing soon to please people like Barack Obama and others like him.


https://patriotpost.us/articles/59500?mailing_id=3871&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3871&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body

eden

Is it possible I wonder to find a position somewhere between globalism and nationalism?Or is common sense and pragmatism just too difficult to wrap your head around?

Seth

I don't see how.

Look at the refugee crisis in Europe, for example.

The crime, violence, no go zones, etc. Less prominent countries whose citizens see what's going on in other EU countries and want no part of it are bullied into taking refugees by more prominent countries like Germany and France.

All EU countries have to "pony up" because of bad economic decisions by the leaders of one and, sharing a common currency, have to endure devaluations because of those bad decisions.

Then there is the open borders policy between the EU countries, one country's weak external borders or lax immigration policies allows any "undesirable" into all of Europe.

Every country has its own culture -- a common governing body can be and often is invasive to the culture of one country.

Back to the bullying. Germany, historically a bully, has enough power in the EU to threaten internal sanctions on smaller members for failing to allow a common EU policy to make them go against their better judgement.

Now imagine that kind of arrangement on a global scale.

No, thanks.

Our Constitutional Republic is just fine. Even with our internal political differences, we're better off with the option of solving our own problems among ourselves than having some panjandrum elected by a collective that includes nations who have no liking for nor understanding of how our country works, tell us how to run our country.

We don't need our economy, culture, security or day-to-day governance tied to decision makers who aren't Americans living in America.

Texas Truth Loc: Behind Enemy Lines

I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you on that one brother. Angela Merkel and that cheese eating surrender monkey both need their heads placed in a glass jar for future research to protect the population of unsuspecting smaller countries that can barely afford to buy a pair of shoes.

Weasel Loc: In the Great State Of Indiana!!

The cultural differences alone will DOOM A G*******TIC VIEW.
Just 1 example,- - In almost Every Country, The
Participants in L***Q Activities are put to Death, if not Severely Punished.
That's will always hold true!

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

Especially our nationalism since they were poised to claim our muscle and our money to make sure their plan for a world government worked out. They were soooo sure the hag would win!

eden

I agree with your last sentence but this whole topic depends on your definition of Globalism. To many academics the concept of Globalism means engagement with the greater world in terms of diplomatic relations, international trade, international cooperation on disaster management, promotion of democratic forms of government, and a hedge against rogue nation states like NK. This topic "G*******ts just plain h**e Nationalism"
is fundamentally incorrect in its premise. A country can still be proud of its culture and nationalistic in its outlook and still remained engaged with the outside world in a meaningful and constructive way. The Trump era of isolational nationalism is foolish, short sighted and ultimately self defeating. Standing down while the Russians and Chinese eagerly fill the political, military and territorial influence vacuum left by us clouds the future with half the world falling under the sway of f*****t regimes that once entrenched will be difficult to dislodge. To be blunt, constrain them over there or one day have to repel them much closer to home, maybe too close.

(Look at North Korea and see how extreme isolationism and rabid nationalism has worked for them.)

Seth

I am about retired from a consulting business I had for a number of years in the security field. I have done overseas cooperative work like that in disaster management and several areas of physical security. That kind of international partnership is good, as are shared law enforcement techniques and technology, trade (equal tariffs and not one country picking up the tab for others in any multinational ventures), arts and sciences, etc, but not any kind of continental or global union that gives countries the authority to tell other countries "what's good for them," as it were.

You do not live in a country if it has no secure, controlled borders or it's own complete sovereignty, or outsiders can dictate any of it's government's policies.

Bush II tried, stealthily, to pull the SPP on us -- the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, but it failed before it could really get off the ground, ending in NAFTA. His partners were the PM of Canada and the President of Mexico at the time. It would have ended inaNorth American Union, with Mexico responsible for border security along our "union's" southern border. Just what we'd need to sleep really well at night.

As far as the political left is concerned, their version of globalism would be more like the UN setving as the core of a world government.

Just listen to things l*****ts say, they make it quite obvious that they would love an omnipotent central world government. They'd like censorship of speech they deem "offensive" as well as the total financial destruction of anyone of opposing political views, complete public disarmament and a number of other items no real American would tolerate.

So no thanks, no globalism, no how.

Nationalism is the way to go. Not "white nationalism", just "nationalism."

eden

“Just listen to things l*****ts say, they make it quite obvious that they would love an omnipotent central world government. They'd like censorship of speech they deem "offensive" as well as the total financial destruction of anyone of opposing political views, complete public disarmament and a number of other items no real American would tolerate”

You were doing ok until this segway into the murky world of absolutist tribalism. I know pundits on both sides of this but have never heard anyone on the left promote such ideas as censorship, public disarmament or “financial destruction” (wh**ever that is).
That there are ignoramuses on the left who want a total end to private gun ownership and sanctions on non PC speech I do not doubt. But I think they are a tiny if vociferous minority. Similarly there are Nationalists who are happy to add the qualifier “White” to their tribal designation but I also think they are in the minority. Glib descriptions and one dimensional categorizations of the “other” is obsolete I would suggest. At some point we have to leave this speed bump in human evolution behind.

Seth

Attempted Financial Destruction:

They tried to boycott Chick Filet because of their Christian opinion on one issue, put them out of business, recently tried the same with In n' Out for donating to the Republican Party, both attempts failed.

They tried destroying that Christian baker's business in Colorado because he refused to bake a gay wedding cake and a similar thing happened more recently in Oregon.

They're certainly not about "live and let live."

Marx was the same way, he destroyed people who either disagreed with him or didn't do "enough" for him.

eden

You do realize you are describing Trump...right?

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I don't think he is describing Trump, in any way. I do think that you have sounded so much like the left leaning leaders on this thread though.

Globalism is just what I think the left wants us to have since most of them believe in following the UN. That would mean letting them control the United States in forcing Agenda 21 on us. Do you accept that part of their crap?

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Lets see, wasn't it the left that came up with PC? Why, hell yes, it was them and they haven't backed off a bit.

As for nationalism, I don't think Trump, like me, wants anything like white nationalism.

So you really believe the left, at least the leaders, don't want private gun ownership done away with along with the censorship they are practicing on we of the right. I have to wonder how you can think like that.

Can you name one president from FDR to the present who wasn't a nationalist? Please tell me if you can but don't strain yourself trying to think of one even the Democrats.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

This is a really fine post, in my estimation. Especially, this sentence early in your post.
"You do not live in a country if it has no secure, controlled borders or it's own complete sovereignty, or outsiders can dictate any of it's government's policies."

I wonder how most of our people who don't agree with that sentence feel about what is about to happen when those Central Americans start trying to break down our walls like they did in Mexico.

I wonder how many of them believe that we are not getting closer and closer to going along with the UN's Agenda 21. Most of them don't even know what it is let alone that too many of our cities and counties have really gone too far to agreeing with the UN.

Speaking of the UN, I was so happy with Harry Truman when he pushed it off on us but not two happy with later presidents who let us slip into that early form of globalism.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I will take it for granted that this post is aimed at me since I am a nationalist and could never be a g*******t. I want us to keep our national borders, sovereignty, and all the other things needed to maintain our self-government. When I went into the Army I was happy to serve the United States for the whole time but I sure as hell would never have even enlisted if we were part of the global government, it seems you would prefer. I now wear caps that state that I was a Cold War Veteran and am proud to have done that. The UN wasn't even 10 years old when I went in but I just couldn't have served in the present order of things. I want the UN to be kicked out of NYC since they don't like us as a sovereign nation. I sure don't want to ever see the US eaten up by a g*******t government.