I see this word used a lot on /pol/ in a negative context. Can someone explain to me exactly what is wrong with the free movement of goods, ideas and people? I value freedom above pretty much everything.
I have less and less control as "government" gets bigger. I don't want anyone to have so much power so concentrated. That's globalism to me. Maybe you're thinking of free trade, which I wholly support.
>>73416971
People, from hostile nations with hostile ideology's, do you also like decisions being made for you in some far off land with no accountability?
>>73416971
It brings the average person down to the lowest level, which is absolutely destitute by Western standards. The only people that actually benefit from Globalism are very wealthy people and multinational corporations.
Why do you live in a house/apartment with just yourself or those whom you select into where you live? Why don't you let the movement of all goods, people and ideas into your abode? Same concept applies.
>>73416971
If you value freedom, why do you support all power being in the hands of unelected bankers and technocrats with no checks and balances?
>>73417274
Not all. Globalism doesn't mean the end of property rights.
I like buying goods at the lowest price possible, why should I have to pay weird artificial tarrifs just so some dumbass in Ohio can keep his manufacturing job? I'm not worried about competing in a global economy because I know Jose from Mexico City can't do what I do.
>>73417353
Capitalism itself acts as the checks and balances. Even bankers aren't going to act against their own self interest. They will do whatever makes them the most money, which in turn gives power to people depositors.
People who complain about capitalism are dumb as fuck.
>>73416971
It means replacing domestic industry and growth with a shadowy spiders-web of amoral transnational megacorporations with enough power to topple hostile governments. It means all your food grown in Argentina, Suriname and Gambia meaning a disruption of world trade would lead to immediate starvation conditions.It means being completely vulnerable to trade distortions and the economic shocks coming from the other side of the world. It means a race to the bottom on regulations, standards and worker's rights resulting in a perpetual race to the bottom by governments to retain domestic businesses and jobs.
>>73418138
>Capitalism itself acts as the checks and balances
Burgers actually believe this.
>>73418182
>>73418369
You don't understand capitalism at all. And you guys wonder why so much more innovation comes from America than anywhere else.
>amoral transnational megacorporations
>all your food grown in Argentina, Suriname and Gambia
there's nothing inherently bad about these things
>>73416971
Globalism is bad because the powers at be are failing HARD at it implementing it. Furthermore, it'll fuck up the West the same way that Communism fucked up the east, and we'll live with the scars for the rest of our lifetimes.
An honest answer to your question is that the 'NWO' doesn't know what the fuck it's doing, because Globalism itself would entail that their class wouldn't run the Globe. That's why Sulla failed in the end, and why Julius emerged triumphant.
Think of it this way. Octavian, in order to solidify power, murdered the five richest men in North Africa to give to his legionaries. Would the Global order be willing to throw the five liquidate the five richest billionaries to save the world order? No. Okay then.
This act, by the way, is trifling compared to all the hardcore shit Augustus had to do to keep things going. Even fucking Alexander the Great couldn't 'unify the globe' after conquering it. There is no scenario of Globalist victory, merely how it ends. Which is why the only correct answer is to vote No contest.
>>73416971
>"You know, those god damn Samintes keep making trouble with us Romans."
>"We need to intergrate them in our community."
>"Let's murder their men and force their women to mate our Men."
This is the kind of deeds that were necessary to build a world order. Got the stomach for it? More importantly, do you really believe that going against the Western Man is somehow going to be a 'winning strategy.'
>"Anyone associated with the Cult of Muhammad shall be Crucificed as ordered by God-Emperor."
Augustus has more in common with Trump than any of the bigshots
>>73418925
>>amoral transnational megacorporations
>there's nothing inherently bad about [this]
