While the governments slept Globalism already happened... and they don't like it.
I was just chatting with my friend @thatgermandude on his post about a law that Germany just passed that he was apologizing for and said he would fight it. I told him that I don't blame him for the act of his government, but I am glad he is fighting it.
I realized something that was profound to me. Perhaps not so much to other people. So I'll share it and let's see if it is profound to you as well. If not, that's okay I sometimes am easily amused.
You know that mystic and often reviled term Globalism that those in control of our governments seem to be pushing for and trying to ram down our throats?
Well it's already here. It has been for awhile, though in reality it is kind of a hybrid.
The internet is Globalism. When I speak to someone on the internet I speak to them as I would anyone else. I do not view them as a German, French, Russian, Korean, American, etc. I simply view them as a person.
On the internet we can all work on projects together and for the most part it has been a completely free environment. In fact, in reality it is an anarchists (in the classic meaning of the word, not the propagandized version of late) dream.
Yet, what we're seeing is that the governments do not like this idea of globalism. You see it has an element they don't like. For all intents and purposes as far as the internet is concerned the governments are irrelevant and unnecessary until they start pushing laws, and trying to restrict and alter the landscape of the internet to make it not free.
When such things happen the entire internet is concerned, they don't typically focus exclusively on borders. So my friend @thatgermandude is apologizing for something his country did. Yet, his country is not the only one trying to restrict that which has been working beautifully and has been totally free.
The government does not want to take a chance at the populations waking up and increasingly realizing just how irrelevant they are. They don't want the populations realizing that without government most of the things we know as wars would cease to exist. Wars are not usually instigated by the common men and women of countries. They are instigated by the power brokers who have power within the government.
I see nationalism as valuable at the moment only in one way. I do not believe one size fits all has ever really worked out. Yet it is the same thing people keep trying to implement to solve all problems. So as in the U.S. I'd prefer the federal government stayed out of things and let the states handle it, as then at least we'd have 50 different laboratories that we could learn from, rather than trying to get it all right with only 1.
Globalism when it comes to the world and government is trying to apply a one size, one lab fits all mentality to the entire world.
Perhaps people are starting to realize the wonderful things that happen when the government just get's out of the way.
Look around you on the internet. Sure there are vile nooks, and crannies. For the most part it has been amazingly liberating and life changing for the entire world.
It is Pandora's box, and the governments are trying really hard to close that box. They dislike that which they cannot control.
This is because if government will not have control of many things then how can they brain wash the mind of people through media and other mediums and block chain technology and internet is trying to make the system transparent which governments don't like it because they want pandora box should be closed.
Of course Governments are what we have to face, but i am not sure if governments have a decisive role anymore. I do not believe that there are independent governments. And if we talk about the strong governments, we need to see where they get orders from. Internet is a way of globalization, but the real globalization includes the danger to be turned to a way to control the masses globally. This is my concern. Thank you for your very good post!
Yes, that is indeed the nefarious plan. In the past people that talked about it were laughed at as conspiracy theorists, but these days it seems to be largely accepted as true. Now they laugh at people for other conspiracy theories. :)
My realization and partial amusement was that it already happened. Just not how they planned. :)
It also is a good illustration of what the world might be able to do without them.
Nothing is more terrifying to governments nowadays than a free and liberated internet. Germany's recent Orwellian laws are bad, but they are nothing on my nation's (the UK) recent forays into internet censorship. Shame on Theresa May.
Yes, WE (the global citizenry) need to help fight these things wherever they rise.
Eye opening post. Enjoyed. Hit's home for me how you said no matter who they are you talk to them here on the net as you would anybody. I've always said if someone from somewhere else parachuted down in a foreign country and broke their leg outside someone's dwelling that those people would help, care for and be kind to this injured person. I know I would. It's not the ordinary people of the country that are bad per say but rather the one's who think that they are in charge that are. JMO.
Very nicely worded. The internet makes life easier. We can communicate faster anywhere in the world. And totally agree with you that government does not like this because they lost control of the citizenry.
thanks for mentioning me and my post :D
and yes, I love the global community called Internet. You should see how many different nationalities subbed to my youtube, they are from countries I did not even heard of til then and I only got 100 subs :D. It is awesome how instantly we can connect to actual people all around the world.
I should have mentioned for fairness that I saw examples of "hate speech" taking over in the comment section of my Merkel Video. I dont think it needs to be censored, I pity those people. Let them speak and show how ignorant they are!
I do think the cultural difference between us is quite low, 50% of our television is dubbed or licensed american television after all ;). There is context I have to explain to you that I would not have to explain to a German and vise versa. But as I said a few times already, I actually like the diversity of cultures that is why I think every state or ethnic group has a right to preserve it.
Oh and for clarity, I am not what you would call a patriot either despite my name and avatar.
I actually don't have a problem with people being a patriot as it can mean a great many things and is subjective.
Do you love your community and strive to keep it a safe and free place for all of your fellow community members?
In a sense to me that is patriotism too. :)
Though it like many words can create different mental images depending upon who we speak to. :)
Well I think if we can get the government small enough we can truly refrom/recreate it from scratch and yeah I see nationalism more of a stepping stone towards that.
I actually don't mind if people believe their culture is the best as long as they do not rally against other cultures. To me the definition of patriotism includes this feeling of superiority, but I know that the word has another meaning to other people.
to me this is the meaning of socialism ;)
You've yet to show me how you can do socialism without forcing other people, and how to deal with those that do not agree and comply. :)
That is where socialism typically fails for me.
alright, I will make a post about it this weekend :)
Make sure you let me know. Easy to miss stuff here with the flood of stuff. :)
Interesting thought!
Nationalism can be seen as a solution, but also as a problem. The solution would be that it would reduce the size of large governments, as you point out in your example about the American federal government.
On the other hand, the problem with nationalism is that it often demands a strong state as well. It's just smaller than, say, the federal government of the European Union. Over here in the Netherlands there is a new popular guy in parliament (his name is Thierry Baudet) and his critique toward the EU is rock solid, but he proposes that the national government gets their powers back.
So basically it's still a one size fits all, but smaller. I see it as the lesser of two evils, I guess. Maybe it's the first step towards reducing the state, right? Let me know what you think.
One thing about Lesser of two evils... it's still evil.
As to nationalism. That is already here. I'm not proposing we create nationalism when it doesn't exist. If it didn't exist and we could just eliminate government that would be the route I'd recommend.
However, the bulk of population has been succoring at the breast of states/nationalism for so long that they would need to go through a WEENING process before we could be truly free of government.
Nationalism still is one size fits all. So are the 50 states for that matter within their borders. It is a shell game.
I believe this stuff should be dismantled in stages. If nationalism did not already exist I certainly would not recommend it. Yet I also won't recommend increasing the shell game and perpetuating the mistake on a global scale (aka globalism or global centralized power).
That is a great analogy. I believe internet will be the invention that has the foundation for other technologies and (most of all) ideas to get loose of this chain of command.
I think they realized this. They are actively fighting it. I am hopeful they will lose this fight.
Ur article brought me inspiration to write :) Will probably post it tomorrow, think u will like it ;)
This is how I get a lot of my ideas. Reading other people's posts. So you can also blame @thatgermandude for some of your inspiration... as he inspired me.
haha, u mean thank him :p
Yeah. :) That works too. ;)
There's been a huge monkey wrench thrown into the gears of the globalist agenda with Brexit, rejection of the TPP and the misc. nationalist movements now taking place, let' hope this continues. Globalism in terms of community (ie; the Internet) is one thing but globalism in terms of centralized power is quite another.
I agree completely. My profound thought was the realization that as a community it is already here. It has been for awhile, and they are doing everything to try to gain control of it, because it doesn't require their centralized power.
Good post. I sometimes don't understand why it is as difficult for some to believe the notion that politicians and governmental bureaucrats are consumed by power and control. We just have to look at history to see the many atrocities and destabilizing actions that gov'ts and politicians have caused. Do many think that our gov't is any more noble and altruistic?
I like to ask people some questions...
Is it okay for me to tell YOU what to do and how to live your life?
Okay how about me and my family, is that enough, can we now tell you how to live your life?
If that isn't enough how about if I get my entire neighborhood and we ALL tell you how to live your life?
Still not good enough? How about my entire town telling you how to live your life?
Okay, if that's still not enough, what is the magic number of people that suddenly makes it okay for me to tell you how to live your life?
Wait... did you just say there isn't one?
Then why can the government do it?
I have had similar discussions with people, and after every point that's made, many seem to arrive at this roadblock that goes something like this: "well if the gov't isn't going to do it, then who's going to do it?" It's like many can't even imagine or comprehend the idea of things being done by, you know, people. So perhaps it is a question of self-esteem or lack of belief in humanity and mankind or the human will, because many just can't arrive at the conclusion that we, as people, can do so much more than we have been led to believe, partly because we have been dependent on the gov't agencies to do them for so long. But many also fail to realize that this dependence comes at a cost; and the cost goes beyond just monetary (taxes, taken by force), or civil liberties (privacy intrusions), etc. ; but also comes at the cost of future generations being stuck in the same, or perhaps worse, governmental cycle. Is it possible that future generations will look back at the age of governmental slavery and think, "why did they allow themselves to be enslaved? Why couldn't they figure out that they could do things for themselves?"
The famous "Who will build the roads?" conundrum.
It's actually not a conundrum. It's pretty simple.
I ask them. "Who builds the roads now?"
The government doesn't. They request bids. Companies and contractors bid, then they build the roads.
In the mean time all of that goes through a wasteful bureaucracy.
You could do the same without governments, either directly, or crowd sourced, and guess who would build the roads?
Answer: the same people that really do it today. :)
Yea, say this then watch heads explode.
Humans are like domestic animals. Set the cows free and they wont venture far. Set the sheep free and they stick around to be protected. People have been dumbed down and propagated to for so long they wouldn't recognize freedom if you rubbed it in their faces. And what would they do with the freedom? Most people aren't even able to take care of their financials. Most people cannot think logically. They haven't asked the questions, because it is not what we learn to do. So that's why they don't want freedom. With freedom comes great responsibility, and they don't want responsibility - like the children they are. And then they don't want anyone else to have freedom either. Because what is more provocative and what makes you more resentful than seeing someone being happy and free when you arent, especially when you don't dare to do the same thing.