Nationalism vs Globalism - Re-Response to @vieira
![balloon-2223048_960_720.png](https://steemitimages.com/DQmNmVFX6xpzKyMdaG9MDHrLTaV59scsUux1mWkEkpHpL8w/balloon-2223048_960_720.png)
Okay so I wrote an article making a case for Nationalism as a tool to use against Globalism and I got a response-rebuttal from @vieira who appears to be just a random Steemit user. While I usually don’t do responses like this, the amount of nonsense he used as counter-arguments really begs for a counter-counter-argument.
The Original Article:
@vieira Response Article:
Germans are the biggest trouble causers in Europe for the past millenia.
Well this is actually a true factual statement. Aside from some Russian and Turkish involvement in the East and a few French aspirations in the West. The past military history of Europe has been pretty much market by German domination. Ironically, Germans fighting other Germans. There was the Holy Roman Empire which was a German Empire. Then there was Prussia fighting Napoleon, both of them actually. Then the German Empire. Then a brief peace in the Weimar Republic, and then came Hitler…
to say that the European Union is a German device is simply absurd
Well then you have to do some deep research, start here:
That is the past of course, pretty dark though, but to talk about the present, it’s still German dominated, massively:
- http://www.thecommentator.com/article/6036/germany_the_dominating_puppet_master_of_europe
- https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Germany-disproportionately-powerful-in-the-EU-Germany-is-the-largest-economy-in-the-EU-and-has-the-most-population-However-its-economy-only-accounts-for-21-of-the-EU-GDP-while-it-seems-to-have-become-an-undoubted-leader-of-Europe
- http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-eu-28103691
- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-4298494/Polands-Kaczynski-says-EU-dominated-Germany.html
anti-German sentiments had been marked in the Europe controlled by the United States and the United Kingdom.
I don’t think so. Most people just look around and see most businesses around them are German. I know plenty of small businesspeople who get very marginalized due to German corporate players entering in their businesses who are financed by cheap loans and good regulations, making competition very hard.
It’s not that Germans are competitive, even if you agree that German products are high quality, which perhaps is true.
The fact that the financial and regulatory landscape favors German multinationals against local small businesses is undeniable.
There were even EU Court rulings directly against local businesses in favor of EU businesses.
To say that the Germans have been the cause of evil in Europe for millennia is simply fallacious.
Not millenias, only 1 millenia mostly. I mean after the Frankish Empire when the Holy Roman Empire fell. Of course you could make a case as whether the Germanic tribes had any influence in destroying the Roman Empire, but I don’t really like the Roman Empire simply because it was pretty much just as imperialistic. Although the Roman Republic was another thing, which I think was the most successful country so far in human history, and if we are going to have a rolemodel, it should be based on that.
In what world do you live? Germany only finished paying for the Treaty of Versailles, that is, the First World War, in 2010, that is, they finished paying for the reparations of wars 92 years later,
Okay but I am pretty sure they haven’t paid the reparations regarding WW2 which also destroyed most of France, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, etc….
without counting the innumerable figures of reparations that Germany gives every year to Israel for the holocaust.
Well that is really only a fraction of what it actually owes to the Holocaust victims.
- First off the “Nazi gold” which was the bullion treasure of the Nazis directly melted from the gold and silver confiscated from the Jewish population. It’s probably worth trillions. Nobody knows where it is, some people claim it was allegedly laundered through Swiss Nazi banks.
- Then the countless of hours of prison labor in Nazi labor camps which should actually be payed not by the Government but by the Nazi corporations that actually profited from that, it’s a long list, most corporations got away with it and won lawsuits against paying any reparations.
- Then of course it can’t be quantified since the tragedy of the Holocaust is really unmeasurable but, I only see a few million Euros being thrown here and there whereas a more appropriate sum would probably be in the billions.
So I don’t really think the Holocaust victims have been well compensated for the suffering and agony they went through.
And it wasn’t just the Holocaust victims, there were many other people who lost massive amounts of property due to WW2, that should be paid back as well, with interest.
but forget Jamaica, Nigeria, Tanzania, Pakistan, New Guinea, Guyana, and in fact, almost all of its colonies, only few of their colonies were really prosperous, you also forget about Apartheid, and many other atrocities.
Sure I am not denying the bad things that happened there but the technology and economic progress still happened.
I think you are conflating the US imperialism with British. For instance Afghanistan was a rich country at the beginning and mid 20th century, it was the US involvement that messed it up. Under British influence it was quite prosperous.
Same with most of Africa, it was mostly the US involvement that messed it up to the degree that it is today.
This is very questionable, since first they are human rights and then the "divine" rights, I do not know what they are based on to decree that this land belongs to them, that is, respect the freedom of religion but that does not mean that they are you must remove the country to give it to others.
I think you need to look into Jewish history in the Middle East since you don’t know anything about it. It’s not just the religious claims which may or may not be true based on people’s faiths.
But there is massive archeological, cultural, genetical, and historical evidence that ties the Jewish people to the Judea and Samaria region for about 5000 years.
From pottery to architecture to coinage, most of the relics there are pretty much Jewish. It’s undeniable, from a scientific standpoint.
Stalin was not anti-Semitic since he was a Jew,
No he was not.
his maternal surname was Dzhugashvili which literally means "son of an Israelite".
Interesting, I didn’t know that. But he was definitely not Jewish. Many people have Hebrew names in Europe, that doesn’t mean they are Jewish, he could have had a russianized-hebrew name since he was a baptized christian, but later possibly turned atheist due to his Communist views.
Stalin was most definitely not Jewish and I actually researched this in the past, there was a documentary on Youtube that debunked this Jewish-Bolshevism myth, and specifically debunked that Lenin,Stalin or any other major Bolshevik was Jewish.
The Soviet Union was one of the first countries to recognize the State of Israel in 1948 and from that point Stalin was known to support creation.
I don’t know about that claim, but Stalin was definitely a big Anti-Semite, start reading here:
Lenin, Marx and countless other Jews were the main leaders of socialism, for which reason there would be no reason for Stalin to be anti-Semitic,
Yeah I think you are the Anti-Semite here. As I said the Jewish-Bolshevism myth has been debunked. The only Jewish person in the original Bolshevik group was Kamenev, later purged by Stalin :
And of course Trotsky who was directly assassinated by Stalin in Mexico.
So which one is it then, if “Jewish Bolshevism” is true then how come all Jews were purged by 1940. In fact some Anti-Semites claim that 80% of the Bolsheviks were Jewish which is ridiculous, at best perhaps 1-2% of them were.
There are also claims that Lenin was Jewish. He was not, at best he had 1/8th Jewish ancestry, but that is still not confirmed. Of course some people claim that Hitler was Jewish. Utter nonsense for the most part spread by Neo-Nazi Conspiracy Theorists.
Not to mention that the Jewish oblast of which you speak, was the only autonomous oblast in the entire Soviet Union, the only one.
Yes and the original intention of Stalin was to concentrate all Jews there to get rid of them. It was like an open-air-concentration-camp.
Most Jews were purged even there, it was not a sanctuary for Jews in any way, perhaps from the Nazis, since most Jews who escaped the Nazis went there, but they quickly realized that Stalin wasn’t that much better than Hitler.
That is why many Jews fled to Israel instead, they knew that Stalin was an evil maniac like Hitler.
The Nazis were bitter enemies of the Bolsheviks, so they invaded them, saying that Hitler or the Nazis were secret friends of the Bolsheviks is totally unfounded and without any real historical basis.
That is disputable. There were many secret negotiations between the Nazis and the Soviets later on. And there is pretty strong evidence that Lenin was a friend of Hitler:
- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1210950/Pictured-Young-Adolf-Hitler-playing-chess-Lenin.html
I think that if this wasn’t a massive conspiracy at worst, then it was at least a political/diplomatic alliance from at least the Polish-Soviet war and the secret partition of Poland where Hitler and Stalin entered into a non-aggression pact.
There are some claims that the British might have pushed the Soviets against Hitler, and of course 2 great powers being so close together would have meant conflict at some point.
But the fact is that there wasn’t a lot of difference between the policies of Hitler and Stalin.
The Nazis were leftists, the totalitarian kind. National Socialism which means Socialism with a xenophobic element, socialism in the Ancient-Germanic barbarian sense. Nazism was pretty well into the occult and paganistic rituals, and practiced a lot of barbarian habits that ancient Germanic tribes did.
Curated for #informationwar (by @openparadigm)
Relevance:Rebuttal of a critique of a discussion on Nationalism
I see Vierra a lot also, he is fairly active in the history and politics tags. I also read your original article and you bring up some strong points. Taking a libertarian and nationalists approach and desire for the global stage. I see your arguing points. I think there are certainly some pitfalls in globalist policy, but my biggest issue is why would the U.S want a nationalist policy? Look at the U.S since the civil war. The country has risen economically and politically to a reach, unmatched in history. Not trying to make the United States sound like a angel country, surely it isn't, but United States wealth has directly correlated with the number of countries we have invaded, the number of markets we dominate. Of course that is the case, it is basic economics. I think we can agree on many of the problems with having a global economy like that, but China is licking their chops right now at what the western powers are doing. They have long been under then thumb and economic barriers presented by a unified global economy, but it is being broken up and China will grab the pieces.
I wasn't referring to the US, I was referring to Europe and European Countries.
East Europe has been devastated by Soviet Bolshevism and Western Europe also became infiltrated by totalitarian leftists pretty much since the 60-70's, and ironically Western Europeans are now more leftists than Eastern Europeans. There was a chart somewhere that showed tha amount of % of the population supporting leftism and the peak was of course France, Sweden and Denmark while there was almost no support from the Eastern side.
The US warmongering is really problematic, but the 20th century can be justified, it was pretty much against the Soviets. What was before that was what is questionable, especially the stuff around Central America and Mexico and things like that in the early 20th century and 19th century.
The current wars make no sense either, but I don't think the US is nationalistic in this respect.
It's heavily dominated by the Globalist cabal, that is steering it into this Global Government system.
While the US invaded many countries, it never annexed them, and in most cases it help rebuild the economy.
The Globalists are about direct annexation like how the EU is now moving for a U.S.E:
I would agree with that. I'm not too acclimated to everything that is happening to Europe, but I agree with the demographic shift twaord a centralized global EU that has pushed Europe and brought about the umbrela rule that is happening today. I wrote a few posts about U.S. imperialism and how it was smart about extending it's influence without directly controlling countries
Good publication, I wanted to respond immediately:
https://busy.org/politics/@vieira/nationalism-vs-globalism-counter-response-to-profitgenerator