Opinion Can Trump supporters define globalism and tell me how Trump is fighting it?

[Reactionary Corporatist]

There seems to be an inherent confusion among Trump supporters and Republicans.

While on the one hand they demonize "globalism" and policies that hurt the working class, they also attack anti-corporatists as being communists and "socialists" (le gasp).

So I want Trump supporters to clarify for the rest of us:
1. What is globalism in your view
2. How is Trump fighting globalism
3. How are the pro-middle class pro-working class policies of the "socialist" left antithetical to being anti globalism?

 

[Reactionary Corporatist]

not a single one huh?

 

[luckyshot]

Simple: Globalism is the Saudi-Marxist-Corporate-Jew plot to destroy America, end the white race, outlaw the straight male, and establish global transexual Sharia law.

 

[Sketch]

Simple: Globalism is the Saudi-Marxist-Corporate-Jew plot to destroy America, end the white race,

/Thread

 

[sloppypie]

May as well start posting cricket gifs, Bc the Russian trolls pretending to be right wingers are too busy flooding the forum with transgender hate threads and fear mongering about immigrants.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

1. What is globalism in your view

The erosion of national and then individual sovereignty in the name of furthing the collectives whims.

I tried to state it in as few words as possible. Obviously there's room for refinement, but that's a good point of entry.

2. How is Trump fighting globalism

Doing his best to deescalate Wars.

Pulling out of Accords and agreements that undermine American sovereignty and give political power to International bodies.

Appointing Pro-2nd Amendment judges to the courts (globalists prefer disarmed populations).

Cutting taxes (The more of your own money that doesn't get taxed away, the more personal sovereignty you have).

3. How are the pro-middle class pro-working class policies of the "socialist" left antithetical to being anti globalism?

Being forced to pay for the benefits of another comes at the very high cost of your own personal sovereignty.

That's a choice no one has the right to make for another.

Glad I could help with your questions.

 

[Blood and Thunder]

The left wants to create a world with open borders because they believe all cultures are equal and can co-exist. This will pave the way for a total police state where everything you do is monitored and controlled. They want the world to be disarmed. Free speech will not exist in this global utopia. They want a central power like the UN/NATO to direct policy.

Trump combats this with nationalism.

 

[Blood and Thunder]

May as well start posting cricket gifs, Bc the Russian trolls pretending to be right wingers are too busy flooding the forum with transgender hate threads and fear mongering about immigrants.

lol the thread is only 37 mins old.

 

[Reactionary Corporatist]

The erosion of national and then individual sovereignty in the name of furthing the collectives whims.

I tried to state it in as few words as possible. Obviously there's room for refinement, but that's a good point of entry.

It would seem to me that you are only concerned with governmental intrusions into personal sovereignty. What about corporate intrusions into personal sovereignty?

Doing his best to deescalate Wars.

Pulling out of Accords and agreements that undermine American sovereignty and give political power to International bodies.

Appointing Pro-2nd Amendment judges to the courts (globalists prefer disarmed populations).

Cutting taxes (The more of your own money that doesn't get taxed away, the more personal sovereignty you have).

How do you make this claim while Trump continues to provide billions to Saudi Arabia who are waging a genocide in Yemen? Not to mention the continued droning of the middle east.

Being forced to pay for the benefits of another comes at the very high cost of your own personal sovereignty.

That's a choice no one has the right to make for another.

Glad I could help with your questions.

I am not sure how you make this conclusion. Virtually any data or study you could look at regarding this subject will paint a very clear picture: the more your citizens have access to healthcare and education, the better that society is for you and your family to exist in. Less crime, less poverty. Its a tide that lifts all ships.

 

[Reactionary Corporatist]

The left wants to create a world with open borders because they believe all cultures are equal and can co-exist. This will pave the way for a total police state where everything you do is monitored and controlled. They want the world to be disarmed. Free speech will not exist in this global utopia. They want a central power like the UN/NATO to direct policy.

Trump combats this with nationalism.

How do you reconcile the underlined part of your quote with the fact that its only democrats that are fighting to break up the big tech companies and do away with their control over every day life? If republicans are fighting against everything being monitored and controlled how come A) Bush established the NSA and signed the patriot act and B) No republicans are calling for the big tech companies to either be broken up or regulated?

 

[Blood and Thunder]

How do you reconcile the underlined part of your quote with the fact that its only democrats that are fighting to break up the big tech companies and do away with their control over every day? If republicans are fighting against everything being monitored and controlled how come A) Bush established the NSA and signed the patriot act and B) No republicans are calling for the big tech companies to either be broken up or regulated?

The Dems are not fighting globalism. When they sell out and the globalist have complete control it will be like the UK on steroids.

This is why nationalism is so important.

 

[Reactionary Corporatist]

The Dems are not fighting globalism. When they sell out and the globalist have complete control it will be like the UK on steroids.

You didn't actually address what I said. Stay on topic.

I asked you specifically, how are you going to claim that dems want to control and monitor everything, when it is only democrats that are fighting to break up and regulate the tech companies, and it was a republican administration that signed the patriot act and created the NSA?

Address that specific point then we can talk about dems and globalism. You made the claim - defend it.

 

[Happy Man]

As Bernie would say, globalism main tenet is the super wealthy battling to forces of labor. The working man.

Break down borders, so you can ship jobs overseas to workers that will work for nickels, and then ship product back to sell on the sleeves. Trumps trying to tariff those products so jobs are protected. Bernie supports this.

When they can’t ship jobs overseas, the wealthy want to bring illegal immigrants in to work for nickels. Attacking the American worker. Trump is trying to stop this as well. Bernie supports this.


There is a start for you.

 

[Stoic1]

So who did you USED to be before you were banned, TS?

 

[Blood and Thunder]

You didn't actually address what I said. Stay on topic.

I asked you specifically, how are you going to claim that dems want to control and monitor everything, when it is only democrats that are fighting to break up and regulate the tech companies, and it was a republican administration that signed the patriot act and created the NSA?

Address that specific point then we can talk about dems and globalism. You made the claim - defend it.

Globalists want to monitor everything. The Dems are going to pave the way by destroying nationalism in America. They will remove all resistance. The Dems won't completely get rid of the tech companies.

Globalists have their puppets.

 

[nostradumbass]

A lot wrong with your suppositions.

1. It's making decisions for world at large at the expense of one's own country. This doesn't necessarily mean the only choices are cucking your own country or having an adversarial relationship with every other country. Considerations should be made for your own country first, then allies, then the rest of the world, in that order.

3. They are not "pro-middle and working class", they are simply anti-business and pro-centralized power. The financial and regulatory demands harm small and medium sized businesses the most, which is why the biggest corporations are in favor of them. The short-term burden for a huge corporation is nothing if it throws extra hurdles behind them and snuffs out future market competition. Fuck do they care when they have the means to either lay people off or move their labor to some shithole?

2. His stance of immigration and its limits is to maximize the benefits of immigration while minimizing the drawbacks. Immigration is not supposed to be a favor, it's supposed to be a mutually beneficial move. If a population is a pyramid, as it always is, with unskilled workers as the base with fewer and fewer people of higher skill, immigration should be in opposite measure with mostly higher skill moving down to fewer low skill or unskilled. US and Europe are running their immigration policies like a goddamn international charity funded involuntarily by their own citizens.

 

[WarDosAnjos]

Based TS is putting conservative brainlets in their place. Their continued support of being raped by large corporations is unreal

 

[Devout Pessimist]

"The global market has stimulated first and foremost, on the part of rich countries, a search for areas in which to outsource production at low cost with a view to reducing the prices of many goods...with consequent grave danger for the rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity associated with the traditional forms of the social State"

Pope Benedict on Globalization:

"Global interconnectedness has led to the emergence of a new political power, that of consumers and their associations. It is good for people to realize that purchasing is always a moral — and not simply economic — act."

"Economic activity cannot solve all social problems through the simple application of commercial logic. This needs to be directed towards the pursuit of the common good, for which the political community in particular must also take responsibility."

The complete encyclical on globalization:

ENCYCLICAL LETTER
CARITAS IN VERITATE

"The technical forces in play, the global interrelations, the damaging effects on the real economy of badly managed and largely speculative financial dealing, large-scale migration of peoples, often provoked by some particular circumstance and then given insufficient attention, the unregulated exploitation of the earth's resources: all this leads us today to reflect on the measures that would be necessary to provide a solution to problems that are not only new in comparison to those addressed by Pope Paul VI, but also, and above all, of decisive impact upon the present and future good of humanity."

The global market has stimulated first and foremost, on the part of rich countries, a search for areas in which to outsource production at low cost with a view to reducing the prices of many goods, increasing purchasing power and thus accelerating the rate of development in terms of greater availability of consumer goods for the domestic market. Consequently, the market has prompted new forms of competition between States as they seek to attract foreign businesses to set up production centres, by means of a variety of instruments, including favourable fiscal regimes and deregulation of the labour market. These processes have led to a downsizing of social security systems as the price to be paid for seeking greater competitive advantage in the global market, with consequent grave danger for the rights of workers, for fundamental human rights and for the solidarity associated with the traditional forms of the social State.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

It would seem to me that you are only concerned with governmental intrusions into personal sovereignty. What about corporate intrusions into person sovereignty?

It's much easier to "vote" against a corporation with your dollars and/or patronage.

How do you make this claim while Trump continues to provide billions to Saudi Arabia who are waging a genocide in Yemen? Not to mention the continued droning of the middle east.

The conflict you mentioned isn't being carried out by President Trump.

The conflict is unfortunate, but you can't hold President Trump responsible for the actions of others.

What you can measure President Trump by, are his own personal actions in regards to the de-escalating of military conflicts. The Korean Peninsula and America's wars in the Middle East are great examples.

Trying to play "7 degrees of separation" with other people's Wars in an attempt to connect them with people you don't like politically isn't a productive or honest debate.

I am not sure how you make this conclusion. Virtually any data or study you could look at regarding this subject will paint a very clear picture: the more your citizens have access to healthcare and education, the better that society is for you and your family to exist in. Less crime, less poverty. Its a tide that lifts all ships.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/opportunity-cost

Even those benefits you support come at an unseen cost. One of them is personal sovereignty.

 

[MicroBrew]

Doing his best to deescalate Wars.

Hit and miss here, mostly miss.

During the 2016 campaign season he certainly preached non-interventionism and opposed deposing Assad. But once president he attacked Assad , once.

How is he trying to deescalate wars when he trashed the Iran nuke agreement, labels the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as terrorists and appoints such Neocon hawks as Bolton and Abrams. How is he trying to deescalate when his admin is taking a Cold War hawkish attitude towards Latin America, specifically Venezuela.

Appointing Bolton as National Sec. adviser and giving Abrams a high ranking position runs contrary to your belief he is trying to deescalate wars. Both these guys are died-in-the-wool interventionists, uber war hawks. Trump criticized the Iraq war before he became President but now he appoints two of the most hawkish ideologues to support the Iraq war to his cabinet.

How is he trying to deescalate wars when he supports Bin Salman and vetoed the US resolution to stop aiding Saudi and Emirati warmongering in Yemen.

How is he deescalating when goes along with what Bibi wants.