Europe, Boring Until it's Not

[Montegriffo]

It is not exclusive.

I agree, but CM's article tries to conflate Socialism with Globalism. This is erroneous.
He challenged me to prove him wrong, I believe I did.

[C-Mag]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-glob ... n_movement

Anti-Globalisation is more of a left-wing ideology than a right-wing or Nationalist movement in origin.

Anti Globalist protesters were chanting ''Maggie Maggie Maggie out out out'' in the 1980s in the UK.

I never made an argument for some anti globalist movement as stated in the wikipedia article. The globalists are backing a model of international socialism.

[BjornP]

Capitalism is Socialism, yo. Because it's international....

This is why it's pointless to debate anything here these days. Words mean whatever (constantly changing things) people feel they mean, and you're a terrible, disrespectful bigot if you tell them they're wrong. No difference whatsoever to the SJWs people here mock.

[C-Mag]

Globalism requires Big Government, central planning, and full control of systems by political elites. Socialism requires exactly the same structure. Through globalism you have multinational corporations, financial elites, making rules for the underclass. Socialism requires the exact same top-down distribution process.

A few high powered political institutions (think Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren) decide the wealth distribution and sharing processes used to support the masses. They retain power through control at all costs. Within this alignment you see financial elites, globalists in every sense of the word, accepting socialism as a tool to retain corrupt power and influence; and defend against the independent action of lower-class rubes.

There is no room for personal liberty in globalism. No Free Speech, No Freedom to keep and bear arms, No Freedom of Privacy. Not to mention taxation schemes levied by the few on the masses.

[Speaker to Animals]

Both globalism and communism is rule by the middle managers / bureaucrats. It's the same people. This is why much of the ideological discussion is so specious.

[C-Mag]

Both globalism and communism is rule by the middle managers / bureaucrats. It's the same people. This is why much of the ideological discussion is so specious.

I don't understand why any average person would support and defend globalism. I get it if you are an up and coming elitist or international money guy. Your wallet is dependent upon keeping the status quo. For 25 + years it has worked very well at transferring wealth from the middle class in the Western world to the elites.

But if you are an average middle class or working stiff, you're fucking insane to support Globalism.

[Montegriffo]

The globalists are backing a model of international socialism.

Globalism is not about redistributing wealth amongst the world's poor.
Globalists are lining their own pockets at the expense of their own country's working classes.

This is why nationalists disapprove, not because it is socialist.
It is also why socialists disapprove.

Does that make you a national socialist? (of course not)

[Speaker to Animals]

The globalists are backing a model of international socialism.

Globalism is not about redistributing wealth amongst the poor.
Globalists are lining their own pockets at the expense of the working classes.

Which is the same thing to be said about communism.

If we lived in the Soviet Union, the corporate managerial class and deep state would all be bureaucrats and politburo wonks within the communist party. The enemy is the Soviet-Harvard establishment.

These are people who enrich themselves at the expense and risk of others. They want to make decisions with other people's lives and other people's money, because they think they know better than everybody else.

[Montegriffo]

Hence Maggie's declaration that there is no alternative.

The answer is socially responsible capitalism. ie social democracy.

[Speaker to Animals]

Hence Maggie's declaration that there is no alternative.

The answer is socially responsible capitalism. ie social democracy.

Absolutely there is an alternative.

You should not allow people to make decisions without skin in the game. If you want to vote for war, you best be ready to muster. If you want to spend money on a grand new social welfare program, you better be a net tax payer.

The managerial class are people who enrich themselves by taking the power to make decisions on matters in which they have no stake and do not take the risks.

It doesn't matter if it's socialism, communism, or globalist capitalism, it's the same problem.


Chicken warhawks tend to have one thing in common: they don't lift.

Socialists tend to have one thing in common: they are not net tax payers.

See the problem?

The Noodles communist guy should be reviled for wanting to control the restaurant that employed him without having any investment in said business for the same reason that Bolton should be reviled for pushing for wars he never had any intention of fighting himself.