Nationalism vs Globalism

[Razer]

On 09/02/2016 05:51 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

> individual sovereignty and anarchism


Try "individual RESPONSIBILITY to the 'collective' called humanity and
Anarchism" and I'll nibble. Until then it's just Feudal Nihilism by
different means.

Ps. "New Left" is a DISGUSTING reference to everything that was wrong
with the now-non-existent 'left' in the US. It was Reform towards
Progressive-liberalism (spellchecker also notes a correction to
"Oppresive-Liberalism"). A strategy and tactic-less'borging' of Radical
activism by people with access to the media.

Cf. The end result of Occupy with imperialist cunts like Dave "I support
"anarchists" who collaborate with the CIA for a chunk of Private
Property" Graeber

Rr


> The new dichotomy, Nationalism vs Globalism.


> 
> This is how the current USA election debate is now framed it seems, see
> for example:
> 
> 
> Hillary’s ‘Racism’ Speech, And the Stunning Emergence of The New Left
> and Right
> "Old Lady Yells At Internet"
> "A titanic struggle between nationalism and globalism is playing out in
> the American elections"
> http://russia-insider.com/en/moment-reckoning-has-come-american-political-scene-hillary-reveals-alt-right-world/ri16135
> 
> 
> Left out of this debate of course are other genuine and alternative
> foundations such as a swing towards individual sovereignty and
> anarchism, which some name as direct democracy (perhaps a branch of
> the theory of anarchism/ anarchy/ political anarchy?).
> 
> The powers that be of course are pushing very aggressively for globalism
> - their One World Order or New World Order, of course with America at
> the helm and dictating the terms. But individual sovereignty seems to
> strike fear into the hearts of oligarchs and global power brokers, since
> they still frame the debate as a black and white dichotomy between
> globalism and nationalism - this is their preferred dichotomy,
> attempting to ensure that individual sovereignty, politically empowering
> the individual, does not get a look in on this debate.
> 
> We the disempowered, the non monied, will take nationalism over
> globalism, and "the elites" will take nationalism over individual
> sovereigntism.
> 
> So except that the American voting machines are controlled by the
> existing powers that be in America and institute an entirely corrupt
> outcome, with "everything overall touch and go for the results, who can
> say?" and a "key swing state" "just nudges Hillary over the line" (ever
> seen this sort of corruption before?) - aka the usual corruption of
> American elections, there's a real chance for nationalism to prevail in
> the disgraced olde Ewe Ess of America.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately it seems the public consciousness is fully entrenched in
> dichotomies "gotta have a political party, and play the corrupt game, if
> we gonna get a different outcome".
> 
> 
> Can these disempowering and unnecessary or "false" dichotomies be busted
> or changed somehow in the public dialogue?
>