General Chat (Non-Music-Related)

Globalist naturally. Surprised?

If I did not know the progression of world events and that evil men would continue to rule this world system I would be a nationalist.

Knowing that the reign of evil is destined for destruction and a new heaven and a new earth are prophesied I would not like to extend the suffering of mankind under the reign of evil men which is only prophesied to become worse until almost all of civilization is destroyed.

I'm a come quickly Lord Jesus Christian, knowing and accepting that certain events must come to pass first before that can happen. I am eagerly awaiting the time when the father of all evil is destroyed.

"I'm looking for a philosophical slant."

As an observer of human behavior I believe you have both my philosophical slant as well as the reasoning behind my reply. It is impossible for me to be philosophical excluding the known nature of men. Therefore it is impossible for me to play let's pretend and give any other reply. You may or may not care for my reply but it is what it is and I attempted to answer it as honestly as I could, even adding my reasoning, isn't philosophy based on reason? . All opinions are based on personal reason if a person is honest with himself.
I was not attempting to derail your thread at all, just answering it as you asked without taking into consideration the limits not posted within the question. Regardless, in the very beginning, I did state that I would be a nationalist if I did not know the nature of men. Sorry if you didn't care for my response, but perhaps it will be only one of the responses to your query.

Never really considered it in that context, globalist or nationalist, but looking at his bullet list I'd definitely fall in the nationalist category.

That said if you want to label me, the only one I'll agree with is American. OK two...musician too.

Thing is, we have to start looking at things from a global perspective. Primarily due to instant communication and increased ease of international travel, the economy is going to go global whether we like it or not. But the nations still need to retain their identity and individuality.

One thing I have to disagree with, Republicans and Democrats are not exactly the same. It may seem that way because they are controlled by the same group of billionaires and lobby groups, but individuals in each party have very different views. Unfortunately in the past few years the Republicans have lost the backbone to stand up for themselves and what they believe, due to political correctness and the fear of being [falsely] labeled racist. The exact opposite can be supported by a close look at history.

A small group of people has been attempting to achieve a world government for a long time, probably dating back to the 70's. I don't think we're likely to even find out who they even are, it's people who are so rich they have the ability to keep their names out of the news. I remember the days when Rockefeller and Rothschild were household names. You almost never hear either any more. Kennedy is a name you don't often hear any more either. Bill Gates has managed to slip out of the public eye. Are any of these involved in the one world government push? I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure the Rockefeller clan didn't fall of the face of the planet or jump on a UFO and head for somewhere across the galaxy...but I haven't heard that name in a long time, now and then but certainly not almost daily like I did in the 70's.

Who else is out there rich enough to control even their exposure in the press? How many journalists would defy a Rockefeller who said don't print my name? The Clintons would love it but they don't have that kind of cash...yet...they still can't escape public scrutiny, even with the liberal media on their side. But I'd be willing to bet Hillary hopes she has a position in the "New world Order"...I'm positive Obama thinks he has his wrapped up. Both are not intelligent enough to realize they are being used and will be discarded when the time comes.

What happens to this country just depends on how we can handle the transition to a global economy. Can we retain our national identity at the same time, or simply become just another district in the world view of things?

That's why the UN and probably NATO too need to both be disbanded and start over. Or we pull out. The UN is definitely all in for global government, and we need to stop funding it. I found a chart a while back of UN funding, the majority comes from the good old US. While they work against us. Same for NATO, the US provides most of their funding too.

So it looks like to me, we need to find a way to remain a dominant part of the global economy, whether we like it or not, and still remain a separate and sovereign nation. One thing that definitely requires. A leader with a backbone. The wimp in the White House right now won't do it, that much is obvious, Hillary is a carbon copy. This country will be under tremendous pressure to become part of the world government, that must be resisted. Even a cursory look at Europe is a glance into the future and it's not pretty.

No more than about 30 years ago we were more insulated from all this by far, our news came from the same 3 accepted TV networks and a few major newspapers, and we had no way to communicate in real time with people in foreign countries. Today, we can get online and find forums like this one or chatrooms where you can communicate with someone in almost any country n the world, either instantly or with no more than a few hours lag time if it's a forum where you don't see their reply until they wake up or come home from work. That means we can also find out what people in other countries see and how they view our country, what they see in the news they get, and outside opinions we never had a chance to see not so long ago.

Now we have full time cable TV news networks like Fox and CNN, real time communication worldwide, newspapers are a dying breed, and more people get their news online than any other way. Once they start to find some of the alternative news sources that actually try to tell the truth, people start to wake up. This is why we even know about this world government push at all. It was already going before the Internet existed. Now it's getting stronger, but more people are aware of it too. Let's hope enough oppose it to prevent such a thing from becoming a reality.

That's the main reason I don't go for the globalist agenda, those trying to push for a world government do not have the idea of making things better for the individual, they want money and power and it will all go to the select few. The rest of us will be serfs. Unarmed, powerless, voiceless and dirt poor. The few at the top will live like royalty at the expense of the general population. Look at the EU, that's the beginning of it. What shape is Europe in? That's our future if we let it happen here.

What shape is Europe in? That's our future if we let it happen here.

As an outsider when I visit Europe, I'd have to say it's in much better shape than America is today.

Most of that is based on a crumbling infrastructure here, and the fact that a lot of Europe has been built from the ground up since 1945 when the war ended. Warsaw, for example, is an amazing beautiful mix of history and modern. Then you remember that it was flat scorched earth when Hitler left. They passed a law that anything rebuilt in the city must be to the exact specifications of what was once standing there, so you'll see a building that looks a thousand years old...with central air-conditioning and modern amenities.

You really see the difference at the border though. I find America to be THE rudest place in the world for a traveling tourist that I've ever seen.


Now, to the question posed:

"Nationalist" means something other than I could agree with. It conjures images of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and other despots.

I do believe we are living in a "one world" community of nations, but the best way for that to work is allowing for national sovereignty and defensible borders.

The only problem with globalism is that it's usually a euphemism for a stronger political entity to take advantage of a weak one.

Otherwise, I'd be a globalist in favor of strong national sovereignty.

Moderation is a good thing. Any theologian, psychologist, philosopher will agree to this. So if this is a good thing, why isn't it practiced or accepted?? Why do people have to espouse an extreme view or belong to an extreme party??

I have two question before I can proceed:


Did you like REO Speedwagon?

Did you buy any of their albums?



.