Nationalism or Globalism? We can’t have both.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Our nation was founded as a decentralized Republic with a focus on national sovereignty.  Most of our early national income was derived from tariffs on imports.  The Founding Fathers wrote language into the Constitution to guard against loss of this sovereignty.

Most Americans hope to pass on to their children and grandchildren a nation based on the vision of our Founding Fathers.  A strong and thriving middle class and the American Dream depend on this nationalism.  This is not to say America was isolationist or even leaned that way.  Our Founding Fathers envisioned a sovereign nation acting responsibly and fairly with other nations.

That sovereignty is being lost as power is shifted beyond Washington to world organizations beyond the reach of the American voter.  We the People are slowly losing control of our government and our lives.  Prosperity is slipping away.

Globalization, Post-Industrialism, and the New World Order ideas have eroded our sovereignty, our middle class and our economy.  These ideas are all cut from the same cloth and are attempts by powers that be to establish a world community with no borders, organized around a world-wide authority.  Americans become subordinate to these global powers without representation.

What worked so well for the American states has proved a disaster for the world as we try to overlay free market and free trade ideas onto a world that has none of the controlling factors that American states have: a common language, a common currency, common laws, and consequences for deviations from those laws as well as common business ethics and morals.

This New World Order has none of these controlling factors and as a result, outcomes are out of control.  Rather than the most industrious and efficient succeeding, the most ruthless and deceitful prosper.

We need to elect leaders who will restore lost national sovereignty and return power to the states and people.  Empirical evidence shows that local control (nationalism) produces prosperity but centralized control empowers the elites while destroying the middle class and creating poverty for everyone else.

The debate over globalism and nationalism is on full display in this year’s presidential debate.  After 40 years of trade agreements moving us in the direction of “Globalism,” voters will have a choice between continuing on this path by electing those who endorse passage of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), or charting a new course where we put American producers first.

Trump and Sanders are the most vocal advocates for charting this new course – a new nationalism.  Others have indicated that they agree with Trump – specifically Cruz, Fiorina, Santorum and Huckabee.

In the camp wishing to double down on globalism are those that some refer to as the establishment and Ted Cruz refers to as the “Washington Cartel.”  These are Sen. Marco Rubio (FL), and Governors John Kasich (OH), Chris Christie (NJ) and Jeb Bush (FL)  .

Secretary Clinton worked on and advocated for passing TPP.  Candidate Clinton has changed her mind and now opposes TPP for political considerations.  Fully 80% of Republican voters oppose TPP and Democrats oppose by even larger margins.  Supporting TPP is the “Third Rail” of all third rails for Democrats and Clinton knows this.  I believe that it will become a third rail for Republicans as well.  Marco Rubio will soon be forced to state his position on TPP and we will learn if Candidate Rubio still supports passage of TPP as Senator Rubio did.

The “Washington Cartel” (an alliance between Big Media, Big Business and Big Government) are doubling their efforts to take Trump down.  One super PAC for Gov. John Kasich has begun with a series of anti-Trump advertising, while ex-Gov. Jeb Bush attacked Trump on Friday and a Club for Growth-related super PAC plans to resume attack ads in Iowa against the New York billionaire. The Club’s ad campaign in Iowa has been cited for Trump’s sagging numbers in that state.

Changing the direction of the nation towards nationalism will be viciously resisted by the Washington Cartel and may ultimately push Trump into running as an independent.  This would surely elect Hillary but the Cartel would rather deal with Hillary (a proven Cartel member) than someone who has threatened to remove them as power brokers.

Frank Shannon served in the U.S. Army, was an engineering/operations manager for AT&T for 27 years, was the owner of a small manufacturing business for 23 years, served as Colorado Chair of the Coalition for a Prosperous America and moved to Mesquite in 2013.

Comments

  1. Harry Hicks says:

    I think that the natural evolution of mankind is toward some sort of globalization. It will come to be on its own long after I am gone. The trend toward nationalism is also a leaning toward isolationism. Some of which isn’t bad and will slow down the move toward globalization. Trump, I think expresses the frustrations and doubts that most of has. We all possess bias and prejudice, not necessarily a bad thing. Most of us who claim to be civilized try to keep this part of us under some kind of control. Trump doesn’t. He appears as a wild card and that scares people who feel they can’t predict him. It makes for an interesting old age.

  2. Frank Shannon says:

    Harry,

    We may have a definitional problem.

    If you refer to the shrining of the planet due to instant communications and other natural things, I agree this is good and shouldn’t be mitigated.

    However my usage of the term “Globalization” referred to movement towards a “New World Order’ without borders and nations cede their sovereignty to global powers. When I refer to “Nationalism” I meant that nations retain their sovereignty and our leaders are still subject to a vote of Americans.

    On my continuum of Isolationism vs. globalism, nationalism stands in the center – a balance between the two.

Speak Your Mind

*