Okay pol

Okay pol

What the fuck is wrong with globalism? What's so bad about unifying the world?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Because most of the world is shit and I don't want my country to be shit

Take a moment and try to imagine a scenario where globalism would benefit everyone when implemented with the current state of technology?

Protip: it's impossible.

Benign globalism is achievable only in a post-scarcity world.

It's like drinking muddy dirt water when you could drink clean water instead.

It's not about unifying the world, it's about making a gigantic playground for vested interests while flooding the job market with cheap labour.

TLDR: memes

You can't give one in depth argument can you?

The burden of proof is on you. Prove me globalism works. If you can't, it's a worthless concept and should be discarded.

Bit late Sven

It would make a small group of people extraordinarily powerful, to the point they would never be able to be contested.

Human nature won't allow it, the only time we unite is when we are fighting other humans.

I can't really be bothered right now so I'll just keep posting retarded analogies.

Embracing globalism is like embracing a cancerous tumor in your body instead of cutting it out.

Your standards of life decrease since you will be flattened with the africans in africa.

/Thread

Rural and suburban retards oppose globalism because they are greedy parasites. Whereas city people allocate each joule as efficiently as possible among each human, rural and suburban retards drive massive cars, live in huge houses that take up absurd amounts of space and use up to 10 times as much energy as an average city person.

Whereas the brain of the city person is programmed to use its energy in a way that benefits humanity as a whole, which results in glorious large scale civilizations, the brain of the rural and suburban retard functions in such a way that it must hog as much energy as it can for itself, even if it means sabotaging the rest of its community, which results in drug abuse, alcoholism and incest.

The main purpose in life of rural and suburban retards is to shit up civilization as much as possible. Rural and suburban retards are incompatible with the civilized world.

Sure, take trade for example. Each country has a capacity to produce certain good depending on their technology, culture, and natural resource reservoir. Globalism enforces efficient allocation of these capitals as seen in the post modern world as opposed to say the renaissance. Europe, Asia, Africa, and America largely operated as separate entities during the previous eras and did not take part in large scale economic unions.

inb4 The trade triangle
Again, small scale.

Nice try Soros

Well Burger.
Do you want all the world to be the same, everywhere you go is poor , race mixed and totall shit.
There is a reason why Countries have Borders and Law.
But if you want to see how a global state would look go south of your border.

>globalism enforces efficient allocation
>globalism efficient
>globalism

You realize that globalism is the epitome of a bureaucratic nightmare right? Name one instance where globalism did some more efficiently then fair trade deals would have between individual nations.

Not all countries have equal capacity to produce goods.

>Globalism enforces efficient allocation of these capitals as seen in the post modern world

If you think this is true, then you only need to look at the state of today's post modern world in order to answer your original question on what is wrong with globalism: everything.

Multi-cultural societies are unnatural. There has never been such a society which has survived the test of time.

I'd love to unify the world, I'd love to live in peace and harmony with all humans. The issue here is not where I want to, it's whether THEY want to. Look at Europe. If all those refugees were genuine and good people who just wanted a new home to make a life they should show gratitude to the inhabitants and do their best to contribute right? But they're not, they're causing havoc with huge amounts of crime, assaults, sexual abuse, taking over entire suburbs and turning them into Little Syria where if natives walk in they get harassed, accosted and even beaten.

Every day that passes just proves the point further that they never had any intention of showing gratitude. They are there because they feel it's their right, they are there because they see western countries as weak institutions who they can exploit for their own benefit.

Time to wake up and realize the majority of the world is like this. Humans aren't altruistic by nature. The majority are fucking scumfucks who would gladly drain you of all your wealth to enrich themselves. They do not give one solitary fuck about you, your family, your community, your culture or your nation.

Why would I be ok with globalism when it promotes the west having to prostrate itself to these people who want to take what we have for their own and leave us to rot?

>Anime poster
>Jewish opinions
>Low test cuck
It all fits

Ok, to be honest now. Globalism is ok, except when isn't.
You know how communism looks good on paper? Good idea on the first sight but very hard if not impossible to implement and leads to slavery in the long run.
Well globalism had the idea that countries can exchange all products equally because the world is one big market and borders are imaginary. People are people, cultural differences enrich the market and differences make us stronger.
Except it turned out not to be so.
Not to mention that workers kept getting poorer and poorer. Why? Because smart but corrupt people don't give a shit about their country. Why follow the rules in my country when I can outsource to shit hole for $2/hour. So in the long run, only top 0.0001% got extremely rich and all others got shit.
It is not that simple but you get the idea.

>Every day that passes just proves the point further that they never had any intention of showing gratitude.

Most of them weren't even refugees, just third world migrants who couldn't wait to take advantage of Germany's nazi guilt complex.

It's not about unification being bad. It's about the world being shaped to benefit certain people and fuck everyone else.

why should I have to give up my culture and country to others?

The amount of Nazi's in this thread is deplorable, I can see we're going to have a lot of people re educated in our camps in the future.

Yes but it's always going to be shaped that way is it not?

This.

Also isn't your experience on the internet enough to show you that people (in general) do not get along because we are all different.

Because that means we will have to even out the standards of life, thus making the entire world a shithole with a corupt democracy and the 0.01% rulling in perpetuity by monopolizing the best schools and living high in capitals while the rest of the world goes to shit, Now sure, if we can get to a Starship Trooper sytem where every individual has basic rights, but only trough military service can poeples get the right to vote, thus making the eltoral population actually concerned about a good governance and not more gibsmedat, then why not.

>just third world migrants who couldn't wait to take advantage of Germany's nazi guilt complex.
Pretty much. Germany opened it's arms in a show of altruistic charity and they got taken advantage of by every African who ever dreamed of sitting around playing PS4 while the government sends you cheques for it. You don't help people by letting them use you as a doormat.

It's objectively immoral.

this

When i clicked that image i expected to see this

Homogenization is bad.
Lifting up one group not based on merit but on emotion while damning another is bad.
The natural order is not globalism.
We are not all one race.
We are not the same.
The advanced should not kill itself just so those who could not push forward can inherit and ruin our legacy.
Good and evil exist and evil has been in control for a very long time.

...

Do you want the entire US to be governed by the laws of California? Now extrapolate that to a global scale.

Because most of the world will get a say in everything, and most of the world are nothing but primitive retards that still practice witchcraft and defacate in public.

Nothing in theory, however the fact that evil Zionist Jewish pyschopath want to unite the world just so they can rule the humanity as slaves and get rid of the White race then there's a problem.

Do you want the people who run Detroit to run the world?

>What the fuck is wrong with globalism? What's so bad about unifying the world?

Always the fucking bluepilled people.... you have to think about the end goal of it all.

First of all, why is mixing of the people needed, why do they need to destroy everything evolution presented to us? They use a stage of devide and conquer between the people (not liking outsiders is human nature, if you don't have that, you'll get genocided, hey native americans). In the end, they will literally create a middle brown negroid race with average IQ of 85-90, easy to be controlled for all eternity.

Then the end goal of their political system... One world governemt which will include a highly socialist state, meaning people will be made dependent on government gibsmedats so that they will never revolt. Of course you won't have any elections anymore at that point.

Complete globalism will also destroy all the cultures and most likely languages if you think long term so that in the end, you will literally have created a boring mass of same looking people, all doing the same, having the same "traditions" (so none at all). You will have a world where the ones wanting to achieve and work hard get milked to feed unneeded subhumans.

Of course, this world will bring stability, but you will pay for that stability with nearly everything we have created what makes us human... our heritage, our culture, our nation states and their history (all will be forgotten), while blonde people with light eyes will die out (already only 2% of the world population) and then everything will look the same, no matter where you go on vacation. The same boring shit everywhere, it will be like living in the matrix with greatly reduced freedom and suicide will be the only way out.

it would probably be useful if you detailed what globalism means to you. people have very different ideas about what it entails and i've noticed people tend to just argue past each other on this topic because they're arguing for/against completely different things. especially if you're going to complain about arguments without depth when you haven't really stated your perspective.

Ehh.. isn't the economic stuff you describe not just Globalization? That's net identical with Globalism...

>What's so bad about unifying the world?

average IQ is too low. Everyone needs to have a much higher IQ before there can be one world.

We accomplish this with international genius sperm banking and trading.

Sources? Or just tin posting?

>Of course you won't have any elections anymore at that point.

Two party elections where both parties have exactly the same set of centre-left policies influenced by the same lobbyists gives the illusion of democracy.

The idea used to be about uplifting all countries to our standard of living. That idea has been scrapped in favor of a global baseline where other countries would be lifted to a point... And our standard of living would be decreased to meet it.

In order to do that, we're shipping off our jobs to those countries and importing the citizens of those countries to come to our own and compete with our people for their work.

I'm against globalism because Western society is exceedingly comfy and I want it to stay that way. I want you to have comfy jobs, I want you to have comfy families with comfy wives that have comfy pussies.

I want what our parents had, but for you. I want you to be able to buy a house with the first job that you got out of high school... And it's not impossible, we just need to undo some of the damaging policies that made the lives of our countrymen so hard.

There's absolutely no excuse for me, for example, to cram my family into a three bedroom cuckshed when we have a combined family income of $160,000.

And there's no excuse for the fact that most of my friends and family will never, ever, have the means to afford a cuckshed of their own.

Our standard of living is being damaged and I want it to get better for my sake, for your sake and for the sake of my kids.

So, you didn't want to have a conversation about this after all.

Eh? The one world government is something they are talking about even pre WW2 already... and the UN is the first stage of this.

If you want to start mostly after WW2, then the book "United Nations exposed by Jasper" is a good start. Also read "World Order" by Kissinger (know your enemy).

What the liberals are currently doing (the likes of clinton wanted to do etc) is basically socialism/communism through the back door, forced egalitarianism etc... don't you see what is happening around you? You think the extreme gender politics, maniac feminism etc are just independent occurances? At the same time, they wanted to increase taxes (like Sanders wanted, in Europe they are already sky high) and the working people have to pay for everything with barely anything left for their own.

The quote in pic related from Rockefeller is from his own memoires.

Or this yes. Still having fake elections making the people think they still have a choice... bread and circus for the people where the circus changes every so often.

The thing is why was it all of a sudden an idea to let them in when that hasn't really happened for a long time? I know not every country was overnight mailed rapefugees, but a few were. They have to go back.

Because most of the world consists of violent shitty people who will kill you for your shoes.

1. Diversity increases social distrust
2. Centralization of political power is always a bad thing and will inevitably lead to tyranny and totalitarianism if applied on a global scale

>pol
Newfag get out

>11 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar[b] and settled there.

> They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

>5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

>8 So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

What you are actually proposing is a form of min/max. Comparative Advantage is a way to maximize what a country is "good" at and eliminating what it's "bad" at. This has the impact of severely damaging economic diversity and the production of novel goods.

Ultimately, your plan is just a way to enslave the labor of nations and is a form of neo-imperialism that doesn't even have the overtones of patriotic capitalism to its credit.

Because instead of having diversity of culture and people it crushes everything. tries to get people to mix to make everyone the same shit.

It's not a damn rainbow. It's turning the world grey. That is globalism.

Your trips will never make you right. As for your other points, I'll just direct you to the DTES. Vancouver is a stunning example of urban inequality, glut, greed and avarice... And it's not even the worst. I'm a city person, my condo is definitely worth more than yours, and I will freely admit that you, and people like you, are the scum of the Earth.

1. a surplus of workers from countries with low wages flood the market of countries with high wages and therefore lower wages in those developed countries

2.companies can pay niggers pennies in 3rd world countries to make 500$ sunglasses and sell it to you/your wife

3.surplus of imported goods weakens local economy

4. outside investors fuck with the supply/demand of certain products like housing making it more expensive for locals

The best governments are those that govern locally. The further away one's rulers are, the less in tune they are with the needs of the people they claim to represent. Globalism, by definition, amounts to people from far-off places meddling with local affairs. It can never work by virtue of this truth alone.

I don't care what you want when there are countries much more 'shit' than you which need resources.

Global democracy

International law.
And most places will be better off

In a more global society the refugee crisis would not have been a problem.
Refugees usually don't want to leave their countries. Immigrants in general wanted to leave their country, and are willing to integrate.

'We are not all the same' is is a very low energy way of justifying global inequality.
It's more complicated than Sup Forums memes about blacks in America having a bad attitude to school.

To begin with, not all countries will have the same laws. There will be Soviets with devolved powers.
In the future, demand for different laws will wither away and Soviets will equalise laws to reduce the hassle and let judges and people move around.

How many people in developing countries do you think are worrying about being able to buy a job as soon as they get out of school?
You deserve to be in a gulag for being like this.
I bet you don't believe in your heart that people in the first world actually matter more than those in the third world. You are just trying to use your intelligence to argue the opposite view.

Diverse cultures don't have everyone acting the same. Even if you mean the deep future, when everyone is the same race, there will be people with different interests.

The way you raise IQ is through economic development and increased education.

That's why they need stronger government.

God isn't real.

Trade increases the production of novel goods because everyone is more able to create 'niche' products.

It still amazes me that a working class job could buy you a home and support a family about three generations ago. And today the supporters of globalism have the audacity to claim that it's improving living standards.

There are right and glorious ways to do it and there are ways of slavers.

*buy a house with their first job

> global democracy
How do you imagine this work?

>Even if you mean the deep future, when everyone is the same race, there will be people with different interests.

Is this supposed to be a pro globalism argument? If yes, then a very poor attempt. Culture would be the last relevant thing. First comes race (which can't be recreated once destroyed), then the state/living space of your race and everything after is less important.

Because It can't happen without massive strife and suffering for all.

it's a joke bong bro, we have so many worthless illegals living off our version of the dole popping out equally worthless children with no desire to integrate or contribute that even with Emperor Trump we will never be truly unfucked. About anywhere you go you see these shit bags chattering with each other in their retarded midget bird speak stinking up the place with no further goal in life than to send half their dishwashing check back to shit Mexico and buy some cup noodles with their food stamps. I know there are places where they haven't infected like a plague, but it that won't be the case for long unless they start holding them accountable and I dunno, enforcing the laws.

Globalisation is the natural result of advanced communication and shipping technology making it easier and faster to move product.

Globalism is the soft political aspect of the neo-liberal economic cult... Neoconservative "politics" are, once again, another aspect of the neo-liberal economic dogma's hard political philosophy.

Since the the two party political systems which most of our nations truly have are dominated by neo-liberal economist thinkers, they are simply two faces of the same coin... Because regardless of anything, the economic, trade, foreign and immigration policies remain almost identical.

>Global democracy
That's just a horrific nightmare.
>all decent nations get looted to nothing by gibsmedat hordes
>the entire world falls to pieces because it's run by people who already ran their own nations into the ground
>It's more complicated than Sup Forums memes about blacks in America having a bad attitude to school.
Not really, they're just incapable due to genetics. The other arguments are just mental gymnastics to justify equality. The evidence doesn't support them.
>The way you raise IQ is through economic development and increased education.
To an extent, but you'd still have a very large gap.

Who would be the worthy of governing 7,5 billion people? I hate bureaucracy as it is, I don't even want to imagine what kind of a bureocratic fucking nightmare such a fucking colossal government would be, if anyone has ever played the game of broken phone as a kid then you propably get the picture...

because people are different. If i remove the locks on my house, it wont become a tolerant paradise, the homeless will simply walk in and shit in my kitchen.

there are structures in place to preserve peace, like borders. If we respect each other and the borders we have, there would be no war (disconting if there is extreme cases like natural shortages and you have to steal water)

We have to respect each other, and the need for controlled seperation via borders, so we can live side by side on this planet in peace and diversity.

It is now our ''intolerant'' views and systems that create the situations where racism, discrimination and destruction is possible, but the so called nice people

You simply remove the structures that keep the peace, then you tolerate the violent result. It is you that is evil, not us :)

Fuck you, I'm looking after my own and I don't care about the surplus people that should never have been born in third world shit holes. I'm looking after my fucking kids and countrymen and I don't give a fuck about their conditions.

If they have a problem, they should ask their parents why they had twelve fucking kids.

You belong in a fucking mass grave for selling out your people.

It's a fact that wages were lower. Imports have also reduced the price of many goods. The impression that living standards haven't gone up must have to do with something else

There are elections to your Soviet, and global elections to the global government

I don't remember the exact figures, but blacks in America have an average IQ the same as whites in America had not too long ago. The gap hasn't changed much, but then education spending is higher across the board and whites are wealthier as well.
I think they will eventually have an IQ as high as whites have today.

You belong in a gulag for being a dirty reactionary and selling out humanity

I wish I could vomit so I can feel better after reading that

It was only one generation ago. I'm an early millennial. A dude born in 1975 has had the same job since high school and his house is probably worth $1.5 million right now.

I missed the mark by two years, actually.

>I don't even want to imagine what kind of a bureocratic fucking nightmare such a fucking colossal government would be

It would be a natural progression of the existing supranational organisations we have now such as the UN or the EU. Layers and layers of it, intentionally far too complex and opaque for the population to be able to work out where responsibility lies.

This thread is gay, post some fucking cat titties.

...

In pure globalism products are made in the cheapest country which means that the people of the cheapest/worst countries will become wageslaves with very minimal wages and very long hours, much like is happening already.

This in turn decreases the possible jobs in other countries. People who are not smart enough to get a good enough degree in these kind of countries are fucked. The lowest and dumbest class is forced to become service workers since they cannot learn a decent trade since everything is made in the cheapest country. The people who either already own businesses or the smart people who can get a good degree will do ok until technology advances enough and their degrees become pointless. When they wish to re-educate themselves, there is already a bunch of younger people who the companies will hire and the same thing can be done by dumber people in dumb countries where it is cheap since the tools have advanced enough.

This creates a situation where the smartest people try to stay relevant until they are forced to become service workers. The owning class is doing best. The service workers are forever wage slaves who will never advance anywhere. The people of cheapest countries are forever slaves. Best bet in this kind of world is to start a business in a new area, since the old areas have already been conquered by the large businesses. Obviously a large business becomes lazy and you can fight with it by doing something specific better than them.

My text is not very coherent since I'm goin to sleep, but basically when we get the high speed transportations, get rid of all barriers between trade and automatize everything, the dumber people can do same things as the smart people could with better tools and less effort. This in turn forces the dumb people to live in poverty while the smart people will fight to the death while the old owning class can do what they want. I could post something better constructed but fuck it.

>It's a fact that wages were lower.

Relative to housing costs? No.

>and are willing to integrate
Then why don't they? 90% of them just want money and nothing else.

also
>that pic
>/leftypol/tards actually see themselves that way

When the state gets bigger you by definition is smaller

More than Half the worlds population lives in china, India and Southeast Asia

If we lived in a globalised world you wouldn't be anyone's concern

And who has power over who and what?

God forbid this idiot ever gets into a serious debate.

>"What is wrong with Black Lives Matter?"

>"Well, imagine if the US appeased BLM. Protip: You can't."

>"That's a stupid answer"

>"Burden of proof is on you. Prove why BLM works, you can't? Guess it doesn't work lol!"

1. Most of the world doesn't want it.
2. It always seems to necessitate fucking over white people.

He already said.
Niggers on welfare popping out kids they can't afford run the government.
A truly progressive society only a truly enlightened elite could come up with.

Impossible

Okie doke, you didn't answer my question though

>Who would be the worthy of governing 7,5 billion people?

Nobody, obviously. Wasn't that a rhetorical question?

because Christians are afraid that the antichrist will rule the whole world

That doesn't have much to do with globalism, so it's not really an argument against 'globalism raises living standards'. Part of it is the green belt, which has artificially restrained supply even as population increases very quickly. Another part of it is the increase in people living on their own and the decrease in the frequency of grandparents living with their families.
There are other reasons too.

The global government supplies resources where they are need- 'from each according to their ability, to each according to their need'.
And manages international problems like pollution, disease, crises of production

You are either an immigrant or went to a very liberal school. Your level of sjw indoctrination is astounding. Hope you get some wisdom over time, because maybe you are educated but you are also dumb as dirt.

So global democracy? Seems to me we're going to live by how China and India wants then

Ted suffers from ILS.

So how do you suppose you're gonna address the from part if I'm not giving it to you willingly?

Too big a concentration of power is a bad concept. Look at Imperial Rome - one minute you have someone wise as Marcus Aureliius running the show, it doesn't seem too bad - next thing you know, another Commodus, a Caligula or a Nero is asking you to sacrifice peacocks before altars set up to their godhood.
Fuck globalism, I will fight to the death to prevent it.

youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE
Sven knows what he's talking about in that first post. It's not a meme: the world is mostly shit. Most people in the world couldn't function productively in the society you grew up in any more than you could function in theirs. Their interests aren't always your own, and bringing them here helps neither of us. Globalism is just modern colonialism with (((international corporations))) at the helm, and they want more consumers. It's bad because it destroys cultures by replacing them with one shitty mold for everyone and placing the hunger of every mongrel failure upon even those who could succeed by their own efforts otherwise. It's directed at destroying western culture more explicitly than others, perhaps because it's a sizable threat that they might be strong enough to change the course, or perhaps because our liberal ideology has made it easier. It's the will of the highest of the elite: it doesn't take a genius to guess they aren't looking out for you.

because the more diversity there is in society the more conflict which means a single unified world would either mean people overcoming something they have never overcome before or certain destruction of everything. and since overcoming a very diverse society has never happened before we can assume the odds of unifying the world peacefully are quite slim we can assume certain destruction from conflict is most likely.

>That doesn't have much to do with globalism

It's simple supply and demand. And mass immigration coupled with internationally trading property as a commodity increases demand on a fundamentally limited supply. London is a prime example of this.

>The global government supplies resources where they are need- 'from each according to their ability, to each according to their need'.
And manages international problems like pollution, disease, crises of production

Yeah, because it worked so well in the USSR

>What the fuck is wrong with globalism? What's so bad about unifying the world?

no more caucasiod europeans

This is where I have a problem. Who chooses when and where these resources are allocated? In a perfect world, this might work. But we are not in a perfect world; people who like to be in power are more than not corrupt or corruptable, and like the EU, you will have a body of people you didn't vote for making decisions over your life and well being with no way of voting them out.