Why does Sup Forums Hate Globalism?

My ideal world by 2050 is basically four states that all work together. The European union, the Eurasian alliance, the Afro-Arab Union, and the American union. It would cover the world. All states would be multicultural and diverse and i don't see a singleproblem with that. Each state would merge together and allow open immigration within. Tell me what is wrong with that?

>multicultural

Acculturation is a myth, otherwise race-specific ghettos would exist in every country.

Nothing, suburban and rural retards can't understand this however because it might mean that an Indian family moves into their neighbourhood.

>Afro-Arab Union

You take that back! I don't want anything to do with niggers. And if we "get rid" of niggers the better if you ask me.

People that hate globalism are ignorant of their true history, cababilities, responsibility as a soul in this time and space and so much more.

Now being a globalist is far, far from being accepting of all, all in good time! For example there simply is no room for muslimes and so on!

>meme flag nigger fag
>duuuuuurrrrrrrrrr
Go back to rebbit where you belong.

Look, people who don't want muslims are ignorant of their history and true history. I would be ok with nationalism if it meant more multiculturalism.

Too bad, the MENA will be a free movement zone by 2100 and that free movement zone will meld with the EU and Eurasia by 2150. Perfect distribution of labour and there's nothing you can do about it.

The problem with globalism is that it allows the powerful to exploit loopholes and screw over others.

>America has a strong steel industry.
>China has more factories with more workers who are paid for less money to produce lower-quality steel.
>American and foreign companies naturally want to save money.
>Buy from China.
>Put Americans out of work.
>Cut trade deals to reduce restrictions to save more money from buying Chinese.

The more global our society gets the less restrictions or borders there are, so the power ultimately lies with people who already have the largest companies as well as the governments whom they bribe and vice versa. In the end the people who are screwed over are those who live in the wrong country where jobs have been outsourced. Globalism is ultimately the most effective and efficient form of doing business as it allows a freer market, but that freedom only applies to those who have taken it for themselves and only themselves. Nationalism may be anti-capitalist in some respects, but it protects people who would have lost their jobs to a Chinese factory with little to no scruples. They are not the kind of people we want to be doing business with. And from a humanistic point of view globalism will only exhort people like the Chinese to be even less fair to their workers.

Think about it: If you make a product and suddenly don't have to worry about quality control or competition then the only thing keeping you doing good work is your own moral code. Sounds a lot like communism, right? If the central government holds all the power we get Soviet Russia, but if a few large multinational corporations also hold all the power then you have globalism. They both lead to inferior products, the death of competition, exploited work forces, and the death of national industry.

globalism is the belief that a vague concept of a united world comes over the benefit of the state and in particular the lower echelons of the state that often live in poor conditions.

the problem with globalism is that it allows or encourages importation of vast amounts of new workers to the state, which allows industry to treat their workers, old and new like garbage. furthermore it dilutes the culture, victimizes the people, destroys cultural institution (chasing profit or utopian dreams of world unity) and diminishes the kinship between the higher and lower echelons, leading to disaster. furthermore, it sows division amongst anyone who would OPPOSE these problems, because people have a great deal of trouble overcoming the language/culture barrier once the society is suitably divided.

tl;dr globalism deliberately weakens society so that it cannot resist those who would exploit it's newfound weakness, division and lack of opportunity.

If the world is run by a global state that wouldn't happen since corporations couldn't escape anywhere since the rule of law is global

>Yes, haha, let's merge hundreds of ethnic groups into mass states controlled by wealthy (((bureaucrats))) and absolutely no conflicts at all will come from that. None!

because a lot would just pile into the US and we don't have the capacity to deal with all those millions more people - it would literally transform this nation into a shithole overnight.

Think about consequences before you run your mouth shill.

Yeah sure the world is TOTALLY falling apart because your neighbor is from a india

diversity enriches everyone

Big corps grease the palms of politicians all the damn time. It'd be worse with a global government, because there would be no alternatives to a corrupt government. The US was created to have it's politicians voted into office to represent the public interests. The entire idea of a globalist government is to subvert that. It's purpose is to make the US laws overruled by a bigger, non-representative government where positions of power as based entirely on nepotism, much like the EU. Having a representative government is utterly pointless when an outside group can overrule it.

Except the EU actually takes on big corporations, the U.S is their bitch. U.S politicians are funded by wealthy corporations meanwhile E.U is slapping companies with anti-trust fines.

Not on my watch. And yes I can do something about. Throw your ass off my helicopter. All free of charge.

oligarchs*

social democrat here. not exactly the stereotypical Sup Forums user. I oppose it because the sort of post national future we're liable to get is a democracy proof plutocracy. one where any regional resistance to the excesses of the wealthy elite can be vetoed by the rest of the federation and/or economically pressured into compliance

the emphasis on immigration is designed to balkanize the general public and neutralize anti-globalist sentiment. anti globalist factions will be branded as openly or crypto-fascist in nature.

the environment would prosper under a one world government, but only by dint of driving down the standard of living of the general public. every sacrifice the proles must make will be one the wealthy do not have to share. where the proles will be economically pressured if not outright required by law to eat beans and lentils first and then later insect meal in place of meat or fish, the wealthy elite will continue to enjoy sushi and steak and so on. natch niceties like air conditioning and having one's own washer and dryer and car or truck

the proles may not even get UHC out of the deal. already the forces of neoliberalism are chiseling away at the health care systems of canada, france, the uk and germany; the IP and ISDS provisions of the ttp and ttip in particular betraying the intentions of the globalists wrt the national health care systems of signatory nations

in short, I believe we are ruled by junkies. no amount of wealth or power will satisfy them, and there's no sacrifice they'd balk at inflicting upon the common people in order to spare themselves from suffering the slightest inconvenience from the consequences of their short sighted and greedy stewardship of the human race

But why though.....

Americas too educated to be focused on boosting manufacturing. Its simply a poor allocation of resources to have a bunch of college educated steel mill workers.

when all the nations are unified where do they point all the military weapons? they point them at the civilians. one omnipotent world government. i cant think of a worse idea.

Independence, bitch.
If you don't value not being dependent on other, then we do.
The value of independence is that you don't allow anyone to have power over you.

lol ok if your definition of 'dependence' extends to buying and selling things from and to other countries then sure I'm fine with that.

And what happens if they threaten to stop selling us what we need to build our infrastructure, weapons and good we desperately need, unless we do something else for them? How naive are you?

Are you 10? Or are you on welfare?

He has never had to deal with any of that, he doesn't realize that this it's still a world of nations.

Well the WTO would step in or you could just bring them to arbitration if you had a trade deal with the country.

If those all failed then you could just respond with protectionism.

Fuck you, were coming for ya globalist!

Why. The. Fuck. Would. I. Care. About. WTO?

Are you mentally handicapped? What power would WTO have over my mega-nation?

Protectionism, yes, makes it cheaper to produce everything in your nation than another.
How does this not make sense? There is a reason why US infrastructure is fucked. Too much dependency on importing goods.

>spanish

>fought bloody wars for 1000 years against muslis

>ignorant of that history for not wanting them in their country again

Because there are vast differences of standards of living across the world. You cant have globalism when there are people who will work for a small fraction of what people from developed countries would work for. If you are pro globalism you are a corporate shill.

Any and every attempt at a pan-global (or even pan-continental) empire throughout history has failed spectacularly.

Muslims today aren't extremists except for ISIS

you are a corporate shill corporations love nationalism because it lets them outsource.

You are naive and stupid if you think this is true.
Over 50 to 70% of Muslims are extremists.

This doesn't make sense. Under Nationalism the government would be completely against outsourcing.

Because the idea of pooling the world's nations together after beating it into people's heads for thousands of years that competition is god, doesn't really work out.
The only way it would, would be if it was an authoritarian nightmare where people would be executed for going to the bathroom during their shift.
The only other option is niggerville which is basically returning back to our primitive ways where only the strong survived.

islam itself is extremist you absolute moron

You're stupid, under globalism the global government would tax ciompanies wherever they go.

Global capital has always existed. The belief that the moneyed class can invest their capital wherever they choose hurts the nation that these people come from. They are essentially traitors.

As far as the belief that people should be able to live wherever they choose... it's idealistically perfect, but obviously not grounded in reality. Do you think the Native Americans believe that, after being wiped out from warfare and disease?

This also negates the fact that you have more in common with your ethnic group and culture than you would believe. Nations tend to blend together their cultural and ethnic elements until they're relatively homogeneous. Nations should have some control over these inputs. Enough foreign cultures and genes and YOU change, not them. So much for the individualistic Enlightenment ideals that we worked so hard to fight for.

it wouldnt cover us so fuck off because were full

What makes you think I am on board with taxation?
What makes you think there is a government that doesn't tax?

a globalist government would be controlled by globalist corporations you fucking mouth breather

That just means those corporations didn't do the right amount of bribing.

>All states would be multicultural and diverse and i don't see a singleproblem with that
Try taking a walk away from your gated community to tell the local ghetto of your majestic plan. If you're alive tomorrow, you'll be one of us.

This too. The laws of supply and demand apply to labor, as well. To force a country to accept more uneducated people drives the value of labor down. It isn't fair to the people already here who will get paid less as a result, not to mention it leads people to immigrate solely for economic reasons.

If you want to move to America, you should have our ideals in common. Yes, they are already set. No, our guns and individualistic tendacies aren't going anywhere (hopefully). If you don't hold our founding father's values, don't move here; don't try to change us when we clearly don't want to be changed.

>What power would WTO have over my mega-nation?
Well it depends on the nation you're talking about but this is of in the weeds already. You're saying countries should adopt protectionism just in case other countries stop abiding by their trade agreements and the WTO and have no issue sparking trade wars with other countries. It just doesn't happen, you'd have a point if this was a regular occurrence.

>Protectionism, yes, makes it cheaper to produce everything in your nation than another.
And more expensive for literally everyone else apart from people in the protected industry. US infrastructure would be in greater disrepair if the steel, concrete etc. cost twice as much to procure because it was entirely produced within the countries borders.

ghettos make you realize these people are victims of racism

>this is what mouthbreathers actually believe

But it benefits the nation where they put the money.

>an Indian family

go the fuck home

>there are educated people in america so forcing the lower and middle classes to compete with chink slaves is a good thing.

t. Quai Chang

>Just because it doesn't happen we shouldn't be prepared.
This is dumb as saying people shouldn't use condom because it's rate to get a STD.

>And more expensive for literally everyone else apart from people in the protected industry.
Good, fuck them all to death. I don't give two shits about any other nation but mine. I hope everyone in the world goes extinct but my country. I don't care. Nor anyone should care about me.

You know how some countries have dirt poor farmers who barely make anything but can at least survive in their country due to comparable cost of living? Under globalism, this is now a sanctioned class with a mandatory quota but cost of living is now an average of all 1st and 3rd world economies. Have fun starving to death.

Yes. China is a good example. Benefit is often a funny word in economics, as it usual means loss to the other party.

In this case, American capital was invested in China. China makes out, the investors make out, America and the people dependent on these blue-collar jobs lose.

The demand for food would go up making these farmers more money. But sure buddy that's TOTALLY a bad thing

Right, because the ebil white boy is responsible for nearly all blacks being violent low-IQ thugs in every country they inhabit.

We still need your role in the global market and global politics.

America gets cheap goods in return

Yeah sure the drug war TOTALLY didn't hurt the black community

As the demand for food goes the competition to supply that food goes up. New farmers would enter the market if there was enough demand, negating the gain for individual farmers.

But, yes, the more people in the world who are producing things the better off we all are. Everyone creates a surplus when they produce (the part they don't get paid), and the more people producing a surplus the richer we all are.

an arabian family?

I'm literally saying the opposite of that. US shouldn't have to compete with China's manufacturing, they should focus on the higher skilled professions that they have the education infrastructure to support (as opposed to China which tends to send students overseas to utilise other countries infrastructure at enormous cost) and also tend to pay much better than low-skilled factory work.

Also middle class in US is pretty much entirely skilled work.

>This is dumb as saying people shouldn't use condom because it's rate to get a STD.
The condom is the WTO and trade deals are the birth control pill. There are already measures in place to make sure that countries don't engage in protectionist policy to screw over others you just don't think that what is currently in place is sufficient to protect national interests, you want us engaging in preemptive protectionism (vasectomy I guess).

>I don't give two shits about any other nation but mine
I'm talking about people in your nation. IF you levy tariffs on steel in SA for example the price of steel for everyone in SA will become more expensive. The only people who benefit from this is the SA steel industry as their jobs and profits are protected by the government.

I smell curry.

>middle class in U.S is pretty much entirely skilled work
What do you mean skilled? Because i always though of the middle class as doctors lawyers bankers accountants politicains etc

this has to be the saltiest political cartoon I've seen in a while.

>America gets cheap goods in return

Yes, there's a give-and-take to everything. Point is, blue-collar America was dealt a serious blow.

There's also no saying those factories (created from U.S. investments) won't be converted to munitions factory's should a war break out. This would be outright treason on the Capitalist class's part.

>government overreach on a global scale
>forcing cultures to mesh which simply do not and will not agree with each other

And for what? A cheap, smelly workforce compiled of rapists and terrorists. Blow it out your ass.

Not really it wouldn't be their fault they didn't know a war would break out. And during a war economy the U.S abandoned factories could always be brought back too.

Normally something beyond high school. Most of the listed professions tend to be upper middle class or upper class (depending on the specific person). By middle class I'm referring more to electricians, plumbers, store managers etc. which need some training but not as much as highly skilled doctors, lawyers, bankers.

The mongrel Kissenger, in his book World Order, makes the case for these excessively removed and remote governing organizations as the only way forward for the species. This never made much sense to me. Not because I don't get the argument, sure, it's comforting to a tay-sachs ridden plutocrat to live his life, at any time he may pull from the population an organ or two and if anyone should complain he may say ' oh well look at all this peace and order we bring, we direct the evolution of the human race, blah blah ' Pretty archetypal hubris. Which is the source of my hate.
I don't believe anyone to be intelligent and forthright enough to hold that much power over that many people. Your globalist system suffers problems at scale which cannot be solved. Invariably these systems will become corrupt and people will suffer artificially.
The notion of world order, or empire, or whatever is to mitigate the organic suffering put upon man. This is a fatal mistake. The suffering which entire nations _will_ face _will_ determine the evolution of nations. What you propose, in essence, is unnatural selection. Eugenics.
Global systems will fail. I will make them fail gracefully.

That's actually a good idea since there's really no way to define the pumbers, eletricians, etc.

Oh please, niggers were stupid and violent long before any drug war. You still haven't even accounted for the billion Africans ripping apart their own infrastructures and agricultural equipment and selling it all to the Chinese

The globalists' language implies they hate me. Why would I want to help these people enact their final solution?

>And during a war economy the U.S abandoned factories could always be brought back too.

There are a lot of high-tech machines in Chinese factories paid for by U.S. capitalists. They had none before outsourcing and now they have them.

I find it funny how you believe free flow of capital is a human right. Not only is free love, being able to move anywhere in the world and the right to education human rights, you should also be able to do whatever the fuck you want to do with your money, including selling out the country that you are supposedly a citizen of, unimpeded--unless you are buying drugs, in which case you should be arrested.

That's what globalisation is all about, isn't it? All of these idealistically perfect ideologies--and I admit, a lot of them sound pretty good--and the free flow of capital is the only one that is an actual fact in the world instead of a theory. If capital is a human right, which it isn't, it would be far down the list behind free love, world peace, ending world hunger etc.

The ONLY idealistically perfect ideology that is kept is free flow of capitalism. Quit sucking the Jew cock.

Blacks were actually getting good jobs manufacturing before the 80s.

TICK TOCK WHITE MAN.

If I met you in person I would covertly follow you home and assassinate you

Globalization destroys culture. That's how a melting pot works.

Your ideal world sounds exactly like that movie Idiocracy.