General, Globalism vs. Nationalism, Nationalist Theory, Politics

Globalism vs. Nationalism

In every wise struggle for human betterment, one of the main objects, and often the only object, has been to achieve in large measure equality of opportunity. In the struggle for this great end, nations arise from barbarism to civilization, and through it people press forward from one stage of enlightenment to the next. One of the chief factors in progress is the destruction of special privilege.

Theodore Roosevelt, The New Nationalism

Politics has been most simply described as a contest between the “ins” and the “outs”. Those who are “in” eventually succumb to Lord Acton’s proverb that power corrupts. The “outs” then try to hold them accountable, while the “ins” desperately try to justify and preserve the privileges of their power. Monarchies tried to claim a “divine right” to their power and nineteenth century robber barons adopted the theory of social Darwinism to justify the inequality of the Gilded Age.  This quotation from Theodore Roosevelt’s New Nationalism emphasizes the importance, indeed the inevitability, of the defeat of such excuses for power and the outdated assumptions that underlie them. 

Globalism has become the latest ideological excuse used by international elites to preserve their privileges in today’s world.  This philosophy believes economic and foreign policy should be made on a global basis without regard to any particular nation’s needs or interests. Politicians thus have a duty to improve the lives of every person on earth equally regardless of national boundaries. Peace will occur when there is worldwide homogeneity in economic, political and cultural conditions and practices.  

In theory, these goals are laudable and its attraction has deep roots in Western civilization and history (see my series on “Nationalist Foreign Policy – A History” under the Foreign Policy tab above). It becomes particularly attractive during waves of economic globalization.  Here is where we need to clearly distinguish globalism from globalization. Globalization is a socioeconomic phenomenon involving a significant increase in trade and cultural knowledge across national borders. When Marco Polo arrived in Chinese Emperor Kublai Khan’s court in 1275 AD, he was part of such a wave of globalization made possible by stable and safe trade routes through Central Asia from Europe to Asia.  The history of this process has been brilliantly told in Prof.  Peter Frankopan’s book” The Silk Roads”, which describes how periods of global trade and cultural contact changed the world from ancient to modern times. However, these waves would prove to be temporary. Globalization could not survive a nation’s love of its own culture and desire for independence.

This latest wave of globalization began in the 1960’s with the Kennedy Round of tariff reductions, continued during the latter part of the Cold War and then took off after it ended. A new international elite whose disproportionate privileges arose from the benefits of this wave then proclaimed a “New World Order” dedicated to spreading their interpretation of democracy and free enterprise throughout the world. This became the basis of modern globalism and achieved a bipartisan consensus in American politics. 

Meanwhile, American elections continued to be fought over the increasingly vacuous divide between big vs. small government.  The debate over the domestic and international costs of the new order were incorporated into this old debate. Four ideologies, each with their own goal or god, emerged: 

  • Corporate globalism and the god of efficiency 
  • Socialist globalism and the god of equality
  • Ethnic nationalism and the gods of blood and soil 
  • Progressive nationalism and the goal of community

In the perfect world, each of these ideologies would be represented by four different political parties.  The real world of our two-party system requires American voters to research each candidate individually and determine which of these ideologies best matches the candidate’s philosophy and positions.  As we approach the 2024 election, the American people need to become familiar with the basic premises underlying each of these new ideologies, the political philosophy behind them and their current leaders.  My next four posts will undertake that task, starting with a survey of the tenets of corporate globalism. 

2024 Election, General, Nationalist Theory, Politics

We all must be in the Arena

The nation is relieved that former President Trump survived yesterday’s assassination attempt. However, an audience member was killed in the attempt and another injured. They and their families should be in our thoughts and prayers. The photo of Trump defiantly raising his fist before the flag recalls Theodore Roosevelt’s defiance of the attempt on his life during his 1912 presidential campaign, famously declaring that “It takes more than that to kill a bull moose”.

I lead, however, not with that quote, but with Roosevelt’s equally famous “Man in the Arena” speech, where he calls all Americans to embrace the risks of action and the kind of “dust and sweat and blood” that Trump defied. This call does not necessarily mean a call to enter politics ourselves, but to the kind of courage that those who fight for our country here or overseas live daily.  This injuries and deaths at the Trump rally now call us to a new fight for our political life here at home.

Over the past few years, our political debate has coarsened and polarized to the point where violent rhetoric has become shamefully common. Only last week President Biden promised to put his opponent Trump “in the crosshairs”.  A poll in the New York Times revealed that 10% of respondents believed violence was justified against Trump and a similar percentage believed the same about President Biden. The rest of us have seen all of this and either shrugged our shoulders or remained silent out of fear.

We can no longer be among the “cold and timid” who assume this is someone else’s problem. It is time to summon the courage to confront calls to hatred and violence in the political arena and ostracize those who engage in them.  Media outlets that feature or promote them must be shunned and boycotted. Finally, each of us must have the courage to confront friends and acquaintances who engage in such hateful rhetoric and ostracize them as well.  If necessary, we should not hesitate to report them to law enforcement if they pose an imminent threat.  Otherwise, the hatred will not only worsen, but we will also then be complicit in what happens afterwards.

Domestic Policy, General, Nationalist Theory, Political Reform, Politics, The Crisis of the American Spirit, Uncategorized

The Crisis of the American Spirit – Introduction

America has faced and conquered crises over its history that have destroyed lesser nations. The common cause of these crises was the concentration of power in an elite whose outsized privileges threatened our democracy.  Whether it was British colonialism or the “Slave Power” of southern aristocracy, the key to its durability has been our confidence in the morality of our fundamental ideals and commitment to spreading opportunity to all Americans. This commitment never was implemented in a straight line and many Americans were left out for too long, but we always had the confidence that we would eventually prevail.

The US now stands at another hinge in its history more threatening than any foreign adversary. At a time when autocratic powers like China and Russia are confident to the point of recklessness, the American people are mired in doubt and anger about the future of the nation. You see it in statistics like the decline in the percentage of Americans who are proud of their country or the two-thirds of Americans who say the country is on the wrong track.  Statistics, however, cannot truly convey many American’s deep and boiling anger. It shows in songs like Oliver Anthony’s “Rich Men North of Richmond” or hip-hop protest songs about “DemoCrips and ReBloodlicans”.  These anthems come from dramatically different sources but express the same sense of betrayal.  They cry out against a hypocritical government and economy preaches opportunity but makes it impossible to achieve.

Theodore Roosevelt never forgot that he became President because of an anarchist’s bullet during a similar period of economic inequality and protest. Criticized as a radical because of his progressive ideals, he always insisted that they were intended to preserve the legitimacy of American free enterprise against more radical and dangerous policies.  TR knew that America could not be strong unless the American people were strong, and Americans could only be strong if they saw a better future for their children.  If we are to survive as a beacon of democracy, we must have courage to confront and conquer the current crisis in the American spirit.  We start by looking back and determining how we lost our sense of American community and shared commitment.

Next – The Confrontation with the Concept of limits