|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on May 20, 2019 13:18:45 GMT
I think it would be good to have a thread devoted to globalism. The political divide in our time seems to be increasingly globalist vs. nationalist rather than liberal vs. conservative, although globalists do tend to be liberals and nationalists do tend to conservative. (Not all conservatives are nationalist, though-- indeed, some conservatives can be ardent globalists. And you do get liberal nationalists, although it seems a bizarre pairing to me.)
No time to really go into it right now, but I'll return to the topic soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on May 20, 2019 14:24:47 GMT
One of the reasons I'm posting this thread is because I've been watching this lecture by the arch-globalist Peter Sutherland, who takes as his lecture title a statement by the Tory politician Geoffrey Howe that European integration is about the "taming of nationalism". youtu.be/TnyNDmRbrEISutherland quotes George Orwell (who I greatly admire but who said some idiotic things) as saying that "a nationalist is essentially someone who thinks that his people are better than others". Peter Sutherland thinks this is "as good a definition of nationalism as you're likely to find." What nationalist would accept this definition? I am a nationalist because I think the world is a better and more interesting place when individual nations are sovereign and distinctive. It's not a question of any nationality being better than any other. They are all worth preserving because they are distinct and irreplaceable. Nobody has any problem accepting this when it comes to animal species or biodiversity, but the preservation of cultural diversity seems to be controversial when it comes to human beings. Peter Sutherland appeals to the Christian tradition, British liberalism, and socialism as three strands of thought which he took from Garrett Fitzgerald, and all of which are based on the idea of "universalism", which he takes to mean common human values. But who would deny there are common human values? One common human value, I would say, is the desire to belong to a particular tradition, a particular national or other community. I don't see any conflict at all between nationalism and universalism. You can believe in our common humanity while also believing national bonds and loyalties are life-enhancing. Sutherland voices the claim, common to Irish globalists, that we somehow "enhance" our sovereignty by membership of the E.U., because we can achieve more. Yes, but only if it's the same thing the E.U. wants to achieve. It's like saying you have more freedom by getting on a train. You might be able to get to a particular destination quicker, but you give up any freedom to chart your own course-- so long as you are on the train. And the E.U. doesn't like people jumping off... |
|
|
|
Post by assisi on May 21, 2019 11:39:25 GMT
I think it would be good to have a thread devoted to globalism. The political divide in our time seems to be increasingly globalist vs. nationalist rather than liberal vs. conservative, although globalists do tend to be liberals and nationalists do tend to conservative. (Not all conservatives are nationalist, though-- indeed, some conservatives can be ardent globalists. And you do get liberal nationalists, although it seems a bizarre pairing to me.) No time to really go into it right now, but I'll return to the topic soon. I think we should recognise that there seem to be 3 strands of globalisation, cultural, economic and political. We already partake of each of the three. Cultural, in that we are exposed to popular culture, literature, Arts and sports from other nations, primarily the U.S.A and GB, and that we often travel to other nations and cultures. Economic, in that we can buy and sell products from all around the world from French wine to Japanese cars. Political in that we are in the E.U. and are influenced by global bodies like the U.N. For the globalists like Sutherland it seems to be an either/or scenario (globalism Yes, nation state No). For me, the best way is a qualified 'and' (Nation state and global interaction) as follows: Political Globalism - No. Except perhaps for security reasons. Cultural Globalism - This is fine but nation states must also promote their own national culture Economic Globalism - This is fine but nation states must also promote their own national products |
|
