Tell someone how the world is becoming more globalized due to a post industrial pacifist ideology

>tell someone how the world is becoming more globalized due to a post industrial pacifist ideology
>get called tinfoil hat

why do people deny this? this philosophy is so fucking blatant and out there.

>it's a faggot doesn't realize globalization has been the aim of every successful civilization in history and that nation states are a modern phenomena episode

Wait what? It's literally the establishment's narrative, why would they deny it?
Did you try to claim it was pushed by reptilians or something?

*tips tinfoil fedora*

>it's a leftie makes shit up episode

>it's a everyone who doesn't agree with me is a lefty episode

>it's an episode

no i said it was an ideology pushed by elites and they pulled out their panic hats

lol

Most people are idiots and don't see further than their basic view on politics and the left/right vision

Tell them they're idiots and in french schools people are even taught about globalisation as an economic phenomenon (although not social)

>the world is becoming more globalized due to a post industrial pacifist ideology

What are you talking about? The United States, a critical and highly proactive player in the push toward 'globalization', hugely increased its military expenditures in the 00s--for obvious fucking reasons--which coincided with a significant contraction of the industrial job market.

And it's not like the past 15-30 years of nearly constant military engagement has vitiated America's bloodlust. The UFC was just purchased by the WWE for $4 billion, and both major political party candidates are openly promising to 'crush ISIS' with basically no one in a prominent power position challenging the judgement of yet another foreign war.

>no i said it was an ideology pushed by elites and they pulled out their panic hats

Probably because that view overlooks the fact that such ideologies also form from the bottom up as well as from the top down. Sure it's easy to say the elites push globalism, but it's the average person that happily eats up its products and makes it profitable.

Nice refutation bro, got any evidence? Do you honestly think globalization wasn't the aim of the Assyrians? The Romans? Persians? Of Alexander? What about the Mongols, they too "leftie" for you? Or how about the British Empire?

Why the fuck do you even come to Veeky Forums if you are going to try to ignore history and jump straight to contemporary political insults?

Globalization is only the beginning.

>empires did things in the best
>therefore we should keep doing those things

so you're a Whig historian

look, i believe that we should grind down the influence of globalism. not to say get rid of it. The world is already pretty fucking unified and i want the cultures, races, philosophies of the world to continue to flourish because i view them as beauties just like the earth itself.

>empires did things in the past*

>implying that is in any way a bad thing

>tfw you remember how people feel for the ISIS meme in 2014
People look like fucking morons now that ISIS is about to lose Mosul

what are you talking about? even the most warhawk of the warhawk dont want war in the middle east. Almost nobody with a brain wanted the iraq war.

you cant critique globalisation without critiquing capitalism

they are both shit

not if you keep free market capitalism inside borders

>Almost nobody with a brain wanted the iraq war.

.........

isn't that what we have now?

Capitalism is the thing that won the Cold War. It rules the world today.

The Green areas are mostly on board, the red areas are being integrated.

Doesn't work.

Someone inside that border is being screwed over unless the state also has a means of redistributing wealth baked into it. Not gifts or welfare, but redistribution as a basic function of the state.

If you don't mind a lot of people inside your border being second-class citizens, then go for it. Modern capitalism avoids this by keeping these people outside your borders.

>the aim of the Assyrians? The Romans? Persians? Of Alexander? What about the Mongols, they too "leftie" for you? Or how about the British Empire?
It wasn't
They wanted to expand their own states (indefinitely so of course, but probably with the knowledge that such a thing can only ever be a dream)
As opposed to entirely removing the concept of states.

>One is a nation that wants to expand its borders
>The other is an international movement to remove borders in general
It's quite different in my opinion

to an extent. lots of out-sourcing and importing legals and illegals alike. in that sense its globalist influenced
it has worked, im not saying the nation state is perfect but im saying i want it more then globalization

>now that ISIS is about to lose Mosul

(Citation needed)

>due to a post industrial pacifist ideology
I fail to see the problem with this.

Expanding your own borders indefinitely is exactly the same as removing borders.

Compare the borders of this to the borders of 18th century Europe.

Just make homelessness banishable B)

but its not

roman empire, nazis, Napoleon, they all wanted to expand, yes. But they wanted to push their ideas and culture aswell. Modern day globalism is concerned with getting rid of said culture for a world that lives under a nihilist type ideology

>People look like fucking morons now that ISIS is about to lose Mosul
Not this year. Still, yeah. the ISIS meme is overplayed, they burned out long ago.

It's just the bourgeoisie realizing it's easier to band together instead of constantly fighting each other like they did in the past via the big nation states. They discard nationalism for globalism and replace the various nationalities with an equally spooky concept, Humanity.

Also, capitalism relies on infinite growth, so it's pretty much given that it would eventually lead to globalism (and war). Trying to keep it within the borders would just lead to countries cannibalizing themselves which would clash pretty hard with any nationalist ideas.