The Need For Nationalism
Globalization has increased the need for nationalism, not lessened it.
As more companies and internationalist organizations are becoming integrated in different countries and nations, the nations themselves need tools to oversee these corporates. The nations need to ensure proper accountability rests over these mammoths to guarantee their interests aren’t being subverted in the process of the change to an internationalist world.
We can’t “go back”. The world is interconnected now. In every sense: social, technological, and especially business. We can only move forward.
But the paths forward reside somewhere on a spectrum. On the far left is absolute globalization, where the international corporates and organizations have full control and national institutions are left with none. On the other end of the spectrum is absolute nationalism, where the nations have full control and the internationalists are left with none.
This is the battle dynamic between the globalists and the nationalists. There are few, if any, that desire a return to the traditional lesser trade and minimization of international connection of the past (which would simply remove all forms of international organizations). Because of technology, we’re in the internationalist age. There’s not a feasible way to change that, nor would it be desirable. Any nation that did so would be at a massive disadvantage to the others who utilized it.
But we can change what that means and who holds that power within the new type of internationalism. On the spectrum, if we lean more to the right, the national people have more say. This means that even though international organizations and corporates will still exist, they will exist only at the mercy of the nation. This is the correct way to allow them to exist, because it subjugates an unaccountable power source to an accountable one.
We can’t control the globalists if we favor the globalization approach, because they are the ones with the power—And their power exceeds that of the independent nations they operate in. Usually due to international organizations, trade treaties, a “free” market, and similar types of illusionary curtains.
Granting this level of power to unaccountable actors that care little about the independent nations they operate in is moronic. To assume that they would be benevolent, or act in the interests of the world, is foolish. They never have before. There are no incentives or accountability measures to change their mind this time around.
They play a part of a larger game by getting a few select national people to align with them and subvert the interests of their fellow people. Since they are unaccountable to the nation itself, no pushback can be had. The leaders of the nation have minimal powers to override them, and like I said, most of the time they are bought out by them in the process of globalization.
Most of our own politicians, funded by international corporates, are clear examples of this effect. We can’t control them. Our own leaders are paid off by them. And they control the international organizations that regulate themselves. A recipe for full-speed carousel clown world.
A nationalist nation could correct these glaring issues easily. The nationalist nation would operate within the new internationalist sphere to use it to their advantage, but they would prohibit any foreign corporate or international organization from having unaccountable control. Their involvement within the nation would be contingent upon being beneficial to the national people.
The power cycle changes. Instead of the globalized industries being at the top, directing the independent nations, we see the inverse. The independent nations rule from the top, thereby directing and allowing the international corporations and organizations involvement only so long as they are beneficial to the nation itself.
The globalized world is a utopian dream. It ignores the natural law and biological reality. This world tries to paint us all into the same grey blob of “human,” eliminating our beautiful and enthralling national cultures and histories. It requires that select globalists rest at the top, directing each of these unique regions, with minimal input from the regions themselves. These people then become the directors of culture, health, and worldwide action. It’s the first step in creating a fully united, centralized world—Where such a world can never exist, except perhaps in the end times.
The globalized world can only exist by destroying. They must destroy local cultures and local businesses to succeed. The nationalist world is the opposite. It demands regional creation and exploration. One builds and protects, the other destroys and degrades. Nationalism does not put down other nations, but allows each nation to build themselves up as they see fit.
It’s not conquest or imperialism. Which, ironically enough, globalization is. Globalization requires an economic imperialist conquest by the internationalists. They have to claw themselves in to each and every nation and subvert it to further their own desires. Nationalism stays within its own borders, whereas globalism must expand. This is why globalization is just a new name for the same old worldwide conquests that have always been happening. Except, instead of through military force, it’s through cultural and economic force. This force is just as damaging, and perhaps even more damaging, if we consider it from a cultural-spiritual lens.
Nationalism is heavily needed, even though it has become a “bad” word to most here in the West.
It’s even more needed in our new internationalist world, due to the new playground that has been created for those that seek worldwide domination.
If you enjoyed this article, give us a bookmark and check back often for new content. New articles every weekday.
Help us fight the censorship – Share this article!
Finally, please consider supporting my work. Every donation is immensely helpful to keep us growing.