Globalization, Globalism, Globalists, and Governance

George Rebane

RR commentaries have defined and used globalism and globalization interchangeably to mean the political and commercial progress toward a one-world government as long proposed by the United Nations and its proponents, and especially by those espousing the UN’s Agenda21 program (q.v.) promulgated by its worldwide network of ICLEIs (more here and here, and see also RR’s ‘Agenda 21’ category of commentaries).

In recent RR comment stream exchanges, a couple of our leftwing readers reminded me, correctly, that most of the public understands ‘globalization’ to refer to the trade and commerce aspect of companies rapidly expanding to do business across national borders.  Moreover, that this same cohort, which includes our commenters, doesn't connect ‘globalization’ with today’s concurrent efforts by the international collectivists to abrogate the Westphalian order of nation-states and unite humanity under a one-world government.  Merriam-Webster defines globalization as “the development of an increasingly integrated global economy marked especially by free trade, free flow of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets.”  Clearly the focus and intent here is in the fields of commerce and not unified governance.

Yet M-W and others define ‘globalism’ as “a national policy of treating the whole world as a proper sphere for political influence”, and “the attitude or policy of placing the interests of the entire world above those of individual nations”. Here we definitely overlap into the area of politics and governance.  And people who are ‘globalists’ are those who share such an “attitude”, now on the track to one-world governance.  This has been the sense in which RR commentaries have interchangeably used ‘globalization’ and ‘globalism’, along with ‘globalist’.

So, in the interest of continuing our tradition of precise definitions (which so vexes the Left), I will henceforth use the following definitions in my commentaries and comments –

Globalization - the development of an increasingly integrated global economy marked especially by businesses and commercial institutions in sovereign nation-states expanding their products and services across national boundaries in conducting free trade, free flow of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets.

Globalism – the ideology that treats the whole world as a unified sphere of political influence, and promotes institutions which place the interests of the entire world above those of individual nations, with the ultimate goal of achieving a one-world government.  A globalist is a person embracing such an ideology.

These definitions will be included in the next edition of RR’s Glossary & Semantics.

Comments

[Don Bessee]

The Longest Day for Trump’s Adversaries
His State of the Union address dramatically advanced his case for re-election in 2020.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-longest-day-for-trumps-adversaries-11549497693

Who’s Afraid of Socialism?
The new Democratic agenda sure looks like government control over the means of production.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/whos-afraid-of-socialism-11549498364

The EU is quietly cheering the dem/socialists here to come back into the global socialist order not to mention the full blown commies in China and Russia who know its the path to their crushing the US.

;-)

[Bill Tozer]

The EU formed as a economic union with the free movement of goods and people as a bloc to compete with the big boys. Then, and slyly, the Lisbon Treaty was pushed through and the EU morphed into a political union which overruled memberr states’ consitutions and even local law, ordinances, and customers in various tiny villages. Thus, Brexit. The EU is now in empire building business.

The very next morning after Brexit, pre-drawn up plans to create an European Army were thrown on the table and discussed. The Brexit dust had not even setttled. Why? For defense? Or to send troops in to keep member states in line. Suppose you live in Italy or France and one day you see EU troops come marching in. Is that for a globization or for globalism? Me thinks the latter, not the former.

The best kept secret of the 2016 race to the White House was Hillary’s support and statements advocating for a North American bloc with the free unrestricted movement of the peoples of North America under a single currency and international law. Me thinks trading blocs are fine...but they just cannot help themselves or of their insatiable lust for more power and control, thus becoming political blocs...at the expense of soveign states.

[George Rebane]

Administrivia - The nom de plume Tricky McClean has bid us adieu. During his stay with us he made regular deliveries of low grade ore, and last night he even ran out of that. But RR is such a draw for his ilk that I'm sure he'll be back as soon as he finds another sack with eyeholes.

[scenes]

Globalization vs. globalism

I think that's a fair distinction to make, although the two tend to blur.

As of late, liberal democracies seem to be attracted to trade agreements that specify behavior in other countries. In a sense, those pieces of paper nudge towards a defacto government.

I suppose that it's like the mission creep of the UN. If nothing else, professional bureaucrats like to expand their domain.

[George Rebane]

scenes 902am - Your point is well taken and on the mark. Indeed, globalization does tend to 'mission creep' toward globalism if the trade and commercial agreements are such that they reach into, limit, and/or dictate prerogatives that nations hold sacrosanct as pillars of their sovereignty. Many Americans argued that the TPPA and NAFTA did exactly that. The Brits voting for Brexit definitely thought that the EU was doing that. (Actually, Brussels has turned out to be a posterchild for reasons not to relinquish sovereignty.)

[Ricky McVeigh]

Looks like the RR “Complexifier Crowd” is still attempting to defend the indefensible. May I suggest a drywall intervention?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVaYKvyZos0

[George Rebane]

A commenter under another post inquired about my applying for e-residency in Estonia. Were I still in business, and not enjoying dual citizenship in the US and in the EU, I would consider it for certain types of businesses. You may want to check it out here.
https://e-resident.gov.ee/

RickyM 751pm - It appears that you're still having trouble understanding some of the dialogue in this comment stream (and on these pages). Can one of us be of any help to you?