I just want to point out that anybody currently in the United States government who has sworn an oath to the constitution and has signed the required affidavit would be in violation of their oath of office if they advocate the overthrow of our system of government, which includes casual dismissal of our national sovereignty via globalism, and therefor subject to the penalty of removal from office and confinement or a fine.<p>This to me is the crux of the matter. If you attempt to hand wave away national sovereignty via globalism or even as pdog says regional globalization, you effectively are advocating traitorous policy (unless specifically called for via constitutional means of alteration of the constitution), not only that, but if the US was to embrace that method, it would lose legitimacy as a government. I don't buy for a second this hullaballo about inevitable globalism. Yes, we have global markets that all effect each other, that's not disputable, what is disputable is that we should allow that excuse to further undermine basic principles of national sovereignty, or further, to undermine the national sovereignty of other countries via imperialism wrapped in banners of globalism.<p><a href="https://youtu.be/RgcdRCWEt4Q?t=5097" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/RgcdRCWEt4Q?t=5097</a><p>Keep in mind that's a Larouche video, so retain a skeptical view.
We're witnessing history as part of a larger Hegelian dialectic. We're not going back to the isolated nation state (that ship sailed a long time ago). However, it's clear that unfettered globalization will give way to something akin to regional spheres of influence.<p>Thesis: Globalism<p>Antithesis: Nationalism<p>Synthesis: Regional Globalization