View Full Version : The Economist claims the election is nationalism v. globalism
Peter1469
07-29-2016, 06:00 AM
The Economist claims the election is nationalism v. globalism (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21702750-farewell-left-versus-right-contest-matters-now-open-against-closed-new?cid1=cust/ednew/n/bl/n/20160728n/owned/n/n/nwl/n/n/n/n)
I have been saying this for a while. But here is it again from the Economist- note that they are the publication of record for the EU.
AS POLITICAL theatre, America’s party conventions have no parallel. Activists from right and left converge to choose their nominees and celebrate conservatism (Republicans) and progressivism (Democrats). But this year was different, and not just because Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major party. The conventions highlighted a new political faultline: not between left and right, but between open and closed (see article (http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21702748-new-divide-rich-countries-not-between-left-and-right-between-open-and)). Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, summed up one side of this divide with his usual pithiness. “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo,” he declared. His anti-trade tirades were echoed by the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party.
America is not alone. Across Europe, the politicians with momentum are those who argue that the world is a nasty, threatening place, and that wise nations should build walls to keep it out. Such arguments have helped elect an ultranationalist government in Hungary and a Polish one that offers a Trumpian mix of xenophobia and disregard for constitutional norms. Populist, authoritarian European parties of the right or left now enjoy nearly twice as much support as they did in 2000, and are in government or in a ruling coalition in nine countries. So far, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union has been the anti-globalists’ biggest prize: the vote in June to abandon the world’s most successful free-trade club was won by cynically pandering to voters’ insular instincts, splitting mainstream parties down the middle.
News that strengthens the anti-globalisers’ appeal comes almost daily. On July 26th two men claiming allegiance to Islamic State slit the throat of an 85-year-old Catholic priest in a church near Rouen. It was the latest in a string of terrorist atrocities in France and Germany. The danger is that a rising sense of insecurity will lead to more electoral victories for closed-world types. This is the gravest risk to the free world since communism. Nothing matters more than countering it.
http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-width/images/print-edition/20160730_LDD001_0.jpg
stjames1_53
07-29-2016, 06:15 AM
The Economist claims the election is nationalism v. globalism (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21702750-farewell-left-versus-right-contest-matters-now-open-against-closed-new?cid1=cust/ednew/n/bl/n/20160728n/owned/n/n/nwl/n/n/n/n)
I have been saying this for a while. But here is it again from the Economist- note that they are the publication of record for the EU.
http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-width/images/print-edition/20160730_LDD001_0.jpg
I have been saying this for a while. But here is it again from the Economist- note that they are the publication of record for the EU.
............lol...........Merkel's Brownshirts
Common
07-29-2016, 06:17 AM
Globalism has murdered the entire middleclass in this country. It has robbed those on the lower socio economic to have something to go up to to better their lives. Its been a windfall for the rich who outsourced all manufacturing elsewhere and pay no taxs here.
Its got to be pulled back
Chris
07-29-2016, 06:37 AM
One could also try to cast it as individualism vs collectivism but Trump is an authoritarian so nationalism vs globalism probably fits better. Sanders was a nationalist and lost to Clinton--does that predict where America wants to go?
Peter1469
07-29-2016, 06:39 AM
No this election has nothing to do with individualism. I predict we won't ever see one that is.
After the eventual debt crash that will be the default position.
zelmo1234
07-29-2016, 06:42 AM
One could also try to cast it as individualism vs collectivism but Trump is an authoritarian so nationalism vs globalism probably fits better. Sanders was a nationalist and lost to Clinton--does that predict where America wants to go?
America is usually behind Europe by a few years. So I still give Hillary a 6 in 10 chance of winning the election. That being Said it is very close.
When you think about it, is a fair primary election without super delegates, Bernie is the Nominee. So Yes Hillary beat Bernie, but they had to rig the system for that to happen.
Common
07-29-2016, 06:45 AM
One could also try to cast it as individualism vs collectivism but Trump is an authoritarian so nationalism vs globalism probably fits better. Sanders was a nationalist and lost to Clinton--does that predict where America wants to go?
That predicts where liberals want to go, not america
Chris
07-29-2016, 06:54 AM
That predicts where liberals want to go, not america
Agree but I listen to Clinton and she makes all these promises to give everyone what they want and it makes me wonder watching all her followers. And Trump's no different telling people he will fix everything.
Chris
07-29-2016, 06:55 AM
America is usually behind Europe by a few years. So I still give Hillary a 6 in 10 chance of winning the election. That being Said it is very close.
When you think about it, is a fair primary election without super delegates, Bernie is the Nominee. So Yes Hillary beat Bernie, but they had to rig the system for that to happen.
Following Europe is a good predictor.
The system is rigged. Electing new managers of a rigged system won't solve anything.
waltky
11-24-2016, 03:10 AM
Can it happen again?...
http://www.politicalforum.com/images/smilies/confused.gif
Historians ask if 1930s nationalism is returning
Thu, Nov 24, 2016 - In the 1935 novel It Can’t Happen Here, an ignorant US demagogue called Buzz Windrip becomes president, promising to make a depressed and fearful country proud, rich and safe again.
Eight decades later, the satirical piece of fiction by Sinclair Lewis has gained a new lease of life, becoming a bestseller online following US president-elect Donald Trump’s victory at the polls. Observing Windrip at a presidential campaign event, a journalist describes him as “almost illiterate, a public liar easily detected, and in his ‘ideas’ almost idiotic.” Written as virulent nationalism spread disastrously in Europe, and to a lesser extent in the US, the book’s revival reflects a surge of interest in one of the 20th century’s darkest decades. The parallels between the current time and what one writer describes as the “Morbid Age” of the 1930s has led to a fierce debate between historians about how far the comparison can be taken. “We are facing a cataclysmic moment,” renowned British writer Simon Schama said following Trump’s election, recalling that Adolf Hitler came to power via the ballot box in the 1930s.
Antony Beevor, another best-selling heavyweight on European history, rebuked him. “It is too easy for alarmists to fall for the temptation of lazy historical parallels,” he wrote. So, as the return of ultra-nationalism, xenophobia and anti-elitism spur Trump, anti-EU voters in Britain and a host of far-right parties in Europe, does history offer comfort or cause for concern? Some historians point to several striking parallels. The Great Depression of the 1930s, sparked by the Wall Street crash of 1929, has echoes of the global financial crisis caused by the sub-prime crash of 2008. Seething with anger at the financial and political elite, struggling or unemployed workers in the 1930s grew bitter and despondent and openly questioned the future for their children.
Many blamed foreigners or Jews, became attached to an idealized past, and worried about the spread of their enemies, abroad and at home. In the 1930s, the threat was communism, now it is radical Islam. Governments reacted by trying to protect their economies with tariffs and barriers, sparking an international trade war. On the other side of the world, a nationalistic Asian power with territorial ambitions added to concerns. It was Japan, which invaded the present-day Asian hegemon China in 1931. In Austria, where the far-right came within 31,000 votes of winning a presidential election in May and could still win in next month’s re-run, a far-right chancellor came to power in 1932 and destroyed the country’s democracy.
As fascism spread, the decade was defined by Germany looking to avenge its humiliation after World War I. Could President Vladimir Putin’s Russia, pained by the decline of the Soviet Union, be the modern equivalent? Ian Kershaw, a world authority on the rise of Hitler, admitted to reporters that during his research for a new book on Europe from 1914 to 1949 some similarities “make the hair stand up on the back on your neck.” “But I don’t think we are returning to the dark ages of the 1930s because there are big differences as well as superficial similarities,” Kershaw said. Chief among the differences is the role of Germany, now a beacon for liberal democracy, committed to peace and a lynchpin of the stabilizing force that is the EU, Kershaw said.
MORE (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2016/11/24/2003659915)
Peter1469
11-24-2016, 03:21 AM
I don't think so. I have said this election was nationalism v. globalism for well over a year. I have cited to numerous articles from good sources. Not the Huffpos or the Infowars. More like Foreign Affairs and the Economist (the paper of record for the EU).
I and these sources are using nationalism in the sense of the nation-state system created in 1648 at the Treaty (or Peace) of Westphalia. There is nothing racist about it. It is not the fascism that we saw in post WWI Europe. And it isn't the neo-fascism that we see today.
It is simply a belief that the nation-state is the cornerstone of the international order- not global institutions. And for good or bad the migrant crisis in Europe has reawakened a sense of nationalism.
Brexit then the US elections. Next watch to see what happens in France and Germany- their elections are in 2017. There are other national elections in Europe, but those are the major ones.
Can it happen again?...
http://www.politicalforum.com/images/smilies/confused.gif
Historians ask if 1930s nationalism is returning
Thu, Nov 24, 2016 - In the 1935 novel It Can’t Happen Here, an ignorant US demagogue called Buzz Windrip becomes president, promising to make a depressed and fearful country proud, rich and safe again.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.