Globalisation is essentially an ideology where special interests (elites) profit at the expense of the great majority of citizens. As we might expect, globalisation is popular among the elite classes who benefit from it. Some might characterise these as the readers of New York Times, Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal.
David Brooks wrote an enlightening essay on the subject of globalisation. It is listed as “Karl’s New Manifesto“. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/opinion/29brooks.html I’ll class this as essential reading. I give you this characteristic quote:
“They congregate in exclusive communities walled in by the invisible fence of real estate prices, then congratulate themselves for sending their children to public schools. They parade their enlightened racial attitudes by supporting immigration policies that guarantee inexpensive lawn care.”“Karl’s New Manifesto” (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/opinion/29brooks.html
A longer form is:
The educated elites are the first elites in all of history to work longer hours per year than the exploited masses, so voracious is their greed for second homes. They congregate in exclusive communities walled in by the invisible fence of real estate prices, then congratulate themselves for sending their children to public schools. They parade their enlightened racial attitudes by supporting immigration policies that guarantee inexpensive lawn care. They send their children off to Penn, Wisconsin and Berkeley, bastions of privilege for the children of the professional class, where they are given the social and other skills to extend class hegemony.
The information society is the only society in which false consciousness is at the top. For it is an iron rule of any university that the higher the tuition and more exclusive the admissions, the more loudly the denizens profess their solidarity with the oppressed. The more they objectively serve the right, the more they articulate the views of the left.
Each few years, an election is held where the oppressed class votes for which person from the ‘oppressor class’ is going to oppress them for the next few years. The two main politicians argue harshly on every topic but the source of their money and power. Both support the ‘debt banking system’ and every war advertised by their chums in the corporate propaganda machine masquerading as ‘News’. The divide into parties to give the illusion of choice. At the election, we vote out a party that caused problems and replace it with a party that we voted out for incompetence some eight years ago. The only ones that rise to the top of these parties are the ‘educated’ elites that have the backing of the monied elites.
What is significant is that both branches of the ‘educated class’ have presided over the decimation of the working class. For half my life, we have watched schools turn into failed institutions under their watch. In the words of David Brooks: “They have imposed a public morality that affords maximum sexual opportunity for themselves and guarantees maximum domestic chaos for those lower down.”
The music industry run by ‘those we may not criticise’ churns out rap music with the common chorus: “Get on your knees, bitch and suck my dick.” Just search: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rap+lyrics+Get+on+your+knees%2C+bitch+and+suck+my+dick&t=hk&ia=web
The pornography industry run by ‘those we may not criticise’ has the same theme: https://www.bing.com/search?q=porn+on+your+knees+bitch+and+suck+my+dick What is bizarre, is that the ‘educated class’ forming the worker bees for the ‘political class’ allow this with no protection. Anybody anywhere can access this destructive anti-woman (abuse of girls) at absolutely no cost in complete video bites plenty long enough for any young male to make a damp patch in his undies.
Our family structures have dramatically change under the watch of the ‘Corporate funding of the educated elite forming the political class’. In the late fifties, rich and poor had similar family structures mostly with mom, pop, and the children. In 1960, Children were mostly born under wedlock and three-quarters of poor families contained a mother and a father. Now only a third have the luxury of a mother and father under one roof. The percentage of single-parenting have changed little for the educated elite. But family structures have been decimated for the oppressed masses.
- Blazing Arrow sings “Leave your city burnin…”
- Lil Wayne can choose rhyming words: “Suck my dick with red lipstick”
- Neden Game:
“I’m steady staring at your sister, I’ll tell you this / For only 13, she got some big tits”
- The Murderers sing:
“Y’all know who the fck this is You know we would kidnap yo kids You know what the fck we do
Murder bitch niggas like you
For real, all the time, any place, anywhere
Daddy never showed me how the heat will hold me down
So now I rob and steal, spit shit you feel, wit a clique that kills
Yea my shit’s that real, I hustle hard all my life
Ran the streets all night
I rob and stomp niggas 2/3rd of my life
The other 1/3 spent sittin’ on curbs chasin’ those birds”
- Lil’ Somthin’ sings:
“Even if ya don’t fuck on the first date, just put my nutz in ya mouth
Bitch couldn’t be a day over 15.
So I threw her in the buck like that.
I hit it so quick I made her butt cheeks clap. (haha)
Why wait around till she gets married, cause I’m ready as long as the den’s hairy.
Everybody in the hood says that your easy”
The poor children are significantly less likely to live with both parents. The result is commonly failed graduation from high school, lower grade jobs. This leave them with little chance of rising to challenge those with political muscle backed by globalist money from usury.
A formal definiton of ‘globalist’ runs along the lines of:
An ideology based on the belief that people, goods and information ought to be able to cross national borders unfettered.
globalism(Noun) A socio-economic system dedicated to free trade and free access to markets.https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/globalist
But that is a formal definition. In real terms it means that there is a power grab by those that have weezled their way into international organisations particularly those that operate outside of any national scrutiny. International organisations that are ‘a law unto themselves’.
Love him or hate him President Trump gave an informal definition:
America is winning again. America is respected again because we are putting America first. We’re putting America first. It hasn’t happened in a lot of decades. We’re putting them first. We’re taking care of ourselves for a change folks… But radical Democrats want to turn back the clock… for the rule of corrupt, power-hungry, globalists. You know what a globalist is? You know what a globalist is? A globalist is a person that wants the globe to do well, frankly, not caring about our country so much.
And you know what, we can’t have that. You know they have a word. It sort of became old-fashioned. It’s called a nationalist, and I say really, we’re not supposed to use that word. You know what I am? I’m a nationalist, okay? I’m a nationalist. Nationalist. Nothing wrong. Use that word. Use that word.Donald Trump at a Houston rally 2018-10-22
The crowd responded with an enthusiastic chant of “USA, USA, USA, USA, USA, USA.”
There is more to it than the balance of trade between nations. It has much to do with who controls the situation. Do nations make their laws or do supra-national organisations operating outside and above any democratic institution make our laws?
The term has become a disparaging term. It was even considered an anti-Semitic slur for reasons you might guess, but from which we are self-censoring. Anti-Defamation League’s Jonathan Greenblatt put it, “Where the term originates from is a reference to Jewish people who are seen as having allegiances not to their countries of origin like the United States, but to some global conspiracy.” The were seen as having allegiances to other than their nation of residence.
Ernst Jäckh, a staunchly anti-Nazi academic who taught at Columbia University after fleeing Germany in the 1930s, published a book on the battle against “Hitlerism” titled The War for Man’s Soul. Jäckh used “globalism” to describe Hitler’s world-conquering ambitions:
Hitler … reaches out for the sun itself. He has set out to conquer the world to make the globe a German possession! He aims at more than military or economic and political conquest. He has embarked on a “holy war” as the God-sent leader of a “chosen people” bred not for imperialism but for globalism—his world without end.
“Globalist” is often understood as code for “Jews”. So heavy Jewish participation is covered up by screams “anti-Semitism” because it upset Jews. The sentiment became louder after a bomb attack at the home of George Soros, a prominent Jewish philanthropist who is often slammed with the “globalist” label. Much of Soros’ recent’ work promotes the idea of an “open society”. The concept of ‘open societies’ describes itself as a society open to ideas, people, and markets. In reality, it means unfettered migration of incompatible cultures into Western Nations and rampant exploitation of nations by corporations. Let us study a clash of claims. Media run by ‘globalists’ claims that ‘alt-right’ white nationalist movement uses the term interchangeably with “Jewish” to promote the belief that Jews put greed and tribe ahead of country. Yet the claimants, the globalists, coined the phrases ‘alt-right’ and ‘white nationalist’ as slurs against Christians, whites, and anti-globalists. It is nothing but a battle of the slurs. Globalists effectively claim that to back one’s own race and nation is anti-Jew. It is all a bit mixed up because Semitic peoples are from the middle east and include the Palestinians and all the other tribes of the middle east. We should never use the term anti-Semitic. There is no opposite in common use, such as anti-white or anti-Christian or anti-Caucasian or anti-European. Those claiming anti-Semitism tend to have Khazarian origin. Those yelling: “anti-Semitism” class negative comments as: “Conspiracy Theories” whilst claiming ‘conspiracy theorists’ such as David Duke and Alex Jones’ portray George Soros and a fantastical Jewish conspiracy designed to destroy “white” or “Western” society by flooding it with third-world hordes – all the better to strengthen their control of banks, businesses and, of course, the media. Those yelling: “anti-Semitism” tend to profit from usury and use the gains to control politics (for good?), hold the shares of corporations(for good?), and run supra-national organisations (for the benefit of whom?). The benefits have certainly not flowed to the people in the streets.
This David Duke, that these globalists decry, runs the website ‘The Daily Stormer’ which is clearly stands against Jewish-supremacism. In the eyes of the globalists, the word globalist on the site is used as a euphemism for “globalist Jews.” If so, what is the problem? Are the globalists thus stating that they are in fact ‘Jewish’. I find no sentence by David Duke stating that ‘globalist’ stands for ‘globalist Jews’. Yet jewish organisations demonise Duke claiming that it is against Jewish interests for Duke to use the term ‘globalist’ because they believe it to mean ‘globalist Jews’ even though he never uses the paired words: ‘globalist Jews’. So Jewish-supremism is not to be criticised. Black-supremism is advertised and promoted. But you must be completely against anything the could be conceived as being white-supremism.
The most lied about man in history, Hitler described Jews as “international elements” that “conduct their business everywhere,” thus harming and undermining good people who are “bound to their soil, to the Fatherland.” The first speech that Hitler broadcast live on all German radio stations took place only nine months after his take-over as Chancellor of the German Reich:
‘The struggle between the people and the hatred amongst them is being nurtured by very specific interested parties. It is a small, rootless, international clique that is turning the people against each other, that does not want them to have peace … It is the people who are at home both nowhere and everywhere, who do not have anywhere a soil on which they have grown up, but who live in Berlin today, in Brussels tomorrow, Paris the day after that, and then again in Prague or Vienna or London, and who feel at home everywhere. [Man in audience shouts ‘The Jews!’] They are the only ones who can be addressed as international, because they conduct their business everywhere, but the people cannot follow them.’
The term globalist to some is comparable to the triple parentheses used to flag Jewish names by ‘anti-Semites’ as in (((globalist))). What they are trying to hint is that it will be the downfall of Western Civilisation as we know it.
Aryeh Tuchman, associate director of the Jewish financed ADL’s ‘Center on Extremism’, was quoted as arguing that Trump’s use of the term ‘globalist’ “emboldened” white supremacists and anti-Semites. He told the Washington Post that things have reached a point where the word should be off-limits if the person is Jewish. “To use that word about a Jewish person is just really problematic. It’s a really unfortunate choice of words,” he said. So a Jew can use the word ‘globalist’ but a Christian cannot utter the word ‘globalist’. So how does 2% of the population manage to prevent 98% of the population using the word ‘globalist’ because the 2% assume that the 98% might think that ‘globalist’ is full of Jewish people working to the detriment of the 98%? Which begs the question: “How Jewish are those called globaists?” If they are primarily Jewish, we have a dangerous situation for the 98%. So Jewish hatred for Hitler is because Hitler talked about Jewish influence.
TED did a biassed propaganda on the topic:
So, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari argued: “The old 20th-century political model of left versus right is now largely irrelevant.” With the implication we should embrace (Jewish) globalism.
Ann Coulter got into a heavy Tweetstorm at ‘globalist’ whilst playing the game on whether globalists were Jewish in nature.
Coulter tweeted the statements after posting a the headline of a Huffington Post article calling “globalist” an “anti-Semitic term.”
Coulter’s string of tweets racked up thousands of likes. Coulter’s comments also found appreciation from neo-Nazis, people on far right forums like 4Chan and on Gab.ai, a micro-blogging service that does not censor hate speech. So who invented the slur ‘neo-Nazi’? Does someone label themselves as “alt-right”? I proffer that a group wishing to counter the group’s views would label them. I don’t see the ‘alt-right’ dominating the IMF, the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, or the World Bank. The ‘alt-right’ does not demand a nation for its exclusive use. The alt-right does not demand that alt-right only marry alt-right. The alt-right does not shoot Palestinians.
And what si wrong with questioning the ethnic and racial makeup of this supposed elusive group called: “globalists”. I would question my council if it was entirely made up of Protestants, even though I assume that I was baptised Protestant, mainly because it was the closest ‘Christian’ Church.
The old testament states:
“You shall rule over many nations but no nations shall rule over you.”
“You may not lend money and expect more in return from thine brethren.” Brethren, here, meaning ‘people in your community, group or tribe.
“But you may lend money and expect more in return.
It also says:
“These lands that I give you, you shall kill the inhabitants therin. Ths inculdes the Canaanites, the …”
The Christians were required to reject the ‘old ways’ and follow a new contract with God through Jesus. Jewish people still revere Moses. So, in black and white, they have godly authority to deceive and decimate us as Christians.