The new political dichotomy? Globalism vs Patriotism

Actually read Trump’s speech to the UN yesterday:


He says:
"We reject the ideology of globalism and accept the doctrine of patriotism.”
Is this what the midterms are about? Is voting for Republicans a vote for “patriotism”? Is voting for Democrats a vote for “globalism”? The old distinction was “conservative” versus “liberal”, and those taking the “globalist” side appear to me to have no substantive arguments for globalism. Instead they are going all in on the legacy notion that “conservative”=“bigoted”. But it seems to me to not even be about conservative vs. liberal. (And in fact, if Trump could have won running as a third party candidate, then I think he would/should have).

I guess I reject the idea that globalism and patriotism are mutually exclusive, or at least Trump’s vision of what those words mean.

One can be in favor of having multi-lateral trade agreements, cooperating with our military & economic allies, allowing immigrants into the nation, and still be patriotic. Not everything that’s multi-national is bad or wrong or unpatriotic. And rejecting treaties, rejecting alliances, rejecting immigration doesn’t make one a patriot.

What, exactly, is globalism in your view? If it’s free trade, that has been a boon to the economy, both in the US and the world. If it’s something else, you’ll have to explain so people know what they’re supposed to defend.

If “instead of trying to work together, every nation should think selfishly” is the model of “patriotism” we’re going for, I’m waiting to hear a compelling argument for it.

How do you expect to solve global problems if you discourage and fight against frameworks designed to bring nations together?

Trump wants to simplify the message by treating everything as zero-sum games. If something makes liberals mad, it must be good for conservatives. if Germany or China hates something, it must be good for the US.

You don’t need to solve global problems if you don’t acknowledge the fact that they are global problems. Instead treat it as a problem for the US. (Or not a problem at all - like global warming.)

Do you have any evidence at all that this is what the midterms are about? Can you point to campaign videos or materials that say “Vote for me, I’m a globalist” or “Vote for me, I’m a patriot”?

As far as I can tell, the midterms are about whether the tax cuts helped or didn’t help the middle class, healthcare (specifically, whether pre-existing conditions will be protected or not), how great (or maybe not for wages) the economy is. The only campaign ads I see are for NJ Senate, where the topic is just how corrupt the Democrat is and just how many evil pharmaceuticals the Republican worked for. Nothing about patriots vs jets, uh, globalists.

Please provide a cite that this is what the midterms are about before this discussion goes any further. Thanks in advance.

I would argue that it is impossible for a vote for a Republican to be a patriotic choice, when that is the party intent on preventing the investigation in Russian interference in our elections. As you well know, comrade, there is ample evidence that the Putin has attacked the US, not just through election meddling, but with actual troops in Syria and that the GOP has prevented investigating and responding to these attacks. Further, the GOP’s insistence on abandoning the rule of law, allies and core values in the pursuit of white nationalism and kleptocracy ensure that it is not possible to be a patriot and a Republican.

I heard the speech (well, most of it). It reminded me of previous speeches Trump has given. Basically, he said, “As an American, I only care about America. You other countries should only care about yourselves. This mutual interest stuff is a bad bargain for the U.S.”

It reflects his idiocy and unwillingness or inability to recognize complex arrangements. As noted above, he thinks every deal is zero sum, so he can’t understand, for example, how spending money to keep troops on a foreign military base provides the U.S. with a global reach; to him, it’s just charity. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” appears lost on him. Trilateral diplomacy? Forget it.

Trump’s brand of patriotism is nationalist nonsense. Sure, it matters to the midterms. But that’s because the real issue in the midterms is Trump’s boorish behavior and juvenile view of the world. One where real patriots can’t possibly imagine how the U.S. may benefit from being a leader on the world stage.

Forgot to mention that Trump’s speech mimics the themes of a lot of Putin’s puppets. Igor Dodon of Moldova is also a critic of globalism, the EU and NATO, dontcha know. All of these tin-pot wannabe authoritarians read from the same script from Vlad like some telemarketer in a dingy St. Petersburg basement that reeks of cabbage and failed dreams.

Who are we kidding here? To Trump’s base, “Globalism” is a shibboleth, the (far) Right people know what it means (Spoiler alert: It means ZOG).

Trump’s speech laid out the “vote for my party, I’m anti-globalist” argument (I prefer the term anti-globalist). I haven’t seen any campaign ads. I have noticed a constant bombardment of the theme Trump and Republicans are bigoted in mainstream media. And I don’t believe they are. I’ve never seen an argument for something globalist, like say NAFTA.

No, it isn’t. This is just the last resort argument: “I can’t point to anything bigoted in what Trump said, so I am going to assert he is speaking in code. And under that fantasized decoding, he said something bigoted.”

The obvious theme of the mid-terms is whether we are going to be able to take back the House and maybe even the senate and a) finally establish some oversight of this corrupt administration; b) push back the wave of white nationalism that is engulfing the country; and c) begin the process of identifying how and to what extent the Russian government undermined our democracy so that we can push back against that grubby little failed empire and re-establish the political institutions that have ensured peace and prosperity since the end of WWII.

To argue that a speech that resulted in UN members literally laughing in the face of Trump is somehow the cornerstone of a political movement is either delusional, or intentionally disingenuous.

I hope for leaders who are smart enough to formulate policies that are good for America and the rest of the world.

I see it as “globalism” versus “nationalism”. Trump, being the master manipulator that he is, has cleverly couched it in terms that imply that one is unpatriotic if one puts the good of the entire planet first.

People who are still living in the 1950s haven’t figured out that putting the good of the entire planet first is what is really most beneficial to America in the final analysis.

“Globalism” is code for Them Jews. Hasn’t always been the case, but today it 100% is. Non-antisemites talk about globalization, or international X and so on.

So, he gave a speech to other countries about why they should be voting for his party? Or, are you arguing that his speech was not at all directed at those in the room?

What (besides his doom and gloom description of the world’s economic order) did you find convincing in the argument?

Or do you simply agree with Trump that the U.S. has been exploited and taken advantage of by the rest of the world, and we are left worse off because of it? If so, can you support it with some verifiable evidence, or is Trump’s word all you need?

Are you suggesting that there aren’t arguments to be made, or that you just haven’t seen them? NAFTA is generally regarded as a net positive. See here, for example.

There’s a late Isaac Asimov story…and Asimov wasn’t the first person to express it, but it has the lines:

a) What has the administration done that is corrupt?
b) White nationalism is not engulfing the country. The mainstream media is trying hard to deceive you into thinking that though, because the establishment does not like Trump, and wants you to vote the Democrats in so he will be impeached.
c) I think the investigation into Russian collusion has turned up nothing: if it did, it would have already leaked. I am surprised you still believe it.
And you need to watch the video to see the context of the laughter. The mainstream media has misconstrued it.