Magic Poriferan
^He pronks, too!
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2007
- Messages
- 14,081
- MBTI Type
- Yin
- Enneagram
- One
- Instinctual Variant
- sx/sp
So I was reading a book by Zbigniew Brzezinski and came upon a part where he described his view of globalization as a new, American ideology. He proposed that this was a somewhat unusual occurrence in that the USA has historically been driven more by pragmatic national interest than ideology. But supposedly this was an inevitable result of the USA facing the gaping, uncertain abyss in the wake of the cold war.
I found his description on this ideology interesting. Its two key components were free market economics, and an erosion of state sovereignty in the political sense, enhanced by global military involvement. It really struck a chord with me, because it was descriptive of a certain kind of American ideologue that I have encountered quite frequently.
The free market part amounted to what I would call libertarian. As I've often noted, this country has been shifting libertarian in the political arena for decades, and has recently experienced a sudden, populist burst of libertarian enthusiasm on top of that. It is definitely a passionate ideology, and it is definitely the most rapidly growing one in the USA. The thing is, most people who actually call themselves die-hard libertarians seem to be pacifists or isolationists, and they often seek to shrink the government in part by eviscerating the defense department. In this regard, libertarianism has not grown at all. There has been neither a political shift nor a significant popular movement against the USA's military preponderance, and this is particularly amazing in light of the USA's two unpopular contemporary wars.
So we have this being who is increasingly becoming the face of American political ideology, and this being is bascially a libertarian economist with a fetish for a boundless military. It seems to me that this is what Brzezinksi would call a Globalist.
While he described the emergence of an American ideology as being circumstantially understandable, he did also say there's great risk. There is already an anti-globalist sentiment, which is often inseparable from anti-Americanism (as happened with Communism and the USSR), and that this defuse, contrary sentiment is fertile ground for breeding a well defined, actual ideology in opposition to globalism.
And from there me and Brzezinski definitely depart, because to me, an anti-globalist ideology sounds just like what the doctor ordered. I've been intently watching to see what ideology emerges to counter globalization and hoping, though pessimistically, that it might bear some similarity to my prescriptions for the ills of globalism.
It's only a matter of time before something emerges as an obstacle to this would-be hegemony. What is it going to be? And how far will globalism get before that obstacle emerges?
I found his description on this ideology interesting. Its two key components were free market economics, and an erosion of state sovereignty in the political sense, enhanced by global military involvement. It really struck a chord with me, because it was descriptive of a certain kind of American ideologue that I have encountered quite frequently.
The free market part amounted to what I would call libertarian. As I've often noted, this country has been shifting libertarian in the political arena for decades, and has recently experienced a sudden, populist burst of libertarian enthusiasm on top of that. It is definitely a passionate ideology, and it is definitely the most rapidly growing one in the USA. The thing is, most people who actually call themselves die-hard libertarians seem to be pacifists or isolationists, and they often seek to shrink the government in part by eviscerating the defense department. In this regard, libertarianism has not grown at all. There has been neither a political shift nor a significant popular movement against the USA's military preponderance, and this is particularly amazing in light of the USA's two unpopular contemporary wars.
So we have this being who is increasingly becoming the face of American political ideology, and this being is bascially a libertarian economist with a fetish for a boundless military. It seems to me that this is what Brzezinksi would call a Globalist.
While he described the emergence of an American ideology as being circumstantially understandable, he did also say there's great risk. There is already an anti-globalist sentiment, which is often inseparable from anti-Americanism (as happened with Communism and the USSR), and that this defuse, contrary sentiment is fertile ground for breeding a well defined, actual ideology in opposition to globalism.
And from there me and Brzezinski definitely depart, because to me, an anti-globalist ideology sounds just like what the doctor ordered. I've been intently watching to see what ideology emerges to counter globalization and hoping, though pessimistically, that it might bear some similarity to my prescriptions for the ills of globalism.
It's only a matter of time before something emerges as an obstacle to this would-be hegemony. What is it going to be? And how far will globalism get before that obstacle emerges?
