Wednesday, July 20, 2016

"Nationalism" is a GOOD word

What's the best way to sort people out? Many of my libertarian friends insist that you shouldn't, really, because the individual is the only "group" that matters. Everything else is arbitrary or imaginary or something. Oddly, you find the same attitude among Social Justice Warriors on the left who say that such things are "social constructs." This is very appealing thinking to adolescents who feel very individualistic and who think that nobody understands them, so why be in a nation or a family or a group of any kind? Most adolescents grow out of such silliness. We're not an individualistic species. Tigers are an individualistic species (the scientific term is "solitary"), but we're not. We're a pack animal. We live in packs. We usually don't put it that way, saying "tribes" instead, but if you'll notice, all human organization seems to be based on that basic tribe, all the way up to the nation. When you go to a higher organization than the nation, you're in danger of losing the affinity individuals have for one another because of their common nationality. We're now witnessing the collapse of the EU precisely because it's not a nation, but several nations, which do not have enough in common to coexist within a single state.

The nation is the way to go, folks. Smaller things are too vulnerable, larger things are too clumsy and oppressive. And when you have nations, you have a very nice system. The nation supports and defends the individual, and vice-versa. And this isn't theory. This is what goes on, and has been going on, for quite some time. Any country that rejects the idea of nationalism simply gives up all the advantages of nationalism while competitor nations retain them. After a few years of that, the first country finds itself weaker and smaller, and will disappear unless it wises up. At Unca Bob's Treehouse, Bob Wallace clarifies the matter:

Nationalism Trumps Globalism Every Time

"Economic nationalism is the future." - Patrick J. Buchanan
I understand what globalism is supposed to be about: when countries are bound together by trade there is little reason to go to war. That's been noticed as far back as Frederic Bastiat. And it's worked pretty well.
It's also about enriching the 1%. And increasing their power - but those are a bit different of a story.
But as for the first paragraph...a different kind of war has sprung up.
Here are some examples. The Chinese and the Russians, for whatever reasons, very much lack innovation. On the other hand, the U.S. leads the world and is so far ahead of everyone else it's leaving every other country in the dust.
So what are China and Russia doing? Stealing everything they can from us.
Why? Nationalism.
Seems like every time some naive American company hires Chinese nationals they steal software and millions of dollars and get back to China as fast as they can. The last one I read about was about a married couple that stole ten million dollars from a scientific company in southern Missouri and zipped right back to China.
God knows how many Chinese and Russians and Israelis are spying in the U.S.
I gave up the belief in "free trade" a long time ago. We've sent trillions of dollars to the Middle East for their oil. And what did they do? The Saudis stabbed us in the back by funding the Wahabis who pulled off 9-11 (don't try that remote-controlled airplanes/bombs in the towers/Bush-Cheney did it/Jews did it crap on me – I refer to such people as Conspironuts).
We've sent trillions of dollars to China and they're using it to build up their military, which is not a threat to us but every Asian nation anywhere near China - Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines.
The U.S. finally figured out what to do: in a few years we will be energy self-sufficient (the reason you never hear of OPEC anymore is because we destroyed it). It's been estimated we've only used one to two percent of all the oil in the world.
As I've mentioned before, why is there any Chinese steel in the U.S.? I was raised in a steel mill town and the mill is having problems staying in business and is currently not hiring at all - and these are jobs that paid very good starting wages...with a high-school diploma!
Now we're involved in a cyberwar with foreign nations who are trying to, again, steal everything they can from us.
I knew Brexit was going to pass. Actually it's the first warning shot signaling the end of globalism as we know it. And why did it pass? Nationalism.
I have a fair understanding of cybersecurity, which is why I know the Internet is fundamentally insecure, and there are about four million open IT jobs in the U.S. Especially cybersecurity.
I call cybersecurity people Warrior Geeks, because it's all about offense and defense against other counties continually probing our defenses. It's a lot better than World War III but it's still war.
Foreign geeks could probably screw up our power grids pretty bad if they wanted. But we can screw up theirs even worse. It’s “You attack me and I’ll attack you ten times as bad.”
Obviously the free flow of goods and people is not working. France has found that out hard way, more than once. Germany and northern Europe has found out the hard way, too, with all their Muslim rapists and pedophiles.
I don't have any problems with a trading bloc consisting of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico (the more jobs in Mexico the more those 87 IQ Mexicans will stay in Mexico).
Every country is trying to do the best it can for itself. Except the U.S. and Europe - both of which created about 98% of everything in the world. A lot of which we’ve given the world and now they’re trying to steal the rest.
But that's starting to change. No matter how hard our traitorous "elites" howl and fight against it, nationalism is starting to assert itself again.
Nations – which are just tribes writ large – have been around a lot longer that globalism.
That’s why America first - and for Americans. And that is why "globalism" is circling the drain.
Quibcag: I found the illustration at, but I can't figure out who drew it.

1 comment:

  1. Nations are partly race, but that is often not the essence - they are cultures, and remember that word is based on religion, i.e. "cult".
    There is a genetic component, and it is stronger than you might suspect. There is a difference Spaniards and Norwegians differ. Behavior which the culture didn't like would reduce the number of offspring, so it would cut off even things normally considered virtues.
    Newt Gingrich even noted Asia is based on rice - grown in a constant process during the season v.s. Europeans who have wheat and such where you are very busy planting, pray for rain in the summer, and are very busy with the harvest, then endure the winter.
    When over thousands of years, natives have had genes amplified or reduced based on what worked in a geographic area, it becomes hard to mix them.
    It is not to deny reason and free will, but if your genes make you naturally aggressive (where it isn't acceptable to be so) you will use most of your energy to suppress what your body wants to do. Even worse if your genes make you naturally more cooperative or passive, you will have to try to be more aggressive to get food and the girl.