Well, I enjoyed this blog post, and mostly agree.
I think it is worth looking at the world (in terms of commerce, finance, policy) as dominated by multi-nationals.
Here is a curious thing: Most people are irritated if "outsiders" attempt to influence a sovereign state election, ala Russia and the USA, or China recently in Australia.
But multinationals, which have fiduciary obligations to global shareholder bases that trump any sort of nationalism or patriotism, can pour unlimited funds not only into US political campaigns, but PR campaigns, think tanks, foundations, academia, and media.
While the term "deep state" may be a bit loaded, surely we can agree there is a "perma-state" in DC, and that it is globalist in perspective. PR from the Pentagon often refers to "global security," as easily as our forefathers advised avoiding foreign entanglements.
It is also not too much to posit that there is an rough alliance between multi-nationals and mercantilist nations, such as China, or oil companies and OPEC.
We see this in the framing of "free trade" debates in the US. In theory, there is much to support free trade. In practice, there is much to ponder, such as stagnant US wages but exploding house prices. Something about the Detroit story challenges triumphant globalism.
In this regard, Trump may be something of a maverick.
It is to be much regretted that the figurehead of an anti-globalist, or even just a questioning-globalism, US movement is Trump, and not someone earnest and reliable.
No comments:
Post a Comment