Nationalist to Globalist Spectrum: Where Are You? (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

Let's use these definitions:

Nationalist: A person who strongly identifies with their own nation and vigorously supports its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

Globalist:  The attitude or policy of placing the interests of the entire world above those of individual nations.

Where do you fall on the spectrum?

And please, let's not bash or defend positions. I'm just trying to see where folks are. 

 

[Franknbeans]

whats the difference between mostly and strongly?

 

[Joe Bryant]

whats the difference between mostly and strongly?

Strongly is closer to totally.

 

[joffer]

mostly globalist. pure luck I was born here.

 

[Gr00vus]

<------ One World Is Enough For All Of Us

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Uhm, I'm pro-democracy and believe that international organizations and ties are designed to help protect against atrocities and wars of the past repeating in the future. I view that as being in primarily America's interests. Do with that as what you will.

 

[Sinn Fein]

<------ One World Is Enough For All Of Us

Lines are drawn upon the world
Before we get our flags unfurled
Whichever one we pick
It's just a self deluding trick

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Go Team Globalists!

 

[Gr00vus]

Lines are drawn upon the world
Before we get our flags unfurled
Whichever one we pick
It's just a self deluding trick

We can all sink, or we all float, 'cause we're all in the same big boat...it may seem a million miles away, but it gets a little closer every day.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Based on those definitions why would anybody be a nationalist? Why prioritize a country and its people based on artificial boundaries when you can put the good on the world over all else? Seems selfish.

 

[Dickies]

Generally speaking I am a globalist, but in terms of politics I lean slightly nationalist, so I voted that way.  I think our policy should make sure we are taken care of first (because in the real world there are arbitrary lines dividing us), but I see a prosperous world being prosperous for us too.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Based on those definitions why would anybody be a nationalist? Why prioritize a country and its people based on artificial boundaries when you can put the good on the world over all else? Seems selfish.

People are inherently selfish.

People choose nationalism because it protects what is "theirs."   I think its rational - albeit misguided.

I do chuckle when I see nominal christians who tout nationalism.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Do you guys think this has changed much recently for people? Or have they always been this way? 

It's safe to say President Trump is much more of a Nationalist than previous Presidents, right? 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Do you guys think this has changed much recently for people? Or have they always been this way? 

It's safe to say President Trump is much more of a Nationalist than previous Presidents, right? 

I think some people still see this as an important battle to fight - Good v. Evil.

Trump is more nationalistic - but his supporters have always been nationalistic - they just never had someone to rally around their concerns.

And - if I am being honest - I don't think Trump is "Nationalistic"  I think Trump is "Opportunistic" - Trump wants what is best for Trump.  Galvanizing the support of a bunch of nationalists was simply a means to an end.  Trump tapped into a rich vein - he has no problem exploiting that.

The vast majority of Trump supporters are in the South - and yet that did not stop him from poking fun at Sessions' southern accent...

 

[sn0mm1s]

Do you guys think this has changed much recently for people? Or have they always been this way? 

It's safe to say President Trump is much more of a Nationalist than previous Presidents, right? 

Those definitions are really poor in the context of the current political environment. I think it would be much more accurate to say Trump is much more of a bigoted racist than recent Presidents.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think some people still see this as an important battle to fight - Good v. Evil.

Trump is more nationalistic - but his supporters have always been nationalistic - they just never had someone to rally around their concerns.

And - if I am being honest - I don't think Trump is "Nationalistic"  I think Trump is "Opportunistic" - Trump wants what is best for Trump.  Galvanizing the support of a bunch of nationalists was simply a means to an end.  Trump tapped into a rich vein - he has no problem exploiting that.

The vast majority of Trump supporters are in the South - and yet that did not stop him from poking fun at Sessions' southern accent...

Thanks. I can see that. 

 

[Juxtatarot]

Globalist:  The attitude or policy of placing the interests of the entire world above those of individual nations.

I struggle with the word "above" in this definition and it makes me not want to select a poll result until I've thought about it more. My hope is that what is good for the world is also good for individual countries including ours.  It's not a matter of a win-lose or sacrificing, it's about finding ways for everyone to benefit.  

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Based on those definitions why would anybody be a nationalist? Why prioritize a country and its people based on artificial boundaries when you can put the good on the world over all else? Seems selfish.

I had kind of the opposite reaction. I voted "totally globalist" before I saw the definitions supplied in the original post. When I voted, I was going by what I perceived to be common usage, where nationalism meant stuff like reducing (legal) immigration and international trade while globalism meant favoring those things. By those definitions, I'm a globalist through and through, in large part because I think globalism is in our national interest while nationalism is not.

But based on the definitions in the OP, I'd take myself down from a 9 to maybe a 6 or 7. I think there are good, practical reasons for being more concerned with what happens in our own country (or state or town or family) than outside. The biggest reason is that we have more power to affect things close to home than we do farther away. I'm more likely to help my neighbor out than a starving child in Africa not because my neighbor is more deserving, and certainly not because he needs the help more, but just because there's more I can easily do for my neighbor. He's right here. (There are also psychological reasons, but focusing on the practical reasons seems enough for now.)

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I had kind of the opposite reaction. I voted "totally globalist" before I saw the definitions supplied in the original post.

I can’t vote.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I can’t vote.

Because you lack ID?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Because you lack ID?

Ha no man, because of the reasons you stated. I happen to think I’m putting my country first by supporting NATO, World Bank, IMF, SEATO, NAFTA, WTO, etc. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Ha no man, because of the reasons you stated. I happen to think I’m putting my country first by supporting NATO, World Bank, IMF, SEATON, NAFTA, WTO, etc. 

Oh, yeah, that's a good reason as well.

 

[ffldrew]

Voted Mostly Globalist - it might be higher but every year they run that forum out of Davos and show it on CNBC and Bloomberg and they start to piss me off when they seem to ignore the negative effects they bring on to the World economies - this year was like 2008 and the CDS debacle never happened.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I had kind of the opposite reaction. I voted "totally globalist" before I saw the definitions supplied in the original post. When I voted, I was going by what I perceived to be common usage, where nationalism meant stuff like reducing (legal) immigration and international trade while globalism meant favoring those things. By those definitions, I'm a globalist through and through, in large part because I think globalism is in our national interest while nationalism is not.

But based on the definitions in the OP, I'd take myself down from a 9 to maybe a 6 or 7. I think there are good, practical reasons for being more concerned with what happens in our own country (or state or town or family) than outside. The biggest reason is that we have more power to affect things close to home than we do farther away. I'm more likely to help my neighbor out than a starving child in Africa not because my neighbor is more deserving, and certainly not because he needs the help more, but just because there's more I can easily do for my neighbor. He's right here. (There are also psychological reasons, but focusing on the practical reasons seems enough for now.)

That's interesting Maurile. When I think of Nationalism, I think of doing things that are in our National Interest. In other words, doing what's best for us. 

I'm with you in my natural inclination is to help the person I'm close to. But isn't being more concerned with what happens here the basic idea of "America First"? 

 

[adonis]

Mostly globalist.

I believe that the venn diagram of the world's interest has a ton of overlap with the circle of america's interest, but for america's interest we have to weigh heavily national matters while at the same time keeping an eye towards improving things in the world.

So I'm 100% interested in global outcomes/situations/poverty, and 100% interested in America prospering, but I feel like in order for America to prosper, you have to take back some of the focus from the global view and make sure that we're taking care of business at home too.  I think roughly 75% covers the balance.  I'd not bicker about 66% either.  

So in terms of a venn diagram, I'd say about 66-75% overlap between America and World interests, with the remaining 1/3-1/4 being policies that favor America first/only.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

That's interesting Maurile. When I think of Nationalism, I think of doing things that are in our National Interest. In other words, doing what's best for us.

When I think of nationalism, I think of doing things that are not in our national interest -- like ending trade deals, enacting new tariffs, pulling out of NATO, etc.

I'm with you in my natural inclination is to help the person I'm close to. But isn't being more concerned with what happens here the basic idea of "America First"? 

I would say no, not really. That's not the phrase I'd use to capture that sentiment.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I would say no, not really. That's not the phrase I'd use to capture that sentiment.




 

Agreed. That phrase has a clearly negative history. Could you say if Trump's tagline was "Helping America Before We Help Other Countries" that's the basic idea of what we're talking about in being inclined to help the person we're close to first?

 

[Sheriff Bart]

I was strongly nationalist when I was younger and voted almost a straight republican tickets.  I had traveled to Mexico, Dominican and Jamaica. 

When I got older I was able to visit France, Spain and Italy.  Now I'm mostly globalist.

I was raised like most on this board hearing how the US was the greatest country in the world.  It's great in a lot of ways, sure, but there are plenty of warts too.  Things that will never be fixed because if you dare say something bad about the US you're a heretic. 

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Agreed. That phrase has a clearly negative history. Could you say if Trump's tagline was "Helping America Before We Help Other Countries" that's the basic idea of what we're talking about in being inclined to help the person we're close to first?

I don't know. If my tagline were "Helping America Before We Help Other Countries," the basic idea would be to help the people we're close to first. But other people (whether Trump or anyone else) might mean something different by it, so I can't say what it would mean if it were somebody else's tagline.

One of the problems is that people disagree about what is good for America. If somebody thinks that ending steel imports in order to support American steel manufacturers would be good for America, he might call ending steel imports "Helping America Before We Help Other Countries." He could then accuse people who support steel imports of being anti-American. But that's super lame. Because the people who support steel imports might also want what's best for America. (And they're more likely to be right, IMO.)

When two people both want what's best for America (but disagree about what's actually best) and one of them decides to call his position "America First" or something similar, that's just cheap, imitation patriotism. I find it distasteful -- especially when the people adopting it are factually wrong about what's best for America, as I think the current "America First" people are.

 

[TLEF316]

I like that the US helps those less fortunate.  But it is really frustrating how sometimes we do that instead of helping our own. I don't see how we have money for disaster relief in other countries while many of our veterans (just as an example) suffer the way they do.

And it REALLY pisses me off how other countries allow us to take the lead on so many humanitarian projects but are so damn quick to mock the "ugly Americans" when we make mistakes or overstep a little bit. Obviously that's been easier to do the past few years but it has happened in the past as well.

I'd feel much better about helping the rest of the world if the rest of the world showed some freaking gratitude.

 

[timschochet]

Without globalism, there would be no Harlem Globetrotters.