Discussion of nationalism vs. globalism

Propose a formal or informal debate or discussion in this forum. Declare a challenge/invitation or respond to one.
Post Reply
User avatar
munnki
Posts: 3431
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:43 am
Location: London

Discussion of nationalism vs. globalism

Post by munnki » Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:30 pm

Is anybody interested in either an exclusive discussion of nationalism/globalism or a debate around issues involved in either.
I'm particularly interested in - the problems caused by federalism (e.g. US vs states, EU vs member states, ASEAN...etc...) vs the problems caused by nationalism (minority groups, representation etc...) as well as the implications of same issues for the political/economic systems in those countries...
I'd prefer to do something more formal but with an emphasis on quality of argument/content rather than deadlines...
Anybody interested in these issues... post on here and we'll get something going...
To get an idea of my interests (which are somewhat 'left' wing...if you hold to the left/right model) and my output...have a look in the other exclusive engagement here or at my posts...
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Hunter S Thompson

User avatar
BWE
Posts: 9653
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:54 pm
Location: one of the unnamed sidestreets of happiness

Post by BWE » Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:11 pm

I'm interested. I would like to see a more formalized format too based on the idea of quality of argument.

At the moment the idea of community and the precedence of the community over the idea of free trade are rattling around in my head. I am familiar with the arguments for both free trade (essentially chicago school/thomas friedman/ milton friedman... are they all named friedman?) and community a la Paolo Soleri, Aldo Leopold, Jane Jacobs and others.

I would argue that certain industries are not good candidates for free trade based on the capacity for damage they present to communities. Or something along those lines.

User avatar
munnki
Posts: 3431
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:43 am
Location: London

Post by munnki » Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:50 am

Great, on phone just now but will post further later today.
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Hunter S Thompson

User avatar
munnki
Posts: 3431
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:43 am
Location: London

Post by munnki » Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:04 am

How about a debate. It's not that I'm competitive, I just find that a debate tends to sharpen and challenge my preconceptions about a given topic. How about something along the lines of 'That the modern concept of free trade is a deeply flawed and misleading one given the increasing federalization of Western states, governmental involvement in trading deals and the structural inequalities already present in the global market.' A topic like this may involve the subjects both you and I wish to discuss. What's your thoughts on above... please modify... discuss...etc...
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Hunter S Thompson

User avatar
BWE
Posts: 9653
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:54 pm
Location: one of the unnamed sidestreets of happiness

Post by BWE » Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:14 pm

Well, I think it's deeply flawed for those reasons plus the reason that in reality, policies get passed that protect markets every day. It's just that they tend to protect large capital investors to the exclusion of communities. I'm trying to figure out how to do it as a debate.

My position is that markets are not equal I guess and regulation ought to be fair for competition AND put community needs as the primary goal. To put it as an is/ought, I think I'm saying that economics should flow from the concept that the community allows businesses to operate within it rather than the idea that community develops for the benefit of business. The symbiosis should be explicit and a guiding principle.

ETA: I'm totally up for a debate on it.

User avatar
Rie
Posts: 12272
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 4:02 am
Location: Australia

Post by Rie » Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:07 am

Since I come from a country which has inspired books such as 'They're A Weird Mob' and I'm observant and a 'people watcher' I would like to discuss, not with formal rules, of which I know nothing,nationalism vs globalism, the which word I do not understand. Is it a 'wordy' way of saying something that doesn't exist but would be desirable?

User avatar
Rie
Posts: 12272
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 4:02 am
Location: Australia

Post by Rie » Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:40 am

:) You need to know where I'm coming from and a simple quote will do it... it's from Goldie Hawn "I have witnessed the softening of the hardest of hearts by a simple smile." Men don't often see this sort of wisdom as wisdom and as I am a sort of Pollyannam maybe a debate with me might do you good.

User avatar
Redshirt
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:20 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Redshirt » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:57 am

"Rie" wrote:Since I come from a country which has inspired books such as 'They're A Weird Mob' and I'm observant and a 'people watcher' I would like to discuss, not with formal rules, of which I know nothing,nationalism vs globalism, the which word I do not understand. Is it a 'wordy' way of saying something that doesn't exist but would be desirable?


Hello Rie. Judging by munnki's OP, I think (s)he would prefer a debate/discussion opponent who has more in-depth knowledge on the proposed topic. I'd recommend starting a thread in the Politics & World Events forum (P&WE) to discuss the issues. Since P&WE is less formal, I think that would be more to your preference anyway.

Post Reply