constant escape

winter withered, warm
I honestly didn't even know that usages of "globalism" have anti-semitic connotations. It makes sense, if the word is utilized in some conspiratorial capacity, but frankly I'm not to interested in that. Anything claims I make that can;t be evidentially substantiated are working claims, hypotheses.

I generally use "globalism" to refer to any actor who has a global scope rather than a national one, and this global scope is one that would involve cooperation. Perhaps at a certain extreme of globalism, it would entail a federation of nations.

It seems like the implicit agreement here is that the word is to be avoided entirely, due to some conceptual alignment with the anthropology of the Jewish people, which to me seems a bit random. One reason being that globalism doesn;t just mean "without a nation, hence not national"

And "cosmopolitan" despite the semantics, is more of a cultural label, no? Rather than a literal citizen of nations around the world, someone with political agency in multiple states?

I just don't see why anti-semitism is necessarily unpacked from every usage of the word.
 

version

Well-known member
Unfortunately Biden's law will be used against BLM, ANTIFA etc as much as if not more than the fash.
Absolutely. If the incident at the Capitol wasn't orchestrated with this in mind, it'll certainly be taken advantage of in service of it.
 

luka

Well-known member
I think that's right Stan but people here are very sensitive to any hint of racism, which is a good thing. It's one of the good things about dissensus but it's also one of the things which I think should allow us to use a term like globalist on the understanding that we don't mean the Jews
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Er-Eu6-c-W4-AA8-BDP.jpg
 

luka

Well-known member
Neoliberal doesn't do the same work so I'm not gojng to make that substitution. I haven't worked out what il do yet.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
I think that's right Stan but people here are very sensitive to any hint of racism, which is a good thing. It's one of the good things about dissensus but it's also one of the things which I think should allow us to use a term like globalist on the understanding that we don't mean the Jews

Yes, and Patty was only talking about the Rothschild family.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
I don't follow your logic here though. Why a reactionary fascist coup exactly?
I was just arguing that the only meaningful contingency that leads anywhere but globalism/international-capitalism/techno-feudalism would necessarily involve a reactionary, more or less fascist coup, which is a strong statement that doesn;t have enough backing it up. But as a point of departure, it may be useful, and usually that is what i;m going for: what can further our understanding?

And such a coup is what would have unfolded if that siege was successful. And when I say that nationalism is now officially parochial, I mean it in a subtle and implicit way. Because now, you take nationalism to its extreme, and that sorta siege is what you get, no? If things go on in the way they promise to, for me, nationalism (at least in the US) will continue to be relegated to underground tactics.
 

version

Well-known member
I think that's right Stan but people here are very sensitive to any hint of racism, which is a good thing. It's one of the good things about dissensus but it's also one of the things which I think should allow us to use a term like globalist on the understanding that we don't mean the Jews
Do you remember what you said about WW2 re: Gravity's Rainbow? I think that's the approach you should take to this.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
I think that's right Stan but people here are very sensitive to any hint of racism, which is a good thing. It's one of the good things about dissensus but it's also one of the things which I think should allow us to use a term like globalist on the understanding that we don't mean the Jews
You're right, and I'm not trying to change that. Part of my difficulty here is just that I wasn;t even aware the word so widely carried this connotation - and it makes sense why it does, I just think its a mistake to apply that degree of skepticism to every usage of the word.
 

luka

Well-known member
I think it's a mistake too. Particularly in a context like dissensus. On Twitter perhaps the rules change. But is it worth arguing for getting lectured and called a nazi by this lot? That's what you have to ask yourself
 

luka

Well-known member
It's just the way a lot of the debate has been framed from the start isn't it. And it does seem to represent a divide between two different factions of The Power Elite. Not that I have any more idea of what's going on than you do.
 
Top