national sovereignty in America

Globalism vs. National Sovereignty

When we talk about immigration in America, you usually hear opposition calling for open borders. What does open borders mean? Ultimately it means the end of national sovereignty.

Do you want to have a sovereign America? Or do you want to be ruled by the UN (one world government)? One side is for a sovereign America with borders and a clear system for lawful immigration. The other wants the destruction of borders and sovereignty.

What Is Globalism?

Globalism is working toward a one world order with one over-arching government that rules over individual nations. Eventually, globalism leads to each person being a citizen of the world, instead of citizens of their individual nations. The founders of the United Nations envisioned one world government. Member nations are obligated to the UN and to each other. The laws and regulations imposed by the UN override the laws of individual countries.

You may be saying, “So what? Why does this matter?”

I will take just a moment to explain why this most definitely matters. Anything is managed best at the most local level. Think of homes. They’re managed best when the parents are involved and responsible. Your neighbor will not love and raise your children as well as you will.

A classroom is managed best by the teacher because a good teacher knows his or her children and how they learn. A county is managed best by local people who live there, own property,  care most about the area, and have friends there.

The higher up you go, the more poorly things are managed. We see this rampant mismanagement and lack of true caring for constituents on a federal level. Seriously, how concerned is the average congressman about your paycheck? My parents’ retirement? Your child’s creative skills?

Take that to a global level. How much do you think Korea is going to care about people in Kansas? How well can our country be governed by a global group who would gladly sell out our country, you, or me for money and power? It’s in the interest of each nation to govern itself.

The majority of the world is NOT free. Do we want them governing our nation? Policing our streets? Creating curriculum for our children and grandchildren?

Nationalism Vs. Isolationism

nationalism vs isolationismMany people confuse nationalism with isolationism. Proponents of globalism accuse those who want borders and national sovereignty of being naive at best and xenophobic at worst. Their argument is that we live in a global society with global trade and travel. They accuse nationalists of being backward and old-fashioned. Proponents of globalism often like to say that nationalists are isolationists. But this simply, is not true.

Nationalists are not isolationists nor are we against world trade or travel. Those who want to protect national sovereignty are not suggesting that we not trade with or be a part of the world. In fact, an important quality our current President possesses is his experience negotiating with people all over the world.

There is a BIG difference between amicably trading with the world and allowing the UN to set rules and laws for our citizens. There is a major difference between trading globally and letting global laws have a higher say than our own Constitution.

In his parting speech at the UN Obama said we need to give up some of our freedoms to allow for world government. This is the position of the left.

Nationalists say, “America first for Americans. Britain first for the British. France first for French, etc.” Each country must take care of its own and come to a trade table looking out for the interests of the people they represent. What good is a legal counsel during a negotiation who has no vested interest in his client?

Also, what good is an entangled negotiator who doesn’t have the ability to easily walk away from the table? The UN entangles us in foreign wars and obligates our military to police other countries. The UN appropriates our dollars to other nations — away from solving our own internal problems. There’s no way for a country to easily walk away from a UN negotiation table.

When the people are no longer represented with integrity, and our leaders are entangled in alliances that take precedence over our own people’s needs, tyranny is inevitable.

Posted in Essays, Globalism.