Globalism Versus Internationalism

I recently mentioned on Twitter the need for international solidarity and was asked how this was different from globalism. I replied that international solidarity was the acknowledgement of brotherhood and sisterhood among all workers while globalism was the unity of capital all over the world. Many conservatives are afraid of any international cooperation, because they believe that there can be nothing of the sort that is not run by an elite cabal. They recognize globalism as a danger, but are unable to see the solution.

In fact, globalism and internationalism are in complete opposition to one another. They are eternal enemies, the one only gaining strength from the weakness of the other. Globalism takes local autonomy away, while internationalism recognizes the necessity of local decision-making. Globalism is at the root of most every modern war, while internationalism denounces war as being against the interests of the people of all countries. Internationalist care about the rights of people, globalist’s only concern is the rights of capital.

Much of the confusion stems from the fact that globalism has spread under the guise of internationalism. We were sold the idea that people around the world would be able to communicate, cooperate, and work together, that all boundaries were being broken down. With vast expansion of media and communication technology, it seemed a given that small artists and small voices would be able to find new audiences. And that was true for a while, the reach of independent artists and journalists grew. But as their opportunity to find audiences grew at an unprecedented pace, the reach of corporate media and social media influencers grew exponentially greater. They flooded the market so that independent voices became harder to find, though there were more of them.

Independent media was for a time allowed to blossom, as any movement from the bottom drives the initial growth of a capitalistic idea. As they say, it is small business that drives the economy. But when the flower is fully bloomed it is snipped by the big corporations to be worn on their lapel.

Many successful indie media personalities were rewarded by corporate media and, thereby, defanged. Other successful ideas and personalities were copied by corporate media, pretending to but not including any real criticism levelled at the system. Portals such as Google and Facebook favored corporate voices and “artists” because they made more money doing so. It’s just good business sense.

But even that was not enough to protect corporate media from being called into question by independent voices. The more powerful corporate media became, the more obvious its flaws became and the greater the desire for legitimate alternatives. So the establishment media turned to disparaging and slurring independent media. For certain, there is much dishonesty and ill-will to be found amongst the many voices in independent media, but corporate media should worry about the Sean Hannity’s, Ali Velshis, and Jerry Springers in their own midst before worrying about what is to be found on Rumble. If people are willing to embrace a radical demagogue on social media, it is more than likely only because they have already been conditioned to it by corporate media.

The war against non-establishment voices is in full swing now, with social media employing outright censorship and an Orwellian use of algorithms to silence people and ideas without anyone even being sure of what’s going on. They do so at the behest of the politicians, who are doing the work of the security agencies, who are being funded by politicians, who receive campaign contributions from the giant media empires. It is an incestuous bowl of fascist stew.

In case you didn’t know, corporate media is in the service of globalism, as are the politicians and the security agencies. Perhaps individuals within the system are unaware of who their masters are, but they serve them nonetheless. In fact, if you look closely at many of the politicians and media personalities who find success in the system that promotes globalism, many of them are clearly not intelligent or self-aware enough to understand who their masters are. The rest are mainly ego-driven beasts who know it’s in their own best interests to serve power, will never ask questions, and are quick to pick up on cues so that they never have to be overtly told what to do.

That leaves the cause of internationalism up to average working-class people on social media, some people who’ve been successful enough at their work to eke out a living writing or doing podcasts, and a handful of older journalists and politicians who have been squeezed out of an increasingly intolerant establishment media but still have a following, people like Chris Hedges and Ralph Nader. Since the media is becoming increasingly unaccepting of personalities and viewpoints that do not fit the globalist narrative, do not look for many new personalities with global recognition to drop out of the corporate system. Although we are occasionally pleasantly surprised to find a Russell Brand or Joe Rogan use their celebrity to host shows that challenge establishment narratives.

It would appear hopeless to me but for one thing: The more powerful globalism becomes, the less concern it has for maintaining its disguise of internationalism. The more a global system’s concerns are only for the profits of international corporations, the greater and more obvious the lies are that they will need to tell. As this happens, people will turn more and more towards those who will give them different explanations as to why they can’t afford to pay their hospital bills and why their water is not fit to drink. Some of them will turn to demagogues, no doubt. But others will discover those with real internationalist ideals, people who care for people, justice, the planet, and peace. People who do so with conviction and not in a performative fashion as those in the establishment do.

It is unfortunate that you cannot have the honest voices without the dishonest ones, but such is life, and such is the conviction behind our country’s deep-seated belief in the freedom of speech. The servants of globalism will tell you it is their intention only to silence the liars, but the liars have never really been a threat to them, it has always been the truth-tellers they fear. Worse yet, the servants of globalism will have you believe that they are the truth-tellers, and that it is they who are in the service of the causes of internationalism. But this disguise is wearing thin, and as their agenda is more and more instituted, all the makeup, CGI, and spectacle in the world will not be enough to veil the truth.