Do you believe that in a globalized world being literate in Geopolitics is becoming more relevant?

[Luz P.]

Geopolitics is the study of the political meaning of geography and spatial relations. Its focus is on territorial dynamics, it doesn’t reside on domestic political issues.

Yet too many shy away from the debate, too many see the word “politics” and misconstrue the whole thing.

 

[Nationalist]

Its my opinion that Globalists are trying to remove geopolitics from relevance. They want no boundaries. No nationhood. Just obedient little saps who are terrified of disagreeing with them.

Does anyone really think the establishment went after Trump so hard because he's a big meanie?

His fate was sealed when he announced his plans to oppose this globalization effort. The amount of money they've spent trying to destroy The Donald is staggering. Yet...the courts are still beholden to the law. It too is cracking and soon, the law will be whatever the money says the law is. You can toss your precious US Constitution down the toidy, because it'll only be worth ass-wipe by then.

If any person values their nation, they must work to stop this before its too late. Because the ONLY thing that can stop them now, is millions upon millions of people who refuse to play their little game of total planetary rule.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Nationalist

[Michael Hardner]

If Trump is so against Globalization why is his company doing business in China ?

Why did his properties use undocumented workers ?

Anyway, this thread isn't about Trump.  The OP is an interesting premise, but in a world where FOX and CNN dish out pablum how can you expect anybody to fathom this ?

[Yzermandius19]

Globalization is over

guess y'all missed the memo

Edited June 23, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[Luz P.]

A couple of friends and I recently created the Geopolitics 2.0 group on MeWe. The group isn’t USA-centric, we touch on what’s happening the world over and would like more international members to join.

(The MeWe site/app has great features/functionality; unfortunately, there's not much membership diversity)

We’d love to see you there!

https://mewe.com/group/629ba8857e82a64167c5245c

[Queenmandy85]

Physical geography governs everything. It determines what is located where, where things are produced, and where the power lies.

It is not responsible for who's on first.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Queenmandy85

[Nationalist]

On 6/23/2022 at 12:36 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

Globalization is over

guess y'all missed the memo

It is creating it's own demise.

[Luz P.]

 

I’m so sick and tired of people not understanding what Globalization or Geopolitics are.  Here you go, you can thank me later:

1)    Globalization means the speedup of movements and exchanges (of human beings, goods, and services, capital, technologies or cultural practices) all over the planet.

2)    Geopolitics is the study of the effects of geography (human and physical) on politics and international relations.  Geopolitics is a method of studying foreign policy to understand, explain, and predict international political behavior through geographical variables.

 

Globalization is well and alive and shows no signs of dying.  Mainly, it’s American Conservatives that hold the view that somehow they can bring Nationalism back. Ironic, they demand this now, after reaping the benefits of globalization for decades and being “exceptional” by the ruthless theft of other countries’ wealth and resources.

And if one dares point out the fallacy, they tend to support their arguments citing Bible prophecy and calling anyone that disagrees with them “Globalists and Satanists”.  That’s one accomplishment of their hero Trump. He managed to successfully polarize the country and boast about it. 

If the premise “Divide and Conquer” is evil, then Trump is the epitome of evil.

 

 

[Yzermandius19]

11 hours ago, Luz P. said:

 

I’m so sick and tired of people not understanding what Globalization or Geopolitics are.  Here you go, you can thank me later:

1)    Globalization means the speedup of movements and exchanges (of human beings, goods, and services, capital, technologies or cultural practices) all over the planet.

2)    Geopolitics is the study of the effects of geography (human and physical) on politics and international relations.  Geopolitics is a method of studying foreign policy to understand, explain, and predict international political behavior through geographical variables.

 

Globalization is well and alive and shows no signs of dying.  Mainly, it’s American Conservatives that hold the view that somehow they can bring Nationalism back. Ironic, they demand this now, after reaping the benefits of globalization for decades and being “exceptional” by the ruthless theft of other countries’ wealth and resources.

And if one dares point out the fallacy, they tend to support their arguments citing Bible prophecy and calling anyone that disagrees with them “Globalists and Satanists”.  That’s one accomplishment of their hero Trump. He managed to successfully polarize the country and boast about it. 

If the premise “Divide and Conquer” is evil, then Trump is the epitome of evil.

those who dislike globalization most aren't super religious types

it's the blue collar workers

economic nationalism is winning elections

it's not moving in the globalization direction for at least another decade or two

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

those who dislike globalization most aren't super religious types

it's the blue collar workers

economic nationalism is winning elections

it's not moving in the globalization direction for at least another decade or two

Some great points but I don't see that trend has reversed yet.  The US China trade war didn't achieve its goals although the Biden administration doesn't know what to do with trade either.

[Yzermandius19]

36 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Some great points but I don't see that trend has reversed yet.  The US China trade war didn't achieve its goals although the Biden administration doesn't know what to do with trade either.

the trend has reversed because America is becoming more protectionist

and they are withdrawing from the rest of the world

globalization relies on the US Navy to provide freedom of navigation to everybody

and America to be more free trade in orientation

America is far less keen to do either these days and that trend is accelerating

they are far less concerned about foreign affairs than they were at the height of globalization

Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. the trend has reversed because America is becoming more protectionist

2. and they are withdrawing from the rest of the world

3. globalization relies on the US Navy to provide freedom of navigation to everybody, and America to be more free trade in orientation, America is far less keen to do either these days and that trend is accelerating

4. they are far less concerned about foreign affairs than they were at the height of globalization

1. It's not clear, though, if that will result in a material change in trade flows.  I acknowledge for sure that the sentiment in liberalized trade blocs is to pull back but less like Brexit and more like anti-China and anti-Russia sanctions.
2. Somewhat, yes, but national interest sometimes means reviving old friendships such as Canada and ... uh ... Venezuela too.
3. See 1.
4. But there was always a "national" interest, including the interest of US-owned multinationals right ?  I would say they're less focused on balancing the interests of foreigners as their own donors... uh... voters. 

[Yzermandius19]

42 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. It's not clear, though, if that will result in a material change in trade flows.  I acknowledge for sure that the sentiment in liberalized trade blocs is to pull back but less like Brexit and more like anti-China and anti-Russia sanctions.
2. Somewhat, yes, but national interest sometimes means reviving old friendships such as Canada and ... uh ... Venezuela too.
3. See 1.
4. But there was always a "national" interest, including the interest of US-owned multinationals right ?  I would say they're less focused on balancing the interests of foreigners as their own donors... uh... voters. 

both Russia and China were included in the globalized world and adding them to the mix is what kicked off globalization

now they are being cut out, like during the Cold War pre-globalization world

during the height of globalization

America had it's fingers everywhere

now America is realizing that it's better to concentrate their reach in certain locations and ignore the unimportant locations

US multinationals can make more money without relying on unreliable nations like Russia and China

[Luz P.]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

now America is realizing that it's better to concentrate their reach in certain locations and ignore the unimportant locations

US multinationals can make more money without relying on unreliable nations like Russia and China

Just ROLF!  China and Russia are being cut out of the WESTERN version of globalization.

FYI - plans for a trade settlement currency are already advancing under the support of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), a project planning to do away with dollars for trade settlements. The ambition is for it to become the mechanism for freeing over half the world from dollar hegemony, including all nations whose export markets now depend more on Asia than the current developed world.

If you have no clue how the current financial system works, here’s an example:

“If I want to transfer money from Russia to Kazakhstan, the payment is made using the dollar. First, the bank or payment system transfers my roubles to dollars, and then transfers them from dollars to tenge. There is a double conversion, with a high percentage taken as commission by American banks.”

Why should this unfair advantage continue if the only benefitting is the USA which has squandered the privilege by printing money out of thin air to launch asymmetrical wars of aggression?

BTW, US multinationals will do business with anyone as long as they can increase profits. Or how do you explain Hollywood’s accommodating stance to China’s demands – perhaps the “unreliable” market of 1.4B+ Chinese is what US multinationals are interested in reaching.

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. both Russia and China were included in the globalized world and adding them to the mix is what kicked off globalization, now they are being cut out, like during the Cold War pre-globalization world

2. now America is realizing that it's better to concentrate their reach in certain locations and ignore the unimportant locations

3. US multinationals can make more money without relying on unreliable nations like Russia and China

1. Hmmmm.... Cold war ended in 1989 roughly so the 1990s (boom times) was when NAFTA, China and Eastern Europe really started to get going

2. I disagree that that is what is happening - I think it's a political reaction to globalization and a significant segment of those who have lost out pushing back on the changes it has brought.  

3. Hard to ignore markets of 1 billion plus, low cost resources and labour providing components and parts.  I think this statement is wishful at best.

[Yzermandius19]

2 minutes ago, Luz P. said:

Just ROLF!  China and Russia are being cut out of the WESTERN version of globalization.

FYI - plans for a trade settlement currency are already advancing under the support of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), a project planning to do away with dollars for trade settlements. The ambition is for it to become the mechanism for freeing over half the world from dollar hegemony, including all nations whose export markets now depend more on Asia than the current developed world.

the dollar isn't going anywhere

western globalization is the only kind

without America facilitating it

there is no globalization

[Luz P.]

 Cool!  Yet another conservative whole-heartedly believing the USA is the navel of the world...

 

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Hmmmm.... Cold war ended in 1989 roughly so the 1990s (boom times) was when NAFTA, China and Eastern Europe really started to get going

2. I disagree that that is what is happening - I think it's a political reaction to globalization and a significant segment of those who have lost out pushing back on the changes it has brought.  

3. Hard to ignore markets of 1 billion plus, low cost resources and labour providing components and parts.  I think this statement is wishful at best.

the political reaction is downstream of geopolitics

China is in the midst of demographic collapse

and their labor costs are too high

all that shit can be done elsewhere

China is totally dependent on America not the other way around

and even America cannot save them from their demographic collapse

no one can

[Yzermandius19]

2 minutes ago, Luz P. said:

 Cool!  Yet another conservative whole-heartedly believing the USA is the navel of the world...

it is

when America had economic trouble the world experiences far more

when other countries have economic trouble America barely feels it

American dominance is obvious

Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1.the political reaction is downstream of geopolitics

2. China is in the midst of demographic collapse and their labor costs are too high

3. all that shit can be done elsewhere

4. China is totally dependent on America not the other way around

5. and even America cannot save them from their demographic collapse

no one can

1. Agreed.
2. Let's see. 
3. Not in 'the west' though, not yet.
4. It's a simplification to state that one side is dependent on the other.  If that were so there would be no 'trade' but one side providing something to another right ?  China is a great consumer of what we and the US export, for example.  They provide goods and raw materials that we use.  Even leading economists are reluctant to guess as to what happens when they pull apart.  When the 'trade war' happened, goods just went through 3rd nations as I recall.
5. What is that ?  Like, an aging population ?

[Yzermandius19]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

5. What is that ?  Like, an aging population ?

yeah

China is fastest aging population on earth

they are going to lose 500 million people by 2050

this is not the sign of a rising power

but one in deep decline about to fall off a cliff

the house of cards collapsing can't be covered up forever

Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[Michael Hardner]

44 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

 

1. but one in deep decline about to fall off a cliff

 

1. Maybe but they still have lots of substistence farmers, I believe, that can be moved to the cities.  But... yes, good points all around thanks.

[Luz P.]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

it is

when America had economic trouble the world experiences far more

when other countries have economic trouble America barely feels it

American dominance is obvious

I gather you’re not familiar with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

A World Bank study found that BRI transportation projects were boosting trade among 70 nations by up to 9.7% and lifting 32 million people out of poverty. By 2027, Beijing is expected to commit $1.3 trillion to this project, which would make it the largest investment in history — more than 10 times the foreign aid Washington allocated to its famed Marshall Plan that rebuilt a ravaged Europe after World War II.

 Meanwhile, by attacking Ukraine, alienating Europe and having sanctions leveled against Russia, Putin has suffered a serious but not necessarily fatal geopolitical blow. He is now accelerating Russia’s pivot to the East and rapidly integrating its economy with China’s, all this while the United States, reels in domestic chaos.

But hey! Let’s keep discussing abortion and the second amendment while the east eats USA’s lunch!

 

 

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, Luz P. said:

I gather you’re not familiar with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

you'd gather incorrectly

dominance of the seas is the key

and America is dominant in the Pacific and Indian oceans not China

the BRI is dependent upon America to keep freedom of navigation open for them

because overland trade isn't taking over the world anymore than China is

overseas trade is king

[Luz P.]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

China is fastest aging population on earth

they are going to lose 500 million people by 2050

 

Many countries are experiencing a population decline.  I fail to see what the big issue is, if China loses 500 million, they’ll still have 1B left. Also, AI can pick up the slack for the lost workforce.