If they're so pro-rest-of-the-world, and care so much about Venezuela and Bolivia, and getting our troops out of other nations, then why are they against globalization? I'm a classical liberal, and I'm not going to criticize flobots for much, but the line about globalization shows me that they either are just spouting stuff they don't understand, or are hypocrites that pretend to care about other nations but don't. Globalization and the rise of capitalism and the liberalization of economies in formerly communist or otherwise oppressive regimes have lifted literally millions out of poverty in 3 or 4 decades.
So, in any case, I can't take these guys seriously. Handlebars sure is catchy, though.
The only problem with globalization is that it has allowed the U.S.A. to manipulate and control the rest of the world for many decades. It may have pulled millions out of poverty but it also allowed the exploitation of many nations around the world. It allows a select few to choose how the majority live around the world. If the leaders of the world weren't so corrupt, globalization would be a valid option for world change but unfortunately it allows corporations to choose what they want to do with the vast majority of the planet. There are other forms of...
The only problem with globalization is that it has allowed the U.S.A. to manipulate and control the rest of the world for many decades. It may have pulled millions out of poverty but it also allowed the exploitation of many nations around the world. It allows a select few to choose how the majority live around the world. If the leaders of the world weren't so corrupt, globalization would be a valid option for world change but unfortunately it allows corporations to choose what they want to do with the vast majority of the planet. There are other forms of globalization that aren't U.S. and North American based and they work, just look at South America where there are more honest and less corruptable leaders being elected and poverty rates have been reduced.
I think they would agree that globalization in general is good. What they're advocating against here is neoliberal globalization. Neoliberalism is most basically capitalism taken to an extreme, which often lets business get in the way of human rights.
I think they would agree that globalization in general is good. What they're advocating against here is neoliberal globalization. Neoliberalism is most basically capitalism taken to an extreme, which often lets business get in the way of human rights.
If they're so pro-rest-of-the-world, and care so much about Venezuela and Bolivia, and getting our troops out of other nations, then why are they against globalization? I'm a classical liberal, and I'm not going to criticize flobots for much, but the line about globalization shows me that they either are just spouting stuff they don't understand, or are hypocrites that pretend to care about other nations but don't. Globalization and the rise of capitalism and the liberalization of economies in formerly communist or otherwise oppressive regimes have lifted literally millions out of poverty in 3 or 4 decades.
So, in any case, I can't take these guys seriously. Handlebars sure is catchy, though.
The only problem with globalization is that it has allowed the U.S.A. to manipulate and control the rest of the world for many decades. It may have pulled millions out of poverty but it also allowed the exploitation of many nations around the world. It allows a select few to choose how the majority live around the world. If the leaders of the world weren't so corrupt, globalization would be a valid option for world change but unfortunately it allows corporations to choose what they want to do with the vast majority of the planet. There are other forms of...
The only problem with globalization is that it has allowed the U.S.A. to manipulate and control the rest of the world for many decades. It may have pulled millions out of poverty but it also allowed the exploitation of many nations around the world. It allows a select few to choose how the majority live around the world. If the leaders of the world weren't so corrupt, globalization would be a valid option for world change but unfortunately it allows corporations to choose what they want to do with the vast majority of the planet. There are other forms of globalization that aren't U.S. and North American based and they work, just look at South America where there are more honest and less corruptable leaders being elected and poverty rates have been reduced.
Neoliberalism has not gotten people out of poverty. Try reading "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein.
Neoliberalism has not gotten people out of poverty. Try reading "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein.
I think they would agree that globalization in general is good. What they're advocating against here is neoliberal globalization. Neoliberalism is most basically capitalism taken to an extreme, which often lets business get in the way of human rights.
I think they would agree that globalization in general is good. What they're advocating against here is neoliberal globalization. Neoliberalism is most basically capitalism taken to an extreme, which often lets business get in the way of human rights.