Maurice Re: "nation" You are so old fashioned in your thinking, so "mid 20th century". <g> Nationalism has arisen in the world again and with a vengeance and this is a very good and positive thing.
The Euro-socialist world view which you proclaim stems from belief that socialism must be international (and adopted everywhere or else it will fail everywhere) and also as an attempt to put an end to the European tendency for war (the World Wars). Europe and a few former British colonies have been vastly changed in most every way by the application of these Euro-socialist programs but much of the rest of the world has been largely untouched.
China is now banging the war-drum and proclaiming a new Chinese nationalism. China proclaims the right on nationalist grounds to control Taiwan based on nothing more than the fact that Taiwan is Chinese. This is a WONDERFUL development. As a powerful nationalism arises in China WE HERE will be encouraged to respond with a renewed AMERICAN nationalism.
Go to China Maurice, go out into the interior somewhere and look around. There is nobody there but the Chinese. Now go back there 1000 years from now and it will be the same, nobody there but the native people. And its the same in India, most of Latin America, the Muslim world, even little places like Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam and many, many others. And in all these places a new and very powerful nationalism is arising. It is the wave of the future. The Rockefeller brothers "one-world New World Order" is the past. And the only places where this project has made any impact is Europe and the ex-Brit colonies. I think those places need to wake up and respond to the new world that is emerging before it is too late.
When I mentioned the USA and free trade I was making reference to HISTORY, not the present day. Back when the Brits, Dutch, Germans, Belgians, French, Spanish and even little Portugal had empires all these empires were first and foremost closed trading networks. That was their purpose. And our primary foriegn policy disputes in those days involved our attempts to break into those closed networks, as we possessed no empire in those bygone days. We have a 200 year long history of advocating "free trade" but this is mainly because we had no imperial trade network of our own and made not real attempt to acquire one. "Free trade" is not a valid Constitutional objective for our government to pursue.
The Brits had the first China "Treaty Ports" and in the beginning these adventures were a project of the Crown and the East India Company. By the end ALL the powers except the USA had Treaty Ports, even Germany had two. We protested the "Treaty Port" system from beginning to end as the ports DID NOT allow "free trade" but were an attempt by the concession holder to charge high fees to any outsider (like the USA clipper ships) that desired to trade there. The only European power to conduct the China trade in a decent manner was Spain through her Philippine colony.
Maurice, how come it is that "liberals" like to call people names online ("commie", "fascist" "stupid" and the like)? It is always "liberals" who do this. Why? I have never had one do it in person. I have been posting and e-mailing since 1995 and I don't think I have EVER called anybody a name.
Slagle
|
