People may think this verbiage is off topic, but there is a connection given the tendency for absolute imperatives to encourage fanatics and their supporters.
AD wrote...
Anyway, I'm not feeling like this is going anywhere particularly useful but I thought I would at least give you this response.
Yeah, I know the feeling, but then I slog on ahead anyway and am often surprised by the useful things to be found. I survive on low expectations.
We do have fundamentally different values.
No, we have different opinions and/or beliefs on how to achieve pretty much the same values.
You may pose it as Globalism vs. Nationalism, I do not.
Yeah, please do not speak for me. I abhor Nationalism equally to Globalism, yet if there was more respect for the integrity of nation states there would be lower production of traumatized, displaced people and certainly no support for the ‘hard-right’ of Ukraine, currently planning and hoping to whoop ass on Donbas, then on to Crimea.
I take issue with that framing as it blurs the distinction between grassroots internationalists such as myself with no real institutional power and the neoliberal elites who have not only a different ideology and agenda but also vast amounts of power to enforce it.
I do not ‘frame it’ like that, you do. But do feel free to say anything you like that may unblur the distinctions between grassroots internationalists and neoliberal elites, because frankly those distinctions do seem rather fuzzy. (Hmmm, is that why you choose to frame it that way?)
Equally so, from your end, I think you should be very suspicious of any form of Nationalism which conflates the interests of the rulers and the ruled.
I’m suspicious of everything AD, don’t you know that.
You may be in favor of deporting refugees, imprisoning the poor and fearful, of "strong" borders, even closed borders.
Please do not speak for me, it is rude.
Good luck with that, because it puts you also directly under the control of Master of the Universe types. They came first for the Latin Americans and the Syrians, someday they may block your passage, too...
Again with the no-borders thing. Look dude, either nation states have at least some degree of self-determination or they are not nation states. Your assumptions are that nation states do not have these rights, then presto chango, -no more nation states. Congratulations, now learn to deal with warlordism as the only money floating around is graft paid to protect transnational corporate ‘resources’.
Also, pointing out that war crimes are happening and expressing opposition to them need not put one on the side of some competing government- that is basic logic.
Yes, so what, now how about the logical connection made between no-borders imperatives and a lack of respect if not hatred of nation states?
