Sick of Globalism Yet?
Like a Bug in a Test Tube
by David S. Reif
5 August 2008
On the one hand local and state government is a huge bore to
a lot of people who see only the news on cable TV, with all its emphasis on big
national events and turbulent world news blockbusters. On the other hand, local government is
the site of the most passionate fights over principle. In a land dispute or a school board
issue, tempers can flare to the point of violence. Yet between the catfights
and the day to day work of towns and counties, keeping the water running or the
roads fixed is the real stuff of democracy and local control. Within this
arena, and the lessons learned there, ride the hopes of anyone interested in
restoring the true federalism lost with the death of the First American
Republic (1789-1868).
That knowledge is not lost on those who seek to extend
centralism. They know that a responsibly run and successful local government
will lead the governed to realize they do not need a central government which
only covets power. It is far easier for those in power if the governed are kept
in a glass cage of regulations and occasionally poked with a stick to keep them
stirred up and unaware of their worsening predicament. Small cities and towns
are particularly hamstrung with existing regulations and their implementation;
the new ones typically filed for tomorrow, creating a backlog of work and a
constant deficit in enforcement. The regulators and other agencies are well aware of this deficit and are
duly “understanding” about the inability of local government to keep up. Nearly
all local government agencies are in violation of some regulations all the
time. Department of Transportation, American’s with Disabilities Act, OSHA,
EPA, and other agencies, laws, or regulations are constantly being updated,
keeping state and local governments in a constant condition of enforcement
default. Therefore, the regulated are always at the mercy of the regulators. In other words, the central government
has got you where they want you.
This system is by design unworkable and inherently coercive.
That’s the point of it. At least since 9 July 1868, when the Fourteenth
Amendment was passed. Since then, the central government has consciously sought
to extend its power over all other government entities within the border of the
United States. The central government can swoop in and start investigating and
sure enough they will find a violation.
This centralized system has evolved since the War Between
the States in an ever tightening noose of regulations and laws which seek to
make local government the purveyor of central government rules. This makes local control nothing but a
farce tossed around in congressional committee meetings by people increasingly
conditioned to extend the authority of their employers, the central government.
Yet at the same time there are stakeholders who are equally interested in
centralizing the power of government. The public (indoctrinated by a school system beholden to the government)
cries out for new laws to control every outrage from child abuse to pollution
without a thought to what the implementation of those laws will be. Driven by
the dominant media, which depends on nationalistic laws to operate, the public
rarely looks at local options to solve their problems. When they do, they find
out the local government can’t do anything because it is hogtied by the central
government. Caught in this
dizzying shell game, is it any wonder the average citizen is frustrated beyond
words?
Today the game is quickly changing. With the advent of
globalism, the regulatory authorities are themselves increasingly under the
spell of international interests. Congress has discovered it can abdicate its
responsibility to global regulation, so it can spend more time raiding the
national treasury, throwing money at NASA, global warming, “bridges to
nowhere,” or other pet projects to line the pockets of its friends.
Both major candidates for President are committed to
increasing the influence of global institutions and reducing the role of
states, counties, and municipalities. In Mr Obama we have the new
African-American-Open Society-socialist agenda of George Soros and others,
while embodied in Mr McCain we have the more familiar David Rockefeller-Federal
Reserve-global Stalinist agenda. Neither bode well for liberty, but both will give us an increasingly
bitter taste of what it means to live under “globalism.”
The following story gives us a sample of life to come.
Carbolic Nettles: A Fable of Modern Life
Marshall Walker lived in a nice three-bedroom house on the
edge of town. His daughter liked
to play outside, and as she got older all the kids in the neighborhood started
to play in the empty field next door. No one knew who owned or took care of the
lot, so it was assumed it was alright to play on. In the past, the field was
never mowed, and all the kids were too young to care about playing there, but
as they started to play their ball games and hide-and-seek on the empty field,
something needed to be done. Marshall decided he needed to mow it because the
kids were complaining about insects and snakes. He went down to Wal-Mart and
bought a new Weed Whacker made especially for tall weeds. It was made in China,
but he thought that it would work well enough for a year and then he could
figure out something else when it broke down. So he went to cutting weeds and
in a day cleared out a nice place for the kids to play.
Time passed. One day Marshall got a letter in the mail. It
was a strange official letter with a Canadian address. Opening it, he read:
“Notice of Infraction.” Marshall
was stumped. He had never been in Canada. He read on. “This is to inform you
that according to photographic records of the Medusa 13-VX ecological
monitoring satellite, actions taken by Marshall Walker (then his Social
Security number) unlawfully have destroyed a protected stand of Carbolic
Nettles known to have habitated there.” With the coldest of intent the letter
went on. “You are to fill in the following form or be prepared to accept the
actions of a restoration panel when they rule on your case.” He looked at the
seven-page form and promptly threw it away. This is stupid, he thought. All I
did was mow an empty field which nobody around here owns. If this is some kind of joke, it isn’t
funny. If it is a government deal, then it is something which doesn’t apply to
me. I’m an American and this is from Canada.
Marshall went on with his life until 45 days later, when
another letter arrived and this one he had to sign for. Tearing it open,
Marshall read the short, tersely worded letter:
“Because you
have chosen to ignore our previous letter, the panel has referred your case to
the Global Ecological Court in Warsaw, Poland, after determining that the
destruction of Carbolic Nettle habitat constituted an infraction pursuant to
the Treaty of Mexico City ratified in May of 1990 and amended in Boston, August
of 2006. Implementation of the Treaty began [and it read March of last year]
and enforcement commenced 90 days subsequent. The land in question (it gave the
exact longitude and latitude) is owned by the Azad Genetic Institute, an
international research group registered with us and headquartered in Qatar.
They are doing legitimate scientific research on guarded species in open
habitat and your actions have interfered with sanctioned study material. You
may appear in person or with an approved attorney at the Court in Warsaw on [a
date 30 days hence] or forfeit your case to a judgment. This judgment can
include penalties up to and including fines, jail term, or seizure of property
in order to satisfy the Court.” Signed, [the signature was in the Cyrillic alphabet so he couldn’t read
it].”
Sweat broke out on Marshall’s brow. He grabbed his phone and
called up someone he knew at City Hall. He explained what happened and his
friend said, “Well, that’s the first case I’ve heard about. But you know a few years ago we did get
a pamphlet on that global-eco nonsense and I think the City Administrator got a
packet from some foreign country and I think he posted something on the City
Public Notice Board for a while. Of course, that’s all we are really required
to do, ah, legally speaking. But
it’s out of our hands. We didn’t
have enough funds in the budget to participate in the national program and
besides we couldn’t get volunteers to serve on a committee which met in Canada
once a year. So that’s all I
know.” The sweat turned cold. Marshall’s skin was clammy and his heart started
to beat really fast.
The moral of this little fable is: With globalism anything
is possible.
Even Libertarians Do It
If it isn’t bad enough that the central government in
Washington spews out laws and regulations, our leaders have for years tied us
up in a whole new game of global regulating. The game is also played on the
field of international law, which cannot be altered through a vote of the
people. Not only do we have to
contend with our own centralists but there is another legion of them working on
global treaties which will eventually impact each of us. We are all affected by
the forces of international agreements. There are appropriate rules which
govern the high seas, aircraft travel, or other mutual areas of interest. It is
another world, however, when overseas laws require standardization of food and
packaging and textile composition and dyes and communication protocols. This
process requires a forced conformity which amounts to mandates. There are hundreds, if not thousands,
of building materials, paints, industrial equipment, foods, medicine, and other
products which are traded globally. They must conform to standards which are
themselves the results of international trade groups, authorized under various
treaties which have been agreed to by presidents of both parties.
Many of these faceless mandates are in direct opposition to
the ideal of a confederation of allied independent states in North America as
the Constitution originally envisioned. To reclaim that dream we will not only
need control of our own regions, but must promote a vibrant local economy
independent of far away producers guarded by nameless unaccountable lawmakers.
Even more insidious, however, is the creeping takeover of
our minds by the symbols of a global control. I remember watching vintage
movies about 19th-century Britain, where a symbol of empire was a shop in
London with clocks on the wall, showing the time in different cities of the
British Empire. The English crown controlled cities in every time zone. “The
sun never sets on the British Empire” was the source of identity for
generations of Britons. They probably have come closest to achieving world
control as anyone, that is, closest to globalism as anyone. That was a straight
out colonial empire. Troops for Great Britain conquered and occupied other
countries. There was no pretext about it. Conquest was conquest, and the Crown
and Parliament were responsible for it. You knew just exactly who was
accountable. Today’s iteration of global conquest eschews the trappings of
power and accountability, preferring instead to rule with symbols and faceless
agencies embedded in arcane treaties. An empire built by lawyers instead of
troops.
The institutions of society are today filled with symbols of
globalism. “Free Traders” flirt with liberals and conservatives alike. The Business
Roundtable and the Chamber of Commerce love to flaunt their progressive outlook
on trade and at the same time support the Leftists who attack the Confederate
Flag, which has come to represent the cause of local control and resistance to
globalism. Everyone, it is
alleged, loves the international nature of commerce. There are even
Libertarians who believe that small government means “no borders” or other
impediments to trade. Whether marketing TVs, pop music, cars, or clothes, the
trade laws are increasingly stacked against the local economy. Go to your
neighborhood Wal-Mart and pick up anything in the store to see where it is
from. It is likely made in the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) than in the USA.
I was brought up calling it Red China, and find it hard to kick the habit, but
the marketers at most trans-nationals prefer to call it simply China. I am told
that in the state of Mississippi, twenty-five cents of every retail dollar is
spent in Wal-Mart. Other states are not far behind I suppose. Setting aside the
jobs we are losing and the money being sucked overseas, a brief look at how
Wal-Mart gets its merchandise is helpful.
Discount Slavery
Red China is our friend. President George Bush will go to
Beijing to represent the United States of America and bring the greetings and
good will of the American people to the Olympic Games. 
No one will officially
say we are in a proxy war with China, which arms Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria. No
one will talk much about the vicious oppression of Tibet and the destruction of
its culture. Certainly the dedicated Christian, Mr Bush, will not lecture our
friends in the PRC about the oppression of Christianity in China. But you will
have it beaten into your head by the dominant media that PRC is a “wonderful
global trading partner.” The PRC (Red China) is an officially atheist and
materialist country, whose leadership murdered tens of millions of its own
citizens to consolidate power. It is no stretch to say that the rulers are a
group of very cunning and ruthless people. Power is loosely divided up between
the Communist Party and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA or Red Army),
although the Red Army is nominally under the Party’s control. Nothing moves to
or from Red China without an OK from the Red Army. It controls all the shipping
companies which export goods from China; goods then sold to Wal-Mart and others
and finally sold to us. This trade must be very profitable for American
companies. Buying cheap, slave-labor-laced products from the Chinese so
inexpensive they can slap a frightful mark-up on them and still sell the
products to us at “discount” prices.
Doesn’t this process make Wal-Mart the de facto marketing
agent for the PLA? Sure, the source of production is not the Red Army, but if
it were not for its subsidized logistical capabilities to get the goods to
market, Wal-Mart couldn’t sell them so cheap. To me it is frightening, and the depths of this madness are
nowhere near an end. Our present
“conservative” State Department permits this practice and has reinforced
policies at one time considered part of what used to be called the
“International Communist Conspiracy.” Never mind the fact that Red China uses
slave labor, prison labor, and child labor to make those cheap goods. These
facts seem to go unnoticed in the face of President Bush’s U.N. speech in which
he decried international slavery. For his efforts he received a deafening
silence from the American Left, which prefers to talk about slavery only in the
ante-bellum South, therefore not offending their allies in Asia and Africa.
But why pick on Wal-Mart? Examples of the practice outlined above are multitude. Pier
I or Hobby Lobby or Target or K-Mart are also busy trying to put the individual
American craftsman, manufacturer, and small shop-owner out of business. Few
seem to care about the extent of the globalist bubble.
Worldwide Indigestion
This is a micro-view of globalism and how it works. Even
though the enormous trade with the PRC is mind boggling, it is small compared
to the global trade in money, stocks, and commodities. The trade in consumer products pales in
comparison to the wheeling and dealing done by world bankers, oil, and
commodity traders. This is the venue of great “humanitarians” like George Soros,
for instance, who built his pecuniary empire on manipulating currencies with
little regard for the dreadful consequences of his actions. But globalism has
no use for traditional cultural norms like ethics. Mr. Soros says as much in
his books, and the Red Chinese says it with their actions. These are the
architects of the new global system. Atheistic, materialist, modernist, amoral,
global pirates and gangsters are the folks who run the show and set the example
these days. To them, individual rights, dignity, and self-sufficiency, like
ethics, are needless relics of a more enlightened time.
The great 19th century heroes of statism like Abraham
Lincoln and Karl Marx would be proud that their ideas have spawned the
globalists of today. Although neither had much regard for what happens to the
people on the local level of society, these two big government thinkers helped
usher in the current era the in which the leaders of today’s world see vistas
of control not dreamed of by the political idols of the 19th century. A new
crop of super-centralists ascends to power. Their appetite for supremacy has
only been whetted by recent events. Keep the antacids handy; although they will
do the eating, we will get the indigestion.
About the Author
David S. Reif lives in the Missouri Ozarks and has written about politics, modernism, and the impact of science on culture for publications in the United States, Europe, and the Internet. He has served on numerous local and county government commissions and on the board of community-based artists' and writers' programs, chemical-dependency centers, and art marketing groups. He was the director of the independent scholar society, The Institute for Perennial Studies, and edited its journal, Perennis. In addition, Mr Reif has served as a guest speaker numerous times. He has been a professional artist since 1981, currently working in silver and other precious materials.
This is a revised and updated edition of an essay that appeared
on The Dixie Beacon, June, 2005
