Volume 4, Issue 35
Societies repel and revolt against any international agreement that threatens their perceived way of life. We in America believe that individual liberty, due process, and equal opportunity are paramount goals of any societal structure. We are naïve if we believe that all other societies want the same thing. Many groups of people are more dedicated to religion, tribal governments, and hierarchical authoritarian systems. These varied commitments to different world views can even complicate the application of ordinances in the World Trade Organization. Free enterprise may in fact threaten authoritarian controls.
There has been prolific discussion about the benefits of global treaties governing everything from the seas, to the environment, to trade. Exemptions in performance or variances are always included to account for the cultural needs of the sovereignties involved. Yet in spite of the challenges, certain leaders tirelessly work for globalization. It is impossible to advocate world treaties without a particular world view. The potential outcome of one world systems is always reflective of the advocate’s world view.
Why?
The answer is because a personal world view is the combination of ideas, morality, and view of an optimum world society. Atheism versus any religious view will have as its basis a different reality check. Free enterprise versus socialism sets the foundation for government structure. The very nature of human dignity is defined by the very nature of achieved hope. And this in turn constructs the flywheel of society that projects momentum evenly to all members, resulting in ultimate freedom.
George Soros is not only a known globalist, he has contributed billions of dollars to various organizations around the globe for the purpose of influencing governments. In the United States, his most noteworthy beneficiary is MoveOn.org. MoveOn is a liberal organization advocating more government and less private sector solutions. What is Mr. Soros’ world view? It is not clear. That in itself is a problem. Why not state unequivocally what one’s world view and purpose for the world is?
In the current turbulent U.S. Presidential campaign, international trade agreements have been an issue. Candidate Bernie Sanders ran on the proposition that current proposed trade agreements are unfair to American workers. Foreign workers would say that the United States treats wage earners in other parts of the world inequitably. Unions, environmentalists, and ethnic rights groups demand standards applicable to manufacturing that cannot be realistically incorporated politically by all sovereigns. What then do George Soros and other international industrialists hope to achieve by influencing internal politics of the United States?
Recently, the State Department released the schedule of Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State. The cursory review indicates that she maintained an exhaustive schedule. She of course met with numerous heads of state and government officials. She also met with a few prominent billionaires. Most of these were U.S. citizens like Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates. However, one private meeting was with George Soros. Mr. Soros holds dual citizenship in Hungary and the United States. But unlike Mr. Buffet and the Gates family, he is extremely active in supporting left-wing groups like MoveOn.org. MoveOn.org has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President. The Gates family’s philanthropic intentions center on humanitarian aid. They are not front-and-center on advancing a world view of government. Mr. Soros may be involved in humanitarian efforts, but his primary energy is spent on impacting government policy. As with any private meeting held with a dignitary at the level of Secretary of State, the purpose, the content and the substance of the meeting and conversation should be made public. Knowing a person’s world view is critical in understanding the direction in which they intend to lead.
Donald Trump has stated that he will renegotiate international trade agreements that he deems unfair to America. He may find this difficult in that other countries will push back to maintain the cultural dictates of their societies. But Mr. Trump’s world view is clear. Free enterprise should be the basis for any world economic system. And the United States has every right to position itself for trade in the best interest of its own citizens.
It is important to remember that in 1776 the American colonies declared independence from the then world order, that at its core was based on the concept that birth is destiny. Whatever station in life you were born, you were restricted to that state and from participating at a level greater than your birth. Religion was to be independent of government to any extent that it restricted freedom. Freedom, in and of itself, was the overriding purpose and goal.
Globalists, whether industrialists or government leaders, more times than not, do not trust freedom to allow a person to pursue happiness as they see fit. They have this elitist view that only government, through management and regulation, can proffer a platform on which all peoples can stand equally. They even seem resentful of the United States trusting the individual in his or her freedom to provide for themselves and the greater good as the superior moral concept. Government is to facilitate the individual’s pursuit of happiness, not dictate the individual’s destiny. Freedom and free will is the marrow of unalienable rights. It is worthy of defense and position in any and all international agreements.
Our Founding Fathers believed in unalienable rights granted by God. Station in life in this system of things was not to be binding. It is just to defend this truth in the sovereignty conflict of globalization. Freedom is God’s gift and our obligation to defend. This was the Founding Fathers’ world view and it should be ours.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?In the world today, cultural, religious, economic, and governmental conflict proceeds unabated and seems intractable. What brings the issue of discord forward is the fact that, since World War II, the world has been moving toward globalization. Sovereign governments are discovering that it is very difficult to enter into international treaties of trade without also dealing with the cultural aspects of religion and world view of rule of law. These two elements, religion and the due process application of law, are not only dramatic and emotional components of cultural societal purpose, they are fundamental and governing.
Societies repel and revolt against any international agreement that threatens their perceived way of life. We in America believe that individual liberty, due process, and equal opportunity are paramount goals of any societal structure. We are naïve if we believe that all other societies want the same thing. Many groups of people are more dedicated to religion, tribal governments, and hierarchical authoritarian systems. These varied commitments to different world views can even complicate the application of ordinances in the World Trade Organization. Free enterprise may in fact threaten authoritarian controls.
There has been prolific discussion about the benefits of global treaties governing everything from the seas, to the environment, to trade. Exemptions in performance or variances are always included to account for the cultural needs of the sovereignties involved. Yet in spite of the challenges, certain leaders tirelessly work for globalization. It is impossible to advocate world treaties without a particular world view. The potential outcome of one world systems is always reflective of the advocate’s world view.
Why?
The answer is because a personal world view is the combination of ideas, morality, and view of an optimum world society. Atheism versus any religious view will have as its basis a different reality check. Free enterprise versus socialism sets the foundation for government structure. The very nature of human dignity is defined by the very nature of achieved hope. And this in turn constructs the flywheel of society that projects momentum evenly to all members, resulting in ultimate freedom.
George Soros is not only a known globalist, he has contributed billions of dollars to various organizations around the globe for the purpose of influencing governments. In the United States, his most noteworthy beneficiary is MoveOn.org. MoveOn is a liberal organization advocating more government and less private sector solutions. What is Mr. Soros’ world view? It is not clear. That in itself is a problem. Why not state unequivocally what one’s world view and purpose for the world is?
In the current turbulent U.S. Presidential campaign, international trade agreements have been an issue. Candidate Bernie Sanders ran on the proposition that current proposed trade agreements are unfair to American workers. Foreign workers would say that the United States treats wage earners in other parts of the world inequitably. Unions, environmentalists, and ethnic rights groups demand standards applicable to manufacturing that cannot be realistically incorporated politically by all sovereigns. What then do George Soros and other international industrialists hope to achieve by influencing internal politics of the United States?
Recently, the State Department released the schedule of Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State. The cursory review indicates that she maintained an exhaustive schedule. She of course met with numerous heads of state and government officials. She also met with a few prominent billionaires. Most of these were U.S. citizens like Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates. However, one private meeting was with George Soros. Mr. Soros holds dual citizenship in Hungary and the United States. But unlike Mr. Buffet and the Gates family, he is extremely active in supporting left-wing groups like MoveOn.org. MoveOn.org has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President. The Gates family’s philanthropic intentions center on humanitarian aid. They are not front-and-center on advancing a world view of government. Mr. Soros may be involved in humanitarian efforts, but his primary energy is spent on impacting government policy. As with any private meeting held with a dignitary at the level of Secretary of State, the purpose, the content and the substance of the meeting and conversation should be made public. Knowing a person’s world view is critical in understanding the direction in which they intend to lead.
Donald Trump has stated that he will renegotiate international trade agreements that he deems unfair to America. He may find this difficult in that other countries will push back to maintain the cultural dictates of their societies. But Mr. Trump’s world view is clear. Free enterprise should be the basis for any world economic system. And the United States has every right to position itself for trade in the best interest of its own citizens.
It is important to remember that in 1776 the American colonies declared independence from the then world order, that at its core was based on the concept that birth is destiny. Whatever station in life you were born, you were restricted to that state and from participating at a level greater than your birth. Religion was to be independent of government to any extent that it restricted freedom. Freedom, in and of itself, was the overriding purpose and goal.
Globalists, whether industrialists or government leaders, more times than not, do not trust freedom to allow a person to pursue happiness as they see fit. They have this elitist view that only government, through management and regulation, can proffer a platform on which all peoples can stand equally. They even seem resentful of the United States trusting the individual in his or her freedom to provide for themselves and the greater good as the superior moral concept. Government is to facilitate the individual’s pursuit of happiness, not dictate the individual’s destiny. Freedom and free will is the marrow of unalienable rights. It is worthy of defense and position in any and all international agreements.
Our Founding Fathers believed in unalienable rights granted by God. Station in life in this system of things was not to be binding. It is just to defend this truth in the sovereignty conflict of globalization. Freedom is God’s gift and our obligation to defend. This was the Founding Fathers’ world view and it should be ours.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?