In right wing social media activity I often see statements like “the globalists will fail” or
Globalists are evil
These terms are often associated with global-trade, liberal free-trade and open international travel. Also there is a often protested or controversial conference in Switzerland “World Economic Forum”, where rich and powerful people meet in Davos. It seems like the right opposes such internationalist conferences more than the left.
Do leftists oppose globalism?
When the right speaks of “globalism,” it is a dog whistle for anti-communism & anti-semitism, a euphemism for the “global Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracy.”
When the left criticizes the World Economic Forum, it does it in the context of class war, not in the right’s racist, harebrained context.
I’d say, in some technical sense, we’re actually more against “”“globalists”“” than the right, because ATM “”“globalists”“” are all varying degrees of capitalists/imperialists/fascists.
That term’s usage is often incoherent and detached from reality, and may have racist implications (depending on the speaker, knowingly or not). So we don’t use it.
We’re able to clearly articulate what we’re for and against, so we just do that instead.
It does not make any sense to oppose international cooperation. Like it’s moronic outside the scope of politics- it’s just straight up brainwashed. “The people are foreign and therefore we can only ever talk to them to exploit them!” Like really?
Marxist-Leninists are internationalists, as in supporting the international movement against imperialism and for socialism globally. The idea of free-trade, and dominance of imperialist finance capital, WEF, etc. is right-wing, and leftists oppose this.
“Globalism” is usually a dogwhistle for racist views.
Marxist-Leninists are internationalists. But the Soviet union was pretty isolated at the end of the cold war wasn’t it? And the wall fell, which lead to more movement between borders?
The USSR was only isolated from the imperial core states, not from other socialist nor non-alligned states. The imperial core, in its hubris, often calls itself the “international community,” but they’ve always been a minority in terms of population, land, and natural resouces.
Being an internationalist in the context of Marxism-Leninism means supporting movements undermining imperialism, which the WEF is a part of perpetuating. It isn’t about isolationism, and further much of that was driven by western sanctions.
Is the European union viewed as an internationalist & globalist project by Marxists or is is it labeled as something else?
Imperialist. It’s international, but is an alliance of imperialist states that plunder internationally. Internationalism in a progressive manner requires undermining imperialism.
I cant speak for other leftists but if there are no states this whole point becones sort of moot. We need global trade even in decentralizrd, stateless communities. But without a nation for this nationalism to take root in I don’t see it being as big of an issue. For instance, none of these right wingers complain about their cups of coffee in the morning and they’d be pissed if the trade routes that supply it suddenly vanished.
they’d be pissed if the trade routes that supply it suddenly vanished.
Didn’t Trump tariff coffee imports from Brazil or some shit? Is this a sign that Trump is anti-globalist?
No, this is called Protectionist trade policies. You can still practice protectionist economic policy in a “globalised” economy.
Like davel said “globalist” isn’t really a useful term.
You need to abandon the term “globalism” altogether. The left doesn’t use it, and on the right it’s a dog whistle. The word has no coherent meaning. It’s a floating signifier.
