I am not a globalist, I do believe in Internationalism. Have fun.

Just a day, nothing much to talk about. I did watch an interesting video (it is an audio tape on YouTube). It is a recording of a book. The book is called "Tragedy and Hope" and was written by one of Bill Clinton's professors about history and a secret group that he worked for. The audio goes on for hours and hours and hours. The author, Carol Quigley, is sort of a bore. He was every bit a pompous, self-important thief. His claim to fame was really stealing from Arnold Toynbee, a brilliant historian. They both agreed on one thing. That there should be a world government.

Americans on the right often believe that liberals want a one world government while supporting international regulation of trade and commerce. Liberals are no better. Both sides believe in international law for certain things. The question is not whether or not there should be international law, that is merely contract law in the end. The question is how those laws should be enforced. In order for nations to trade, nations have to have some trust in one another. Imagine how much oil Saudi Arabia would send us if they never got anything back or we kept changing what they got back in exchange. The essence of international law is contract law and I studied both.

Governments make treaties, isn't that international law? The purpose of the United Nations is to enforce treaties through peaceful means. It is a place where countries agree to not deal with another country that breaks the rules of the game. In the past international law was enforced by one country destroying another on their own. A sort of might makes right. Should we go back to that or is some international law allowed?

The reason I will not link to Alex Jones, Rense or even Icke is because they are against international law. The reason I do not agree with Ron Paul is because he is against international law and the government helping it's citizens. They are against any taxation and claim to favor the constitution. The founding fathers believed in taxation and that was they fought over. They said, "taxation without representation is tyranny", their focus was on representation, on democracy. They were collectivists, they believed in community and working together.

We should never throw the baby out with the bath water. There is nothing wrong with working together and there is nothing wrong with sharing resources. There is nothing wrong with helping your neighbor, feeding the homeless, visiting the imprisoned. There is nothing wrong with trying to make the world a better place.

Anyone who has read me for long should know that I am no globalist, I like nation states. I like the choice of where I can live and under what laws. Want to see the world change tomorrow, open all borders and people will vote with their feet. The most important laws are the ones about immigration. That is how humans vote, with their lives. How can we claim to believe in individual rights if we are willing to outlaw what two consenting adults do in private? How can we claim to believe in freedom if we do not believe in the freedom to leave where you are and go where you will, to associate with people who you agree with?

Life should never be about what we do not want, it should be about where we want society to be. Where do you want humanity to go and we don't get to go backwards.