This year is a special year. That’s because 100 years ago, in the 11th month, on the 11th day, at the 11th hour, major hostilities of World War I were formally ended. A massive “us” versus “them“, where millions died, finally came to an end. Around the world, this special occasion is called Armistice Day or Remembrance Day. In the United States, we call it Veterans Day.

To mark this year’s special milestone, world leaders attended a special ceremony at Arc de Triomphe; one of the most famous monuments in Paris, France. There, French President Emmanuel Macron seized the occasion to not only pay tribute to the millions of soldiers killed during WWI but to also lash out against nationalism and President Trump.

I want point out that Macron was lashing out at the other side, for choosing their side, which actually forced people around the world to choose a side and all at an event marking the atrocities of choosing sides. I think he probably knew that though. In my opinion, he merely demonstrated how stupid he believes the people of this world really are. Let’s examine!

Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism: nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism,” Macron said. “When we say ‘our interests come first, those of others don’t matter’, we erase the very thing that a nation holds most precious, that which gives it life and makes it great: its moral values.

Notice the “us” and “them” theme to that. This was clearly a message to President Trump who is a self-identified “nationalist” and promotes what he calls an “America First” policy; which is a strikingly similar direction given to adults on commercial airplanes in regard to oxygen masks during a crisis (parents put the oxygen mask on first, so they can make the opportunity to assist their children in getting the oxygen they need – and because you would become useless for both of you if you didn’t and you died) – meaning that if America can’t take care of itself (first), it surely won’t be able to take care of everyone else (as expected).

However, Macron’s statement is clearly a statement made out of either ignorance or deception. If you break it down, you can see what I mean.

  • The definition of the nationalism is “a patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts.
  • The definition of patriotism is “the quality of being patriotic; vigorous support for one’s country.
  • The definition of patriotic is “having or expressing devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country.”
  • And the definition of devotion is “love, loyalty, or enthusiasm for a person, activity, or cause.

I’m sorry, but I’m failing to see how nationalism is the exact opposite of patriotism and I’m failing to see how or why any of this is considered bad. By definition alone, we can see that the two are quite similar. I think the hint of his intent and contortion comes from the second part of his statement in regard to the “our interests first” part. He doesn’t like that because it simply goes against the idea of globalism and that’s not what “they” like (again: “us” versus “them“). So define irony as America is always told to keep to themselves and when we finally do, it’s xenophobic or isolationist. As a result, the world leaders that get money from the United States attempt to demonize anything resembling patriotism and hope you don’t examine it too closely. Understand that when you look up the word “Patriot”, you’ll find that it really means “a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.” That’s something EVERY globalist fears because globalism is actually against your national position.

Now, that’s not to say that all nationalism is a good thing either because I’m not saying that at all. Clearly, extreme forms of nationalism are sometimes marked with the feeling of superiority over other countries. There is a big different between being proud of who you are and where you’re from and then thinking you’re better than everyone else. I guess this is sort of how like American’s consider themselves #1 when there is little evidence to support that idea – unless we are talking about semi-free nations that incarcerate their own people; we are definitely #1 there. Perhaps #1 in uncountable laws. We are probably #1 there as well.

Anyway, it didn’t take long for people on social media to begin talking about Macron’s speech. I stumbled upon one conversation on LinkedIn that actually inspired this article. The post read:

French President Emmanuel Macron just gave a ridiculous speech equating all nationalism with spiked-helmet militarism.  We need a moderate and rational economic nationalism, not globalism.

Let’s take a moment to appreciate his statement by understanding what “Globalism” really is. Globalism is defined as the operation or planning of economic and foreign policy on a global basis. Of course, globalism is naturally opposed to economic and foreign policy on a national or even local basis. The Cambridge Dictionary says that globalism is the idea that events in one country cannot be separated from those in another and that economic and foreign policy should be planned in an international way. YIKES! So basically, if globalism wins, your local representatives would really be the long-arm of distant powers – a problem our Founders gave their lives to rid themselves of and went to great lengths to warn us about – but perhaps that is a different article.

In modern terms, the problem is that we are talking about increasing integration and interdependence of domestic and overseas markets which is likely to result in income and employment declines/shifts as well as the downward spiral of the world economy in general. That may sound like a bold claim but we have the evidence. Look at NAFTA. Or better yet, look at how “wonderful” Europe has become since the introduction of the EU and look at why some are so eager to leave it. If it fails big on a small level, it’s likely going to fail immensely on the large one.

Of course, it didn’t take long before globalist minions started commenting on his post…

It was not at all ridiculous. Unfortunately, it was highly necessary, given a resurgence of nationalism, always dangerous, here and in the EU. Please explain what you mean by economic nationalism and why is it necessary, as compared to other models that ensure a good, sustainable life for all, no matter where they live and no matter the arbitrary borders we create in our minds or as national markers.

That poster actually revised the comment from an earlier post which read “other models that ensure prosperity to all”. I guess she felt that she had to tone it down a bit because the Castro was starting to show. It’s okay. I think we know what she meant and why she meant it. Anyway, this next poster had an interesting take as well.

Wasn’t at all ridiculous. The roots of nationalism are xenophobia and racism. Patriotism is a more pure form of what folks really want. One can be patriotic AND isolationist. Then again I’m a Patriotic, American who is a globalist…we live in a globally connected community, and there is no denying that.

I must say that I am always amazed at how some people can buy into certain agendas so freely and with zero examination. But then again, I remind myself that Stalin, Mao and even Hitler likely thought they were doing the right thing and plenty of people loved them for what they were doing. Of course, this doesn’t explain why so many are so eager to hate themselves but I digress. How sad is it that instead of trying to discover WHY the original poster said Macron’s speech was ridiculous, it was instantly “not ridiculous“, and then followed up with personal perceptions, talking points and irrelevance? Granted, it very well could have been a simple hatred of Trump. That is the trend after all. Regardless, I suppose it’s all the evidence we need to demonstrate the necessity of different corners (“us” versus “them” – seems to be a theme here).

Yes, we live in a globally connected world. Yes, nationalist positions have the potential to result in things like the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (known as Nazi) but equating nationalism (patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts) with isolationism, xenophobia, racism and militarism is in fact… ridiculous. I can be quite proud of where I come from, what school I went to, what nation I’m loyal to or what my heritage is without being xenophobic or racist. This is similar to how we can be patriotic, foster a great economy and still be connected globally without subjecting our nation to the whims and failed policies that have proven themselves to be detrimental to the people and destructive to the principles that our foundation was actually built on. Furthermore, a nation can also protect itself from those nations that would try to impose their will and be justified for doing it without it turning into some “you think you’re better than us” tiff. That’s not it at all; we just don’t like the way you’re doing it. Heck, we don’t like the way WE are doing it.

Additionally, I’m currently unaware of ANY model that exists that can provide “prosperity to all“, that does not somehow unethically rob from others. Even the models that exist that provide prosperity to some are often corrupt and don’t work. True prosperity comes from taking advantage of opportunity and innovation; not big government, globalization & forced redistribution. You need a highly educated society that understands multiple contexts and complex ideas and is willing to work hard while working together. Again, America has failed itself. That’s why we are talking about America First. We’ve got some problems here that need to be worked out before we accept the load of the planet. And I’m sorry, but you’ll have a hard time selling me on ANY redistribution model as long as labor is attached to a currency that is derived from a central bank. Now, get these robots up and running like Star Wars or Star Trek and we’ll have ourselves a different conversation.

I don’t want to come across as negative here; that is not my intent. Macron’s speech wasn’t all bad. He did provide an interesting talking point to consider. He said “Old demons are rising again, ready to sow chaos and death,” as he warned of how things like a disregard for facts could be exploited (define irony). He said, “History sometimes threatens to repeat its tragic patterns, and undermine the legacy of peace we thought we had sealed with the blood of our ancestors.

I couldn’t agree more. In fact, I have written about this on more than one occasion and I would encourage that you review an article that I wrote a while back called “History Doesn’t Repeat – But It Does Rhyme” for more clarification on this. Old demons are rising and history will show its patterns again soon. I think Macron is right in this regard and I think it’s likely right around the corner. I don’t think hating nationalists or patriots will stop it though. In fact, I think that will likely speed things up.

So why will history repeat? Why will globalism fail? Why do we divide ourselves up like we do? What many fail to realize is the human element of it all. It is this human element which renders the idea of socialist utopia useless. It’s just not going to happen if ANY substantial differences are present. That’s not the pessimist in me saying it; it’s the fact guy.

Imagine if you had two highs schools in your town. Let’s say that one high school is The Cougars and the other is The Stallions. We will likely pick a side due our children, physical location, logo preference or even colors. We would cheer, scream and support one or the other. Heck, I just made this up and I think I’m going with The Stallions because there are too many cat mascots. You cat-lovers can take a hike! GO STALLIONS! (Cough) – Uh… sorry about that… but you need to ask yourself “why” we do this. Then you need to appreciate the answer for what it is while also recognizing it on the larger scale.

That answer is that humans are tribal by nature. It’s really that simple. Due to survival mechanisms written deep within our codes, we are always trying to figure out the difference between “us” and “them.” I think in some ways, we need it. This natural tendency can be used against you though. Hitler rose to power providing the “them” to his “us“. Political parties rip the masses apart as they struggle for power by simply giving you a team or cause to join. It can be done subtly though; like how Macron did it.

In any situation, you’re likely going to join a tribe; you just have to be careful about why you’re joining it. It’s an odd tool that we use to see similar status, potential mates, friends and foes. This is why we have groups, cliques, gangs, political parties, companies, and so on. These similarities allow us to make stronger connections, build trust and cooperate but it also allows us an opportunity to protect ourselves from potential rivals. In a weird twist, it also creates rivals and the need to have a tribe.

Sometimes this is used in extremely silly ways. Look at your pro sports teams. Many people will choose a team and are willing to argue, fight and celebrate on the logo alone. But if someone invaded your country, you would all band together against the aggressor. Again, this is the human desire for “us” and “them” and this happens on multiple levels from the individual to the planet as a whole. We even do it against animals. Unfortunately, I could provide example after example but the intelligent (us vs them) can already see where I’m going with this.

So let’s discuss the Global Tribe’s dream of a unified world. It’s not going to work. The human factor then becomes the issue. Let’s just use religion as an example of how this simply will not work (right now). There are thousands of different and often opposing religions. Who gives up what to make it work? Heck, there are hundreds of differences within the Christian faith alone. Again, who gives up what to make it work? Muslims have been killing each other due to “us” versus “them” for thousands of years. How is that going to stop? Until something common can be appreciated, there will be strife among the various religions. Even that is a stretch though. You would think that even in a faith such as Deism, you would find unification but even Deists find themselves battling it out over ideas and sects. There are numerous different sects of Deism and they all fancy themselves as intellectual leaders.

All of this doesn’t even factor in the confused ones. Just for example, some people believe in the right to life while also supporting the death penalty. On the other hand, some prefer pro-choice while emphatically being opposed to the death penalty. Confusion abounds! These folks aren’t going to help anyone make decisions because they have already let their leaders confuse them into a choosing a side they don’t fully understand. Of course, these same folks usually vote the party line so it’s not hard to see the “us” versus “them” here.

Do you see what I mean? We can likely forget about global unity until our planet witnesses a global threat from outer space. Why? Because “Global Warming” isn’t going to work as demonstrated in my book Destroying the Narrative. The powers keep trying to present a global threat but the smart people keeping ruining it with truth. That’s also a hint. See, if we were more vision oriented, we might have a better chance.

A global alien threat is a pretty darn big “us” versus “them” scenario that could potentially unify the planet for a common goal. This is actually what scares me about technology though – specifically the ability and desire of the globalists to manufacture such a scenario (hence my hesitation about biting on stories of alien probes). Imagine such ideas in the heads of people who can be sold on things like flat earth. You would be able to sell them anything! Scary stuff.

That may sound like madness but I’m not the only one who has thought about things like that. In fact, Gorbachev was once quoted about a conversation that he and President Reagan had on the topic. He said, “President Reagan suddenly said to me, ‘What would you do if the United States were attacked by someone from outer space? Would you help us?’ I said, ‘No doubt about it.” He said, ‘We too.’ So that’s interesting.” And that’s true. A global tribe would come together to fight the common foe – “us” versus “them“. Sadly, when the aliens left, we would go back to our petty ways.

The question that I think some people need to ponder is which tribe you’re going to ultimately choose. You have plenty of tribes to choose from and if you choose wisely, you can have an amazing life. You can join the globalists, the patriots, the ignorant masses, the intellectuals or even the “I don’t care” crowd. You can choose left or right or black or white. You can choose big government or small government or go simple with male versus female. The list literally goes on and on and on and your leaders love you for it because the more small tribes you choose, the less likely you’ll be able to see the people versus government section. Just know that even if you choose not to decide, you’re still making a choice and that the dominate tribe will ultimately decide for you in the long-run.

My advice is to get involved whenever and wherever you can and learn as much as you can along the way. If you’re seeking a recommendation for which tribe you might want to choose, then may I suggest the tribe of intellectuals; people seeking to find answers that can solve problems and reduce some of these walls while exposing some of the pseudo-transformational leaders for who and what they are.

So much to think about…