Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on February 19, 2004 01:38 AM
It's interesting that you quote B. Anderson then hint that globalism is preferred over nationalism. According to Anderson's definition, the global community is also an imagined community. You neither know nor will ever meet all the members of that community. The borders are arbitrarily set by the size and shape of the planet on which we live. The perils of hypernationalism are grossly overstated. It's analagous to stating that hyperfamilism prevents me from moving into your house and eating your food.
Are you in favor of erasing all national boundaries and creating a world government? The utopian society shown in Star Trek where money no longer exists and people work for the satisfaction of a job well done doesn't exist and likely never will.
As for the corporate altar of profit, corporations are inheritantly greedy. They have to be if they want to continue to exist. I've never gotten a job working for greatness or kindness. I work for a company to pay the bills and provide for my family. Without corporations we wouldn't be talking about globalization. Think of the things required to make a global community possible. Every one of them was invented or developed by people working for corporations. A single doctor may research a cure for cancer or AIDS for altruistic reasons. However, the money funding the reasearch likely comes from a pharmaceutical company looking to profit from the research. Does that make the corporation evil, even considering that the research wouldn't exist without corporate greed? What percentage of the worlds great inventions came from collectivist environments where people aren't allowed to profit from their hard work and inventiveness?
In the end, nationalism is under attack by those that envy the wealth of the "rich nations". In their view, those nations should be forced to share their wealth with the world. What happens when globalism succeds in dragging the wealthy nations down to the level of the global underachievers? Who will feed and clothe the world then? Consider this, people that work hard and strive for success usually find it. People that wallow in their own misery usually stay there.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Please reflect on the following
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 19, 2004 01:38 AMAre you in favor of erasing all national boundaries and creating a world government? The utopian society shown in Star Trek where money no longer exists and people work for the satisfaction of a job well done doesn't exist and likely never will.
As for the corporate altar of profit, corporations are inheritantly greedy. They have to be if they want to continue to exist. I've never gotten a job working for greatness or kindness. I work for a company to pay the bills and provide for my family. Without corporations we wouldn't be talking about globalization. Think of the things required to make a global community possible. Every one of them was invented or developed by people working for corporations. A single doctor may research a cure for cancer or AIDS for altruistic reasons. However, the money funding the reasearch likely comes from a pharmaceutical company looking to profit from the research. Does that make the corporation evil, even considering that the research wouldn't exist without corporate greed? What percentage of the worlds great inventions came from collectivist environments where people aren't allowed to profit from their hard work and inventiveness?
In the end, nationalism is under attack by those that envy the wealth of the "rich nations". In their view, those nations should be forced to share their wealth with the world. What happens when globalism succeds in dragging the wealthy nations down to the level of the global underachievers? Who will feed and clothe the world then? Consider this, people that work hard and strive for success usually find it. People that wallow in their own misery usually stay there.
#