Today's News June 27,2016: Globalism

Since the Brexit last week, we are starting to see the world review the whole globalism idea, of which the European Union was just the first step. Let the Chicken Littles crow!

New York Times:
Britain Rattles Postwar Order and Its Place as Pillar of Stability

Britain’s choice to retreat into what some critics of the vote suggest is a “Little England” status is just one among many loosely linked developments suggesting the potential for a reordering of power, economic relationships, borders and ideologies around the globe.

Sounds like a good idea to me, but not to the NY Times:

Slow economic growth has undercut confidence in traditional liberal economics, especially in the face of the dislocations caused by trade and surging immigration. Populism has sprouted throughout the West. Borders in the Middle East are being erased amid a rise in sectarianism. China is growing more assertive and Russia more adventurous. Refugees from poor and war-torn places are crossing land and sea in record numbers to get to the better lives shown to them by modern communications. 

Accompanied by an upending of politics and middle-class assumptions in both the developed and the developing worlds, these forces are combining as never before to challenge the Western institutions and alliances that were established after World War II and that have largely held global sway ever since. 

Have you got all that nonsense? Britain is tossing all the alliances aside which have been formed since World War II! Incredible, even though the Maastricht Treaty didn't happen until 1992 (it went into effect in 1993), with other aspects of the EU happening later (for example, it wasn't until 2002 that the euro became the currency of 12 of the EU member states).

Even better, the article's writers go on to talk about every major country except Britain for most of the article. Then it reaches this classic line:

In the wake of Britain’s choice, Europe faces the parallel challenges of holding itself together and of retaining its global influence.

Huh? Europe has been nothing but a pain in the rear end since before the two world wars, which were naturally caused by European politics. Ask the Native Americans, the Africans, the Indians, and the Chinese how they feel about Europe: All of them were either dislocated or colonized by Europeans. Then we got two world wars (thanks Europe!), after which we rebuilt Europe into the mother of all welfare queens: The EU accounts for at least 50 percent of all of the welfare spending in the world.

This is the model that globalists would have us follow. Unfortunately, there isn't enough money in the world for the rest of us to live like Europeans do. Forgive me for not shedding tears for this alleged catastrophe.

CNN:
Brexit: UK government calls for calm; Labour leader addresses crisis

Amid predictions of a post-Brexit economic tsunami, the UK government is trying to limit the damage of the country's pending withdrawal from the European Union, as leaders prepare for the first round of talks. 

Meanwhile, opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn is dealing with his own Brexit meltdown. On Monday he announced 10 new shadow cabinet positions after a flurry of resignations over the weekend. The exodus came after he sacked a key shadow minister accused of plotting a coup.

Oh no! Britain will fall! What will we do?

More globalist Chicken Little-ism. Britain will be just fine. The resignations are just disappointed globalists having a "ragequit".

One of the things Britain did right was never getting into the euro currency. Keeping the British pound will save them a ton of headaches in both the short and long run:

Early Monday morning, ahead of European market openings, UK Treasury chief George Osborne said that Brexit would hurt the British economy and government finances, but that he accepted the outcome of the referendum and would work towards a smooth transition. 

He said that the economy remained "fundamentally strong" and added that the government would not rush the exit procedure. 

"No one should doubt our resolve to maintain the fiscal stability we have delivered for this country. And to companies, large and small, I would say this: the British economy is fundamentally strong, highly competitive and we are open for business."

I don't know if I would go quite as far as Osborne did. The British economy isn't all that spectacular. However, it is a very developed economy and will take a lot more than this to topple it. For you investors out there, it might be a good time to look for British bargains. Tally ho!

Fox News:
Clinton says 'experienced leadership' needed to avoid troubles Britain faces

Back in the USA...

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton on Sunday spoke for the first time publicly about Britain’s vote to exit the European Union and took a jab at the presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump in the process. 

Without mentioning him by name, Clinton, speaking at the annual gathering of the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Indianapolis, said “steady experienced leadership” is what the U.S. needs to avoid the kinds of troubles Britain now faces. 

"We need leaders ... who understand how to work with other leaders to manage risks, who understand that bombastic comments in turbulent times can actually cause more turbulence and who put the interest of the American people ahead of their personal business interests," Clinton said.

We need leaders who know how to sacrifice consulates to terrorists, while simultaneously pointing fingers at anti-Islam filmmakers to hold them accountable! Uh no...

We need leaders who get us involved in Syrian civil wars, where both sides hate America! Uh no...

We need leaders who wouldn't know an unsecured email account if they were using one to transfer classified information! Uh no...

Speaking of Hillary...

Breitbart:
Hank ‘Meltdown’ Paulson Cites Hillary’s Globalist Platform as Reason for Endorsement 

Hank Paulson, George W. Bush’s treasury secretary, who presided over both the meltdown of the U.S. economy and the subsequent bailout of his close friends and associates, has endorsed Hillary Clinton — citing his belief that she’d be more likely to enact globalist policies on trade and immigration as part of the reason for his endorsement. 

Paulson also posits that Clinton would be more likely to cut Americans’ medicare and social security, which Paulson cites as a top priority following the financial collapse he helped to create.

I bring up this article not to discuss the election so much, but rather to suggest that Hillary might be the "candidate of the globalists" in America. Hank Paulson is the final piece of the puzzle, linking failed globalists' policies with Hillary Clinton. He isn't an aberration either. Other famous neoconservative globalists are supporting her, according to this CNN article:

Paulson's support comes days after Brent Scowcroft, a top national security adviser to Republican presidents dating back to Gerald Ford, similarly backed Clinton, and Robert Kagan, a prominent Republican neoconservative, is headlining a fundraiser for Clinton, Foreign Policy reported on Thursday. Last week, Richard Armitage, who served in the State and Defense Departments under Bush and President Ronald Reagan, announced he will vote for Clinton.

If Britain is any kind of preview of the American elections in November, I would expect Clinton to lose by a small margin. However, she is currently leading in the polls (by as much as 1 to 10 points, when third party candidates are included).

Globalism, in it's present form, simply does not work. We learned that during the 2008 economic crisis. It is far too corrupted by big business influence to possibly work. Just consider what world governments did to fix the economic crisis: They threw a LOT of money at too-big-to-fail banks. Now, the banks are richer, but nothing has really been fixed.

The Brexit was a "globalism is dead" wake-up call. The globalists don't seem to have gotten the message yet. They are still in denial/anger. I am just curious what they will offer when they get to the bargaining stage?