The Failure of Globalism: It's Not About Isolationism; It's About Self-Reliance

Mar 16, 2022

As the leaders of the European Union scramble to figure out how to wean themselves from Russian energy dependence we, too, in the United States are feeling the kneejerk repercussions of the energy market’s upheaval, warranted or not. This is leading a record number of Americans to contemplate the false security of isolationism.

As author and presidential historian Dr. Linda Chervinsky writes at Governing.com:

“Today, many Americans might think that the war in Ukraine has nothing to do with us. The war is far away, and no treaties require our involvement. Yet, the conflict is fundamentally a fight between autocracy and democracy. The remaining World War II veterans know that Ukraine might be the target today but will not be the last if authoritarianism wins. We bury our heads in the sand and hide behind the protection of the Atlantic Ocean at our peril.”

This is not to say that I am advocating for a more active role for the US in the Ukrainian theater, but if we are to navigate the turbulent waters of current events where Russian aggression in Ukraine is concerned, we should do it based on historical experience instead of ginned-up, politically opportune, media-induced emotion.

The truth is that ever since the turn of the 20th Century, the conflicts that have enveloped Europe have bled over into the Western Hemisphere. No matter the attempts by the United States to embrace neutrality, the decisions of European despots and militaristic megalomaniacs have violently goaded the United States to war.

In 1917, the United States was drawn into World War I through targeted actions taken by the Germans to court Mexico into violent confrontation with the United States, promising their support with Mexico’s re-acquisition of treaty-ceded lands in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. This was compounded by Germany’s decision to unleash unrestrained submarine warfare on merchant vessels embarking from the United States. These provocations led to then-President Woodrow Wilson’s request of Congress for a declaration of War, enjoining the United States with the allied effort in World War I. The United States lost 116,516 soldiers in the “war to end all wars” and saw another 204,002 wounded.

Then, in 1941, the United States was again drawn into overseas conflicts, this time on two fronts – in the Pacific against the Japanese and in Europe against the Nazis, Italians, and Nazi-aligned Muslims. The violent catalyst to America’s entry into the Second World War was an unprovoked and vicious attack on US naval forces at Peral Harbor, Hawai’i; on Americans on American soil. The cost of this conflict would result in 405,399 soldiers lost and another 670,846 men and women wounded.

Ever since then, the United States has come to the grim reality that turning a blind eye to conflicts between nations around the world – and especially in Europe; in the embrace of a total doctrine of “isolationism” is a recipe for disaster.

As Dr. Chervinsky wrote:

“These most recent lessons loom large in public memory, especially as most of the World War II generation has passed away. Without their knowledge and experience, younger generations have forgotten that what happens in Europe rarely stays there. In the age of rapidly advancing technology and an increasingly interconnected international community, an attack on one democracy will be felt on American shores.”

This stark truth, while uncomfortable to admit, is, nevertheless, a fact of history that only the uninformed and historically ignorant can deny.

And while it is just as unpalatable for the United States to be cornered into the role of “world policeman,” a role that a dependent Europe and Southeast Asia – and increasingly the Middle East, welcome all too well, at times there is no recourse to the actions of the world’s tyrants.

The globalist scheme that was cobbled together after World War II; that created the increasingly useless United Nations and its nefarious spawn non-governmental organizations (NGO) like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Economic Forum, have resulted in a complete mission failure where averting violent conflict is concerned, even as it paved the way for debilitating, sovereignty-killing international interdependence.

Today, under the guise of pursuing peace and a “better world,” the globalist leaders of those same NGOs are aggressively chipping away at nation-state sovereignty on all levels. They are doing so as the international apparatus of comingling-needs allow China and Russia to hold the world hostage via the withholding of their stakes in energy and technology products.

Today, China and Russia are both saber-rattling and executing war while the global opportunists at the helms of the sinister NGOs join them on their attack on sovereignty and freedom.

Why This Is Important

As the sanctions that have been placed on Russian for their naked aggression against Ukraine cause gas prices to rise untenably in the United States, the American technology sector reels from a lack of technological components and rare Earth materials for which it is dependent on China. Add to those vulnerabilities the supply chain issues at our nation's ports – both self-inflicted and not, and it cannot be denied that the United States is too dependent on foreign nations.

This reality has led many to ride the violently swinging ideological pendulum from a point of “I’d like to teach the world to sing” to a neo-isolationism.

New analysis based on YouGov polling last December – even before Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine – suggests that isolationist beliefs in the United States have increased steadily from 28 percent in 2019 to 40 percent at the end of 2021. Data reveals that historically – dating back to 1952, the embrace of isolationism has never been more than 30 percent among the American population.

As an aside, with regard to the subject of military intervention by US military forces in Ukraine, Americans are “firmly opposed to the US sending troops into the country to fight Russian soldiers. Most Americans (55 percent) say this is a bad idea, especially Republicans (62 percent). Just 13 percent say it is a good idea,” reports YouGov.com.

It would appear that given America’s dependency on global trade – especially with China and Russia, and its weak knee to the bullying of the globalist NGOs, our nation is between a rock and a hard place. So, what to do?

Sovereign self-reliance is not isolationism, no matter how many unqualified pseudo-pundits exploit the media to say that it is. Sovereign self-reliance, in fact, is the only way to be seen as a responsible member of the global community.

A perfect example of why sovereign self-reliance is a prerequisite to a healthy international compact comes in the subject of energy independence.

During the Trump administration, the United States was energy independent. We ranked third in nations exporting energy into the world market and energy costs, domestically, were down (gasoline was $2.25 per gallon at the advent of the Biden administration). Had we been in this situation as sanctions were placed upon Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, the United States would have been able to pivot a large portion of its energy exports to Western Europe to facilitate their energy needs even as gas prices remained stable in the United States.

Two more good examples of why the globalist interdependent scheme is a complete failure reside in the fact that American technology is completely dependent on foreign manufacturing of computer chips and the rare earth minerals needed for the Green Energy movement’s required batteries. These dependencies leave us at the mercy of foreign nations for not only our energy needs but also to the detriment of our national security.

With the abundance of natural resources indigenous to the United States of America we should never need to trade with a foreign power. That vulnerability leaves us open to political and ideological manipulation. We can, and have been, self-sufficient on all levels: energy, technology, agriculturally, militarily, etc. This was the reality that existed in the United States immediately after World War II and into the 1960s and 1970s. It allowed our nation to engage in trade with foreign nations as a luxury, not a necessity.

The United States, by nature and through our freedoms, is a consumer nation. We should exist self-sufficient for all of our core needs – energy, agriculture, technology, manufacturing, research, etc. – and allow the luxury of our independence to provide our nation with the ability to trade internationally from a position of power, not dependence.

This is not an isolationist policy. It is a smart policy centered on survival and independence.

Only when a nation is independent of foreign entanglement can it be truly free. Today, the United States – thanks to those who crafted the failed scheme of globalism and those who are now using that failed scheme to co-opt the financial systems of sovereign nations – is not free. We are dependent and, therefore, exist at the whims of those who are proving not to be our friends.

So, please, ask yourselves why we continue to head down the path of globalist servitude when the toll for traveling that path is our freedom? Ask yourself who is forcing us down that path, and who crafted those policies. The answers will chill you to the bone, but you must seek them out before it is too late.

In President George Washington’s Farewell Address, the nation’s first president called on the American people to remain unified to the cause of freedom, resist the rise of political factions (read: political parties), and avoid the influence of foreign powers.

It appears we have failed on all counts.

Today’s Headlines

Support Underground USA (USD)

Underground USA

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?