Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 27:
Line 27: − + − + + + + + + + + +
→Liberal distortions of sovereignty: Add.
==Liberal distortions of sovereignty==
==Liberal distortions of sovereignty==
Besides establishing international treaties and organizations, liberals and globalists advance their one-world agenda by either attacking or distorting the meaning of national sovereignty.
Besides establishing international treaties and organizations, liberals and globalists advance their one-world agenda by distorting the meaning of national sovereignty, either through false attacks or by changing its definition to make it compatible with their globalist worldview so they can claim to support sovereignty.
Many liberals have attempted to delegitimize nationalism and sovereignty, equating it with "[[racism]]," "[[xenophobia]]," "[[nativism]]," and even "[[fascism]]."<ref name="Hayward2016"/> They have also equated it with "imperialism" or "white supremacism."<ref>Perlman, Merrill (September 25, 2017). [https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/sovereign-trump-united-nations.php A war of words over sovereignty]. ''Columbia Journalism Review''. Retrieved November 27, 2017.</ref> In addition, they have attacked and criticized policies promoting sovereignty, such as low immigration levels, [[border wall]]s, and putting a nation's own citizens before immigrants – but when they do this, they do so without mentioning sovereignty, instead making emotionalistic or superficial statements like "that’s not who we are," for example, or even deriding those who promote such policies.<ref name="Hayward2016"/> Not only are such attacks false, as nationalism and sovereignty can be mutually exclusive with racism, fascism, and even nativism, but the attacks are also hypocritical, as the Left supports fascist planned economy policies and has [[Liberal intolerance|an intolerance]] for opposing viewpoints.<ref name="Hayward2016"/>
===False attacks===
Many liberals have attempted to delegitimize nationalism and sovereignty, equating it with "[[racism]]," "[[xenophobia]]," "[[nativism]]," and even "[[fascism]]."<ref name="Hayward2016"/> They have also equated it with "imperialism" or "white supremacism."<ref>Perlman, Merrill (September 25, 2017). [https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/sovereign-trump-united-nations.php A war of words over sovereignty]. ''Columbia Journalism Review''. Retrieved November 27, 2017.</ref> In addition, they have attacked and criticized policies promoting sovereignty, such as low immigration levels, [[border wall]]s, and putting a nation's own citizens before immigrants – but when they do this, they do so without mentioning sovereignty, instead making emotionalistic or superficial statements like "that’s not who we are," for example, or even deriding those who promote such policies.<ref name="Hayward2016"/> Not only are such attacks false, as nationalism and sovereignty can be mutually exclusive with racism, fascism, and even nativism sometimes, but the attacks are also hypocritical, as the Left supports fascist planned economy policies and has [[Liberal intolerance|an intolerance]] for opposing viewpoints.<ref name="Hayward2016"/>
===Changing definitions===
In addition to blatantly attacking nationalism and sovereignty, many liberals and globalists distort the definition of sovereignty to make it compatible with their globalist worldview, allowing them to claim to support sovereignty while continuing to push for global governance in reality. While national sovereignty is something that a country either has or does not have, with no middle ground – according to Professor Jeremy Rabkin of [[Cornell University]], "a sovereign state is one that acknowledges no superior over its own government — or as the Declaration of Independence put it, with proper piety, no superior 'among the powers of the Earth.'"<ref name="Jasper2004"/> However, many liberals and globalists have created their own definition of "sovereignty" that resembles a "middle ground" approach that in reality allows for globalism.<ref name="Jasper2004"/>
An example of this fake "sovereignty" is the [[George W. Bush|Bush Administration]]'s plans for [[Iraq]] when planning for the nation's future after the [[Iraq War]]. Not only did the Bush Administration support handing the country over to the UN, but it effectively admitted that Iraq would not be a truly sovereign nation while verbally stating otherwise.<ref name="Jasper2004"/> According to then-Secretary of State [[Colin Powell]] in 2004: "They will be sovereign, but I think as a result of agreements, as a result of ... [UN] resolutions that are passed, there will be some constraints on the power of this sovereignty."<ref name="Jasper2004"/> While stating that Iraq would be "sovereign," they effectively admitted that their [[newspeak]] definition of "sovereignty" was synonymous with one-world globalism.<ref name="Jasper2004"/>
Another example of the fake definition of "sovereignty" comes from Stewart Patrick of the "International Institutions and Global Governance Program" in his book ''The Sovereignty Wars''. The thesis of his book, according to the globalist [[Council on Foreign Relations]] website is that "the United States can protect its sovereignty while advancing American interests in a global age."<ref name="CFRSovereigntyWars">[https://www.cfr.org/book/sovereignty-wars The Sovereignty Wars]. ''Council on Foreign Relations''. Retrieved November 27, 2017.</ref> In reality, Stewart promotes a globalist worldview where nations must make "sovereignty bargains", twists the definition of sovereignty to mean more than autonomy and independence, and attacks the [[Trump Administration]] for actually taking steps to preserve national sovereignty such as by announcing its exit from the [[Paris climate agreement]].<ref name="CFRSovereigntyWars"/>
==Examples of the War on Sovereignty==
==Examples of the War on Sovereignty==