english version

Globalization and internationalism

 Global trade does not imply going towards chaos, it is a consequence of more advanced communication and transport means. Business and travel existed since ever and always created positive elements in the development to better social structures. But at the same time countries existed and created their diversified models reflected into different products contributing to faster development of the world. If globalization created unification, the development would stop. If we imagine this in the past, unification would never have created different cultures. Globalization is however a phenomenon, which represents another phase of connecting and opening. Production is already dislocated into the whole world; we cannot say there are any state borders anymore. That is why we have free movement of goods, capital and people. The whole global paradigm is described in various works (74).

It seems that internationalism is in progress and it will kill the diversification of cultures, which creates mutations for the creation of the most suitable model. However nothing says that the most suitable model is the Euro-American civilization, enforcing itself by economic and political power. Unification is a damaging factor of development, because competition models of cultures will vanish and evolution will not work. Therefore certain isolation of countries, necessary for independent development, is important but with openness to exchange, communication and travel. So far we are just at the beginning of this process and it is hard to predict anything, only that it is useful to avoid unification and maintain our diversity, if it is possible. Perhaps we will have to learn to “cope with globalization”.

 Despite the fact, globalization, which progresses to unification, manifests the signs of the process of disjunction – reified freedom and limitation of responsibility. The latter is manifested by easier leaking of dirty money and criminals, but also of capitals, regardless the country of origin, the people who created them or of tax blackmailing of the country. Even a fairly average international corporation has the possibility to leave the state anytime and leave unemployed people without losing the market, because the borders are opened and it can easily import the goods back. By this the society is blackmailed and damaged more and more and individuals out of it are promoted, the countries have less power but instead of some communities (e.g. municipalities) strange people are put forward, often financiers with dirty money or funds of undemocratic countries rise to power. These people have no interest in the society apart from material, taking it as a consumer, nothing else. They are not interested in the culture; they support nothingness of commercials and lower requests – everything that decomposes the society.

 Even serious global companies having their own internal morality and carrying out altruistic actions, create their own world. They claim that they do not need the state and they create a cosmopolitan virtual reality of belonging, which is false and unsure and should serve only as a means to acquire performance and benefit. Unfortunately employees let themselves be manipulated psychically, thinking that they participate on creating a “new better company world”, even though existence of such a world would be allowed only by existence of national countries, creating general norms, justice and safety. Moreover, the companies mostly contribute to unification of the world with their universal products; the world of “anarchy-capitalism” could at best be the world of consumption, company competition, advertisement and lower standards. This would make people become animals consuming as many products as they can in favour of the companies, destroying the environment and themselves without any higher goals. We can see this in the weakening world already today.

 A world supporting “people, who stand aside” – somewhere abroad, is a typical manifestation of social irresponsibility, freedom for “somebody”. It destroys not only freedom, but also the existence of others. It is given by global open environment, where there is no order, where there is no social order of any country, no civilization, where there is the opportunity to escape from country to country without laws. This is disjunction from society at its best and unlimited freedom without responsibility. Of course so far only those, who have enough financial means can afford to do this. This group of people actually determines its own laws; it has its own ideas of individualism and freedom that, regarding its influence, are successfully promoted in countries, which the group had already left. Usually it is a bearer of disjunction or irrational feelings of belonging.

 Economic crisis is manifested mostly by insufficient collection of taxes and a collapse of social systems. Normal cyclic crisis then uncovers everything and allows talking about a civilization crisis, which is the main cause, which does not allow overcoming the cyclic crisis. This I hope will bring about discussions concerning deeper contemplations over real causes uncovered in this book. However various cosmopolite ideologies requiring adaption to globalization, decomposing of nations, belonging and rooting, oppose this. We can surely easily prove, that coherent groups having internal belonging will survive, while the apologists of openness and cosmopolitism in case they really mean it and live by it, will literally dissolve in the world, because without the group and its culture they will lose the meaning of life and reproduction.

 Open world market lowers the possibility of monopolistic controlling of the market inside of a country, because in an international market there is always enough competitors and it would not be beneficial for economic growth to close the borders – only this will keep the competition borderless and possible direct monopolistic blackmailing of clients with high prices will be removed. This would require stronger inner political unity, belonging and resistance to direct influence of big money, because this only can ensure that this advantage would be worth it. Nevertheless it is necessary to say that purely opportunistic consensus is the base of bonds that prevent wars and nations are tied economically in such a way, that they cannot wish for anything bad to happen to the others, because eventually everyone interested in the business would pay for it. This is an advantage and it is certainly necessary to maintain the international market environment to some extent. However this does not prevent creating certain business locally based relationships, especially those, which could ensure safety and security due to its independence.