From: f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Nationalism or the Sewer?
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:27:55 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University


In a recent article, "What's in a name?" by Jonathan Kauffman writing
for the Boston Globe, Kauffman speaks of the "virus of nationalism".

It interests me that in the mainstream media "nationalism" has now
become a dangerous virus.  Nationalism, generally associated with ideas
of sovereignty and patriotism, is a dread disease.  Of course diseases
must be treated and the obvious cure for nationalism is "internationalism".

Well, all hail the New World Order...the doctor is on the way!  First
we witness the destruction of sovereignty in third world nations
[does anyone remember any invitation to "cure" problems in Panama
or Somalia?] and then we see the sacrifice of our own sovereignty
[with NAFTA and the creation of a permanent UN military force, etc. etc.].

The cure for this dreadful virus looks harsh enough to finish off
the patient.  A bit scary, isn't it?

But we see this type of thinking not only in the mainstream media but
right here on our own news group with some frequency.  For example,
Brad Pierce recently forwarded an article [posting entitled " Common
Sense Security for Political Organizers"] which included the following
remarks about nationalism:

[Start of quote from posting]

TO THE FLAG

An inanimate object.

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Which brings us to Nationalism. Here's an evil for you to ponder. This is the
sort of thinking that got millions of Americans to believe that Desert Storm
was a good thing. A returning GI said to a friend of mine: "We saved your
butts over there!" Yeah, right. I can't say as I felt overly threatened by
Hussein, who just happened to be clear on the other side of the planet. But
we sent troops over there anyhow, and spent bazillions of taxpayer dollars
to do it.

[End of quote from posting]

I must ask what tortuous thought process was used to arrive at the conclusion
that nationalism got us involved in Desert Sham?  Those who put American
interest ahead of international interests were much opposed to the war.
Ross Perot, for example, spoke out fervently against US military action
in Iraq.  He suggested that if left alone the states in that region
including Israel would be able to work out their own problems without
US interference and that if the devil himself controlled the oil he would
still have to sell it to us.  Populists besides Perot such as Liberty
Lobby which is frequently maligned on this newsgroup came out strongly
against military action in Iraq and continues to oppose our involvement
there to this day. In general, people I know who respect the constitutional
principles upon which our nation was founded wonder what in the heck
we are doing over there.   
                                                                        
Who did get us involved in Iraq?  The Globalists.  The Internationalists
who put the New World Order at the top of agenda.  Whose interests did
the war serve?  Certainly it saved the international oil companies from
a much larger glut of oil on the market.  Certainly the arms merchants
smiled with glee.  And of course the international bankers who finance
both and reap their largest profits at the expense of human suffering
had the most to gain.  That is not to say that these same degenerates
did not propagandize the American people and try harness the patriotic
instinct.  But don't confuse nationalism or populism with flag waving.
Plenty of flags are flying and many of them are blue and white and
have UN written all over them.

What got us into Korea or Vietnam...the no-win wars?  Our nationalism?
If anyone is really curious about the role of the blood-sucking
internationalists in these particular conflicts, you could hardly do
better than to read L. Fletcher Prouty's recent book "JFK: The
Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Vietnam and the CIA" ...if I remember
the title correctly. These are the same matoids who are using federal
funds to move American business [and jobs] out of the country and
who are doing their best to force NAFTA on us to finish stripping
our pocketbooks.  These are the same people who conspired to fleece
the S&L and banking industries of hundreds of billions of dollars
and then used their considerable political clout to make it a non-
issue in the general election.  Remember all the politicians talking
about the S&L crisis?  They didn't.  It was only the largest financial
scandal in US history.

Admittedly, blind nationalism based on the premise of "My country,
right or wrong" is dangerous.  But nationalism [or its twin populism]
based on the principles that made our former democracy the envy of
much of the world is something we could use a healthy infusion of
along about now.  For all we have to do is consider the globalist
alternative.  Hopefully we're not ready for the sewer yet.


-Joe Gaut