Ultra-globalists like to call the previous international system isolationism because they use devious ways. It was clearly not. We will call it previous system. Most countries had relations with others. People could travel, import and export products, work in foreign countries. There were international events and plenty of international organizations. There was cultural, scientific and technological exchange. Clearly that was not isolationism. It was not an extreme situation unlike what ultra-globalists have in mind. Isolationism existed in only a few countries like Albania or North Korea.
Between the previous system and ultra-globalism, there is plenty of room for an alternative globalization. Isolationism and ultraglobalism are the two extremes. Previous system and an alternative globalization are in between. The order is as follows.
isolationism - previous system - alternative globalization - ultra-globalism
Alternative globalization can be closer to one of the two (previous system - ultraglobalism) or in the middle. This will not be determined by us. Ultra-globalists are fighting very hard and play dirty. Ultra-globalism will spread all over the world like a virus unless we fight it. People who oppose need to fight back otherwise ultra-globalists will win. There are three types of separations in ultra-globalization opponents; a) stance on globalization b) ideological c) by country.
Let’s examine stance on globalization first. Opponents of current disastrous globalization are proponents of; a) isolationism b) previous system c) alternative globalization. Isolationism proponents are very few. The battle so far has been between the previous system and ultra-globalism because there is not another alternative yet. Researches have shown that the majority or people have a positive stance on globalization but are very skeptical towards current catastrophic globalization.
A return to the previous system may not be a winning position. For previous system supporters, backing an alternative globalization, may be a tactical choice. When you do not have a winning position, you move to the closer winning position. By joining the alternative globalization camp, they can move the center of gravity closer towards the previous system. Alternative globalization is also a unifying position between the two camps that have so far been battling, the previous system and ultra-globalism.
It is not necessary only to have a winning position but a winning alliance as well. Ultra-globalists do belong in all shades of the political spectrum but are mostly concentrated around the center. It seems that they have found some common ground in their differences. People who oppose this extreme, childish, messy, disastrous globalization, also belong in all shades of the political spectrum. They are more evenly distributed and perhaps are stronger in the left and the right. It is hard for the left and the right to come together. The center must perform the unifying role in the anti-ultra-globalism camp. They need to find some common ground as well and coordinate against ultraglobalists.
Anti-ultra-globalism is strong in the left and the right for different reasons. Ultraglobalism has hit workers in advanced economies and is increasing income and wealth differences. These are the main reason anti-ultra-glomalism is strong in the left. At the same time it is against nations. Supernational entities like EU and open markets have taken a lot of control from nations. Ultra-globalists seek to abolish nations in the end. These are the main reasons anti-ultra-globalism is strong in the right.
As we have explained in a previous article, ultra-globalists operate as a global vicious cabal. In order to fight them, a global coordination is necessary among opponents of ultra-globalism. As a last resort, a similar but opposite vicious global cabal should be formed that will use their ways and beat them in their own game. We really hope that this will not be necessary and ultra-globalism disease will be cured with other ways.
In Britain, Brexiteers were definitely not ultra-globalists but the same was truth for many Remainers. In US, ultra-globalists seize and lose control according to election results. Trump is clearly not an ultra-globalist. Between the two he will choose the previous system but most likely he would go for an alternative globalization. Trump’s alternative globalization is closer to the previous system.
It is not certain whether Obama was an ultra-globalist. He was definitely a globalist. Between the two he would choose ultra-globalism. Our perception is that he would rather go for an alternative globalization. Obama’s alternative globalization is closer to ultra-globalism. Off course we can’t read their minds. Most likely Hilary Clinton is an ultra-globalist like Bloomberg. She was Secretary of State and determined US foreign policy.
Hitler was based in the center of Europe. Europe was his stronghold. Like Adolf Hitler, ultra-globalists' stronghold is Europe. They control the whole continent, except UK. EU is the second economic power after US and before China. There is a clear danger that ultra-globalism may spread like cancer all over the world. Hitler was eventually stopped and EU must be stopped.
EU must be completely or partially dismantled. In the second case, part of Europe with other countries will form a new economic block with much looser relations and belief in a nice and easy alternative to current catastrophic ultra-globalization.