Diversity should strengthen our sense of nationhood. It shouldn’t be seen as a threat to the locals.

Saul’s book on “The Collapse of Globalism” is a review of the ideology of globablism and and a scan of the different responses; positive and negative around the world. The book often left me wanting to have a lie down as the implications of his wide research and writing style can be quite forceful.

However – my summary is that while global forces and especially trade are still important – local interests, especially recognition of people above ideology is more important.

What I also find incredibly interesting is that no-one in the mainstream media has managed to talk to Saul on this particular trip – which is our loss.

Or Canada.

I thought an aspect of the article you reference that is interesting is his criticism of Canada:

“We encourage foreign professionals to come, then let our professional bodies tinker with credential systems to protect themselves by marginalizing the newcomers.”

The same phenomenon or something analogous happens here in New Zealand. How many well qualified migrants are excluded from socially profitable or productive work because of xenophobic and protectionist schemes?

I believe the relatively recent idea of nationalism is one of the most damaging ideas in the repertoire of contemporary civilisation. It adds to fraternalism, factionalism, tribalism and regionalism (but doesn’t replace all or any). Watching NZTV there are a handful of commercials that, with very little modification could be used to incite ethnic cleansing using metaphors like the All Blacks (for MasterCard).

Globalism isn’t an incidious force but one that unifies in a useful, rather than a petty and self interested way – the Internet is the obvious metaphor.

There are two units that matter: 1) The Individual 2) The World.

Oh how nice – did I mention that I miss Wellington!