Globalist Analysis

Globalism and Americanism

Is Globalism an inherently anti-American concept? Nothing could be further from the truth.

Credit: Borislav Bajkic -


  • The concept of globalism is by no means an effort to undermine the United States.
  • Globalism has the potential to bring out the best in the U.S. and remind it of its own global roots.
  • U.S. "anti-globalists" think global exchange is a one-way street with the world there to learn from America.
  • Foreigners looking at the U.S. are often most impressed that the country has the most global society on earth.

Mention the word "global," and a surprising number of Americans immediately become apprehensive. Why does that word make them uncomfortable?

In part, it is a reflection of what, at least between the two coasts, is still a remarkably insular nation. Only four in ten American citizens hold passports (as of 2015).

Others consider globalism as a form of liberal elitism or, worse, as a leftist attempt to circumvent traditional American values (whatever they may be). True conspiracy theorists see it as undermining the United States itself (via the United Nations, black helicopters, immigrants, etc.).

Yet again others, such as the New York Times' conservative columnist David Brooks, see globalism encouraging uniform global responses to issues. In his view, this undermines more decentralized approaches and stifles experimentation. Mr. Brooks professes to prefer to rely on “communities and nation-states.”

In whatever variant the almost uniformly conservative worries manifest themselves, what they see at the core of any "globalist" approach is an implicit threat to American leadership. More fundamentally, their underlying logic is to see the words "American" and "global" as polar opposites.

That juxtaposition flies in the face of the entire American experience from its founding moments onward. Nobody with any knowledge of history can deny the country’s identity and economy has been forged by a powerful confluence of immigrants from around the world. Foreigners looking at the United States are often most impressed by the fact that the country has the most global society on earth.

What is especially astonishing about the U.S. conservatives' perspective of globalism is the implied lack of legitimacy, if not outright categorical rejection, of any foreign influences on American life.

Argentina may have its Italians, France its North Africans, Germany its Turks, England its Indians and Pakistanis and Canada’s Vancouver its Chinese. But nowhere else does a cross-national amalgam become such a powerful combination of talents, desires, styles and tastes as in the United States.

This is not to deny that, as a counterbalancing force, there have always been strong conformist pressures in American society — the inevitable price of forming something unitary out of the many.

But to reject the rest of the world and to see it as a threat to “Americanism” is something else altogether.

More than a denial of America’s multicultural roots throughout the ages (not just in the present time period), this instinctive response is particularly unfortunate for another reason.

For the past 40-50 years, ever since the glory days of the post-World War II 1950s, many countries around the world, at different stages and intervals, have remade themselves in America’s image and performance, economic, cultural or social.

This emulation of the United States was generally undertaken in an effort to become a materially better off nation. Other motives included becoming a country more welcoming of foreigners and their talents, or a more bottom-line-oriented, business-minded society.

Blending whatever seemed crucial to adopt from the United States, these nations — from Europe to Asia — worked to overcome longstanding traditions and cultural resistance, whether on the part of their people, their politicians or both.

The fact of the matter is that much of the world, to an appreciable degree, has become “Americanized.”

The current problem in the United States arises from the apparent belief on the part of the U.S. conservative “anti-globalists” that global learning and exchanges are a one-way street — that the rest of the world is there to learn and America is there to teach.

Indications are that we now live in an era when the United States is suffering from paying insufficient attention to the models and solutions offered up and tested by other nations.

This leads to a corresponding failure to investigate in an open-minded fashion what these “foreign” models may offer in terms of solutions that can be applied at home.

Viewed in that light, the concept of globalism is by no means an effort to undermine the United States. To the contrary, it is the opposite — as it has the potential to bring out the best in the United States and remind it of its own, very globalist roots.

(Visited 279 time, 8 visit today)

Tags: , , , ,

About Stephan Richter

Stephan Richter, from Berlin, is the publisher and editor-in-chief of The Globalist. [Berlin/Germany]

Responses to “Globalism and Americanism”