Silicon Valley’s globalist agenda unsustainable under current policies, says CPC editor

California Policy Center editor–⁠⁠commentator Edward Ring points out, in the Epoch Times, embarrassing contradictions between the SV’s globalism ambitions and proscriptive public policies. Rather than silencing dissenting voices, the nation’s tech hub should reevaluate: what globalism means, if it’s worth pursuing, and how that goal could align with local laws—rising above mere Woke lip service. To receive daily updates of new Opp Now stories, click here.

It is reasonable—or it should be reasonable—to expect a nation to defend its culture, its language, and its borders, to care for its citizens, to respect its traditions. To accept someone as an American citizen, what constitutes an acceptable range of behaviors and beliefs? What are reasonable terms for inclusion in the American family?

This is one of the most important questions of our time: If globalism, pushed by every major institution in America, is determined to erase national identities, then what sort of pushback can preserve nations and cultures in a way where the solution isn’t worse than the problem? What does it mean to be a citizen of a nation? Can nationalism be inclusive without becoming meaningless? Can nationalism be compassionate, offering a better model for the evolution of “global civilization,” and still be authentic nationalism? Is there a version of economic nationalism that nonetheless nurtures global prosperity?

One thing ought to be certain: Denying skeptics of globalism the ability to voice their observations and opinions online is a dangerous mistake, because the concerns voiced by globalism skeptics can often rely on hard facts and sound logic, no matter whether they are expressed with grace or with fury. For the reactionaries of Silicon Valley to silence them defers a much-needed debate about globalism and its consequences, at a time when current globalist policies are becoming increasingly unsustainable.

You can’t demand a 50 percent reduction in the use of fossil fuel, oppose nuclear power, and expect “renewables” to provide sufficient energy to power civilization, when worldwide energy production will have to double merely to provide every person living on earth half the energy that Americans currently consume. You can’t have mass immigration into the U.S. at the same time as environmentalist laws make it impossible to build adequate housing and infrastructure to accommodate them. You can’t have mass immigration while at the same time expanding a welfare state.

This article originally appeared in the Epoch Times. Read the whole thing here.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity

Image by Suzy Hazelwood