{"id":67373,"date":"2006-03-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-03-21T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/03\/21\/une-excellente-definition-de-la-globalisation-la-destruction-de-la-souverainete-nationale\/"},"modified":"2006-03-21T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-03-21T00:00:00","slug":"une-excellente-definition-de-la-globalisation-la-destruction-de-la-souverainete-nationale","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/03\/21\/une-excellente-definition-de-la-globalisation-la-destruction-de-la-souverainete-nationale\/","title":{"rendered":"Une excellente d\u00e9finition de la globalisation : la destruction de la souverainet\u00e9 nationale"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>Dans un article int\u00e9ressant dans le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/Iraq\/Story\/0,,1735643,00.html\" class=\"gen\">Guardian<\/a> de ce jour (nous en reparlerons), Francis Fukuyama fustige notamment l&rsquo;action du Congr\u00e8s am\u00e9ricain dans l&rsquo;affaire de la firme \u00e9mirati DPW oblig\u00e9e d&rsquo;abandonner la gestion des ports US. Fukuyama d\u00e9crit cette action comme \u00ab [&#8230;a] <em>shameless pandering to public fears of terrorism <\/em>[which] <em>undermined every principle of openness and globalisation that the US has been preaching in recent years.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tUn peu plus loin, attaquant l&rsquo;attitude de Hillary Clinton (elle fut une des meneuses de la bataille anti-DPW dans cette affaire), Fukuyama observe: \u00ab <em>Clinton, who has positioned herself to the right on security issues, saw an opening to attack the president and argued that the Dubai takeover would constitute a violation of US sovereignty. It seems not to have occurred to her that by this logic American multinationals are violating the sovereignty of virtually every country on the planet.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tInt\u00e9ressantes observations: Fukuyama nous donne <em>a contrario<\/em> une formidable d\u00e9finition de la globalisation dans la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 du monde, loin des principes fumeux, abstraits et l\u00e9nifiants (ouverture, libre \u00e9change, d\u00e9mocratie, etc.) qui nous habituellement ass\u00e9n\u00e9s. Effectivement, ou bien tout est ouvert \u00e0 tout,  et nous avons une situation o\u00f9 le principe de la souverainet\u00e9 nationale <strong>n&rsquo;existe plus<\/strong>. Ou bien, un pays ou un autre,  les USA dans ce cas,  intervient pour bloquer un des actes de cette globalisation (DPW) au nom de la souverainet\u00e9 nationale, et alors le principe de la souverainet\u00e9 nationale existe et, partout o\u00f9 le globalisation intervient effectivement, c&rsquo;est ce principe qui est viol\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tL&rsquo;extr\u00eame de cette impeccable logique nous dit parfaitement que la globalisation se d\u00e9finit comme antith\u00e8se substantielle de la souverainet\u00e9 nationale. L\u00e0 o\u00f9 la globalisation existe, la souverainet\u00e9 nationale n&rsquo;existe plus, et vice-versa. Rarement une d\u00e9finition ne fut plus claire et plus juste.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 21 mars 2006 \u00e0 12H48<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Dans un article int\u00e9ressant dans le Guardian de ce jour (nous en reparlerons), Francis Fukuyama fustige notamment l&rsquo;action du Congr\u00e8s am\u00e9ricain dans l&rsquo;affaire de la firme \u00e9mirati DPW oblig\u00e9e d&rsquo;abandonner la gestion des ports US. Fukuyama d\u00e9crit cette action comme \u00ab [&#8230;a] shameless pandering to public fears of terrorism [which] undermined every principle of openness&hellip;&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[5175,5133,3082,2632,3278,2937,1097,2746],"class_list":["post-67373","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-dpw","tag-dubai","tag-fukuyama","tag-globalisation","tag-hillary","tag-nationale","tag-protectionnisme","tag-souverainete"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67373","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67373"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67373\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67373"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67373"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67373"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}