To some extent it comes down to being big isn't necessarily better.

Efficiency of scale is real as well as the advantages that come from a common purpose. Despite all the arguments against how much Roosevelt actually helped pull the US out of the great depression Without the power that was transferred to the central government a lot of good things may never have happened. Hoover Dam and the TVA are examples. Certainly WWII could not have been fought against an enemy that was able to control every aspect of its citizens lives and focus it's industrial and human capital entirely on a war effort if the US had not done the same. It turns out that the TVA project was an essential component of winning WWII. The US Air force and the Atomic bomb could not have been built without the Aluminum and Uranium processing that depended on the TVA's electricity.

The difference between preparedness for WWII and today comes down to corruption. The WWII planners knew something that has largely been forgotten. That competition is the life blood of innovation. They used competition to the advantage of the war effort, something that Germany and Japan were largely unable to do because of difference in mindset. Both Germany and Japan had populations ready to accept subservience, for the whole population to march in lock step. While both were capable of impressive innovation, the zero and Messerschmidt Me 262 being examples, those designs as well as Germany's rocket program were produced by outliers. People who were unusually independent for the cultures they came from. The US from the beginning focused on competition, wasting huge amounts of resources in the process. It slowed down development and production but in the end it produced things such as proximity fuses and superior radar. Eventual superior mass producible planes such as the P-51, Corsair and F6F were the result of extensive competition. Both Germany and Japan stuck with obsolete designs such as the Zero and BF109.

The spirit of competition has largely been lost today. Even though the same basic system of selecting designs from various competitors is in place little room or money is left for real competition. The modern military tends to put all of its eggs in the same basket with the same contractors. There is a revolving door of generals moving from the military to lucrative jobs with large contractors. When Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex he wasn't denigrating industry or the military he was warning of the relationship between the military, industry and politicians.

The first thing to understand is that monopolies are efficient. Standard Oil became what it was because it was more efficient than the competition. In WWII Japan and Germany started off more efficiently than the US. Their central planners had absolute control over all resources. In the end however, the spirit of competition alive and well in the US proved more efficient because it allowed for rapid adaptation of new ideas and means.

Today monopolies have gone unchecked because the efficiencies of competition have been forgotten and corruption has crept into the relationship between government and industry. What many people suggest is a move towards communism or socialism is really corporatism or fascism. A good example is the current situation in China. When communism failed the Party just switched to fascism. From concentration camps providing slave labor, the brutal suppression of minorities, military expansionism to an odd form of centrally controlled capitalism no country on earth today resembles the Nazis more than China.

The king of monopolistic practices, Bill Gates, praises China telling you all you need to know about how Microsoft came to dominate the personal computer industry. At first the government made half hearted efforts to limit Microsoft's monopolistic practices but corporatism/fascism has become the new model of relationships between the government and industry. Almost the entire tech industry is characterized by monopolies Rockefellor would have been proud of.

The secret to the great success of liberal democracy is a government not in bed with industry. Just as the game monopoly suggests given enough time all competitive games will produce monopolies and tyrannies. It is a natural law, sometimes referred to as the Mathew principle. While it does reflect hierarchies of competency, competency becomes irrelevant once a single play has the advantage of resources. The modern example is that those most willing to collude with the government and engage in unethical practices regardless of competency will be the winners.

Take a look at the stars at Davos and you will see that they amassed their wealth and power not through innovation or competency but the willingness to exploit weaknesses in the system. For example FaceBook is not an innovation, it's hardly any different than MySpace. It succeeded because of questionable ethics around the use of user data. Microsoft became what it is not because it was innovative, its success is do to buying out the competition. The innovations that made the PC possible did not come from Microsoft but even Windows was a purchased innovation. George Soros didn't become unfathomable rich because he was a genius but because he was willing to destroy central banks with unethical monetary speculation. I could offer more examples but you get the idea.

The bottom line is the West is being run by exploiters not innovators. What may at first appear as efficiency of scale is killing the innovation and necessary course corrections that were the hallmark of liberal democracies. Eisenhower should have included a third leg in his complex of the financial system which is also becoming just one big ponzi scheme because exploiters not innovators are running it. The government's failure to do its job of regulating industry has a lot to do with the tyranny that we are now experiencing. Conservative have to take a lot of the blame because the invisible hand has always been a myth. They never stood up and acknowledged that all systems, even hierarchies of competence will succumb to the Mathew principle. Over time all hierarchies become tyrannies. Not to mention that the Neo Con platform was essentially fascism in disguise.

Almost every attempt at communism or socialism has suffered the same fate. Even to a greater extent than corporatism/fascism. Just like the game monopoly attempts at communism and socialism allows power to be concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. Often to a single individual such as Stalin, Mao or Castro. It is just a variation of the Mathew principle. Instead of those that have money such as in monopoly ending up with all the resources socialism allows those with power to unstoppable gain more power.

People reject liberal democracy because it is not an ideology that satisfies the desire for simple solutions. It isn't even a political theory or system. It isn't an ideology at all but a pragmatic solution to the problem of natural law. The reason the Mathew principle is universal is that it is built into nature. Evolution works the same way. Competition within a species only works until a genotype becomes dominant. The Dinosaurs are an example. Diversity decreased as competition became almost impossible. A few species so dominated the environment that only a disaster could reset the competition. We are currently waiting for a disaster to reset society. But humans should not be hostage to natural law. We have the ability to try mutations through imagination without suffering the pain of natural evolution. Economically we can reset the monopoly board by restricting monopolies.

Civilization is based on abstractions, not natural law. Human intelligence has always been "unnatural" because it develop through the abstract. We don't have tool because we have large brain we have large brains because some primitive ape was able to abstract a tool. Freedom descends directly from the abstract, the ability to suspend our instincts through imagination. Culture evolved because of the ability to live in an abstract world. Where knowledge was passed down through the make believe world of story telling. Story telling and them written language transcended the natural limitation of time and space. Today many highly intelligent people have made the mistake that there is only natural law. Science or natural philosophy dominates the intellectual landscape. That mindset has lead to almost all of the societal problems we see. Natural law kills the abstraction of freewill and the agency and dignity that it allows. Without freewill people are reduced to meaningless "wet robots". A term coined by Scott Adams of Dilbert fame. You could be confused by the seeming contradiction that leftist believe in the complete mutability of human nature so as to allow for endless social engineering. The total absence of biological determinism. A couple of problems with that is that there policies don't reflect that. They insist that homosexuality and transsexualism is not a choice. Their racial policies do not involve raising minorities up but in general a lowering of the standards. In general they take an elitist position that biological determinism applies to the general population and not their enlightened selves. The nanny state in practice treats the population as if they were livestock more of less uniform and without individuality. They create groups of people not groups of individuals. Everyone that opposes them is stereotyped as of a lower order. For example the mythical right wing auto matron. Minorities are not seen as individuals but members of a group. So on and so forth. All in keeping with the denigration of freewill, agency and dignity which undoubtedly plays a role in the mass murder that tends to accompany leftist ideology.

As it relates to the original post globalism as currently manifested is predicated on the civilization crushing loss of individuality within the masses. The people behind it somehow believe they are more than human. Like all megalomaniacs they think they are gods. Soros has said as much and he surely can't be alone.

No matter how loyal the people are to their country, if they do not have the power to hold their representatives accountable, and if they fail to exercise that power, all governments sooner or later become corrupt.

The US Constitution is the only document in history that limits government by asserting that the people have rights which the government may not infringe, and that gives the people authority over the government. The only government in human history that is responsible to the people...IF the people hold it accountable.

If We, the People fail to hold our government accountable, no amount of nationalism can fix it. The proof is that Hitler appealed to nationalism to consolidate his power in the Third Reich. The people had no rights under fascism. Destruction of Constitutional principles by Democrats is moving us in that direction. Only We, the People can stop it. Will we?

Brits need to take the Ukie pill!!!