My comments were related to the Pew poll and the interpretation of its results.
Chuck0 had a good post about the nature of the questions asked, that I would generally agree with. Apple pies and sunshine and whatnot.
You may be reading something into what I wrote that is not there.
For instance:
>Where do you get that? People are "happy" about trading with
>other countries; what could be more normal in a capitalist
>world? I didn't see any sign of people wanting to sing the
>Internationale or cross freely over borders wherever they like.
I don't see _anyone_ wanting to sing that song.
But I do see people wanting better distributed wealth and populations. (Again, if only, initially, as a balance to the U.S. unilateralism.)
Euble made a quip in this thread: How many read any trade agreements? NONE.
Almost no one sees the underpining of what "open trade" means. So Pew isn't measuring real opinion on free trade (or whatever name it's given). They see the people who come from other countries, they see the larger marquee of the UDHR, that kind of thing. Trade is a rider on that.
And I think that was Doug's point in his little bit of obiter there.
I'm originally from Toronto (now in Kingston temporarily), so maybe things are a bit different in the immigration-heavy Big Smoke (Toronto). But part of the reason Toronto is so non-conflicted with such a heavy immigrant base (to the chagrin of Zundel, who lived so many years on Carlton St. around the corner from me) is that there is an acceptance of "international" ideals.
The source of those ideals? You tell me. The validity of those ideals was not my comment.
But I can only speak to what I experience. Maybe Ottawa is different.
Ken.
-- Great nations have always acted like gangsters and the small nations like prostitutes.
-- Stanley Kubrick