On Sep 28, 2009, at 10:05 PM, John Gulick wrote:
> Did you not make the same argument in the waning months of 2008,
> qualified by the remark that
> neo-liberalism's successor was yet to be born (you nominated green
> Keynesianism as one possibility)?
> Nature abhors a vacuum I guess.
Yeah, I thought that for a while. I don't anymore. Though circs can always change. Still, I'm amazed by the ideological and financial resilience of the thing.