On 9/3/2010 11:34 AM, Eric Beck wrote:
> And I'm sorry for calling you an asshole, SA
No harm done. I'm sorry I got on your nerves.
> But I think it should be centralization
> on our terms, not theirs.
"False binaries" are only false if you can actually sketch out some halfway plausible third option. "Centralization on our terms" doesn't cut it, not even close. I can't even begin to speculate what it might mean.
During all the time we spend waiting for some clue as to what it might mean, a Keynesian approach, according to you, should be excluded. Which means prolonged and extended inequality, unemployment, etc. What I don't understand is why for you these seem only to be relative evils, whereas a "nationalized workforce" - which we already have anyway! - is an absolute evil.
If you're really interest in denationalizing things, I'd just observe that the social polarization and atomization that go with the absence of "Keynesianism" don't strike me as very promising terrain for any "denationalization" to proceed from. It might be worth giving some thought to the question of which types of social conditions give rise to more xenophobia and the clinging to nation.
SA