Economic strategy and the state

[Trond Andresen <Trond.Andresen@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Brent McClintock says (on supra-national entities like the EU):

	As for fledgling supranational states, I see them as
	quasi-states that are an opportunity to be used by progressive
	forces rather than to be ignored.

This is not fair. We "progressive nationalists" (to use Tom Weisskopf's
term) do not of course IGNORE such entities, we are very conscious of
their importance, and take them into account in our political work.

We have discussed this very extensively last year. I again offer to
e-mail the complete exchange to anyone interested. There is very little
to say that wasn't said in that exchange on pen-l.

There is one interesting point, though, on the "sociology" of pen-l.
How come one Norwegian (me) and a lot of Canadians belong to the
"progressive nationalist(PN)" following, while most of Americans
participating in the discussion belong to the "progressive
internationalists (PI)"?

My theory is that the capitalist tradition and dictatorship in the
U.S. is so unbridled, the sheer size of the country is so large, the
decision processes so corrupted, the distance to Washington so far,
that you U.S. progressives are PI since you have so little to lose.

Canadians and Norwegians live in smaller countries (population-wise)
with a much stronger tradition of regulating capitalism. We know very
well that we have a lot to lose (and we have already lost a lot, but
this is no reason to sell out completely).


Provocatively yours,  :-)


-------------------------------------
Trond Andresen	(Trond.Andresen@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Department of Engineering Cybernetics
The Norwegian Institute of Technology
N-7034 Trondheim, NORWAY

phone +47 73 59 43 58
fax   +47 73 59 43 99