Ludicrous simplifications such as "Afghanistan attacked us," belie the facts. Saudi Arabian extremists calling themselves "al Queda" (the Base) attacked us and we retaliated by bombing the bejesus out of their host, the Taliban in Afghanistan, then arrogantly doing the same to an uninvolved nation - Iraq. The selective convenience of enforcing with "shock and awe" some, but not all, U.N. resolutions is the epitome of arrogance.

Some good comments, but I must object to the phrase
"arrogant use of power ". Has it been so arrogant? Afghanistan attacked us. Iraq violated the no-fly-zone and corrupted the UN food program there. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia if not part of 9-11 in financing and support have supported terrorism or the Taleban before and after 9-11.

The US has, in fact, not done enough. We should have and should still make Pakistan give up its nukes, missiles and subs. Pakistan is working on miniaturizing nukes to go on missiles on subs. They will sell these to Saudi Arabia and others, because their debt is about 30 billion USD.

The global economy arrived in the United States and the middle class got smaller. Smaller. And because some 98% of the economy is internal, moving outside the United States may well save money as slave labor in China takes care of business, but it hardly does any favors for the folks who own this country.

But we can compete and well. We have a lot of people in jail.. they could make cars, grow crops. We could drop OSHA and do even better.

Globalism for Americans is NOT about the economic circumstances of globalism... it is about the people of the United States. Ah but.. them boys in the high up office with the rug you could sleep on don't know that. Yet.

I have to question your assertion that the state is no longer able to function as a bridge between the democratic ideals and economic realities of modern society. This line has been becoming progressively more common, especially from the neo-conservatives around the world whose star has been on the rise since the death of the 1990's middle path dream.

What strikes me most about this is that the vast majority of the people who parrot this line are the same supply-siders who believe that the solution to life's problems lies eternally at the hands of the fair-minded market, and that by lowering taxes (which of course has no effect on undercutting future entitlement programs and domestic programs designed to help the people who receive the least benefits of the tax cuts.... but i digress.) the rising tide of economic prosperity will lift all boats. The circular supply side argument of give the rich more money and they'll provide jobs and capital to the rest of society is hardly born out by the evident effects of our increasingly competitive, free-trade/no tax oriented world.

In the long run I believe that we have a responsibility beyond our own individual survival. We are members of a community, on familial, local, national and global levels simultaneously, and it is each person's definite duty to do what they can to give the most back to their community however they can. In our modern global world we must strive to have our governments exist as buffers between the vulnerable, economically and socially, and the uncertainties of the greater world which we play a large role in driving. It is only then that we can strive to create the true equality of opportunity in the modern age that each individual deserves.

Cheers,

PSB