I have to admit, I haven't read my Colonial-American-Revolutionary History as well, or as recently as I should have, so I will have to bite my tongue on any debates regarding 'Federalism/Anti-Federalism' or for that matter its relevance to the Modern US Corporate Structure. But Scott needent get so hard on Nick for skipping around on his post, and not backing his argument as well as he might have. It was a nice post Nick!, it propelled us in a working direction. (Although I personally like the space one more! and Scott keep up the criticism, it makes your posts and the blog a stronger cohesive enterprise!)

Now, I am more interested in what Scott is talking about with this Third World eventual revolution, in his FINESTwords he goes something like this...,,

American corporatism continues to encroach on Third World cultures and its inexorable exploitation of the Third World's resources reaches a critical threshold, the concomitant development of an infrastructure in these struggling nations, while superficially the apparatus of oppression and exploitation, will provide a suitably revolutionary organism that will be infiltrated by whatever ideology that effects a revolution that will eventually reorient the global economic energies that maintain the present world order.

and then he goes on to say that this revolution could be in some part America's own making... well see here Victor Keegan of the Guardian because I think it relates to a possible way that Bush and his Corporate-Business-First attitudes might potentially backfire (ever so slowly of course) and potentially allow for what Scott is offering to manifest as some workable future reality - anyway, I just want to post some Non-Scott sources that are interesting to his argument on the fate of the Third World.

Much Love.

  ¶ 12:42 PM