Stanley: Just an afterthought on that Euro-Pessimism post of yours.

“I think the author here is trapped by the Economist’s own position, which has long disparaged the importance of nation and culture, and focused almost exclusively on the significance of economics.”

[Derb] What is that but standard Righ-Multiculturalism of the George W. Bush, Wall Street Journal, variety?

“Faced with the recognition that some relatively ‘thick’ notion of British nationality and culture may need to be nurtured after all, the response is pessimism.”

[Derb] Indeed it is. But now consider: If such an ancient and deep-rooted identity as the British needs nurturing against the onslaughts of globalization, what are the chances for the American identity–a much newer, more fragile growth? [And sure, we can all have a discussion about whether that “British” should really be “English,” the British identity, according to some historians , being very little older than the American… But the point is still worth considering. Certainly the English identity is very old–an Italian visitor in Chaucer’s time remarked on the insufferable arrogance of the English, and how cruelly and unashamedly they poked fun at foreigners. If an identity as deep-set as that can be washed away by postinductrial currents, what chance is there for Americanism? We are doomed, doomed.]