> The point is, and it has been made by others besides Adler, that
> sovereign states are *always* at war with each other.  They may not be
> shooting at each other (a state of warfare, as opposed to a state of
> war), but they are always at war.  The *only* way to end that state of
> war is to have a single sovereign state.  If you think you can't stand
> that idea, then you are stuck with the constant state of war we have
> today.

Yep... and perhaps a single state can be the same as no state - full
devolution and no bang-sticks (no 'exhausting the negotiation process').

> I'll buy you one.  So far, I have met three email friends for lunch at
> the Grand Cafe in Oslo.

Bad luck for you... I'm going to hold you to this. I'll be spending a week
in Lillehammer but, for sure, the big O's en route. I'll try to have change
to buy the bagels.

> The only problem I have found in Norway that I attribute to the social
> democratic culture, is a too strong tendency to conform and to expect
> others to conform.  I suppose Norway over-emphasizes cooperation the
> way the US over-emphasizes competition.  On the whole, however, I think
> the balance of competition and cooperation is better in Norway.

Totally. The benign dictatorship seems to ride closer to a balance that
makes people cheery, and the petro-dollars don't hurt none (shame about the
pandering to the whaling industry though). For me there is still something
surreal about it all because the people are happy to live under a government
rather than to be self-determining, to be the 'government'.

Cheers

b