it was taken from this morning's washington post, which in turn linked to the articel from this morning's ft.
the link:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/0b5d64fa-da...0779e2340.html
my apologies about the omission.
i am less sure what to make of your total naivete regarding the simplest realities of north/south relations in the context of this newest mutation of capitalist organization.
even less do i understand your curious opposition between the "pragmatic" and "postmodern"--neither of which mean very much. in this case, the core of the problem i really have is that you take no account of context but feel that it is ok to opine anyway, and then, when challenged, you simply revert to these strange, meaningless categories. you cannot treat the propositions particular to neoliberalism as abstract statements, any more than you can rationally pretend that "efficiency" is a neutral category. if you want to have an actual conversation, then fine--either do some research--a salutary act that would probably demonstrate what i am saying about truncated contexts in your posts better than i could--or make an effort to actually engage with the content of the argument.
not having information is not in itself a problem--i dont have complete info, you dont have it, no-one has it.
but not having information, not being willing to look and being dismissive of other viewpoints--particularly when it is clear from the start that you do not know what you are talking about is annoying (btw--if you want to play the non sequitor game, just look at the list of arbitrary "evidence" you adduce for your neoliberal 101 conclusion in post no. 5.)
i have other things to do.