"Back to Europe. You extol the west Europeans for helping the east, and compare this to TVA type assistance for the south. But again, the relevant comparison here is to Mexico. The west Europeans are exploiting cheap labor in the east, just as we are doing south of our border. It's the exact same thing --except, and this is a separate criticism -- we are making no effort toward cultural integration with Mexico, which I think is a mistake. We treat Mexicans to our south the way the Europeans treat their Turkish guest workers -- like strangers."

................................................

Lind's analogy between the American "South" (an imprecise shorthand, but then, without imprecise shorthands, every political column in history would be tripled in length) and eastern Europe is fine.

And you've actually indirectly identified the real European analogue to Mexico: Turkey. (And the rest of the Levant and the Maghreb.)

On the subject of "cultural integration with Mexico" - assuming you do indeed mean that the United States and Mexico should combine to form one culturally integrated entity - what an appalling idea.

"We are a purple nation. Look at counties, rather than states, and you'll see it. The population centers are blue, the rural areas are red."

......................................................

^ Not necessarily.

"Red" urban centers may be very rare. (Though there is Fort Worth.)

But in New England, and between the Mississippi and the Great Lakes, even the rural areas tend to be "blue".

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/election/uscounties.html)

"On behalf of the South, I jus' wanna say, thanks to all ya Northerners, who took a lotta time outta your daily work shedul to impart your wisdom on us southerners. First, I reckon, ya had to spend some time thinkin' up all them big words to put in yar article. etc etc etc etc etc"

....................................

The author of this particular article happens to be from Texas.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Lind)

Also, sarcasm is a sign of defensiveness.

It is, of course, slanderous to portray the South as a place populated exclusively by uneducated racists. But if you want to eradicate such slander, stop whining about it on an internet talk-back pages, and start shouting down that small minority of Southerners who have given your part of the country such a reputation in the first place.

"Pardon me, sorry if ma bit of local talk, or "sarcasm" made ya think less of li'l ol' me. Hate ta think you think less of ol' Jon Stewart and the prophet Stephen Colbert, or anyun else who uses sarcasm atall.

Also, so sorry about nominatin' GOPers to office. McCain was from the entrenched southern state of Arizona, and Palin was from the southern backwater of Alaska..."

..................................

*cut* *paste*

Sarcasm is a sign of defensiveness.

It is, of course, slanderous to portray the South as a place populated exclusively by uneducated racists. But if you want to eradicate such slander, stop whining about it on an internet talk-back pages, and start shouting down that small minority of Southerners who have given your part of the country such a reputation in the first place.

"What we southerners can't stand, and part of the ways y'all can't come down here and convince us to vote for y'all, is condescendin' attitudes. Y'all ain't not better than us! Y'all is jus' as racist, backwards, anti-labor, anti-immigrant, anti-edumacating..."

..........................................

*cut* paste*

It is, of course, slanderous to portray the South as a place populated exclusively by uneducated racists. But if you want to eradicate such slander, stop whining about it on an internet talk-back page, and start shouting down that small minority of Southerners who have given your part of the country such a reputation in the first place.

Sarcasm is a sign of defensiveness.

Acknowledging the reputation of American manufacturers for (1) producing low quality cars and (2) being un-green doesn't preclude acknowledging that "Southern" labor practices may result in lowered wages throughout the United States.

It doesn't preclude DIPSUTING the second point either, of course.

But I think this comment section would benefit from posters addressing the two points separately.

General note 1: Half the South-bashing comments here are just paraphrases of the "---- the South" manifesto that got passed around the internet after the 2004 election. Come on. If you're going to trash your compatriots, at least be original.

General note 2: The posters who are trying to defend the honor of the South here would be more convincing if their comments didn't seem to evince some kind of inferiority complex. ("Who still think that the South is some sort of third world country, desperately in need of New Englanders to come down and show them the light.")

gusanocomemuerto - "Yes, Detroit is in thrall to the unions, and the South is not. Thanks to that, and to incentives (not poor social services or minimum wage laws) the South was able to..." ...compel the rest of the country to reduce wages in order to compete with an entity on which they can't even impose tariffs.

JHRS07 - Interesting. I am aware that the reputation of the Big Three is worse than the reality.

thesoutherner - Feigned nonchalance is also a sign of defensiveness.

"Yes, Detroit is in thrall to the unions, and the South is not. Thanks to that, and to incentives (not poor social services or minimum wage laws) the South was able to..." compell the rest of the country to reduce wages in order to compete with an entity on which they can't even impose tariffs.