One of the most intriguing aspects of  today’s opposition to globalization is the kinds of people it puts together.   Some of the people who are disturbed by globalization are radicals in Seattle and assorted others considered significantly “left” of liberalism;   others are considered “right” of the conservatism of, say, a George W. Bush. 

This makes a political figure like Pat Buchanan especially enigmatic, because he cannot be described simply as a more ardent (or less moderate) advocate of the things all conservatives want.  On the issue of globalization, the very definition of what it means to be a conservative is up in the air.

I believe this is precisely the kind of uncertainty we need more of. 

It indicates a shaking up of assumptions as well as positions--and may represent the beginnings of a healthy redrawing of the traditional political map.

I believe this is long overdue.  In fact, I’m beginning to grow increasingly impatient with continuing to be asked whether I’m liberal or conservative.  

It’s like being asked whether it’s colder in the winter or on the farm.  The question itself simply doesn't make any sense.