Omar Kusturica wrote: "This is simply nonsense. If this were so, people could never change a government by elections or in other ways without changing the whole state." Again, the nonsense is yours. I clearly wrote that the authority of the state lies with the particular form under which people order themselves under government. Obviously, except to Omar, this means that people can alter the particular form of government. The vehicles of change might be through referendum or electing a particular group of representatives into power. I understand why Omar might be interested in a free-floating understanding of the authority of the state, free from all the difficulties of material conditions, since it permits the ideological critique that informs so much of his commentary on Israel and the U.S. Sadly, most of those he so boldly defends, including the Palestinians and Iraqis, are hardly served by such critique. They have to deal with the realities of conflicting interests competing for government. How does one institute government when faced with multiple and conflicting interests, as is the case with the Palestinians and Iraqis? What the Palestinians and Iraqis don't need is Omar's 'Beat the shit out of the other guy!' routine or his 'Death to Israel' chants. Sincerely, Phil Enns Toronto, ON ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html