What issues do you think are most important

[Chaerophon]

1 ) I must have misread, I thought Ashkael was just claiming that it was the *preception*, not the reality.

2 ) I'd consider the large connected land mass to be the most important factor (which was sparsely populated until 'recent' history)

3 ) I'm morbidly curious about how Ashok will respond to your 'foolish' comment, do you stick your hand in the mouths of Rottweilers for a living, by chance?
[right][snapback]62694[/snapback][/right]

1.) OK, I guess. However, I think that he made quite clear how he feels, whether it ultimately sounded like a compliment or not.

2.) I wouldn't. Another factor to add, maybe, but not a necessity for development. See Britain, Japan, Germany (to an obvious lesser extent) for reference. I wasn't about to write the definitive book; rather, I thought I would contribute some major factors as a counter to Ashock's ignorant point. The West was, in the early stages of American development, largely a non-factor. The East established itself industrially around the major cities with port access in a fashion reminiscent of 'city-states'. Success was the result of rural-urban interaction around these major centers and, ultimately, the development of self-sufficient domestic markets for domestic industrial produce.

3.) He shows that he can barely articulate himself on a regular basis. I'm not concerned. All of my points stand. If you or anyone else want to add some, fair enough. His point, re: somehow America has 'smarts' going for it while the rest of the world does not, remains completely invalid.