In response to Blimpish's comment:
"'... namely the long-term untenability of a political philosophy that demands the subjectation of self-interest (or national interest) for the benefit of an uncertain "other"' - expand a bit on this. Not sure I quite agree on it as a characterisation of the key weakness of European social democracy. After all, all politics demand that we at some stage put the common interest (often, if not admittedly always, an uncertain 'other') before our own."
I could point out that I said “one of the most fundamental…” not “THE fundamental…” and leave it at that, but I don’t think I’ll be that cheap. I do agree with you that politics and being in society does demand a certain degree of common interest. I’m not a Millian or a Randian, after all, and do support quite a shocking amount of self-abnegation and sacrifice (albeit mostly social, rather than economic). A good example of this is the idea of military service, the idea of giving your life for your country. Granted one can make arguments that one really fights for your home and family and not the greater good of the nation, but I don’t buy into the idea that selfish reasons lie behind acts of charity and unselfishness and I don’t think you would make those arguments. Another would be my full-throated support of the rigorous use of shame to enforce social norms.
Truthfully, there is a lot behind what I wrote--as the questions I posed at the end of my post show--and I haven’t fully thought through or really formed codified opinions on many of these issues, so perhaps I should not have been so sloppy with my quickly written post. This is, after all, still a 'blog that people read for frivolity rather than substance, not a term paper.