Those on the right take the basically good idea of national sovereignty to its absurd extremes of xenophobia and insularity. Those on the left take the basically sound idea of conservation to its absurd extreme of returning us to some pristine state of nature. In the name of conservation and maintaining the bonds of arbitrary geographic communities, they reject the growing trend towards commercial chains. Besides, this vision of preserving arbitrary geographic community from outsiders has no appeal to someone like me, a student not yet rooted in any geographic locale. Dynamists are not interested in pre-determined communities where each has his predefined place.
Reactionaries impose their own forms of coercive regulation based on their moral conviction.
They charge that dynamists are greedy and amoral and willing to countenance ugly things like child pornography on the Internet. Postrel makes the essential point that dynamists are not simply enthusiasts for novelty, embracing any and all change even if it is cultural degradation. They are not shy about making moral choices, but can live with varying forms of social organization. Many are tolerant of gays, but are also respectful of views of the religious right as well. They also recognize that the free market of ideas is the best mechanism for curbing truly abhorrent social behavior.