…(Jerry Useem in Fortune):

“Wal-Mart in 2003 is, in short, a lot like America in 2003: a sole superpower with a down-home twang. As with Uncle Sam, everyone’s position in the world will largely be defined in relation to Mr. Sam. Is your company a “strategic competitor” like China or a “partner” like Britain? Is it a client state like Israel or a supplier to the opposition like Yemen? Is it France, benefiting from the superpower’s reach while complaining the whole time? Or is it … well, a Target? You can admire the superpower or resent it or–most likely–both. But you can’t ignore it.”

Wal-Mart began in the suburban and ex-rural South, far from the big population centers. It still has yet to appear inside most cities (though Useem notes it’s just opened a prototype in-town store in LA). Big-city-based media people are still amazed and shocked upon learning how big and influential the chain is. Political people, of course, know. The chain’s late founder Sam Walton was one of Bill Clinton’s first big backers. The whole Republican campaign strategy is wrapped around appealing to Wal-Mart’s target customer base.

You already know about the chain’s notorious censorship policy regarding music CDs and their packaging. As it becomes the nation’s biggest video retailer, it could weild similar power over movie content (even more, and more draconian, than is currently weilded by Blockbuster).

Which means those of us who demand more than a discount-supercenter selection of cultural or other merchandise will need to vigilantly support those who can supply it.

For those of you who love overgeneralized dichotomies, here’s a new one:

America might be polarizing again, this time into Wal-Mart Nation (limited diversity, one big smiley-faced authority system) vs. Internet Nation (everything and everybody you could ever imagine in a big chaotic and contradictory spectacle).

You should know by now I’d rather live in the second world.