4 ms·

I mostly agree, but I felt like they were bursting at the seams to criticize Trump. Hardly a piece on the site that I RECALL had anything positive to say about

by muninn_ 10y ago

I mostly agree, but I felt like they were bursting at the seams to criticize Trump. Hardly a piece on the site that I RECALL had anything positive to say about the Brexit, Trump, or other movements. I like to read positive and negatives for both. Overall, a good site/magazine.

snerbles 10y ago
Better to say that The Economist is pro-globalism, right or left.
- muninn_ 10y ago
  Yeah maybe that's more accurate, depending on what you mean by globalism.
- mSparks 10y ago
  guess that depends on your definition of globalism. the economist is pro imf/world bank. that is less pro globalisation and more pro * poorer nations for the Western profit incentive. which isnt quite an equivalence.
- gertef 10y ago
  Isofar as "left" and "right" have meaning, globalism is right, not left. A "left" globalism would be an international workers/labor movement, which Economist does not support.
davidw 10y ago
> I felt like they were bursting at the seams to criticize Trump Could be, there's a reason for that. With some things, the two sides do not really merit the same consideration. Slavery, for instance is an easy one, not something where you need 'fair and balanced' coverage of 'both sides of the issue'. Not comparing Trump to slavery, mind you, but from their editorial stance, he combines a number of worryingly illiberal qualities that are antithetical to their position. They were (and are) the same way about Silvio Berlusconi, despite not having a lot in common with some of his past left-wing opposition.
- muninn_ 10y ago
  Of course. I just would prefer a little more opposition to the liberal imperialism at times. It would be great to have a journal that's somehow even more sophisticated than the Economist, taking into different viewpoints and understandings of the world. Just as a quick example, I don't see much in the way of opposition to war, or the positive side of something like charter schools. Note that these are things I'm just interested in reading contrasting viewpoints about. I am fortunate enough though that I can find books to fill these voids.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    > positive side of something like charter schools The Economist certainly have done this, they used to do one every few months. It's strange, I'd say charter schools were a very "neoliberal" policy.
    - muninn_ 10y ago
      Yeah these were just examples. Might not have been good ones.
  - gertef 10y ago
    propublica.org It's hard to call them "news", but they do important research and expose
pjc50 10y ago
The alleged positives of Brexit have the problem of being incoherent: because there's no fixed policy manifesto for it, people keep citing conflicting advantages. Such as ending agricultural subsidies - while telling the farmers that they're not going to lose out.

by muninn_ 10y ago

snerbles 10y ago

Better to say that The Economist is pro-globalism, right or left.

muninn_ 10y ago
Yeah maybe that's more accurate, depending on what you mean by globalism.
mSparks 10y ago
guess that depends on your definition of globalism. the economist is pro imf/world bank. that is less pro globalisation and more pro * poorer nations for the Western profit incentive. which isnt quite an equivalence.
gertef 10y ago
Isofar as "left" and "right" have meaning, globalism is right, not left. A "left" globalism would be an international workers/labor movement, which Economist does not support.

davidw 10y ago

> I felt like they were bursting at the seams to criticize Trump Could be, there's a reason for that. With some things, the two sides do not really merit the same consideration. Slavery, for instance is an easy one, not something where you need 'fair and balanced' coverage of 'both sides of the issue'. Not comparing Trump to slavery, mind you, but from their editorial stance, he combines a number of worryingly illiberal qualities that are antithetical to their position. They were (and are) the same way about Silvio Berlusconi, despite not having a lot in common with some of his past left-wing opposition.

muninn_ 10y ago
Of course. I just would prefer a little more opposition to the liberal imperialism at times. It would be great to have a journal that's somehow even more sophisticated than the Economist, taking into different viewpoints and understandings of the world. Just as a quick example, I don't see much in the way of opposition to war, or the positive side of something like charter schools. Note that these are things I'm just interested in reading contrasting viewpoints about. I am fortunate enough though that I can find books to fill these voids.
- pjc50 10y ago
  > positive side of something like charter schools The Economist certainly have done this, they used to do one every few months. It's strange, I'd say charter schools were a very "neoliberal" policy.
  - muninn_ 10y ago
    Yeah these were just examples. Might not have been good ones.
- gertef 10y ago
  propublica.org It's hard to call them "news", but they do important research and expose

pjc50 10y ago

The alleged positives of Brexit have the problem of being incoherent: because there's no fixed policy manifesto for it, people keep citing conflicting advantages. Such as ending agricultural subsidies - while telling the farmers that they're not going to lose out.