3 ms·
The economist is known to have an extreme liberal bent. So a book like that is expected. A lot of classical liberal values are going extremist. Way back when I
by corethree 3y ago
The economist is known to have an extreme liberal bent. So a book like that is expected.
A lot of classical liberal values are going extremist. Way back when I was liberal I couldn't see it coming.
Now the two big movements within liberalism are pretty extremist: identity politics and feminism.
The weird thing about this list is although the economist is very liberal they have a book on there that is against identity politics that essentially against liberalism.
However, on the feminism side they still have a lot of books on the "patriarchy" and blaming and attacking men for traditional gender roles that dominated the anthropological landscape for eons.
It's not a coincidence that feminism is on the rise this century. It's almost a universal thing that crosses cultural lines... Unilaterally we see women in most 1st world counties gaining more power than they ever have before in human history. We would assume that culture evolves randomly so random cultures would have random perspectives on gender roles, but the fact that the rise of feminism is so universal among first world countries points to a single factor: technology. One book in that list is about the rise of females in outdoor sports. That book likely blames men for not allowing women to be in said sports (which plays a small role in the whole situation) while also likely doesn't mention how tampons basically are the main technological enabler that allowed women to even entertain the concept in the last century.
This divide among men and women does partly lead to the low birth rate you see not just in Korea. But internationally among all 1st world countries.
- physPop 3y ago> The economist is known to have an extreme liberal bent. So a book like that is expected. Thats simply untrue? Its one of the most balanced, centrist -- if opinionated -- news magazines.
- corethree 3y agoNo it's not. It's true. The economist is really liberal. It's readership is majority liberal at 59 percent. The rest are a combination of moderate and conservatives, I think conservatives are 18 percent.
- pm3003 3y agoThey've been liberal since they were founded. They defend free-market economy, self determination of individuals, open societies, free global movement of capital, men and information. However, they might not be liberal in the sense that the word has taken in the US in recent years.
- corethree 3y agoIn general with more power women are able to be more selective of their mates. By default women are hypergamous. They rather share an alpha male. This changes dating culture into hookup culture where thousands of young women hook up with a few top tier men. Coupled with birth control and disdain for polygamy it lowers the population overall as women seek polygamy, but culture doesn't allow it so they are sort of stuck in this hookup mode as there are "no good men" willing to settled down from their point of view. Prior to women gaining power we would have no choice but to marry a man because marriage was coupled with survival. Women in general couldn't work and even in prehistoric times we couldn't hunt. Thus before feminism, someone like me had to settle for a man that was at my level. So overall this imbalance is better for us and worse for men.