Although this article is ostensibly about globalization, there's something meta going on that I'd like to flag. Irving Wladawsky-Berger wites, "whether economic globalization has been successful, unsuccessful, or something in between depends on the stories we tell each other. We don't all tell the same story, and we tend to discount or ignore stories that are different from the ones we subscribe to." One of the 'stories' is 'The Left Wing Populist Narrative': "National economies are rigged to channel the gains from globalization to the privileged few." Another is 'The Establishment Narrative': "Economic globalization is a rising tide that lifts all boats." You see how this effectively reduces any opinion on globalization to the (unreasoning?) selection of one or another 'story'. This is a pernicious rhetorical tactic, and yet I see it deployed all the time. It hides - nay, deliberately obscures - the idea that there may be any fact of the matter. What you call a 'fact' just the "lens of one narrative".
Today: 0 Total: 1764 [Direct link] [Share]
