Comments on: The Economist Trips, Falls into Mainstream Media Bias Against GOP

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:41:45 +0000

To clear things up – the Economist magazine has always worn its editorial stance on its sleeve – it is “classical liberalism”.

Classicial liberalism is a coupling of both economic and social liberalism.

Economic liberalism is a philosophy that supports free-markets, minimal government interference on business, and pro-free trade. It is against prevlidge, statism, and other such measures that interfere with individual preference. Probably the most famous early “economic liberalism” thinker would be Adam Smith. In America, “economic liberalism” is termed “fiscal conservatism”.

Social liberalism is a philosophy that supports freedom of choice in human action. It is secular humanism. This is a philosophy that governments (and other “moral” authorities such as organized religions) should strive towards the least amount of interference or restriction on individual choice. Social liberalism support of drug & prostitution legalisation, gay marriage, and against any unecessary intrusion of authority on an individual’s freedom to live their life as they choose.

As such, it isn’t surprising the the Economist wouldn’t be in favor of the current direction the Republican part is taking. The republican party is a marriage of “economic liberalism” (aka fiscal conservatism) and social conservatism. The economist party is very socially liberal. Thus, obviously, the anti-abortion, anti-gay rights segement of the republican party would be contrary to their position.

In short, political stances are often more complicated than the black/white, republican/democrat, “liberal”/”conservative” labels that we have in the US. It is a real shame that some many people can’t recognize this fact.

By: ktbell

ktbell — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:57:12 +0000

i’m curious to hear other bloggers opine about their political perspective of The Economist (and if/how that has changed). I have an economics undergrad degree and a master’s in nursing and have been reading/enjoying the mix of conservative and liberal editorials and articles for over a decade.

my husband and i just got into a debate about The Economist’s political lens: moderate conservative (my vote), “liberal!!” (my hubs vote), or other? “you decide..”

thanks in advance, katie

By: Tad

Tad — Sat, 09 May 2009 13:03:11 +0000

In general, if you’re relying on the “mainstream media bias against GOP”, you’re doing something wrong.

If the Republican party is unable to do some critical self reflection and adjust accordingly, it’s not going to fare well in 2010.

. . . and yes, there is a very loud and very angry subset of the party right now. Did you watch the teabag parties? That was not reasoned political discourse. That was anger.

By: richard martin

richard martin — Fri, 01 May 2009 16:42:04 +0000

I am sorry Brandon, but when you accuse the Economist of holding a liberal perspective, you truly have lost it. I read the economist regularly and I consider them to be an important magazine that counters liberal economic paradigms. In fact, the opposite of what you claim. This magazine is the most popular, consistently read magazine by politicians, economists, and statesman. To claim the analysis of the Economist has declined is BS. My very pro-free market econ professor claims it is still top notch and highly advanced in its analysis of markets, businesses, and politics. I completely agree and have no idea what anti-GOP bias you speak of. I call it objective reporting. Only the WSJ comes close to the depth, perspective, and quality of the writing.