It isn’t only Mr. Luce that is suddenly concerned with the welfare of ‘the less well off’. The Economist has just as suddenly come to a realization about ‘young minds’ : ‘If schools don’t open soon the effect on young minds could be devastating’.
Judging from the number of links featured on their twitter account. What can the reader think of this ‘evolution’ ?
One of the most compelling chapters of ‘Liberalism At Large’ titled ‘Globalism and its Contents’ describes, in detail, the men, and the occasional women, who become writers and editors of newspapers like The Financial Times and The Economist.
Pages 334 and *335 of ‘Liberalism’ offers some revelatory insights as to the how and why of career paths, for the favored few, who manage to attend and matriculate/graduate from a small number of exclusive Oxford colleges. A reference to the ‘Magdalen Mafia’ in the context of employment at The Economist provides insights, even Gideon Rachman is mentioned as the beneficiary of an elite education.
What does my presentation have to do with Mr. Luce’s sudden revelation/evolution on the welfare of ‘the less well off’ ? As a regular reader of this newspaper, this is the first time I can recall Mr. Luce expressing anything like concern for ‘the less well off ‘. Is the reality of the word poor so alien? Mr. Luce, with his mentions of Amazon and Tyson, attempts an unconvincing reaffirmation of his Capitalist Faith.
Political Observer
https://www.ft.com/content/1e5207ea-8f77-11ea-9b25-c36e3584cda8
______________________________________________________________
Screen shot of pages 334 & *335:
StephenKMackSD's Blog 