Re: RE: Krugman

To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RE: Krugman
From: "Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:11:59 -0800

----- Original Message -----
From: "Devine, James" <jdevine@xxxxxxx>
> I don't think he listens to me, but I'll try.
>
> It's not just a lack of imagination: posing the question as "globalization
> vs. anti-globalization" -- as opposed to "capitalist globalization vs.
> democratic globalization" -- biases the answer in favor of the former.
>
===============

I know that. I was just pointing out the lack of imagination in creating the binary in the first
place so that the bias of it is tilted. Blast the politics of vocabularies! :->

Ian

"Consent falls apart in the battle of descriptions." [Kim Scheppele]

References:
- RE: Krugman
  - From: Devine, James

Prev by Date: RE: Krugman
Next by Date: Conference announcement
Previous by thread: RE: Krugman
Next by thread: RE: Re: RE: Krugman
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Thread context:
- Kissinger hunted, Eugene Coyle Fri 29 Mar 2002, 19:26 GMT
- Kenan Evren Chair in Turkish Studies, Sabri Oncu Fri 29 Mar 2002, 19:14 GMT
- Krugman, Ian Murray Fri 29 Mar 2002, 16:16 GMT
  - <Possible follow-up(s)>
  - RE: Krugman, Devine, James Fri 29 Mar 2002, 19:53 GMT
    - Re: RE: Krugman, Ian Murray Fri 29 Mar 2002, 20:17 GMT
  - RE: Re: RE: Krugman, Devine, James Fri 29 Mar 2002, 20:54 GMT
    - Re: RE: Re: RE: Krugman, Ian Murray Fri 29 Mar 2002, 21:15 GMT
  - RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Krugman, Devine, James Fri 29 Mar 2002, 21:25 GMT
    - Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Krugman, Ian Murray Fri 29 Mar 2002, 22:01 GMT

[ Other Periods | Other mailing lists | Search ]