I read the following paragraph from Walter Russell Mead’s latest Newsweek contribution three times and still couldn’t figure out why he used the word “worse”:
Liberal capitalism is risky, unequal and destabilizing. Worse, over time, the countries that embrace it tend to grow powerful and rich. Those nations that embrace the chilly logic and brave the rough seas of capitalist development end up developing and exploiting new technologies, creating new industries and gaining more power. Societies that respond with more reserve don’t prosper as much in the good times and often pay a higher price when things go wrong. Just ask the Argentines. Or the Russians.
Even if you buy the argument Mead makes in the first sentence, shouldn’t the transition to the second sentence have been something along the lines of “despite those drawbacks”? Or are we to believe that it makes sense to blame capitalism because of its advantages?
