The version on the left was actually an "Economist" headline!
It CLAIMS to be named after a SOCIAL SCIENCE - and aimed at its practitioners.
(HouseholdManagement and HouseholdManagers)..
How very impartial and scientific!
The "Economist" is one of the most biased pro-capitalist publications in history.
Even my anarchist friends praise the "Economist" for its raw data and scientific facts.
They have a point. Country profiles are often full of information and the reporting is of an excellent quality.
Another publication - "The New Internationalist" also has "country profiles", possibly based on the version of these from "The Economist." Compare the two!
The "Economist" way of doing a "country profile" one is as biased as the "New Internationalist" one, I would argue!
My anarchist friends claimed that even if this version of the magazine from America was biased then another more impartial magazine with this title would be possible!
My contention is that it is all about the way you look at "Economics".
And I would say that this is always ultimately about Politics!
Why can't I go into a newsagent and buy a mainstream magazine called "THE SOCIOLOGIST"?
I certainly would prefer to. It would make a change.
Usually - I would probably have to go to a University Library to dig out a copy of such a magazine. Also about a social science.
.............