Editing The Economist (section)

== Opinions ==
{{Main|The Economist editorial stance}}

The editorial stance of ''The Economist'' primarily revolves around [[classical liberalism|classical]], [[Social liberalism|social]], and most notably, [[economic liberalism]]. Since its founding, it has supported [[radical centrism]], favouring policies and governments that maintain [[Centrism|centrist politics]]. The newspaper typically champions [[neoliberalism]], particularly [[free market]]s, [[free trade]], [[free immigration]], [[deregulation]], and [[globalisation]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=16 December 2010 |title=Globalisation: The redistribution of hope |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/node/17732859 |url-status=live |access-date=23 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110422201232/http://www.economist.com/node/17732859 |archive-date=22 April 2011}}</ref> When the newspaper was founded, the term ''[[economism]]'' denoted what would today be termed "economic liberalism". The activist and journalist [[George Monbiot]] has described it as neoliberal while occasionally accepting the propositions of [[Keynesian economics]] where deemed more "reasonable".<ref name="Grauniad">{{Cite news |last=George Monbiot |date=11 January 2005 |title=George Monbiot, Punitive – and it works |work=The Guardian |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jan/11/economy.g8 |url-status=live |access-date=25 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018124521/https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jan/11/economy.g8 |archive-date=18 October 2017}}</ref> The weekly favours a [[carbon tax]] to fight [[global warming]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=14 June 2008 |title=Buttonwood: Let them heat coke |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11543656 |url-status=live |access-date=25 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081008165633/http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11543656 |archive-date=8 October 2008}}</ref> According to one former editor, Bill Emmott, "the ''Economist''{{'}}s philosophy has always been liberal, not conservative".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Emmot |first=Bill |date=8 December 2000 |title=Time for a referendum on the monarchy |work=Comment |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/monarchy/story/0,2763,408484,00.html |url-status=live |access-date=27 December 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230411215823/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/dec/08/monarchy.comment |archive-date=11 April 2023}}</ref> Alongside other publications such as ''The Guardian'', ''[[The Observer]]'' and ''[[The Independent]]'', it supports the [[Republicanism in the United Kingdom|United Kingdom becoming a republic]].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Katwala |first=Sunder |date=7 February 2012 |title=The monarchy is more secure than ever |work=The New Statesman |url=https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2012/02/monarchy-jubilee-media-public |url-status=live |access-date=14 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220914162446/https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2012/02/monarchy-jubilee-media-public |archive-date=14 September 2022}}</ref>

[[File:David Hume and Adam Smith statues, Edinburgh.jpg|thumb|Scottish economist [[Adam Smith]] (right) and philosopher [[David Hume]] (left) represent the newspaper's foundational beliefs of ''[[laissez-faire]]'' policies, self-sufficiency, anti-protectionism and [[free trade]].]]
Individual contributors take diverse views. ''The Economist'' favours the support, through [[central bank]]s, of banks and other important corporations. This principle can, in a much more limited form, be traced back to [[Walter Bagehot]], the third editor of ''The Economist'', who argued that the Bank of England should support major banks that got into difficulties. [[Karl Marx]] deemed ''The Economist'' the "European organ" of "the aristocracy of finance".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch06.htm |title=The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte |year=1852 |access-date=17 April 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130313030711/http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch06.htm |archive-date=13 March 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> The newspaper has also supported liberal causes on social issues such as recognition of [[Same-sex marriage|gay marriages]],<ref>[https://www.economist.com/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=2515389 Let them wed] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511111130/http://www.economist.com/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=2515389 |date=11 May 2011 }}, cover article on 4 January 1996</ref> [[Drug liberalization|legalisation of drugs]],<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100602002643/http://www.drogasedemocracia.org/Arquivos/the-economist.pdf How to stop the drug wars], cover article on 7 March 2009.  The publication calls legalisation "the least bad solution".</ref> criticises the [[Taxation in the United States|U.S. tax model]],<ref>{{Cite news |date=4 February 2012 |title=Tax reform in America: A simple bare necessity |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/node/21545981 |url-status=live |access-date=25 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120525100024/http://www.economist.com/node/21545981 |archive-date=25 May 2012}}</ref> and seems to support some government regulation on health issues, such as smoking in public,<ref>{{Cite news |date=10 June 2010 |title=Smoking and public health: Breathe easy |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/node/16333351 |url-status=live |access-date=25 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120221145448/http://www.economist.com/node/16333351 |archive-date=21 February 2012}}</ref> as well as bans on smacking children.<ref>[https://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11455006 "Spare The Rod, Say Some"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080802023730/http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11455006 |date=2 August 2008 }}, ''The Economist'', 31 May 2008.</ref> ''The Economist'' consistently favours guest worker programmes, [[School choice|parental choice of school]], and amnesties,<ref>[https://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=6744217 Sense, not Sensenbrenner] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080416022312/http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=6744217 |date=16 April 2008 }}, The Economist, 30 March 2006</ref> and once published an "obituary" of God.<ref>{{Cite news |date=23 December 1999 |title=Obituary: God |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/obituary/1999/12/23/god |url-status=live |access-date=7 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191207135600/https://www.economist.com/obituary/1999/12/23/god |archive-date=7 December 2019}}</ref> ''The Economist'' also has a long record of supporting [[gun control]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=8 April 2009 |title=Lexington: Reflections on Virginia Tech |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/node/13447986 |url-status=live |access-date=13 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511091608/http://www.economist.com/node/13447986 |archive-date=11 May 2011}}</ref> In 2021, the paper was criticized for publishing an "anti-transgender screed".<ref>{{Cite news |date=29 July 2021 |title=Respected News Magazine The Economist Publishes Anti-Trans Screed |newspaper=The Advocate |url=https://www.advocate.com/media/2021/7/29/respected-news-magazine-economist-publishes-anti-trans-screed |access-date=3 December 2024}}</ref> In 2019, The Economist received backlash for suggesting that transgender people should be sterilized. The paper subsequently apologized for this statement.<ref>{{Cite news |date=20 May 2021 |title=Editor's history of calling trans people 'frauds' shines light on Economist's transphobic tweet |url=https://www.dailydot.com/irl/helen-joyce-economist-transphobia/ |access-date=3 December 2024}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=20 March 2019 |title=The Economist under fire for asking if transgender people should be sterilised |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2019/03/20/economist-transgender-sterilised-japan/ |access-date=3 December 2024}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=9 October 2021 |title=Anti-trans rhetoric is rife in the British media. Little is being done to extinguish the flames |url=https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/09/uk/uk-trans-rights-gender-critical-media-intl-gbr-cmd/index.html |access-date=3 December 2024}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=20 March 2019 |title=The Economist Apologizes for Tweet Asking Whether Transgender People Should Be 'Sterilized' |url=https://www.thewrap.com/the-economist-apologizes-for-tweet-asking-whether-transgender-people-should-be-sterilized/ |access-date=3 December 2024}}</ref>

In British general elections, ''The Economist'' has endorsed the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] (in 2005 and 2024),<ref>{{Cite news |date=28 April 2005 |title=There is no alternative (alas) |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/2005/04/28/there-is-no-alternative-alas |access-date=2024-07-06 |newspaper=The Economist |issn=0013-0613}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Keir Starmer should be Britain's next prime minister |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/06/27/keir-starmer-should-be-britains-next-prime-minister |newspaper=The Economist|date=27 June 2024}}</ref> the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] (in 2010 and 2015),<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/apr/29/the-economist-backs-conservatives "The Economist backs the Conservatives"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018124627/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/apr/29/the-economist-backs-conservatives |date=18 October 2017 }}, ''The Guardian'' (PA report), 29 April 2010.</ref><ref name="The Economist">{{Cite news |date=2 May 2015 |title=Who should govern Britain? |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21650113-despite-risk-europe-coalition-led-david-cameron-should-have-second-term-who |url-status=live |access-date=11 May 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150506123551/http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21650113-despite-risk-europe-coalition-led-david-cameron-should-have-second-term-who |archive-date=6 May 2015}}</ref> and the [[Liberal Democrats (UK)|Liberal Democrats]] (in 2017 and 2019),<ref>{{Cite web |date=2017-06-01 |title=The Economist endorses Liberal Democrats in UK election |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/the-economist-endorses-liberal-democrats-in-uk-election/ |access-date=2024-07-06 |website=Politico |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=5 December 2019 |title=The Economist backs the Liberal Democrats in the 2019 UK general election |url=https://www.economistgroup.com/group-news/the-economist/the-economist-backs-the-liberal-democrats-in-the-2019-uk-general-election |access-date=2024-07-06 |website=Economist Group}}</ref> and supported both [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] and [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] candidates in the United States. ''The Economist'' put its stance this way:

{{blockquote|What, besides free trade and free markets, does ''The Economist'' believe in? "It is to the Radicals that ''The Economist'' still likes to think of itself as belonging. The extreme centre is the paper's historical position". That is as true today as when Crowther [Geoffrey, ''Economist'' editor 1938–1956] said it in 1955. ''The Economist'' considers itself the enemy of privilege, pomposity and predictability. It has backed conservatives such as [[Ronald Reagan]] and [[Margaret Thatcher]]. It has supported the Americans in [[Vietnam]]. But it has also endorsed [[Harold Wilson]] and [[Bill Clinton]], and espoused a variety of liberal causes: opposing capital punishment from its earliest days, while favouring penal reform and decolonisation, as well as—more recently—gun control and gay marriage.<ref name="About us">{{Cite news |date=18 November 2010 |title=About us |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/help/about-us#About_The_Economist |url-status=live |access-date=21 September 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160921080832/http://www.economist.com/help/about-us#About_The_Economist |archive-date=21 September 2016}}</ref>}}

In 2008, ''The Economist'' commented that [[Cristina Fernández de Kirchner]], the president of Argentina at the time, was "Dashing hopes of change, Argentina's new president is leading her country into economic peril and social conflict".<ref>{{Cite news |date=1 May 2008 |title=Cristina in the land of make believe |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11293743 |url-status=live |access-date=20 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080706153609/http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11293743 |archive-date=6 July 2008}}</ref> ''The Economist'' also called for [[impeachment of Bill Clinton|Bill Clinton's impeachment]],<ref>{{Cite news |date=17 September 1998 |title=Just go |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/1998/09/17/just-go |url-status=live |access-date=27 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190827225228/https://www.economist.com/leaders/1998/09/17/just-go |archive-date=27 August 2019 |issn=0013-0613}}</ref> as well as for [[Donald Rumsfeld]]'s resignation after the emergence of the [[Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=6 May 2004 |title=Resign, Rumsfeld |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/2004/05/06/resign-rumsfeld |url-status=live |access-date=18 June 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220618124544/https://www.economist.com/leaders/2004/05/06/resign-rumsfeld |archive-date=18 June 2022}}</ref> Although ''The Economist'' initially gave vigorous support for the [[U.S.-led invasion of Iraq]], it later called the operation "bungled from the start" and criticised the "almost criminal negligence" of the Bush Administration's handling of the [[Iraq War]], while maintaining in 2007 that pulling out in the short term would be irresponsible.<ref>{{Cite news |date=22 March 2007 |title=Mugged by reality |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RRRTGGP |url-status=live |access-date=9 April 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071015195744/http://economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RRRTGGP |archive-date=15 October 2007}}</ref> In an editorial marking its 175th anniversary, ''The Economist'' criticised adherents to liberalism for becoming too inclined to protect the political status quo rather than pursue reform.<ref name="The Economist at 175">{{Cite news |date=13 September 2018 |title=The Economist at 175 |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/essay/2018/09/13/the-economist-at-175 |url-status=live |access-date=17 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180916212953/https://www.economist.com/essay/2018/09/13/the-economist-at-175 |archive-date=16 September 2018}}</ref> The paper called on liberals to return to advocating for bold political, economic and social reforms: protecting free markets, land and tax reform in the tradition of [[Georgism]], [[open immigration]], a rethink of the [[social contract]] with more emphasis on education, and a revival of [[liberal internationalism]].<ref name="The Economist at 175" />