Poverty cannot be defeated using half-truths
It’s a common phenomenon; most familiar to readers of (‘centre-left’) publications like the Hindu and Frontline. In an excellent post, Ravikiran proves that at the core of the most insidious arguments against economic reforms lies intellectual dishonesty.
The author is invariably ambiguous about the claim he is making, whether he is saying that reforms have hurt the poor, that they have left the poor behind or that they have not reached the poor at the speed he would have liked. This might look like a small difference in wording, but the lessons to take away from them will be poles apart. The author may not know which inference to draw. But there is no excuse for failing to recognise that there is a difference. [The Examined Life]