Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[moonsun]

[size=18]What does "[b]of ideas[/b]" mean in the following sentence? I have never seen this expression. In general, we say "idea of...".

(You can't go around the world preaching about democracy and free markets if you're not willing to accept the results of elections and acknowledge the shifting sentiments in the marketplace[b] of ideas[/b]. )[/size]

[moonsun]

I've learned that "marketplace of idea" is a kind of concept which advocates free expression of ideas. But what does "shifting sentiment" mean?

And I know that if you don't accept the results of elections, you can't advocate democracy, since the results of elections are the results of democratic election. But what's the relationship between "the shifting sentiments in the marketplace of ideas" and "advocating free markets"? Why is that " if you don't acknowledge the shifting sentiments in the marketplace of ideas", you can't "advocate free market"?

[bud]

If Asterix still contributes in here, he's the best one for rewriting passages. But here's my attempt to explain:

You can't go around the world preaching about democracy and free markets - Free markets and democracy usually go hand-in-hand. The sentence is saying they are both being preached.

shifting sentiments - Changing positions [of citizens about the important issues of today]. For example, 20 years ago few people were worried about global warming. Today it is a big concern for very many people. Sentiments have shifted.

marketplace of ideas - It does not advocate for free expression of ideas. It simply describes that there exists free expression of ideas. (Notice how the author chose marketplace of ideas after using free markets in order to make a point!)

So the author is saying something like this:

You can claim that democracy, with its free markets, is the only kind of govenment that is just. But you can't then complain when your favored candidate loses an election, nor can you then complain when public opinion shifts to your opponents.

(Most likely, this is about current U.S. foreign policy, so favored candidate is a candidate in another country, and public opinion refers to the marketplace of ideas in that other country.)

[moonsun]

Sorry, bud. But I don't think your paraphrase is reasonable, althoughy I myself don't fully understand the points I mentioned in the previous post. The sentences below is the context. Maybe it can help understanding the difficult points.

(With the near-certain collapse of the Doha round, you can be sure that, in the coming days, business executives, think-tank economists and former chairmen of the Federal Reserve will come forward with all sorts of dire warnings about the dangers of protectionism and isolationism. They should all save their breath. You can't go around the world preaching about democracy and free markets if you're not willing to accept the results of elections and acknowledge the shifting sentiments in the marketplace of ideas.)

[lotus]

Hi moonsun,

A marketplace of ideas is simply a collection of ideas exposed for discussion or open exchange. It does not necessarily mean real freedom of ideas, or that the ideas are truly diverse. Certain countries may have what seems like a collection of open ideas. But, they turn out to be the same ideas or a restricted set of ideas. To some extent, this kind of thing happens in the United States. Many say that there are no real differences between the Republican and Democratic party platforms. And that their ideas are essentially the same - mostly moderate and reactionary. Even think tanks are not as free as you might think. Most think tanks fall in the category of conservative or liberal. Even though they discuss the idea of unbiased free thinking, most of their conclusions fall within the political line of their institution. Real free thinking usually comes from grass roots organizations, and not large political or public institutions.

In the context below, the marketplace of ideas is a collection of ideas and the will of the people. It does not necessarily mean that the election was free or fair, or whether the candidates or issues voted on were what the people wanted. It simply states (paraphrase) that due to an imminent change in the political climate, business, economic and political leaders will warn about the dangers of protectionism. And that the rhetoric touting the economic virtues of a free-market democracy is hypocritical and should not be heeded, because the election itself was democratic. Presumably, those who advocate protectionism will be in power.

(With the near-certain collapse of the Doha round, you can be sure that, in the coming days, business executives, think-tank economists and former chairmen of the Federal Reserve will come forward with all sorts of dire warnings about the dangers of protectionism and isolationism. They should all save their breath. You can't go around the world preaching about democracy and free markets if you're not willing to accept the results of elections and acknowledge the shifting sentiments in the marketplace of ideas.)


--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda