Ronald Inglehart’s Comment on “After Postmaterialism”

A Reply

Bibliographic Data

ID11970637
AuthorsR Brym (0000-0002-4732-7524, University of Toronto, corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume41
Issue2
Pages223-228
Publication date2016-06-30
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Canadian Journal of Sociology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0318-6431 • E-ISSN: 1710-1123
PublisherUniversity of Alberta Libraries (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.29173/cjs27994
OpenAlexW2461690946
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited3

Professor Inglehart and I are involved in a foreground/background dispute. We see the same black-and-white image (Figure 1) but interpret it differently. Inglehart’s foreground is white, leading to him to conclude that the image portrays two faces. My foreground is black, leading me to conclude that the image portrays a goblet. His foreground (my background) consists of the intergenerational causes of value change, notably socialization in relatively peaceful and prosperous times and the concomitant proliferation of higher-status occupations. My foreground (his background) consists of geopolitical rivalry and growing income inequality, forces that push the citizens of today’s Great Powers away from postmaterialism and into the camp of the meaner angels of our nature. True, we can see each other’s foreground — I adduce data showing that young Chinese citizens are more postmaterialistic than their elder compatriots; Inglehart admits that growing geopolitical rivalries and income inequality have stymied Russia’s advance to postmaterialism — but we each insist that our foreground is the main story

Aesthetics · Art · Geopolitics · Inequality · Political science · Politics · Social science · Socialization · Sociology · Value (mathematics · White (mutation · Gender Studies · Law · Post-Communist Economic and Political Transition

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access