To the Editor:

Sarah Lyall paints a mesmerizing portrait of London in her recent article: a vibrant city, filled with people unconstrained by ethnicity or socioeconomic background. While the portrait is beautiful, I take issue with the frame. Lyall refers to London as, “the metropolis that globalization created” in the article’s description, but London has been a multicultural metropolis for much longer than the recent phenomenon we refer to today as globalization. If Lyall is, in fact, referring to processes that were in motion long before the rise of the internet and free trade agreements, then she should call them what they are: colonialism and imperialism. I agree with Lyall’s claim that London may fall as a result of Brexit and the anti-globalization sentiments that motivated it, but she frames London’s fall with watered-down language and simplifies the issues. She writes that Brexit will be harmful to London as the city changes and immigrants who form integral parts of the community leave or are forced to abandon their cultural heritage. The full implication of these changes, which she never addresses, is that London’s history and the composition of its current population are reflective of the UK’s economy: built and dependent on foreign cultures and markets, and vulnerable when faced with isolationist policies. London is a great city, yes. As Lyall says, when you walk through the financial district, you can “listen to the plumbing system of international capitalism.” But that hum of international capitalism comes at a steep cost, and Lyall does herself and her reader a disservice by pretending otherwise.

Sincerely,

Molly Hoyer

Wellesley, MA

April 22, 2017