3 ms·
It's a distraction piece: Is the important issue in the US the enraged far right mob that attacked the Capitol in January, and continues to deny the legitimacy
by SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
It's a distraction piece:
Is the important issue in the US the enraged far right mob that attacked the Capitol in January, and continues to deny the legitimacy of elections, and plans further violence? Is it the actual COVID pandemic? Is it the science denial that accompanies the pandemic and has people turning to unproven horse-dewormer over proven vaccines? Is it the disinformation engines on social media and their weaponization by global actors? Is it the looming climate catastrophe? Is it right-wing lawmakers attempts to remove women's rights over their own bodies, and limit the right to vote and thereby "manage" democracy?
No, we need to pay our attention to lefty-wokies instead! They're the enemy of the day! Ignore your lying eyes about where these issues are coming from, pretend that there's an issue on the left here instead!
It's a pathetic piece.
And its pathetic that it gets so much traction here.
- Clewza313 5y agoYou're attacking a straw man of your own invention here. The Economist has devoted pages and pages to the Capitol attack, the COVID pandemic, climate change, social media, abortion rights etc. I find it kind of sad that the US is so polarized that everything (like the Economist) that doesn't fit neatly into Democrat/left vs Republican/right is nonetheless forcibly pigeonholed into one of the two camps, with absurd results like you labeling the Economist -- historically a very liberal/libertarian publication -- some kind of right wing Trojan horse.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agoI have read the Economist many times, although not in the last 5 years. And I would not call it "liberal" at all. I stopped because of the bias. Did the other topics that the Economist "devoted pages and pages to" get as much uptake here as this one?
- systemvoltage 5y agoI think they're pretty neutral. Perhaps your own stance has shifted away from the center instead? Something to consider.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agoI disagree, I stopped because of things that the Economist really were not neutral about, entire arguments that they omitted, things that they decided to paint as one-sided, which were in reality anything but. Maybe you think they're neutral because they confirm your existing biases? Something to consider.