3 ms·
This kind of ad-hominem happens on every Economist thread here. First order of business is to take a jab at the Economist. That just means factual things are b
by systemvoltage 4y ago
This kind of ad-hominem happens on every Economist thread here. First order of business is to take a jab at the Economist.
That just means factual things are being reported and people don't want to confront reality.
- KerrAvon 4y agoThe Economist lost a lot of credibility with some of us around the turn of the century, when it fatally misunderstood US politics and wrote columns addressing people like Karl Rove and asking them to follow their better nature. (Karl Rove does not have a better nature.)
- moomin 4y agoNot helped by one of their senior editors taking a sabbatical to become a full time crank.
- systemvoltage 4y agoI've been reading Economist since a teenager it is by far the best source of general global news in bite sized format. Excellent in every way from writing to admitting to mistakes. It is actually amazing that it is still relatively in the same shape despite of all the polarization in the world. HN has a strict bias for attacking Economist because they tend to take positions on things HN doesn't want to confront (anti-EU in this article). My honest view of this place. So you see attacking Economist rather than actually debating the talking points, quite a pattern.
- jlmorton 4y agoMaybe, but then there was this [1]. [1] https://www.economist.com/leaders/2004/05/06/resign-rumsfeld https://www.economist.com/leaders/2004/05/06/resign-rumsfeld