• DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, I know they were wrong the last 187 times about China, but this time they're totally right and China will collapse any day now!

    Though this isn't actually about China, not really. This isn't an analysis, it's soothing balm for liberals. It's telling them "the enemy" isn't to be feared because they will destroy themselves through their lack of whiteness strange oriental ways incompetence and lack of "civility."

    They constantly put out articles like this to tell the people that no matter how bad things get in the west, and no matter how good things seem to be getting in China, that's all just theater and China is automatically worse by default, regardless of what evidence, statistics or reality say.

    • JucheBot1988@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I know they were wrong the last 187 times about China, but this time they’re totally right and China will collapse any day now!

      It's the same process they use to justify whatever war the United States currently happens to be waging. "Sure, the US government lied to us about Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc., but this time is different, I swear!"

      Like the old proverb goes: Fool me once, shame on you fool me a hundred times, and I just might be a lib.

    • KiG V2@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      1 year ago

      I always tell myself people will wake up when they realize how much better their lives get while ours get worse and worse, but even when I talk about their poverty alleviation, growing middle class, green energy initiatives etc. people just kind of blank and don't say much. The truth is already so far distant from what people are taught it's like they think I'm lying or being lied to.

      • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, that's kind of the problem. They've been trained to think that China just "lies" about everything, and only the clever western media sees through those lies (even when those "lies" are information independently collected by the UN or other organisations.)

        They want China to be the bad guy, so China can't ever do anything positive. It's always a bad guy, doing bad guy things.

  • Red_Eclipse [she/her]
    ·
    1 year ago

    All this propaganda layed out like that makes them look... weird, and sad, like a jealous ex that's obsessed with you and is like, hate-stalking you, but for a country.

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Which is exactly why China is investing heavily in restraining orders of the hypersonic variety.

    • JucheBot1988@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Somebody -- can't rememember who -- in the Chinese media or diplomatic service pointed out that western headlines are funnier if you replace "China" with "my ex wife."

  • nekahat
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    deleted by creator

  • CascadeOfLight [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Look, look! The line's gonna go down! Well okay, but it's gonna stop going up! Well okay, but it'll go up slower! Well okay, but... black-mold-futures

    Show

  • NotErisma
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    deleted by creator

  • ElHexo
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    deleted by creator

  • MelianPretext@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    "the London Economist, the European organ of the aristocracy of finance, described most strikingly the attitude of this class.” - Karl Marx

    "The Economist, a journal that speaks for the British millionaires." - Vladimir Lenin

    Having both Marx and Lenin speak out against a publication shows how this rag has been consistently on the wrong side of any struggle for the past two centuries. Their modern flashy r/designporn-bait cover designs and tidy site UI hides the sociopathy of their publication history.

    For starters, the modern day sinophobia of the Economist is no surprise. They're the original China haters, and I mean that with zero exaggeration. They've been calling for war and imperialism against China for two centuries now. They lobbied in the UK for the Second Opium War using sociopathic mercantilist justifications:

    "We may regret war … but we cannot deny that great advantages have followed in its wake"

    It's an unsurprising stance when their founder literally earned his fortune from the forced opium trade imposed against China following the First Opium War.

    The British capital-centric profit driven agenda they've followed puts them even on the wrong side of a "liberal" perspective of history. They've historically opposed the UK abolitionist movement, protesting that "the boycott they proposed of all goods made using slave labour would hurt British consumers and punish slaves."

    They were the only British publication to support the Confederacy, arguing that:

    "It is in the independence of the South, and not in her defeat, that we can alone look with confidence for the early amelioration and the ultimate extinction of the slavery we abhor."

    In a mask-off moment, they said that the slavery issue was secondary compared to the lucratively low cotton tariffs the Confederacy could offer, which made Marx himself ridicule the rag when he wrote for the New York Daily Tribune, saying that the Economist was finally: ‘honest enough to confess at last that with it and its followers sympathy (for American emancipation) is a mere question of tariff’

    Their chief editor at the time, the Confederacy apologist Bagehot, still has a "cutesy" little column named after him to this day.

    Showing that they've learnt nothing in the centuries since, in a 2014 book review on a book about the trans-Atlantic slave trade, they unironically complained without a shred of self-awareness that:

    "Mr Baptist has not written an objective history of slavery. Almost all the blacks in his book are victims, almost all the whites villains. This is not history; it is advocacy."

    For more further reading, the Citations Needed podcast had an episode on "The Refined Sociopathy of The Economist." https://citationsneeded.medium.com/episode-98-the-refined-sociopathy-of-the-economist-4966767e1688

    • Shinhoshi@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s a shame the Soviets weren’t first with nukes — imagine if the US failed at preventing USSR domination

  • quality_fun@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    this doesn't mean that china has no economic issues at all. real estate, for example, must be properly managed without wiping out everyone's investments.