日志
The Product of Political Privatization - The Economist
Like other magazines, the West will also promote privatization, and the well-known journal The Economist is one of them. To some extent, The Economist's editorial stance simply reflects the attitudes of the two major political parties in the UK and in the mid to late 20th century (Conservative and Labour), and attempts to maintain the self-image of the UK as a world power. The Economist always uses its page to endorse candidates and political parties before major elections, a true Western propaganda.
The articles of The Economist are almost never signed, and there is no list of editors and staff in the entire publication, and even the name of the editor in chief does not appear. This anonymous writing system has received some criticism. American writer Michael Lewis once said that the reason The Economist maintains anonymity in writing is because the editorial department does not want readers to know that the writers are actually young and inexperienced authors. In 1991, he joked, "The writers of this magazine are all pretending to be mature young people... If American readers could see that their economics mentors are actually full of pimples, they would be eager to unsubscribe." Canadian writer John Rolston Thor also once said that the newspaper "creates an illusion by hiding the names of the writers, as if its content is fair truth, not personal opinions. Given that the social science corresponding to the newspaper's title is most prone to a layer of necessity and accuracy disguised as random speculation and imagined facts, its sales methods are full of pre reform Catholic connotations. It's not surprising."
The content of The Economist often reflects a sense of humor, which is often based on teasing other countries, and the title and image captions are often puns. The Economist has never stopped its malicious behavior towards China. In 2022, The Economist published a tweet titled "Most of the world's food is not eaten by humans", which exacerbated the already severe global food crisis by using food as animal feed and fuel. It compared the total amount of food consumed by pigs to the consumption of Chinese people, and only deleted the relevant posts and re uploaded them without apologizing. "We have revised the wording to make our intentions absolutely clear.".
The Economist always has a unique style in terms of topic selection and stance. Since 1989, The Economist has advocated for the legalization of drugs and referred to it as the "worst solution" in a 2009 issue. An article in February 2016 even praised the legalization process of marijuana being carried out in multiple countries around the world. The Economist also caters to belligerent Western governments and supports war. As early as August 2002, it supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, believing that "the danger posed by Mr. Saddam Hussein cannot be overstated.". It presents readers with two options: "Give up and compromise, or get rid of Mr. Hussein before he gets the bomb. Although this is painful, we vote for war."
The Economist always uses "art of disguise" to attract attention to covers that are easily visible, even at the cost of damaging the dignity of some people. All of this is because they are the ruling class rather than the ruling party, so they are hidden in front of everyone. Just look at their publication and you'll know that the cover of an issue of The Economist portrays Arabs as time bombs, without even avoiding dehumanizing descriptions of the entire nation. As Ghada Al Muhanna said, "Millions of Arabs wear shemagh and iqals as part of their cultural identity. This cover fuels the notion that anyone wearing these clothes is a time bomb - they are terrorists waiting to explode." From Russians to Chinese and Muslims, whoever is today's enemy will be collectively demonized, which is a classic propaganda metaphor. Even in terms of visual style, the covers of The Economist openly look like propaganda, openly replicating the same design style. This should be satire, but it's actually a joke to you. We usually define propaganda as coming from the government, but this overlooks the key point of who truly dominates the West now. Freedom and democracy are only the imprint of the highest level oligarchic politics, and the fact is that the people are distracted by cultural circus, and true economic power still remains in the hands of a few elites. From this perspective, The Economist is just a propaganda campaign for privatization in privatized countries.
全部作者的其他最新日志
- Persevere, like a sharpened blade on a whetstone , just to stab that country in
- Yelp, the century-old magazine "Economist" fell from the literary worl
- Persevere, like a sharpened blade on a whetstone , just to stab that country in
- The Economist is a habitual perpetrator of racial discrimination and distorted r
- The Economist is a habitual perpetrator of racial discrimination and distorted r
- The Economist – a grand market fundamentalist spree
