I don’t know what political position The Economist takes, if any. I just know it’s usually wrong. In that sense it shares characteristics with the left.The Economist (yes, I know, evil liberal/socialist newspaper) had a funny editorial comment last week on where JRM belongs. Punchline? Museum rather than a position of authority.
They still don't kill them (at least not all of them), it's called progress when you compare with the Soviet times. We live in beautiful times: lefties get mild mannered, Germans get mild mannered, Russians... OK, Russians are still the same.Why does the left have such a problem with people who are different?
Reminding us that the left-right divide is Europe is completely different from in the States.Why does the left have such a problem with people who are different?
They may be (a little bit, a very little bit) different but agree about people who have other opinions: Exterminate!Reminding us that the left-right divide is Europe is completely different from in the States.Why does the left have such a problem with people who are different?
Take the religious and crony capatilism elements out and it's much the same.Reminding us that the left-right divide is Europe is completely different from in the States.Why does the left have such a problem with people who are different?
Michael Kinsley, who I think was employed by The Economist early in his career, wrote a scathing send-up of the magazine years ago. Couldn't find it just now, but the gist of it was that they hired kids just out of journalism school and had them write articles of the general form, "Such and such is a problem. But what if X is the solution? That being the case ...," and then write the rest of the article accepting that X was in fact the solution -- a solution always agreeing with The Economist's free market preferences -- and outlining all of the policy steps that should follow this received wisdom, never acknowledging that it had been tossed out as a conjecture with no evidence or argument to support it.
You take the religious out of the GOP and you’re left with pretty much just pure racism, with a mix of misogyny and a lust for money. But, the religious desire to control all aspects of other peoples’ lives dominate.Take the religious and crony capatilism elements out and it's much the same.Reminding us that the left-right divide is Europe is completely different from in the States.Why does the left have such a problem with people who are different?
Michael Kinsley, who I think was employed by The Economist early in his career, wrote a scathing send-up of the magazine years ago. Couldn't find it just now, but the gist of it was that they hired kids just out of journalism school and had them write articles of the general form, "Such and such is a problem. But what if X is the solution? That being the case ...," and then write the rest of the article accepting that X was in fact the solution -- a solution always agreeing with The Economist's free market preferences -- and outlining all of the policy steps that should follow this received wisdom, never acknowledging that it had been tossed out as a conjecture with no evidence or argument to support it.
It's goes w/o saying that guns go hand-in-hand with religion "over there".
Why aren't you a Republican then? You're staying in America only for the money, as you said "having a lot of money and not being a troublemaker may save you from the worst mistreatment for a while" (your words). You're ruining your health and suffering untold tortures for a fistful of pennies only. Few people are so greedy.You take the religious out of the GOP and you’re left with pretty much just pure racism, with a mix of misogyny and a lust for money.