Hard hitting liberal jounalism from The Economist tackling the important issues

"There's NO SUCH THING AS RACISM. Although I consider myself racist and will criticize people for not being racist enough.....but there's no thing as racism btw."

Do these dumbasses hear themselves speak? How do you deny something YOU CALL YOURSELF!? It's like chavs whining that people call them gammons even though they call themselves gammons.

A journal that speaks for the British millionaires, is pursuing a very instructive line in relation to the war. Representatives of advanced capital in the oldest and richest capitalist country, are shedding tears over the war and incessantly voicing a wish for peace. Those Social-Democrats who, together with the opportunists and Kautsky, think that a socialist programme consists in the propaganda of peace, will find proof of their error if they read The Economist. Their programme is not socialist, but bourgeois-pacifist. Dreams of peace, without propaganda of revolutionary action, express only a horror of war, but have nothing in common with socialism.

13 year old redditor ass article

It's kind of a recent change. Even during the Bush era, they would mock the antics of reactionaries (although still recommending people vote for Republicans). I think they're just getting more in touch with the gestalt of the divorced dads and reactionary older "liberals" who make up their subscriber base.

Fundamentally, it's a rag started by the bourgeoisie in protest over tarrifs on grain. I don't think it ever was against reactionary beliefs, I think when they publish anything even slightly critical of the right it's for "balance" in the way American news does it. It's really funny because you see people comment on the articles saying "wow the ecommunist is woke"

If you watch the Jon Stewart interview of one of the lead editors of the paper, it's abundantly clear who the paper has always supported and their propaganda intentions.

It will always be this kind of low hanging fruit, so it's it's easy to get a laugh out of it.

It's either that or they define it as believing trans people are real

I already know about this one, thanks comrade.

Some thoughts for the day from the USA Imperium:
++ An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded ++
++ Blessed is the mind too small for doubt ++
++ A small mind is easily filled with faith ++

If the masses are ignorant, that is the strength of readers of the Economist. So basically yes

Yeah I thought the new consensus was that viruses are natural and we should just let them rip, and doing anything to prevent their spread is tyrannical overreach

They briefly define it at the start.

The term refers to a loose constellation of ideas that have changed how educated, left-leaning folk view the world. It says all disparities between racial groups are proof of structural racism; that norms of free speech, individualism and universalism are camouflage for discrimination; and that injustice will persist until systems of privilege are dismantled.

It's the same as when that judge tried to get the Ron DeSantis administration to define woke. They defined it as something like "a belief in structural discrimination and a call to change it." They mean any and all belief in structural oppression. The opposite of wokeness is believing everything's fine except a few scattered individuals.

Judeo-Bolshevism