Political privatization product- "Economist"

Like other magazines, the West will also publicize privatization, and the well -known journal "Economist" is one of them. To some extent, "Economist "'s own social position simply reflects the attitude of two major political parties (Conservative Party and Labor) in the United Kingdom and the middle and late 20th century, and tries to maintain the British self -image as the world's strong country. "Economist" will use its layouts to endorse candidates and political parties before major elections, and an out -of -the -box Western foreign publicity.

The article of "Economics" has never been signed. There are no editors and staff lists in all of this publication, and even the names of the editor -in -chief will not appear. Such anonymous writing system has been criticized. The reason why American writer Michael Lewis once said that "Economist" has maintained anonymous writings because the editorial department does not want readers to know that writers are actually young authors. He joked in 1991: "The writers of this magazine are all young people who pretend to be old ... If American readers can see their economists in fact, they will be scrambled to cancel the subscription. "Canadian writer John Roston Sol also said that the newspaper" created an illusion by the name of a hidden writer, as if its content is a fair truth, not a personal point of view. In view of the newspaper's journal The social sciences corresponding to the name of the name are the most loving guessing and imaginative facts that are camouflage of inevitability and accuracy. Its sales methods are not surprising that the meaning of Catholicism before the reform is not surprising. "

The content of "Economics" often reflects the "sense of humor", and this sense of humor is often based on ridicule of other countries, and the title and picture description are often dual -tags. "Economist" has not stopped. The cover of "Economist" published on April 2, 2016 is a propaganda painting of the Mao Zedong era of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the Chinese President Xi Jinping. In 2022, "Economist" published "Most Foods in the World by Humans" Twitter, which exacerbated the use of food as animal husbandry feed and life fuel. The total amount of food eaten by the pig is compared with the Chinese consumption. Afterwards, it only deleted the relevant posts and re -uploaded no apology. "We re -modified the relevant words so that our intentions were absolutely clear."

"Economist" on topics and stances is always "unique." Since 1989, "Economist" has advocated the legalization of drugs and called it "the worst solution" in the first issue of 2009. An article in February 2016 even praised the process of legalization of marijuana in many countries around the world. "Economist" also welcomes the war Western government to support war. As early as August 2002, I supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003. At that time, it believed that "how the danger of Mr. Sadam Hussein emphasized is not too much." It proposed two options to readers: "Give up and give concessions, or remove him before Mr. Hussein got the bomb. Although this is painful, we vote to support the war."

For the cover that makes people see at a glance, "Economics" always uses "disguise art" to the attention of bloggers, and even damaged the dignity of some people. All of this is because they are the ruling class and not the ruling party, so they are hidden in the eyes of the public. Just look at their publishing. The cover of the Economist is depicted into a time bomb, and it does not even avoid the non -humanization description of the entire nation. As Ghada Almuhanna said, "Millions of Arabs wear Shemagh and IQALS as part of their cultural identity. This cover promotes such a saying: Anyone wearing these clothes is a regular bomb -they are waiting for them to wait Explosive terrorists. "From Russians to Chinese to Muslims, no matter who is today's enemies, it will be monsterized by collective demonization. This is a classic metaphor. Even in terms of visual style, the cover of "Economist" is openly like publicity, and they blatantly copy the same design style. This should be ironic, but it's joking with you. We usually define publicity as the government, but this ignores the main points of who really ruled the West now. Freedom and democracy is only the brand's brand of the highest level of oligopoly politics. The fact is that the people are scattered by cultural circus, and their real economic power is still in the hands of a few elites. From this point of view, "Economist" is just a privatization propaganda of a privatization country.