undefined | Better HN

0 pointshollandheese6y ago0 comments

They are a right-wing magazine (i.e. ardently pro-capitalist). Their endorsements support that idea. All of those candidates that they supported were also ardent supporters of capital.

0 comments

skybrian6y ago

This is kind of a weird critique though. It's like, it's not enough for a movie critic to think some movies are bad and they should have been made better. They have to hate the whole concept of movies.

jjeaff6y ago

Or more like, to be a true critical, you can only like the stuff that no one has ever heard of.

"Oh me, yes, I'm very liberal. I'd tell you about what candidate I support, but you've probably never heard of them..."

FabHK6y ago

If you want to call the candidates from the left party in the US right-wing, sure (when you look at it on a global scale, you might have a point there).

But as I said, while The Economist supports free trade and free markets, they are not laissez-faire, but support sensible regulation, anti-trust, action on climate, etc.

> "The Economist considers itself the enemy of privilege, pomposity and predictability." [1]

> Is The Economist left- or right-wing? Neither. We consider ourselves to be in the "radical centre" [2]

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20090228231949/http://www.econom...

[2] https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2013/09/02/...

https://web.archive.org/web/20190329063026/https://www.econo...

thelasthuman6y ago

Considering the shift in the Overton window the last 50 years in the USA, radically center is right wing.

scarface746y ago

What exactly does an anti-capitalist look like that would be considered something that most Americans would recognize?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse