The National Review magazine has published a scathing indictment of the fortunes of the Economist, which has taken a hard stance against President Donald Trump, while supporting the deep state and European integration.
PHILADELPIA – An article published over the weekend by The Economist warns that an America governed by “wall-builders” will be “poorer and more dangerous,” while urging Republicans to support Hillary Clinton instead of Donald Trump, who, the magazine claims, has “sucked confidence out of global institutions.”
Human rights groups are condemning The Economist for publishing a column promoting “the least nasty version” of female genital mutilation (FGM). Experts believe that even a “symbolic nick” can be as physically and psychologically damaging as any surgical procedure involving the removal of female genitalia for religious reasons.
For two days in a row, Hillary Clinton utilized used in her speeches a claim from a British research organization that ranked Donald Trump as the third greatest threat to the global economy.
The British flagship financial magazine The Economist, considered one of the preeminent voices of the global financial, business and political elite, has waded boldly into U.S. politics, publicly calling for a Trump ouster from the race for Republican nominee with a
Christianity is experiencing an unprecedented boom on the African continent and now accounts for more than half of Africa’s total population, while Christian affiliation and practice continue to ebb in Europe, signaling a major demographic shift in global Christianity. An
An essay in this week’s issue of The Economist suggests that for the first time since its birth, the Islamic State may be running aground on financial shoals, prompting some “to ask whether IS will survive.”
A group of prominent mainstream British journalists — including former editors at The Economist and The Guardian — are backing a new Europhile website designed to attack what they say are the “inaccuracies and twisted logic” promoted by Eurosceptics. The group’s
Like a sledge hammer falling on a glass table, Duke Researcher Chris Conover has dropped scholarly methods and results on the anti-gun rhetoric regarding gun ownership versus car ownership to show that owning a car is “80 percent” riskier than owning a gun, as it relates to the lives of others.
In an August 10 column, which was equal portions cathartic and panic stricken, The Economist basically admitted that the media’s relentless focus on gun crime results in more gun sales in America.
On August 1, The Economist claimed America averages one mass shooting a day, and they countered the impulse to use a gun to defend oneself from mass shooters by suggesting “the impulse to self-defense… is natural, but mistaken.”
A recent article in The Economist reminds readers of the sobering reality that men are the primary victims of violence in the world and their situation is getting worse, not better.
In the U.S. today, all the focus seems to be on gay marriage. It’s a central topic at the Supreme Court this month, for example. But the real story isn’t the death of men; it’s the death of marriage.
Economists understand that the government creates both positive and negative incentives. Tax credits may encourage people to have more children, but higher tax rates discourage people from working more.
On April 4, The Economist mocked the NRA and Second Amendment supporters with a column that turned out to be an epic fail because it was built on numbers from a debunked Everytown for Gun Safety study, an erroneous claim that “armor piercing” M855 ammo endangers police, and a not-so-veiled attempt to undercut the push to arm women for self-defense on college campuses.
On February 13, The Economist (TE) ran a column showing that shooting guns is “a thrill” and suggested the gun control movement is hurting because most people pushing gun control do not understand how enjoyable shooting guns can be.
In a column dated January 10 The Economist (TE) argues that “tougher laws and less driving by young people” under the age of 25 have led to safer streets while a lack of more laws on guns means “death by guns [has] been trending slightly upward.”
