Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

←

Публикация

Предыдущая публикация
mskathleenquinn

"Speciously" -- ??? Wear this review as a badge of honor. Ms Crabapple. This is the newspaper that welcomed with delight the ascent of Benito Mussolini. www.wsj.com/articles/not...

Notable & Quotable: On MussoliniNotable & Quotable from the foreword of Benito Mussolini’s 1928 autobiography.www.wsj.com
1802
noirtiervillefort

And the Manchester Guardian didn't like Abe Lincoln. You can look it up. Do you think that's relevant? The WSJ has some more recent bad stands, but no one who liked Mussolini works there.

Обсуждение

1 прямых ответов · 15 сообщений

Показаны не все ответы

Публичный счётчик показывает 2, а источник передал 1. Остальные ответы могли быть удалены, скрыты или не выданы публично.

mskathleenquinn

WSJ hasn't changed. In fact, its editorial staff has gotten worse.

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
noirtiervillefort

It's no one who was even alive when Mussolini was, except Rupert Murdoch, who was a child. So where's the relevance? It's just BS rhetoric.

Ответ для noirtiervillefort
mskathleenquinn

You can't really be this stupid. Getting paid to look like it?

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
noirtiervillefort

I'm not the one who thinks editorials from 85 years ago are relevant.

Ответ для noirtiervillefort
ding🔻chavez

Bro the point is they have always been like this. Wise up or shut up

Ответ для noirtiervillefort
casino96

Leadership tends to be succeeded by similar leadership in literally all fields historically

Ответ для casino96
noirtiervillefort

It was just a lazy demagogic post and sad that people are rationalizing it. It's one thing to say "look at what Politician X said ten years ago!" Because the implication is now we know his ideas proved bad, so he has bad judgment. But the WSJ is just an institution with generations of turnover.

Ответ для noirtiervillefort
mskathleenquinn

WSJ's ideas have consistently been proven bad for 100 years. They consistently hire sweet-on-fascist opinion writers to replace the ones who died at their desks. That's the point. 🙄

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
mskathleenquinn

Until (like Mussolini) it was plain Viktor Orban was turning into a loser, WSJ loved Orban's antisemitic government -- just like Netanyahu! www.wsj.com/world/europe...

Essay | Viktor Orban: An Improbable Hero for the American RightHungary’s leader has won an enthusiastic following among conservatives for his opposition to immigration and LGBT rights and his pugnacious defiance of liberal critics.www.wsj.com
Ответ для mskathleenquinn
mskathleenquinn

WSJ doesn't archive its editorials (there's a reason for that!) but others have noticed its opinion sections seems to have taken a wrong turn against humanity a long time ago and have yet to return:

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
noirtiervillefort

Actually, their editorials are archived in various ways. They are in digital databases and microfilm. I've seen them cited in academic studies. Many universities and other libraries subscribe to Proquest, which includes the WSJ and other leading papers.

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
noirtiervillefort

The Nation and the New Republic thought Stalin was a great guy. Mao too. At first even the Khmer Rouge! I am not sure if you think they were wrong even now. But if so do you want to tag today's writers there with that?

Ответ для noirtiervillefort
mskathleenquinn

I don't read either of those publications. (I never had any use for Marty Peretz and have none today for Michael Tomasky.) You're losing this "argument" because the opinion staff of the WSJ is indefensible.

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
noirtiervillefort

I'm not losing anything. You're not going to admit your position is lazy and indefensible. Criticize people for what they do today, not for what an institution where they work did 90 years ago is a pretty sound principle and you're not going to refute it.

Ответ для mskathleenquinn
mskathleenquinn

(You're also losing this argument because if someone pro-Israel had mocked WSJ fanboy love of Mussolini you wouldn't have said a thing. You saw my screenname and got on your high horse to call me names because I oppose Israel's genocide and Zionism to its core.)