I remember a far-right Canadian publication trying the same argument.
“Back when the retirement age was set, it was X years below life expectancy. Now life expectancy is higher, so we should raise the retirement age back to X as well. The serfs aren’t supposed to enjoy things!”
“Vanguard of the non-working class” sounds like a red triangle thing
is the economist trying to portray china as bourgeois? if not then why is it saying this
I think so, but in the way dumbfuck libs co-opt marxist language with zero understanding. Being able to structure a sentence to merely sound like a hypocrisy or contradiction is more than enough to fool most westerners.
They mean the Chinese workers are “non-working class” because they can retire before death or becoming completely sucked up human wreck. Just the usual nearly two centuries old Economist stance on workers.
This is kinda an old article from 2021. Eventually China will have to raise the retirement age due to an aging population.
I just can’t get over the framing there
The pushback would be horrific. The younger generations probably aren’t going to be very happy to hear that others before them get to get out and enjoy the fruits of their labor at 54, but they have to toil away till 60 or, most likely, older.
People said the same thing about the raising of retirement age in various European countries but in the end what little pushback there was didn’t matter. If a government wants to do something it will find a way to do it. I just hope that China’s government will decide against it.
France has quite literally been on fire for over 15 years at this point, all over raising the retirement age by four years. What are you talking about, there has absolutely been massive pushback. Unions keep striking and massive protests keep breaking out every few weeks.
Also China is above striving to act like the decrepit capitalists states in the EU. Its best they decide against it. Workplace efficiency drops off like a stone past 58-60. No one should be working against their will at that age.
There have been on and off protests but has it actually stopped the raising of the retirement age?
Also China is above striving to act like the decrepit capitalists states in the EU. Its best they decide against it.
That’s what i’m saying. I believe and i hope that China will continue to show that it has a government which behaves in a qualitatively different way.
There is a reason why publications like the Economist are trying so hard to push the idea that China needs to do these things supposedly for its own good, and it’s because China refuses to act like western neoliberal governments do. The West are trying to gaslight the Chinese into thinking that these are the kinds of policies that you need to implement if you want to be part of the modern, developed world. But at this point i don’t think anyone in the Chinese government is falling for that; all they have to do is take a look at the shitshow that Western countries have become and contrast it to how much better things are going in China. Why abandon successful policies in favor of a clearly failing model?
i doubt anyone in any position of power even reads the British rag, much less would be convinced of anything in it
Probably not, but Westerners have an overinflated sense of their own importance and assume the entire world is always paying attention to what their media and politicians do and say. I’ve heard a bunch of US commentators who are convinced for instance that Putin and Xi sat and watched the entire US presidential debate. To someone outside of their bubble that sounds absurd, but these people are so entirely self-absorbed that they are convinced they are the center of the universe and they project their own obsessions onto everyone else.
I’m sure they read it for entertainment.
Yes, France. Europe has many countries and most of them hadn’t much protests. Can’t even remember if there was something like that in Germany.
I would say !notthechinabadtimes@lemmygrad.ml but The Economist is literally !thechinabadtimes@lemmygrad.ml incarnate
