Similarly, it insists on what economists have called Chile’s “economic miracle” (its massive growth thanks to neoliberal policies), but if it mentions the obscene inequality and (eye-gouging) state-repression that has accompanied said “miracle,” it does so as if they were mere accidents. Just random happenings with no relation to the system of upwards redistribution they support — just a weird bit of correlation here, no causation, no siree.
So Bloomberg’s problem is not systemic violence, nor structural inequality, but the “rage” (another loaded word we haven’t even focused on) towards them. But the idea that the problem is not violence but the oh, so impolite anger of those affected by it is literally the twisted logic of abusive partners, you guys. In this (disingenuous) sense, the corporate whitewashing of neoliberalism and its legacy is everywhere in the article.
It mentions the word as if it’s some insult the intolerant left uses (instead of a long-established academic term that just happens to name a rotten thing), and completely ignores the current President’s sketchy as hell history. It also paints a rosy picture of the upbringing of a right-wing candidate without mentioning how it appears to have been made up. Cherry-picking, as we said. Oh, and we almost forgot, the piece refers to Pinochet’s 1973 overthrow of Allende … but omits the well-established fact it was backed by US economic interests.
Why's Wall Street Pearl Clutching At Chile's Left Turn?
Source: Pinoy Daily News
![Disclaimer](<a href="https://rebrand.ly/LazadaSalePh"><img src="http://getfreefollowers.net/images/lazhorizontal.jpeg" /></a>){kind=link}
0 Comments