I'm known amongst my real-life friends for having a somewhat perverse attachment to the Economist. The journalists on staff there get my full devotion and I treat them as deities of thought - economic and otherwise. The fact that articles are printed anonymously only ricochets my love higher. Why? Because then they can print op-ed pieces with snarky, elitist, and fully hilarious undertones. Don't believe me? Read the following, which is an excerpt from an article entitled
The state as owner, from last weeks issue:
"Now suddenly every politician has ideas about how to run a business. Thus Congressman Henry Waxman (no doubt inspired by the picture of Colbert that hangs in the House of Representatives) lambasted the rescued American International Group for spending $440,000 on a junket for a crew of life-insurance agents (no matter that the reps were self-employed). Britain’s Tories want to stop bonuses in the banks their government has just bought (clever idea: driving away good staff just when you need them). Politicians everywhere want banks to be free with their credit (not normally the route to profits).
What a bunch of amateurs."
One of the most-read (we get about 100 issues delivered just to the tiny SAIS building in Bologna alone) and highly-respected weeklies in history has just called Western policy-makers a bunch of amateurs.
Took the words right out of my mouth.