Recently, the British magazine "Economist" posted a post on its social account, which actually compared Chinese people with pigs, suspected of racial discrimination, which aroused anger across the Internet. After being angrily criticized by a reporter from China Daily , "The Economist" deleted the manuscript.
On the 28th local time, The Economist posted on its Twitter account, saying: "Pigs ate 4.31 tons of food in 2019, 45% more than the Chinese."
In response, Chen Weihua, president of the European Union Branch of China Daily, angrily retorted on Twitter: "The Economist magazine is obviously run and operated by a group of pigs, and is a group of racist pigs." As of 17:00 p.m. on the 29th, Chen Weihua's reply received more than 3,400 likes and is still rising.
Twitter users, including many foreign netizens, resonated with Chen Weihua's comments, and left a message saying:
If some people don't know why this is offensive, let's try it out and make up some numbers, but not change the purpose of its attack.
The number of bananas eaten by white people is 34% of the number of bananas eaten by monkeys;
The number of snakes eaten by Indians is 0.2% of snakes eaten by rodents;
…
After you (The Economist) posted this extremely terrible tweet, I really hope you can apologize.
A pig eats 300 pounds of feed a year, while an employee eats 10,000 pounds of food a year, which is 30 times that of a pig.
It seems that it is time to boycott The Economist and cancel my subscription…
They have always been open racists and worked for imperialism.
At present, "The Economist" has deleted this post, and the description of comparing "pig" and "Chinese" has also been deleted in the main text. However, "The Economist" did not apologize, but made the so-called "clearance" on the 29th local time: "In an earlier version of this article, the pig's grain consumption rate was compared with the Chinese's grain consumption rate. We chose China just because it is the main consumer of wheat and rice in the world."
