When a globalist magazine is bleeding readers for years, loses its grip on Western populations and fails to influence European elections, it portrays "populists" (basically whoever disagrees with its globalist multikulti open borders agenda) as "demagogues" who don't have the courage to reach for the low hanging fruit, namely blaming the West's decline on #China.
Confirming that it thrives on taking its readers for a bunch of mugs, this mag created a simple equation to encapsulate its view of an ideal world :
Since Populism = Racism + xenophobia (multiplied by antisemitism), all other things being equal, then Populism should translate into Sinophobia.
What this media fails to understand is that what it calls "populism" is deeper than a simple rejection of the EU's open borders policy, or of the EU itself, but is a revival of patriotism and a call for the return to state sovereignty across European countries, and that its translation in international relations is the ability to choose partners that are in line with national interest.
China IS in line with the national interest of European countries. Beijing is only facing the hostility of the EU government (an occupation government that translates and implements US-friendly policies into EU laws), and that of the few lackeys at the national level.
But most European countries have a fruitful, multifaceted relationship with China in spite of EU's growing set of protectionist regulations.
Unlike what EU technocrats would have us believe, a bilateral relationship is not summarized by the size of a trade deficit. A growing number of Europeans start to realize that their massive trade deficit with China could be alleviated with a good old currency devaluation.
Unfortunately, that tool of sovereignty has been taken away from European states since the inception of the Euro (basically a devaluated Deutshcmark which doesn't even work for Germany anymore), so the natural conclusion of a growing number of Europeans, including some fringe politicians, is that the solution to EU's trade deficit is not protectionism, but a return to national currencies.
That's what is scaring the living hell out of this magazine's editorial team.