Wait a minute, are you suggesting the communist party should not be called out for it's brutality in the first sentence, or that's somehow biased?
You do realize that a majority of the reason China's population is declining is because of the one child policy, right? Do you think that communist instituted policy is brutal?
Look, I'm all for fairness in reporting, but you have to call a spade a spade at some point, don't you?
To look just at China for the brutality of its government is to hide your head in the sand.
The 'One Child Policy' has been discontinued for years. In my opinion, the sooner the world as a whole implements a 'one child per woman' policy the sooner the world will be able to reach a population level that is sustainable long-term, and halt the overuse of sparse resources like water, fish, soil, and start to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
This article is about China, so that's the context of this conversation. The point of the article is that the policy has lingering effects, which are being noticed now through the study of data points. Are you seriously suggesting a one child per woman policy, or is this in jest?
No, the current declining has nothing to do with the one child policy which has been removed for years. But the editors of the Economists obviously have more love for one-child-policy-topic than any real reasons.