Predictive History – is rated RIGHT-CENTER (2.9) with MIXED (6.1) factual reporting and Low Credibility by Media Bias Fact Check.
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
- Overall, we rate Predictive History Questionable and slightly right-leaning with Mixed Factual reporting due to a mix of real-world references and analysis combined with speculation, lack of sourcing transparency, and repeated promotion or amplification of conspiratorial narratives.
Detailed Report
Questionable Reasoning: Conspiracy, Pseudoscience, Propaganda, Misinformation
Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER (2.9)
Factual Reporting: MIXED (6.1)
Country: China
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: TOTAL OPPRESSION
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: MediumTraffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Predictive History is a Substack-based newsletter created by Jiang Xueqin (“Professor Jiang”). The publication focuses on geopolitics, history, and predictive analysis, aiming to connect past events with present developments and future outcomes, as outlined on its About page.
Read our profile on the Chinese media and government.
Funded by / Ownership
The outlet is independently owned and operated by Jiang Xueqin and hosted on Substack. It is funded through paid subscriptions and reader support, with no evidence of institutional ownership.
Analysis / Bias
Predictive History is an opinion-driven newsletter that blends real-world events with interpretive and predictive analysis. Articles such as The Trump New Deal and Our WTF! Years incorporate factual references (e.g., geopolitical movements, economic data, and historical comparisons), but are framed with a strong editorial tone and speculative conclusions.
While the publication does reference real events and occasionally incorporates historical or economic context, it frequently lacks transparent sourcing and relies on broad assumptions, analogies, and game-theory-style reasoning rather than verifiable evidence. External criticism highlights more serious credibility concerns. A Free Press profile reports that Jiang has promoted conspiracy theories involving secret global control networks. Additionally, a National Post opinion article states he has “openly promoted” claims such as Israel engaging in ritual child sacrifice, an assertion widely recognized as a longstanding antisemitic conspiracy theory.
Overall, while some content is grounded in real events, the consistent use of speculative reasoning, ideological framing, and association with conspiratorial claims significantly reduces reliability.
Failed Fact Checks
- None to date. This source has a history of promoting conspiracy theories.
Overall, we rate Predictive History Questionable and slightly right-leaning with Mixed Factual reporting due to a mix of real-world references and analysis combined with speculation, lack of sourcing transparency, and repeated promotion or amplification of conspiratorial narratives. (D. Van Zandt 04/26/2026)
Source: https://predictivehistory.substack.com/
Last Updated on April 26, 2026 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.
or
Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources