First, some of us Marxists – unlike many of our opponents – are not spittle-flecked fanatics. Instead, our Marxism arises from a cool-headed scepticism about whether capitalism really can maximally advance living standards and real freedom for all. Such scepticism is a virtue in any proper journalist. And it’s surely a vast improvement on the churnalism and unthinking deference to the rich and powerful that passes for most of journalism today.
Secondly, we Marxists know that we are in a minority, so we know which of our opinions aren’t mainstream. This makes us much more aware of potential biases in our own thinking, and so able to slough them off when necessary. By contrast, “mainstream” reporters might be more prone to groupthink and so pass off their own opinions as impartial fact.…I would add that because the mainstream is pretty homogeneously neoliberal, no one is even going to recognize an error, let alone contest it. This is how moronism is perpetuated in the public mindset.
I would also add that many if not most reporters are just reporting the message they are given to read off a teleprompter and also told what the main points of the day are so that the same key words reverberate in the echo chamber. It's designed to persuade, that is, propagandize.
Chris Dillow touches on this subsequently in the post. Cenk Ugyur in the US and Paul Mason in the UK quit for this reason.
Chris Dillow touches on this subsequently in the post. Cenk Ugyur in the US and Paul Mason in the UK quit for this reason.
I’ve read Chris Dillow’s blog articles regularly for a few years now and they’ve good. But why he claims to be a Marxist is a mystery. He never advocates the mass nationalisation of the means of production (a classic and basic Marxist policy).
ReplyDeleteHe writes articles for the Investors Chronicle – not a publication you’d expect a Marxist to write for. Far as I can see he just claims to be a Marxist becase he thinks it’s cool.
Quit it with the tedious provocation. Nonetheless, for the record, most Marxists do not hold mass nationalization, as you put it, to be a core element of Marxist policy. Most Marxists ground their identity as such in an analysis what they would term the social relations of production.
ReplyDeleteAnd Mike Norman quit, too.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a Bobsist.
ReplyDelete