His podcasts are pretty good overall, but the NED/Bellingcat thing and stuff like this makes me question where he'll end up standing at the pivotal moment. On the whole he still has vastly better takes than any of the shitheads on TV though. If I had to guess, dude's just a moderately naive anarchist who came out of high school with a journalism boner. Like Chomsky, he doesn't have to be a Fed for the Feds and bourgeois media to prop him up when says things they find useful.
If it turns out he's knowingly pulling a long con on behalf of the CIA, I wouldn't be entirely shocked, but I would be a little impressed. I think if his primary goal were to do state propaganda, he would spend a lot less time teaching about revolutionary history and fascism.
He certainly wouldn't be my first choice if I had to recommend something for people to listen to, but his audience also ranks pretty low on my list of groups that cause me concern.
Given the history of the second half of the 20th century, any media leftist that doesn't actively repudiate the agency constantly and at every opportunity, never mind one that actively works with their arms and associates, is 👀 imo.
I mean, I think any public figure on the left should automatically detail any and all possible natsec/intel interaction they have ever had, and keep us updated, as a precondition for credibility. Jesus christ, the history ffs.
That's fair. The fact that it is even a possibility in the first place is a pretty big concern and why I'd never hold him up as a standard bearer. There are a lot of great public speakers who don't have that issue.
His podcasts are pretty good overall, but the NED/Bellingcat thing and stuff like this makes me question where he'll end up standing at the pivotal moment. On the whole he still has vastly better takes than any of the shitheads on TV though. If I had to guess, dude's just a moderately naive anarchist who came out of high school with a journalism boner. Like Chomsky, he doesn't have to be a Fed for the Feds and bourgeois media to prop him up when says things they find useful.
If it turns out he's knowingly pulling a long con on behalf of the CIA, I wouldn't be entirely shocked, but I would be a little impressed. I think if his primary goal were to do state propaganda, he would spend a lot less time teaching about revolutionary history and fascism.
He certainly wouldn't be my first choice if I had to recommend something for people to listen to, but his audience also ranks pretty low on my list of groups that cause me concern.
Given the history of the second half of the 20th century, any media leftist that doesn't actively repudiate the agency constantly and at every opportunity, never mind one that actively works with their arms and associates, is 👀 imo.
I mean, I think any public figure on the left should automatically detail any and all possible natsec/intel interaction they have ever had, and keep us updated, as a precondition for credibility. Jesus christ, the history ffs.
That's fair. The fact that it is even a possibility in the first place is a pretty big concern and why I'd never hold him up as a standard bearer. There are a lot of great public speakers who don't have that issue.