Long before #MeToo and the current craze for veganism, Hollywood legend Paul Newman compared marital infidelity to greedily wolfing down a takeaway hamburger when you’ve got steak at home. Yet a section of the Corbyn left is guilty of roughly the equivalent political error.
Here we are, legatees of the greatest minds the socialist and social democratic traditions have produced over the last two centuries, from Marx, Luxemburg and Gramsci to Keynes, Crosland and Rawls.

Yet some comrades cannot resist poisonous snackettes cooked up by the likes of an Assad fangirl citizen journalist, a hard bop sax merchant who professes to see the point of torching synagogues, and a deranged former division three goalie trapped in a lizard-populated four-dimensional acid flashback fantasy kingdom.

Once house room is granted to such relentlessly self-preening charlatans as Vanessa Beeley, Gilad Atzmon and David Icke, it’s a perilously short step to political judgments centred on the shoddy output of propaganda-driven state broadcasters, half-arsed alt-left websites and the crankier fringes of the Trot diaspora.

David Osland in the independent 3 March 2019

There is nothing wrong with recommending the work of great thinkers such as Marx and Gramsci, personally I recommend Aristotle, but, being dead, their perspective on current affairs is severely limited.

These are links to bloggers/journalists that I read:

Abby Martin, Caitlin Johnstone, Craig Murray, Gilad Atzmon, John Pilger, Moon of Alabama, Morning Star, OffGuardian, The Blogmire, The Canary, The Grey Zone, Tony Cartalucci, Vanessa Beeley, ZeroHedge.

Posting this does not mean that I endorse all of their positions or think that everything they say is accurate. It does mean that I think that they make interesting, informative, or amusing contributions to debates on current affairs even if some like Atzmon and Beeley are considered verboten by the likes of David Osland. I have no opinion on David Icke.

What we read from dissenting bloggers/journalists via social media is not necessarily more accurate or truthful than what we read from journalists from established mainstream sources and all information should be approached critically but the value of multiple sources is that we have multiple perspectives to compare.

Using Twitter more extensively, I am expanding the range of people I follow:


It is surely odd to argue that access to more perspectives make me more vulnerable to misinformation.