TL;DR
Novara Media (NM) seems to be a useful reader-funded outlet for UK domestic politics and anti-neoliberalism, but I am growing increasingly frustrated with IRL “leftists” who regularly cite their content in political discussions. From what I can tell, their geopolitical coverage falls into a classic “third-campist” “western leftist” narratives. Despite frequently throwing around phrases like “materialist analysis,” they routinely adopt liberal, mainstream framing when reporting on actually existing socialist (AES) states and multipolar geopolitics, effectively laundering empire narratives for a left-wing audience.
innehållsvarning
Novara Media (NM) describes itself as:
“… an independent media organisation addressing the issues that are set to define the 21st century, from a crisis of capitalism to racism and climate change. Within that context our goal is a simple one: to tell stories and provide analysis shaped by the political uncertainties of the age, elevating critical perspectives you’re unlikely to find elsewhere.”
I first noticed the extent of this issue through family members who are active in the Western organized left. NM has become their primary news source, particularly their long-form video and podcast content. Increasingly, our political discussions have been derailed by textbook liberal takes on AES states, usually cited back to a recent Novara episode.
Because I prefer written analysis over video, I am not exposed to their long-form content. Regardless, I forced myself to watch a recent episode with “China” in the title to get a feeling for their analysis.
The episode was very larpy. The guest—a US professor who wrote a book on “green capitalism” and rare earth minerals—repeatedly invoked the phrase “as Marxists, we understand…” yet proceeded to deliver counter-Marxist takes on many points. She openly admitted she was not previously a China expert (but had learned so much when researching for the book), which became immediately obvious as she pushed grossly simplified assertions regarding China’s governance, internal dynamics of capital formation, and geopolitical stances. Rather than a concrete analysis of China’s historical development and material conditions, the discussion often seemed to fall back on familiar Western assumptions about authoritarianism and state power. I have rarely heard someone talk so much about doing a “materialist analysis” while presenting so little material data or structural understanding.
A quick look at their recent output shows a flood of similar China content. The underlying message seems to always be the same: a lib-brained emphasis that le ebil see see pee is uniquely authoritarian and not to be trusted (even if the West maybe is just as bad).
A few quick examples that come up on their site:
Uighur atrocity-slop: Neither Washington Nor Beijing: The Left Must Stand With the Uighurs
Lib-brained Geopolitical Analysis: We Asked Post-Soviet Leftists What the Western Left is Getting Wrong on Ukraine – More invocation of “materialism” used to mask a fundamentally liberal analysis of the conflict.
To be clear, I understand that NM publishes a wide range of contributors and guests, and I am not suggesting every article reflects a single editorial line. Nor do I think everything they produce is bad. Some of their domestic reporting seems to be genuinely useful, particularly when covering issues that receive little attention from mainstream outlets within the UK.
My frustration lies in the seemingly regular larping as “materialist”, “marxists”, “progressives” and “structural analysts”, while simultaneously laundering empire-slop to wester leftists who then actually think this is what they are. It is already hard to educate liberals, but doing it to western “leftists” who actually think they are principled and informed is even harder.
I’m curious what others here think. For those who regularly consume Novara Media, do you find their geopolitical analysis convincing? How do you assess them as a source overall? Is my criticism fair, or am I overlooking something in their work? Do you view them strictly as a localized tool for the UK Green party and domestic news?
When debating “leftists” like these, I often argue that someone who is progressive at home but imperialist abroad is simply an imperialist. If your conclusions of global politics is safely to the right of liberal realists like Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer, both of whom routinely offer more rigorous materialist assessments of global politics than Novara’s presents, then you are NOT doing marxist analysis.
PS. An actual well-written article I found on their page after digging around a while, sadly I have not found any analysis like this in their video content, which seems to be the main source of information for many.
When debating “leftists” like these, I often argue that someone who is progressive at home but imperialist abroad is simply an imperialist. If your conclusions of global politics is safely to the right of liberal realists like Jeffrey Sachs & John Mearsheimer, both of whom routinely offer more rigorous materialist assessments of global politics than Novara’s presents, then you are NOT doing marxist analysis.
I agree. You can’t call yourself a socialist if all you do is dress up bog-standard liberal imperialism in pseudo-Marxist jargon. Jacobin does this as well.
Is Ash Sarkar still a part of Novara? She seemed pretty cool.
Yes she’s still part of it. I like that she does her own class analysis, instead of just repeating talking points from the internet.
WSWS too.
WSWS have a different type of brain worms. They are on the ultra side of the spectrum.
I need to sit with that for a bit.
someone who is progressive at home but imperialist abroad is simply an imperialist.
Yeah, they might do some good investigative journalism on internal UK politics but they are ultimately western liberals, politically.
Aaron Bastani and Michael Walker are reactionary pseudo-leftists, cloaking their rhetoric in a Marxist garb while vying for social democracy at best. As the founders they have a strong say in the company’s editorial line and output, colouring much of what is published by them. They are solidly on the Jacobin left and if there were a Platner style candidate in the UK I’m sure they would be right there in the same way the Jacobin left are there in the US. See their generally uncritical support of the Green Party of England and Wales.
Michael Walker did recently have a holiday in China that majorly softened their output on the country, but they still have that western left anti-Chinese anti-AES veil even when “Chinamaxxxing”.
Most of their interviews are with soft-left darlings in the media sphere in the UK, and they happily signal boost their imperialist left positions with little to no pushback.
I’ll watch and read their stuff as they’re still probably one of the better outlets in the UK. Basically you have the transphobic CPB aligned Morningstar newspaper that is mostly good and not anti-AES (generally, but they do publish opinion pieces that will happily be anti-AES because they are so heavily aligned with the reactionary British trade union movement); and you have the pro-trans but reformist and imperialist left covered by Novara media.
The other word of “leftists” like those are “national socialists” 👀
I found a YouTube link in your post. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
They have a variety of guests with different viewpoints. It’s good to educate yourself on what different people think, on different perspectives. I know that doesn’t stand up to purity logic.
Oh, sorry that some people have standards about not wasting our time on Zionist claptrap dressed up as activism. I hope the purity logic isn’t too grating. Feel free to spam their articles on Lemmy like every liberal around. Nobody will stop you. Why not follow Owen Jones? Sometimes he gets something right. Hey, why not follow Nick Fuentes while you’re at it?
I haven’t seen anything Zionist they posted (I’ve seen probably less than 2% of their content). Do you have a link?
Not even a fan of Adnan Husain etc they’re distorters of Marxism but they do a great job pointing out their cryptozionism (pretty sure this is the right video).
No it’s not 2%. You people have been incredibly negligent, being nice about it doesn’t help either while they butcher children, fuck your boring holocaust profiteers, get some actual standards, it’s the TYT of the UK. Paul Mason (MI6 agent) & Aaron Bastani? Why do you think these alt media outlets use Palestine reporting to fund themselves? The CIA etc makes a whole boatload of cash off of boosting their own idiots with the algorithm, then all their fandom dopes demand epistemological levels of proof of malicious intent, ensuring the trajectory is smoothly maintained. In the first place, watered down bullshit should be rejected outright. But they are in fact complete scum.
I consider every explanation an unnecessary favor, as there is zero willpower to continue this investigation here. It will be posted again in a year.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
My whole life is spent discussing things with people of different viewpoints and perspectives, that is no problem. I find it unclear in what way the post has a connection to “purity logic”.
I find it unclear in what way the post has a connection to “purity logic”.
Agree. It’s doesn’t
I am to the left of Eyup Lovely on the issue. I have plenty of stuff in the Hitler folder of the RSS feed but they don’t even make the cut.
