What are some goooood, general news sites which aren't offensively liberal?

www.wsws.org

They've been consistently right in their analysis and have been validated by history over and over.

Honestly? The biz and financial papers favored by the people who actually run our capitalist regime. Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg (less so).

The capitalist class is using those papers to make investment decisions, and in the FT's case you'll even get a fair airing of Marxism from time to time. I'd use a referrer control or anonymizer like TOR to browse though because subscriptions to the FT are expensive. The New York Times is more of a propaganda sheet produced by that class for the general population, so it's just bloviating about how virtuous the people who read the NYT are for reading the NYT. Just garbage. I guess it's like the difference between Pravda and Izvestia. The former was for the general population while the latter was more for nomenklatura types… I think.

Attached: FT_marx.png (750x1214 204.35 KB, 181.2K)

Oh and for news of Russian origin: themoscowtimes.com/

front page story
wew. I love the majority of their pieces, but good god get over it.

Your best bet is to use multiple sources that are biased in different ways for your news, if your sources are biased in different ways then you can easily spot the points that they all agree on and infer the truth. Learning how to think critically and how to do your own research are vital skills for an independent thinker.

Trots gonna trot, but the site is still a fantastic news source. Even liberal fact checkers have approved of it (albeit reluctantly and only out of intellectual honesty).

dope

This. No source is perfect. I'm saddened by the lack of a WSWS from a ML perspective tbh.

The WSWS has an ML perspective though. Trots consider themselves ML, but if by ML you mean Stalinist, then it would be impossible to get quality writing because you would have an incorrect understanding of marxism.

Attached: DbAknirWAAE4Ic5.jpeg (1200x600, 32.55K)

Top kek

I forgot to add:
Yeah, if your idea of "quality" is a purity spiral. I was thinking more along the lines of constantly putting out articles that get the basic facts right and add a convincing argument on top of it. Kind of like the CPGB-ML Proletarian News, but they don't put out things as much as the WSWS. I have my own criticisms of that party, but right now we need as much socialist media as we can muster.

I've only been here for a while, but what is the clear difference between Marxist, ML, Stalinist, Trots, and others?

by a while I mean like 1 week of actually getting into socialism…

Marxist covers all of the above.

ML and Stalinist are the same thing, since ML as a specific doctrine was formulated by the USSR in the Stalin era.

Trots and other groups are Marxists, but not "Marxist-Leninist." Trots sometimes referred to themselves as "Bolshevik Leninists". There are also a variety of other groups which often don't have specific names for their tendencies, but include things like Council Communists, Left Communists, Marxist-Humanists, etc.

Current Affairs

Try here.
Abby Martin does some decent stuff
mediaroots.org/radio/

this shit is all fucking ideology. anyone who romanticizes war like this needs the wall.

How do you get past the paywall, I've tried Google and Facebook referrals and incognito mode. Does tor actually do the trick?

No. You have to use Mozilla Firefox private browsing.

Isn't Council Communism a part of the greater Leftcommunist umbrella, though? It's like how Bordiga agreed with the fundamentals of Lenin, but continued to be a leftcom.

Maoist Rebel News

I believe Trotskyists do not consider Themselves ML they consider themselves Leninists however

The Real News Network

pyongyangtimes.com.kp/
en.granma.cu/
plenglish.com/
telesurtv.net/english/
sana.sy/en/
presstv.com/
sputniknews.com/
xinhuanet.com/english/world/index.htm

globalresearch.ca/
greanvillepost.com/
southfront.org/
mintpressnews.com/
rt.com/

theintercept.com

It was started by Jeremy Scahill (wrote the book on Blackwater) and Glen Greenwald (journalist that worked with Edward Snowden). They are great for foreign policy stuff but be aware, they do support people like Ocasio-Cortez I think so always avoid those articles. But they posted an article that shat on George HW Bush today so they are at least willing to break from the liberal civility crowd.

Almost all these replies are shit. There's no way I'm going to link a rt/ WSWS article to a friend. They have zero journalistic integrity and I'll instantly be written off.

moonofalabama.org/

thecanary.co/
I don't know what you mean by "liberal", but the site that I linked is decidedly on the left and is mainly focused on the UK. And it should not be confused with a similarly named site run by some fucking zionazi mounting psyops against BDS activists.

Left communism is a too vague umbrella term. It covers both explicitly anti-Bolshevik, anti-Leninist and anti-USSR tendencies (originating mainly in Germany and the Netherlands in the 1920s) and the so called "Italian Left", which is basically Bordigism of various flavours.
This name comes from the fact that in the Third International, Bordiga pushed for a line to the "left" of Stalin's, which was considered the "centre". The "right" were Bukharin and others. The thing is, Bordigists claims to be Leninists - they indeed claim to be the only legitimate ones - and thus have almost nothing to do with the rest of "Left Communism" which reject Leninism.
Almost every Bordigist group originates in Italy or around Italians abroad. A few are mainly centred in France, but they too were set up by Italians living there in exile in the 1920s and '30s.
There's at least one big break in Bordiga's theory: up to the 1930s he still advocated for democratic centralism. Later, he came up with something called organic centralism.
Btw, Bordigists don't like to be called Bordigists.

Attached: bordiga_0.jpg (578x1068, 121.06K)

Approved by Cybersocialism Gang

Attached: cochshott cw.png (577x404, 117.41K)

If you just google the headline of the article the first link takes you directly to it, it only takes you to the paywall if you click a link on the FT site

They've never reported an false detail.