How long before it's illegal to support any left-wing Party or criticise capitalism?
US libertarian billionaires scapegoat & demonize ‘Big Government’, 'identity politics' & the Left, using propaganda to manipulate citizens into voting against their interests, so they can continue to exploit workers & nature.
The Global 1% have so far siphoned off $158 TRILLION.
They put vast resources into fueling the "culture war", which acts as a distraction, & an ideological assault on the values of fairness, justice & equality by promoting individualism, while keeping voters divided so they can continue their corruption & exploitation uninterrupted.
One of the greatest illusions of modern times has been to trick millions of voters into believing that billionaires, multi-millionaires & ex-commodities traders actually represent the interests of ordinary people - rather than becoming grotesquely wealthy from their exploitation.
America's richest 400 individuals have already amassed $3trillion.
But we humans struggle to conceptualise just what an extraordinarily large amount a $trillion is, so here's a fantastic visualization by @mkorostoff: I guarantee it will blow your mind.
Is there a realistic alternative to rampant free-market #capitalism which depends on & is accelerating the consumption of finite resources resulting in the destruction of the natural environment, while increasing inequality of wealth & opportunity to grotesquely dangerous levels?
The problem is that the very rich & very powerful (those who benefit most from free-market capitalism) have for a century poured vast resources into the #demonization of #socialism & #socialists, a view which now saturates print, broadcast & online media.
A common refrain is that #socialism INEVITABLY fails & leads to totalitarianism! A claim as absurdly reductionist as suggesting #capitalism INEVITABLY leads to financial crises & war. Why? Because PURE socialism & PURE capitalism have NEVER been tried, & imho, nor should they be.
The UK, the USA, & many other 'western' countries are all characterised as #capitalist, but in reality they ALL have 'mixed economies': the private ownership of businesses, mixed with publicly funded services, such as policing, the military, most schools, & some health services.
We MUST nurture a nation of politically aware citizens, capable of thinking critically, & of seeing past the hyper-capitalist #propaganda disseminated all day, every day, by almost every media outlet.
So here's an objective introduction to #socialism:
A multibillion-dollar scheme that exchanges cash from drug and gun sales in the UK for crypto—digital tokens hiding users’ identities—has enabling “sanctions evasions and the highest levels of organised crime, including providing money-laundering services to the Russian state”. theguardian.com/politics/2025/…
In 2023, the hedge fund co-founded by GB "News" owner Paul Marshall, who employs 60% of anti-Net Zero Reform UK's MPs, had £1.8 BILLION invested in fossil fuel firms.
Harborne (who has Thai citizenship under the name 'Chakrit Sakunkrit) also makes money from fossil fuels.
I and countless others are sick to death of the billionaire-funded Reform UK propaganda machine, GB “News”, and their decontextualised ‘facts’ that would make Goebbels blush.
Let’s examine the claim that “one quarter of foreign sex offenders come from just five countries”.
Yes, the raw data comes from a genuine Ministry of Justice (MoJ) prison census, but the way it’s being weaponised is deeply misleading.
The statistic sounds explosive, and deliberately so: a factoid engineered to sound like a revelation of hidden danger.
The right-wing information pipeline: a cherry-picked fragment of official data stripped of context, laundered through an opaquely funded “think tank” that isn't a think tank, amplified by billionaire-funded media, and weaponised by opportunistic politicians for electoral gain.
In the September 2025 @SkyNews Immigration Debate, chaired by Trevor “Muslims are not like us” Phillips, Reform UK’s head of policy Zia Yusuf made a series of inaccurate and highly misleading claims about migration, and more recently, on @BBCNewsnight, about social housing.
These assertions are easily disproved with publicly available data, but often go largely unchallenged on air, despite being about some of the most sensitive and polarised issues in politics.
Yusuf started by claiming that UK net migration “last year” was “about a million.”
When a newspaper repeatedly publishes misleading, distorted, or outright inaccurate stories, the public expects independent regulators to step in.
What if I told you the editor responsible for these stories is now in charge of writing the very rules that govern press ethics?
Privately educated Chris Evans, editor of The Daily Telegraph since 2014, has—since January 2024—simultaneously served as Chair of the IPSO Editors’ Code of Practice Committee, the body that drafts, reviews, and rewrites the ethical rulebook that the UK press is meant to follow.
Evans holds this regulatory role at a time when his own paper is producing more factual corrections and clarifications than almost any other major UK outlet — with an overwhelming concentration in politically weaponised right-wing themes.
The BBC isn’t perfect — but it’s ours. As coordinated attacks on its independence intensify, I warn that if we don’t defend it now, we may lose more than a broadcaster — we may lose a cornerstone of British democracy...
As a long-time critic of the @BBC, let me spell it out: what we’re seeing right now isn’t organic outrage — it’s a sophisticated coordinated campaign by ideological enemies and commercial competitors to undermine the BBC’s independence and funding.
If you can’t see that, you’re being played — and that’s exactly the point.
Let’s start with Michael Prescott, author of the dodgy dossier leaked exclusively to The Telegraph, who is a PR man and former political editor at Murdoch’s Sunday Times.
Growing numbers of people are angry and disillusioned with the political establishment.
Desperate voters are easy prey for manipulative populists—as they were in Germany in the 1930s.
But the problem isn't immigrants or religious minorities. It's always wealth distribution.
The story of wealth in Britain over the past eight decades since WWII is not one of ‘the invisible hand’, but of deliberate policy choices—choices that once built one of the most equal society in modern history, but now sustain one of the most unequal in the developed world.
Data tracking wealth distribution from 1945 to 2025 reveal a striking U-shaped curve: a rapid reduction in wealth inequality after World War II, making Britain one of the most equal countries on earth by the mid 1970s, followed by an unbroken rise.