BBC & Socialism: A love story.

Throughout my life I have distrusted the mass media, however, one that always seemed strangely neutral was the digital portal of BBC Mundo, that is, the BBC version for the Spanish-speaking world. I usually take everything with pincers, but the fact that they presented the news of the world, mainly from Latin America, in a fairly impartial way, especially if we compare it with media like CNN, did that it will win my trust.

It was an absolutely strange case, but it seemed that they were really doing a journalistic work or that they did not have such a marked agenda behind, as if it was evident in any other media, so I recurrently started to inform myself mainly there.

Don't get me wrong, the BBC has always been a leftist media, and that is evident, but the fact of having remained fairly impartial during the advent of the pink tide in Latin America, made me think, for some time, that it was really impartial, or that he had no interest in the region.

About two years ago, things started to change a little, I would not know when to put an exact date, but I know that the first time I noticed was during the death of Fidel Castro.

It is no secret to anyone that Fidel Castro is a dictator of Marxist tendency, who governed for decades and his achievements were null, even worse than that, really negative, that plunged Cuba into the worst conditions, and that, in addition, was one more example of failure in the implementation of socialism. His image will be in the infamous hall of history, or that seems to be what we know so far...

Well, you see, for the BBC, the history is not like that, according to them, Fidel Castro was a man "who possessed superlative amounts of qualities", a man "witty, cunning and brave", is more, a "living example" of those qualities, "the most cunning of all."

During the article made by BBC Mundo during Castro's death, multiple "exploits" and "prowess" of "El Comandante" are recounted, like once he stole some cars from the Argentine government, by giving his payment word and never fulfilling it, or the time he freed the criminals and maniacs from Cuba and sent them to the United States during the Mariel boatliftor the time he said he was not a socialist and if he was, or the time he invaded Angola, and a host of sympathetic dictatorial anecdotes from the adventures of Fidel Castro.

The first time I saw that article I could not believe it, it seemed like something out of a Marxist portal, however, as I was used to reading seemingly unbiased articles there, then I simply ignored that, and took it as a small altercation without giving it any importance.

However, from there things started to twist a little, and I started to see some more and more rare articles, like an article on Chinese proverbs in which they honored the oriental wisdom of the hand of Mao Zedong, where they placed as an example his words for the search for equality between men and women. The article quoted Mao as saying "Today men and women are equal", and then he said that Mao's words resounded today louder than ever. I guess there was no better example to talk about equality than Mao, that is, I'm not saying that his government has caused the death of 100 million people, or anything like that.

But if there was an article that was definitely the straw that broke the camel's back, that was undoubtedly what they did to commemorate the Marx anniversary. It was there when I realized how biased it was and what agenda the people of the BBC had. According to the article, if you "like to have free weekends", "drive on public roads or go to the library", or if you are a person "that seeks to put an end to injustice, inequality and exploitation", then you must commemorate the Marx anniversary, because "he defended all these causes".

Well, I really did not know that driving or going to the library were "causes", and I find these claims particularly strange if we take into account that cars were invented after Marx's death, or that the badly called "public property" is an idea as old as civilization, or that Marx's only contribution to libraries are a few fateful writings that have directly or indirectly caused the greatest chaos ever seen in the history of the world. I will not even try to deny claims about injustice, inequality or exploitation, because it would be useless. The article is totally plagued by demonstrably false statements, which are not based on history, and not even on the version of history handled by Soviet revisionists, it is an absurd propaganda pamphlet.

According to the article, Marx "wanted to send children to school, not to work," which is very logical, especially if we take into account the writings of Marx during the First International in which he says that "In a rational state of society every child whatever, from the age of 9 years, ought to become a productive labourer". Other of Marx's exploits according to the article are; the weekends, break for lunch, retirement and pension. Marx wanted people to be independent, creative, and free, and that they should "live a life that goes beyond work," that's right, the man who says that history is based on a constant struggle for the means of production said, according to the BBC, that life should go beyond work.

Practically the article almost affirms that if you are happy, successful, healthy or kind, you owe it to Marx, who by the way, wanted the world to be a happy and sunny place, with little birds singing all day long while a permanent rainbow formed in the sky.

Look, the affirmations are so many, and so extraordinary, that I could extend the publication so much that Steemit would not allow me to publish it. Practically all the things that are affirmed in the article, I repeat, practically all, are debatable, questionable, and in the least of the cases, doubtful.

By this point, as you know, there is no need to delegitimize or discredit the BBC, since it has done it on its own, going from being a left-leaning medium to a media that openly defends the most radical Marxism.

The fact for which I write this article is due to the latest adventure in which the BBC was launched, breaking the last barrier that remained, praising to... Nicolás Maduro.

That's right, the BBC has already fallen so low.

In this last article, titled "How Nicolás Maduro has shown to be a more astute politician than many thought in Venezuela", and that was published exactly two days before the presidential "elections", there is no shortage of flattery for Maduro, and neither for Chavez.

The article practically shown us how "cunning" Maduro has been in disabling, imprisoning and crushing the opposition, carrying out a political persecution, he also tells us about the hidden intelligence of the man known for comparing himself with Saddam Hussein and Joseph Stalin, and finally they call some Marxist specialists to make even more compromising statements that the BBC did not want to make on its own, as "Maduro is skillful in the maneuver to divide the opposition, to survive, to be a presidential candidate", or that the opposition is "obtuse" and "radical", or the last, but not the least, "I think that in reality we are going to meet the real Maduro now, so we have to give him another chance". It seems that Maduro is good for everything, except to manage a country, stabilize the economy, win the imaginary war that he invented in his head, or spend at least a week without humiliating himself.

I've been reading the BBC for so long, that I think I've even partially become a Marxist. It's true that famines and deaths suck, but… but… at least the trains run on time, right?... no?... that is fascism?... not matter. I look forward to the next BBC article where they talk about how socialism has helped to avoid overpopulation, or where they show the intelligence, sagacity and incorruptibility of Joseph Stalin, the man who shook hands with the Nazis and still remained the most infamous person in the room.

Being serious, it is regrettable to see that a medium that is directly subsidized by the State of the United Kingdom, that is, the country that gave rise to the father of economic liberalism; Adam Smith, and that historically has benefited by being one of the most capitalists countries of the world, this showing, promoting and praising, openly Marxist characteristics.

I don't even want to talk about the English version, that is, the original version of the BBC, who named Karl Marx as the "greatest thinker" of the past MILLENNIUM.

But what can I say, we live in a crazy moment in which the western media are left-wing and the Russian media are right-wing, where the aggressor and the assaulted continuously change roles, and where the facts are different depending on who says them. The moral of the story is simple, don't believe in anyone who tells you that he is telling the truth, that is, don't believe in any media, everyone is pursuing their interests, today the BBC is marxist left, tomorrow can be fascist if their interests change.

---

Image Source: 1, 2