there are entire countries of marxists, china and cuba. in the us, there is a growing trend but marxists are disfavored from grants. parenti was one, hes old now. losurdo was one and he had trouble getting published even by verso. if you doubt the culture of the monied institutions in the us are anticommunist i dont know what to tell you. there are also many black academic marxists around such as august nimtz.

the stuff that gets play in the us is compatible left slop, liberal, or fascist lenses. ppl are selected for positions because they believe the correct things.

Thanks. So you are saying that bias prevents Marxists from being quoted regarding foreign affairs? I thought you were claiming that US journalism was pro-Marxist, which is a much more common claim these days - I wanted to hear about when they quoted Marxists. Until your latest comment, I had no idea what you meant.

I generally agree - almost all mainstream US journalism will not use Marxist ideas for any topic, unless the publication is unaware of the idea's origins. So there is a lack of diversity there.

At the same time, I think your argument conflates Marxism and communism. The US journalists don't know the difference either, and I believe are really anti-communist - openly and avowedly - and assume Marxism is essentially the same thing.

> there are entire countries of marxists, china and cuba.

The idea that everyone in Cuba and China are Marxist or communist is just misunderstanding politics and humanity. IMHO China's government is closer to right-wing authoritarian/totalitarian, with its history clearly in communism (Mao, etc.) but they now mostly use it for ideological cover. Xi is a princeling, inheriting his status from elite (though not every princeling becomes head of the country).