Protests by workers and activists and, in some cases, violence by anarchists marked the far-left holiday May Day this year.

But most American news consumers would not have known that some London demonstrators carried communist flags and banners of brutal Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. They weren’t told that communists marched in Athens, Greece, or that anti-capitalist anarchists destroyed windows and threw Molotov cocktails in Paris.



The New York Times just can't get enough of promoting, defending, and excusing Marxism and communism. At the paper's online blog called "The Stone" on Monday, Jason Barker, an associate professor of philosophy, celebrated the upcoming 200th anniversary of Karl Marx's birth by telling the Communist Manifesto's author: "You Were Right!



As Venezuela's socialism-driven disaster deepens, the press's unwillingness to recognize its cause has gone from being "merely" negligent and outrageous to absolutely disgusting. This obvious failure, which is almost certainly conscious and deliberate, is present even when a journalist's work portraying the human element of the crisis is otherwise compelling. Such is the case with Ernesto Londoño's Saturday report at the New York Times about how refugees fleeing that country are overwhelming the ability of towns in northern Brazil to handle them.



The Associated Press and many of the AP's colleagues in the establishment press have had a nearly 60-year romance with Cuba's brutal communist regime. They have frequently regaled readers with the island nation's "free healthcare" and "free education," as if that makes up for the fact that the typical Cuban subsists on far less than the $2 a day the international community considers extreme poverty. Today, the AP, in a tweet and at least two headlines, pretended that it was a free election that elevated Miguel Diaz-Canel to Cuba's presidency.



Tuesday, the Washington Post, whose motto since February 2017 has been "Democracy Dies in Darkness," gave precious access to a supporter of Xi Jinping's consolidation of power in mainland China. "Shanghai venture capitalist" Eric X. Li also taunted the West, claiming that "liberal democracy in its current state seems incapable of producing a leader half as good."



Both in its related tweet and the story's headline, CNN has promoted Sandra Gonzalez's Tuesday column about the movie Chappaquiddick as being about "one of Sen. Ted Kennedy's darkest hours." This begs two questions: "Wasn't Chappaquiddick far worse for Mary Jo Kopechne?" and "Did Ted Kennedy have other darker hours?"



Of all the absurd takes on the U.S.–North Korean situation in the wake of President Trump's tentative, conditional agreement to meet with Kim Jong Un, Barbara Demick's Friday "analysis" piece at the Los Angeles Times has to be near the top of any "worst" list. The headline: "Whatever comes next, North Korea's Kim Jong Un can claim a win against Trump." Oh really?



The New York Times’ abject refusal to pin the socialism label on the failed and starving state of Venezuela is well-documented (as is the paper’s whitewashing of that and other tyrannical left-wing regimes). In the newest Times Sunday Magazine, writer Wil S. Hylton devoted nearly 9,000 words to fiery, often-imprisoned opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez, “Can Venezuela Be Saved?” yet managed to totally avoid the word “socialism,” the idea that formed the root of the country’s present failures.

 



Raoul Peck, the director of the new film, The Young Karl Marx, acclaimed the 19th-century radical leftist on Sunday's All Things Considered on NPR: "Today, his [Marx's] analyses are even more urgent and necessary than before." Anchor Sarah McCammon pointed out, "But hasn't this been tried before many times? I mean, Marx's ideas pervaded, for instance, the Soviet Union." Peck denied this historic reality: "It did not influence the Soviet Union. Marx and Engels would have probably been the first one to be shot....this incredible monster that was fabricated after the Russian Revolution has nothing to do with their ideas."



Friday's New York Times promoted what they called "A buddy movie about Communism," reviewed by film critic A.O. Scott. It was somehow an occasion for whimsey. Marx and Engels became "the Mick Jagger and Keith Richards of the European left, rock stars for an age of revolution." They "look and act like pioneers of brocialism." Scott even said the jury was still out on the history of Marxism, "bloody and contentious and not yet finished."



New York Times’ reporter Jennifer Schuessler provided the latest entry in the paper’s strange admiration for left-wing dictators, and those “intellectuals” that admire them. Tribute to Castro-loving Communist Angela Davis on the front of Wednesday’s Arts page, “The Davis Papers: Harvard Gets Them – Angela Davis’s personal archive traces her evolution from obscurity to activist.” Schuessler gushed, "Now she has achieved canonization of a more scholarly sort."



As Venezuela plunges deeper into humanitarian crisis, the broadcast and cable networks barely recognize its existence, while the print press, which during relatively tolerable times routinely celebrated the country's socialist government, is more reluctant than ever to use the S-word. Of six articles I found Friday afternoon about the horrid, deteriorating situation in that country, only one used the word — and that was only because it was about snap elections de facto dictator Nicolas Maduro has called for April.