Also exposed is the rank hypocrisy on the part of US media and US officials regarding civilian casualties, weaponisation of conflicts etc...
There are at present dozens of 'Yemen'-type conflicts going on in the world. Low-scale when compared to Syria or Iraq they are nevertheless warzones accompanied by the slaughter of innocents.
The Mainstream Media is filled with pride and self-importance. They view themselves as the guardians of society, the interpreters of world events and the purveyors of wisdom. I'll repeat what I've said before. They are prostitutes and at the end of the day their complicity in deception as well as the obfuscation and sanction of bloodshed makes them something worse.
Revered and respected, they are not journalists but celebrities and entertainers but in fact are some of the worst elements in US society. They are certainly enemies to the principles of democracy they purport to uphold. I'm not trying to speak hyperbolically or in any way attempting to exaggerate the point.
This is quite literally what they are. It's no surprise. They're bought people, virtually all of them are millionaires. You're simply dreaming if you don't think that changes your outlook. Money is the easiest way to win them over. They enter the upper echelon of society and become invested in the status quo. That shapes how they view the world. Whether they tilt Left or Right, whether you're a Maddow or an O'Reilley, in the end it doesn't matter all that much. Despite their rhetoric and heated exchanges they actually agree for the most part. Many of them don't even realise it, but then in most cases they've never seriously considered or questioned their assumptions. They would certainly never question the consensus to which they are a part. Differences in application and style are window dressing. The core assumptions of the Mainstream Media are shared.
And by the way... none of them are socialists, not a one.
Social Democracy, so common in Europe did indeed come out of Socialism in the 19th century and it is sometimes identified as within the Socialist spectrum. And yet this form of 'Socialism' was completely committed to Capitalism and as a consequence embraces both the nation-state and by necessity expansionist militarism. This is the nexus. Even the 'Left' in the United States as represented by the Democratic Party is still a pro-Wall Street, nationalist and pro-Imperialist party. Their differences with the American Right are over the extent of redistribution (understood by both camps to be a social necessity), tax structure, aspects of jurisprudence, the role of tradition and identity politics. While these issues are not insignificant they are peripheral when compared to the foundational commitments.
And in fact these other secondary questions will always be answered in light of the foundational commitments. That's something to keep in mind.