I have seen some of their stuff around, it is recommended a lot for me when watching anything related to Ukraine. I first saw them in relation to the stuff that was happening with Gonzalo Lira, and because of that I’ve always assumed they weren’t worth taking that seriously. They were promoting Lira this dude known for red pill sexist bs and when I looked them up I saw they had a news app with a description talking about “traditional values” which was a huge red flag for me and I’ve ignored them since.
But today I go to watch The Left Lens with Danny Haiphong, and he had them on. I’m about 20 minutes in so far and honestly this has me interested in them. They’re covering that recent video of a EU official talking about how Europe is a “garden” and the global south, Russia, etc are “the jungle” and shit. Surprisingly to me the first response was one of the Duran guys talking against European supremacy and colonialism and the like and how they exploit the global South. I looked up Alexander Mercouris and the first article I see is about how Asia is the future and US empire is dying. Maybe it’s just me living in the US, but I’ve never heard a right winger talk like this. What do you guys think?
They are paleo conservatives.
They dislike the traditional right and liberals, and oppose interventionism. Simultaneously, they hold reactionary social views. On economics I haven’t heard them say much. Often times, they will mostly avoid social issues in their programs, and focus on mostly factual news—diplomatic, military, and economic.
I think the appeal for leftists is that they are ostensibly anti-imperialist, however they are still reactionary. In this regard though, they are still perhaps closer to criticizing capitalism accurately than some of the American “left”, since one of the most important elements of capitalism is imperialism.
In effect, it’s a bit like how a liberal might claim progressiveness on social issues, but be blind to imperialism. At the same time their social critique will be lacking and to various degrees superficial. Their critique of what we call imperialism is what might be called a critique of interventionism.
Accordingly, the Duran presents a view indirectly and sometimes directly critical of imperialism, which stems at least in part from the international relations theory that great powers weaken themselves when too interventionist. While they may not have a critique of capitalism in their analysis, they do cover both some of the internal rot in the imperial core, and present most of the critical developments of multi-polarization.
Since these developments are crucial, the Duran can be a decent source of news for some topics, on the condition that your familiar with their position. Perhaps since they have become increasingly resigned in support for the imperial core, and more supportive of anti-imperialist states for reasons other than ours, their content is more approachable for leftists.
Nonetheless, they are reactionary.