You could possibly have caught me out here a little, most of what I know of him is through the british press and social circles all pre the podcast/longform conversation boom. My reason for not trusting him in this context are quotes attributed to him wrt kick racism out of football, racism in general and his timing thereof, standing back and shouting 'this isnt racism it's classism' rubs me the wrong way especially in the context of football where it kinda was/is racism. He also pops up a number of times in my circles trying to argue a lot of things isnt racism and it just seems fucking toxic. I'm willing to eat crow on this, so i'll watch your video and any long form talk you may know of where he clarifies his thoughts on racism and why he does what he does.
Well, some background. Spiked has its roots in Marxism, which is what it was in its previous incarnation as 'Living Marxism'. Living Marxism closed down due to a notorious Libel case against it. You couldn't really call Spiked, as it now is, particularly Marxist. They have evolved somewhat. It maintains a focus on appealing to a working-class audience though. And so it is obvious why Brendan, for instance, would side with Football fans. It should also be pointed out that Spiked is free speech absolutist. It believes in free speech no ifs or buts. In terms of anti-racism they promote a universalist approach, again something the old-left including Marxists used to believe in. They have a strong emphasis in the idea of freedom in general, but also freedom from the state specifically. And so a lot of their arguments tend to be against policing language no matter how offensive.
In terms of his comments on Racism in football, in was in response to the Lukaku chant.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/that-lukaku-chant-its-open-season-on-football-scum-again/20349#.WwxAniAh3IUWhether you actually agree with his stance on this is kind of beside the point though. I just don't think Alex Jones is a fair comparison. Brendan O'neill at least has a rational argument behind his stances. It's not so much about whether you agree with him, it is simply accepting there is a rational argument there. He isn't simply just talking shit, you can tell actual 'thought' has gone into it. It is the process in which he arrives at a conclusion that is important. He isn't some crazy conspiracy theorist rambling on, in other words.
In terms of what to listen to, there is plenty of stuff out there.
This for instance might give you some perspective of where he is coming from, and where Spiked is coming from for that matter.
Edit: I actually think this is a better video.
