Why Liverpool and Jeff Bezos is far from a match made in heaven

Paul Fennessy

LIVERPOOL HAS ALWAYS seen itself as a bit different.

In 1848, it was home to the first trades council to be formed in the United Kingdom.

A 27 April 1998 motion in the UK parliament noted how “throughout its existence it has been a leader in the struggle of working people for better working and living conditions; recognises its role in fighting for social justice and progress, its promotion of the interests of working people in the struggle against bad employers from the time of the London building trades lock-out of 1859, through the great transport strike of 1911, to the Liverpool dock workers lock-out of 1995 to 1997; also recognises its contribution to the life of the City of Liverpool; and expresses the hope that it will long continue as a leader in the struggle for a just society.”

The ideals of the city and the football club have tended to go hand in hand over the years.

One of their legendary coaches, Bill Shankly, was seen as epitomising the principles of Liverpool. Known as the people’s manager, he once said: “The socialism I believe in is everyone working for each other, everyone having a share of the rewards. It’s the way I see football, the way I see life.”

In addition, the Hillsborough disaster, among the most tragic events in the club’s history, was exacerbated by the reaction of sections of the media and members of the establishment’s attempts to blame fans for the catastrophe.

Yet, by contrast, the club’s leading figures at the time, such as their iconic former player and manager Kenny Dalglish, earned praise for the sensitivity and support they showed at this difficult moment.

The anti-establishment sentiment is consequently among the most notable traits associated with the club.

‘Scouse, not English’ is a well-established phrase. Certain Liverpool supporters feel apathy towards the England team, and some even boo the national anthem.

These are among the reasons why this week’s news that a Jeff Bezos consortium is reportedly nearing a deal to buy a 30% stake in Liverpool will be particularly galling to some.

Advertisement

To have the world’s fourth-richest man inextricably connected to a club with a long history of socialist ideals and a city with a working-class culture is hardly a seamless fit.

In contrast to Liverpool’s aforementioned proud association with trade unions, Bezos’ company, Amazon, has faced criticism over its treatment of workers.

A report in The Independent last year noted how Amazon was “purging warehouse workers who had their work authorisations revoked after President Donald Trump’s administration ended an immigration programme put in place under President Joe Biden”.

High-profile figures have been among those to highlight Amazon’s problematic behaviour.

“Big companies like Amazon have built a vast network of subcontractors who deliver their packages while shielding them from accountability,” tweeted the Mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdan.

“It leaves our workers unprotected and our streets less safe. It’s time for a change.

“I’m proud to support the Delivery Protection Act to crack down on exploitative subcontracting and build an economy that works for everyone.”

Liverpool has also traditionally been perceived as more left-leaning than the average city in the UK.

In 2019, author and journalist Simon Hughes spoke in depth with The 42 about why former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was particularly reviled in the area and how her government’s policies proved so harmful to the city.

Bezos has strong connections with another controversial, divisive, right-wing politician, Donald Trump.

On the one hand, Bezos has insisted that he is not a Trump supporter.

But at the same time, the businessman has reserved substantial praise for the US President.

“He is a more mature, more disciplined version of himself than he was in his first term,”   Bezos said in an interview with CNBC earlier this year.

“Trump has lots of good ideas,” he added. “He’s been right about a lot of things.”

Amazon has also given millions of dollars in support to Trump and funded a lavish 2026 documentary on the First Lady, Melania.

Bezos has similarly been criticised since purchasing one of the world’s most prestigious newspapers, The Washington Post, in 2013.

The publication sparked fury over its decision to take a neutral stance rather than support Kamala Harris in the lead-up to the 2024 US Presidential election, a call that lost them 250,000 subscribers and prompted more than 100 journalists to depart. 

Earlier this year, in another move met with significant criticism, the Post’s sports section was dismantled. If Liverpool win the Premier League this season, you may not get to read much about it in Bezos’ newspaper.

So are Reds fans comfortable being so closely associated with a man who at times has shown a distinct lack of empathy and care for workers, and whose decisions conceivably helped Trump get elected? A hyper-capitalist who has continued to show deference and support for the president in the wake of a succession of scandals and policies that are invariably the antithesis of Liverpool’s humanitarian, socialist principles?

Unfortunately, when it comes to modern football, whether it’s Irish football figures’ reluctance to boycott Israel, or the willingness of most fans to accept their clubs being taken over by nation-states with appalling human rights records, the disinterest in moral or ethical concerns has been a recurring theme.

Not every Liverpool fan will be comfortable with Bezos’ involvement – a section may even vociferously protest it, as was the case at Newcastle – but provided the investor group can continue to deliver Champions League football regularly, recent history suggests the noise will eventually die down with normal business resuming.