>The first thing that must strike any observer is that Socialism in its developed form is a theory confined entirely to the middle class. The typical Socialist is not, as tremulous old ladies imagine, a ferocious-looking working man with greasy overalls and a raucous voice. He is either a youthful snob-Bolshevik who in five years’ time will have been converted to Roman Catholicism; or, still more typically, a prim little man with a white-collar job, usually a secret teetotaller, and often with vegetarian leanings, with a history of Nonconformity behind him
>When I listen to these people talking, and still more when I read their books, I get the impression that, to them, the whole Socialist movement is no more than a kind of exciting heresy-hunt—a leaping to and fro of frenzied witch-doctors to the beat of tom-toms and the tune of “Fee, fi, fo, fum, I smell the blood of a right-wing deviationist."
This is why MLoids hate Orwell he was spitting way too many trvthnvkes
2 posts omitted.>The first thing that must strike any observer is that Socialism in its developed form is a theory confined entirely to the middle class. The typical Socialist is not, as tremulous old ladies imagine, a ferocious-looking working man with greasy overalls and a raucous voice. He is either a youthful snob-Bolshevik who in five years’ time will have been converted to Roman Catholicism; or, still more typically, a prim little man with a white-collar job, usually a secret teetotaller, and often with vegetarian leanings, with a history of Nonconformity behind him
This only describes western MLs though, Orwell was biased and narrow minded.
>>746057nah describes lenin to a T
>>746059Even if it did it still doesn't describe the average Bolshevik in Russia at that point who were a majority peasants.
>managerial states are… le bad!
>heres the list of dissidents officer np