How did these clearly left wing books become a symbol for ancaps?
119 posts and 29 image replies omitted.>>13183You got the gist of it. 1984 was a reaction to Orwell's own experiences in the British colonial police, as a propagandist for the BBC during WW2, and under the late 1940s Labour government. What most people (and evidently many American high school English teachers) don't understand is that the book
has to be read as immanent to WW2. 'Newspeak' draws from an essay Orwell wrote on trends in British journalism. The longing for a half-remembered before time is not abstract and reactionary, but a concrete depiction of how WW2 imposed brutal austerity conditions on the British people. It's also a reaction to Fordism and the kind of obsession with a rationalized, efficient world that was common back then. We see this with "the clocks were striking 13"—they're on military time! It's a depiction of militarized efficiency cannibalizing all of society. The stuff about "we've always been at war with Eastasia"? That happened in 1945 when the war propaganda effort switched abruptly from focusing on Germany to Japan. Orwell was there when that happened, in the BBC. The book ends with Orwell giving up on, essentially, Blanquism and reformism and endorsing a proletarian revolution. It's a critique of the ideology behind British Imperial decline, of wartime social democracy, and of the contemporary trends that idolize that period.
>>13183Fuck, i tried searching for this post so many times.
To whomever bumped this thread, i want to suck your clit/penis.
>>13111>>13107>>13109 >Read Orwell's Homage to Cataluña>the explanation of the USSR influence goes like this: <There were two major marxist parties in cataluña: 1) POUM, that did not align with the USSR, and claimed that the civil war and the revolution were inseparable. 2) PSUC, that aligned with the USSR, and claimed that only after the civil war was won, and bourgeois democracy was restored, that the revolution could go on. <He is very skeptical of PSUC's position, and states that the USSR would not allow the revolution to go on because they needed stable allies, and revolutions bring about many things, but not stability. The USSR had no way to solely support a socialist revolution. Instead, the USSR's strategy was to defeat fascism via a Popular Front that included communists, socialists, and liberals. From the POV of the Communists, the POUM was undermining the war effort by pushing for revolution instead of political unity. I'd also like to add that the militia system was retarded and the Communists were the only faction on the side of the Republic that resembled a real army.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8caypg/in_homage_to_catalonia_orwell_portrays_the_soviet/ >>13055Jewish? Negro
German? Anarchist
Hotel? Trivago
>>13032from an intellectual perspective they're kinda shit books. Completely detached from reality or relevant analysis. Just a butthurt imperialist """leftist""" snitch shitting on ussr
"newspeak" literally doesnt accomplishes at all what it supposedly sets out to do, it's just another elite class signifier
its view on state repression is basically a liberal child believing the evul commies are out to get him and force him to internalize their false ideology like 2+2=3
its funny cause pushing people to believe blatant bullshit is very prominent in modern capitalist society. You just dont need much repression, suggestion and societal pressure is much more efficient.
>>13048I gotta ask
In your mind is writing a book that’s mean to the USSR genuinely worse than Stalin’s execution of a fuckton of bolsheviks, at least 700,000 people frequently on nonsensical and unproven allegations, decision to tell the Chinese workers and peasants to fall down to the mercy of Chiang Kai Shek, rapprochement with Germany at various points, heavy centralization of power, and attempts to essentially use loyal international leftists as pawns to fall for Moscow if needed while treating all other leftists as enemies?
Because bro, if Orwell is genuinely worse in your mind somehow and his criticisms were unfair or false just fucking Lmao
>>13183Excellent post mate, never seen this perspective on 1984 before!
Honestly I think we need a 2084 novel to describe where we’re currently headed as a society, I think the real likely 2084 is even worse than the fictional 1984
>>32669I said a few things.
>>32668Yeah I guess that's the wrong word but it's a lesson that still seems to be lost on most people including in this board (coughziggerscough)
>>32670>language shapes thoughtundialectical
it goes both ways
>>36358The other thing that grinds my gears is the right-wingers who apparently think that Big Brother is the name of the government, or at least the surveillance state (instead of the Thought Police).
Big Brother is the name of their charismatic, strongman leader that their whole society has a cult of personality around.
>>363581984 is always been a garbage book. It's actually based more on Britian than anything about the Soviet Union. Orwell never even visited or even researched the Soviet Union at all.
t. vid related
>>36358George Orwell? Who is that? Isn't he that liberal who provided a list of names to MI6 of people who would be unsuitable to write anti-communist propaganda?
Seems like a lovely guy…
>>36371Orwell didn't get coerced into working for British Intelligence he got honey-potted like the sex pest he is.
His contact/handler was a very attractive British woman whom he desperately wanted to get it on with.
Unique IPs: 36