Black and white thinking, or "splitting." Commies is commies, so if you criticize some commies, you're criticizing all commies.
They're imbeciles who can't write themselves (because creativity and slavish obedience to authority don't go together) and so have to pathetically latch on to left wing art.
Because Orwell is a hypocrite who had left-wing values but betrayed them due to ideological differences and his own arrogance and inability to self-crit resulting in him writing the posted books.
1984 reflects both his vision of the USSR and Capitalist Britain while Animal Farm is a twisted allegory for the USSR from the Revolution to Stalin.
Animal Farm is well written but its obvious jabs at Stalin make it annoying to me from a historical context. Moreover it provided ample literary bait for rightoids to cite at the Left as a "see even lefties hate you" type of quote.
1984 is straight up a rip off of an obscure Soviet novel written over a decade before Orwell's 'vision'.
>>13035>1984 is straight up a rip off of an obscure Soviet novel
This is just a meme talking point that circulated the media headlines a year or so ago purely because of its clickbait value. Far from secretly ripping off 'We' and hoping nobody noticed, he published a review of it before it had even been translated into english, encouraging people to read it and reprint it etc.: https://orwell.ru/library/reviews/zamyatin/english/e_zamy
Anyway calling it a 'ripoff' is just dishonest. Sure he got some of his ideas from We. But it's a different fucking book.
Because the American educational system has, purposely, omitted, not only the fact Orwell was a left leaning libertarian Communist, but, left leaning libertarianism as a whole.
The criticism wasn’t rooted in any actual theory other than Stalin bad Lenin and Trotsky good
Because Orwell has never been truly leftist in the first place. He snitched on leftists after coming back to the UK and still held huge racist, classist prejudice until his death. Dude never shook off his bourgeois class background and only turned Trot due to it.
In short, he’s a radlib larping as a leftist.
These books are basically "Trotsky's books illustrated". And, as you are aware, Trotskyists turned into the Neocons.
>>13040> still held huge racist, classist prejudice until his death
so, like Engels?
He was completely open about the visceral class prejudice which he inherited from his background and upbringing. He was horrified at it, and wrote about how he overcame it. Same for racism. This is the whole point of his essay on anti-semitism. If you're prejudiced, you should recognise in yourself that you are prejudiced, and resolve it from there, rather than immediately deny that you could possibly hold such an 'evil' thought and thus stay unaware of your own prejudices. So contrary to what the other anon said above, he did actually self-crit quite well
>>13044>From a left-pov
<No self crit on Trotskyism
<Made up a majority of slandering of Stalin that modern fascists and liberals use
Face it. He’s a radlib at best and a Trot-turned Tory at worst. A sad fate for most British Trots.>>13043>I wrote essays on admitting my prejudices! This absolved me of snitching my comrades while noting them as jews, deviants and gays for MI6 to extrajudicially put away. >This also make my sperg outs against MLs during my International Brigade days okay!
Your actions are more important than virtue signaling, just like today.
>>13037>just a meme talking point that circulated the media headlines a year or so ago
actually this is something i base off of what i read several years ago. the book essentially is the same concept.
Either way Brave New World is much better.
>>13036>if something criticizes a guy I like it’s bad
<if i strawman an argument i'm smart>>13042
Engels was a class traitor and as for racism his views there are relatively obscure, while orville clearly finds 'niggers and jews' to be distasteful. >>13044>criticise Stalin from left
It's not criticism it is slander. defending every two-bit 'writer' and 'journalist' as self-crit is liberal bullshit. Make hollow allegories based on literal Red Scare myths is not criticism and enables right-wing propaganda. >>13046>muh no-true-scotsman
Orwell repeatedly betrayed the leftist movement and demonstrated conservative anti-left views in many of his works and real-life actions. His actions and words would get him the label of a rad-lib today, but of course after decades of fellating him in Western schools and colleges, Western leftists can't look at him objectively and think that defending his writing requires defending his personality or ideology. I can enjoy Kipling's books, he's still an imperialist. Sinatra was a great singer, he was still an abusive husband and terrible human.
Orwell was a good writer but its obvious allegory for the USSR betrayed the left over-all and his actions outside his writing undermined leftist movements.
>>13046>no true scottsman >slander every leftist movement he could>sperging out about the CNT-FAI progressive social policies because they were “degenerate” to his aristocratic shit brain>snitching leftists to British intelligence >held the autistic Brit Trot ideas of supporting Nazi Germany against the USSR so that revolution would just magically happen
<but he said he’s a leftist so this is all good
My dude you are repeating Mutt arguments for “Nazis are socialist” word for word!>>13042>True racism is when you say the n-word in your shitposts with friends>Making public remarks about “deviants” and obsessively talked about people’s race and sexuality as a reason for prosecution of leftists is not
Running the point of Orwell being a contemporary radlib to the goal aren’t ya.
Except that displaying "anti left leaning views" does not mean "He betrayed authoritarian socialist regimes." I do agree he did shady horrible shit later in his life and that was fucking wrong and fuck him for it, but, to say the man was not a socialist is nothing short of revisionism.>>13049
Except the Nazis actually weren't socialists and this can be demonstrated by their insistent privatization of, literally, everything. Orwell on the other hand fled to Catalonia to fight with the POUM against fascism and for socialism.
*holds up atlas shrugged*
orwell: this bleak look at an alternate future is what could happen if we let a tendency i have identified in leftism go too far and fail to stop it
tankies: WTF HE'S MAKING UP STUFF ABOUT WHAT SOVIET RUSSIA WAS ACTUALLY LIKE
Every time. The fact that tankies take orwell's speculative fiction to be a documentary of the Stalin regime betrays their guilty consciences.
>>13050>Orwell on the other hand fled to Catalonia to fight with the POUM against fascism and for socialism.
You could use this same reasoning for any ex-socialist fascists. My point is that when his biggest “achievement” was when he was an anti-communist liberal then he should be remembered as such, not the socialist he used to be in his youth. Modern leftist should just accept the fact that radlibs exist in every point in history and they shouldn’t be venerated any higher than that.
he had Tabcercolious at the time
How some leftist can defend this piece of trash while claiming to be against fascism is beyond me.
A classic case of the Trot to Neocon (and radlib to fash) pipeline.>>13056>Muh disease
Cringe. Even Lovecraft and his autism is more deserving of defense than Orwell.
>>13052>tankies take orwell's speculative fiction to be a documentary of the Stalin regime betrays their guilty consciences.
What a strawman argument. The Reason Animal Farm is related by 'tankies' to be anti-stalinist drivel is because its a blatant allegory that Orwell does not hide and fits his anti-soviet views. For example the whole "Stalin stole Trotsky's industrialization plans" myth which is quite obviously shown.> bleak look at an alternate future is what could happen if we let a tendency i have identified in leftism go too far and fail to stop it
Except it's fucking ideological sectarian drivel of the worst kind. It's not a solid critique but an embracement of liberal anti-socialist myths.
>>13050>does not mean
He can't betray them because he isn't within said regimes. he betrayed the entire left movement by acting as a 'leftist' who discredits the largest socialist movement on earth through dishonest allegory and cherrypicked slander as well as direct betrayal with his list of suspected communists. >to say the man was not a socialist
He's a rad-lib anarchist. Just because he may have claimed support of socialism does not make him a socialist. Hitler also called himself a socialist while privately admitting to co-opting the phrase to gain popular support.
whats the original obscure novel then?
And how do you know that 1984 reflects the USSR…? I know that's the mainstream take, but when I think about it now, it describes fascism more than anything… brutal hierarchy, religious brainwashing, subversion of all resistance, etc.
I agree that animal farm is a bit basic though. Strange because I was thinking about that earlier today before seeing this thread. >>13032
IMO its just entryism OP. See what leftists rally against (Stalinism) and try infiltrate it. Just like isolationists trying to infiltrate anti-war movements.
You are right, We is an even worse book than 1984. The dystopia it imagines is more in-line with theological idealism of the book Utopia than some slight attempt at critical analysis.
To be honest the only slightly believable dystopias are also books that actually tries at world building rather than a kind of drivel of a writer’s frustration at some real world object in their limited and subjective views (Zamyatin being an opportunist piece of trash and Orwell being an anti-communist snitch). Notable examples can include It Can’t Happen Here and The Iron Heel, which did more to predict the modern post capitalist wreck we are living in than those limp-wristed, masturbatory fantasies of Orwell and his ilk ever did.
>>13064>It Can’t Happen Here and The Iron Heel
Finally someone other than a Russian-speaker sees the greatness of Jack London
I suggest you watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2mFVF8vfuI
There are English subtitles provided.
>whats the original obscure novel
Yevgeny Zamyatin's "We"
Orwell's concepts such as "big brother" is taken from that book as well as the main plot-line. It is also a fact that he read said book and in 1946 even wrote a review on it.
>how do you know that 1984 reflects the USSR
A) His real life political position was anti-Soviet
B) His description of the world of 1984 is very similar to Red Scare propaganda about the USSR. Orwell never even tried to deny that idea.
C) As I stated it was meant to be an anti-Soviet AND an anti-capitalist rant
As a side note the main 'dictator' is a mustachioed mixed-up caricature of Horatio Kitchener and Joseph Stalin.
Opinions on this jackass? I found out about him ironically because he refuses to allow fanfiction about his (shitty) stories to be written on Fanfiction.net. I read some excerpts of his books and its frankly horrifying how much like Ayn Rand this 'objectivist' is. His books are like Atlas Shrugged set in a fantasy world. Thankfully it's not as poorly-written as his idol's works.
And yes pic 1 is a real excerpt from a book of his.
Here are some more: https://www.bookandreader.com/threads/goodkind-quotes.11371/
also while writing fantasy books he is apparently NOT a fantasy author: http://cgi1.usatoday.com/mchat/20030805003/tscript.htm"First of all, I don’t write fantasy. I write stories that have important human themes. They have elements of romance, history, adventure, mystery and philosophy. Most fantasy is one-dimensional. It’s either about magic or a world-building. I don’t do either."http://aidanmoher.com/blog/2009/12/news/an-aside-terry-goodkind-is-still-an-asshole/
A short review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoKIcYeV-ZI
Why is he Controversial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6ylsQ0DepI
Most “objectivist” writers like this faggot or Ditko are usually much better writers than their idols but are hugely cucked by their own ideology to do anything further than make shitty fantasy.
In their inner psyche, they knows that their ideology won’t work in the real world due to human nature itself so most of their creations have to be filled with esoteric bullshit like costumed-vigilantes or magic, or characters so ideology filled they only served as an extension of the writer’s frustration at their failure to realize their ideology in real life.
I wouldn’t put much worries on these fucks. Sooner or later they’ll get cucked by same capitalist they worship.
Is this a counter to the /pol/ moonman meme?
Where is this even from, anyways?
Holy fuck this needs to be a /leftypol/ mascot… just to troll /pol/ with.
Gonna have too agree there
MLs are not commies and deserved to be rat out
Hilariously enough I just found him randomly when some anon posted it on here. Maybe someone can pitch this on the OC thread, I’m shit at photo editing and drawing.>Crescent Moon Mask's scheme involved the creation of a town filled with people abducted by him and his minions, then injecting all those within the town with a drug that can turn people into werewolves upon his command.
Replace “drug” with “cultural Marxism” and “werewolves” with “commies” and you’ll have a perfect spook for /pol/.>>13074
He ratted out Trots and Anarchists too, sectarian dumbass. Take your bait somewhere else.
lol, I posted him in pol and he got them quite rilled up.
>>13075>forcible furry conversion
absolutely based and furcom pilled
>>13074>MLs are not commies
considering that they're the only ones to create socialist states that didn't collapse within a year and actually defended themselves against imperialism and followed most if not all communist ideas…yeah no, fuck off you sectarian traitor, people like you are the reason the USSR had to be careful with security, because self-righteous faggots who wanted "my speshul socialism"
Make some screencaps
But Stalin was a monster. Why worship an ignoble corpse?
The funniest thing about Animal Farm is how they teach it in American schools and push trotskyism on kids who can't even begin to comprehend the theoretical implications of anything that's written, let alone what went down in the Russian revolution and civil war. They just learn that snowball is the "good one" who was unfairly cast out. Like imagine actually having such a juvenile view of history as an adult and then shoving it down children's throats.
If anyone wants to get their Jimmies rustled I suggest readinghttp://anti-dialectics.co.uk/AAA_Russian_workers_raised_not_one_finger.htm
The person writing this is a Succ-dem who styles herself supposedly after Rosa Luxembourg and posts constantly on quora, and now has this blog. The link is a 2 year delayed response to someone elses response to her slander. She proceeds to cherrypick like a motherfucker.
What annoys me however is her veiled hatred of Soviet people, which she manipulates into a claim that they were not going to support "FAKE" socialism.
Huh, so this is the missing link in the Britbong Trotskyist to NeoCon pipeline.
orwell was an anarchist, he hated MLs
>>13086>everyone who hates ML are anarchists
Hitler and Mussolini were anarchists?
>>13087>Hitler and Mussolini were anarchists
<If a square is a kind of rectangle then a rectangle is a square!
What kind of asinine attempt at deflection is this?
I think "subversive" fiction like this is worse than blatant anti-communism, because the latter is easy to identify and clear in intent.
>>9808>Orwell was never an anarchist
<fought on the side of the Catalonians, and vehemently opposed republican and socialist forces other than them.
Also you're an idiot assuming that all posts in the sequence of replies are made by 2 people and not several people replying to one another.
>>13035>1984 reflects both his vision of the USSR and Capitalist Britain
It's more the latter than the former.
I mean most people who read him do it's just that the Iron Heel is not the book everybody I guess at least in the western anglo-spehere gets to read. Instead they end up reading the Sea Wolf or Call of the Wild but even though they're good they're also the kind of books people don't really enjoy because people usually end up getting taught it in high school to be read once, have a book report typed up, and then forgotten.
>>13093>the Sea Wolf or Call of the Wild
<in American Schools
Nigga people didn't even know who Jack London was in my school until I did my Senior thesis on him. White Fang is the only story truly famous enough for most of the US population and people don't remember the author is Jack London.
christ the amount of mental gymnastics that tankie Stalin apologist kiddies do on a daily basis is astounding
Most of his writing straight up rip on anarchism. While in life he snitched out most anarchists he fought with to the British intelligence. Hating MLs doesn’t make one an anarchist.
He’s Trot-adjacent at best.
>>13096>BTFO's ML larp
<books taking interesting story ideas and politcizing them because of butthurt over MLs is totally BTFO and not a massive shit under the table, smearing communism
MLs and other real communists "seethe" because his works became obvious, convenient anti-communist cudgels by capitalists>>13095
Christ the amount of daily knee-jerk mental gymnastics of ankid/leftcom theorylets is mind-boggling.>>13097
He identified as lib-succ and later anarchist and later succ-dem. You're right in assessing him as a discount Trot, however he has at times adhered to anarchist mentalities. Regardless Orwell DID hate MLs.
Orwell sucked on a personal level but his criticism of the USSR is not wrong. His writing is a little overwrought and indulgent IMO, which probably has something to do with ancap kiddies loving it.
Here's an interesting question why did Orwell name the Trotsky stand in in Animal Farm Napoleon despite the common Trotskyist criticism of Stalin as Thermidororian?
stalinist bootlicker seething
brainless Trot ass-kisser dilating >>13100> criticism of the USSR is not wrong
Not ALL of it is wrong, but I never said he wasn't right 100%. That's the problem. He hides his anti-communism under a veneer of idealist disdain and sells it to liberals by mixing half-truths and lies as well as clear exaggerations that the uninformed take at face value. >>13101
Napoleon is the stand-in for Stalin. The Trot stand-in is Snowball. The entire banishment of him and resultant construction plans were a reference to the Leftcom accusation that "stalin stole Trotsky's' ideas (April Theses, 5 year plans etc.)"
>How did these counter revolutionary books become a symbol for counter revolutionaries?
Can someone tell me if https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Steps_to_Death
is worth reading or is it just typical Western view of the Eastern Front?
You're don't know what you are talking about, you should investigate a little before calling other fags and idiots>fought on the side of the Catalonians
First of all, saying that "Catalonians = CNT = anarchists" is wrong. Catalonia was not controlled by the CNT, it was controlled by the Comittee of Anti-Fascist Militias, a organization created by the bourgeois Catalan regional government which contained representatives from the CNT, yes, but also from UGT (socialist trade union), PSUC (marxist-leninist political party, and the largest Catalan party for most of the war), ERC (social-democratic nationalist party) and many others.
Also, the CNT and the FAI were not the same, saying that the CNT was a homogeneous and cohesive anarchist movement is wrong. The CNT was part of the III International for several years, for Christ sake.
And George Orwell fought as an International Brigadier (a movement organized by the III International aka the spooky stalinists) in a POUM-lead militia. The Partido Obrero de Unificación Marxista wasn't a anarchist or catalan organization, it was a spanish marxist-leninist political party which internationally aligned itself with the Left Opposition, even if at 1936 it had broken off with Trotskyism.>and vehemently opposed republican and socialist forces other than them.
Orwell himself says in Homage to Catalonia that he supported and defended the policies and political line of the PCE-PSUC during the war, and the slogan of "first the war, then the revolution". He also defines the situation and social feeling of the people of Madrid (controlled by the PCE and PSOE, marxist parties) as more revolutionary than Barcelona. It was only after the crisis of 1937 and after he abandoned Spain when he started attacking the communist movement.
So basically stop calling names to people who know what they are talking about, and be a little less full of yourself. Also read a bit, it won't kill you.
>>13107>Catalonia was not controlled by the CNT
Its well known that Catalonia WAS controlled by the CNT-FAI, the anarcho-syndicalists. >Orwell himself says in Homage to Catalonia
He later contradicts himself in the same book. >stop calling names to people who know what they are talking about
<using the word idiot is "calling names"
You sound childish considering that I wasn't the person who started the insults.>George Orwell fought as an International Brigadier
And was thrown out of Spain for attacking its leadership because his idealism was offended by it and he didn't like listening to directions half the time.
Regardless why are you replying to a finished conversation?
Judging by the grammatical errors you just rushed a defense of Orwell because you want to defend him for some obscure reason, when the point was that he has always been, at best a lib-succ and at worst a rad-lib. He sided with the Anarchist faction because he didn't like 'authoriarian' tendencies of the socialists.
So basically put some cream on your hurt arse and stop defending a flip-flopping scumbag idealogue, you don't get anything from it.
>>13108>Its well known that Catalonia WAS controlled by the CNT-FAI, the anarcho-syndicalists.
Dude, I'm a communist born and raised in Catalonia. I think I know what I'm talking about. The CNT-FAI refused to take direct control of the territories controlled by trade union militias in summer of 1936, instead putting themselves under the authority of the Generalitat de Catalunya. Lluís Companys, President de la Generalitat, broke a compromise between the different factions by creating the Comitè de Milícies Antifeixistes de Catalunya. The deputies in the Comitè were the following:>El Comitè va aplegar representants de les organitzacions sindicals i els partits del Front Popular, encara que el predomini era netament anarcosindicalista sota les figures de Joan García i Oliver, Buenaventura Durruti i Diego Abad de Santillán. Figuraren en el primer comitè central tres dirigents de la CNT (Buenaventura Durruti, Josep Asens Giol i Joan García Oliver), dos de la FAI (Diego Abad de Santillán i Aurelio Fernández), tres de la UGT (José del Barrio, Salvador González i Antonio López Raimundo), un del PSUC (Josep Miret i Musté), dos del Partit Obrer d'Unificació Marxista (POUM) (Josep Rovira i Canals i Julián Gorkin), tres d'ERC (Artemi Aiguader i Miró, Jaume Miravitlles i Navarra i Joan Pons), un de la Unió de Rabassaires (Josep Torrents i Rossell), un d'Acció Catalana Republicana (Tomàs Fàbregas Valls) i Lluís Prunés i dos militars, assessors de la Generalitat (Vicenç Guarner i Josep Guarner).
This government body controlled the militias until they were fused into the Ejército Popular Republicano. After the dissolution of the Comitè, authority was returned to the government of the Generalitat de Catalunya. The Generalitat remained in charge until the aftermath of May 1937, after which the Generalitat was discredited and lost much of its authority, and leadership was centralized under the Spanish Government in València.>Judging by the grammatical errors
Not everyone in /bunkerchan/ is American, anon. English is not my first language.>you just rushed a defense of Orwell because you want to defend him for some obscure reason
kek, I don't actually like Orwell. I'm a pretty orthodox ml, the policies of the Partido Comunista de España were mostly correct, if anything my takeaway of the Spanish Civil War is that they didn't go far enough because they tried to compromise with Izquierda Republicana and the trade unions too much. But I'm trying to tell it as it actually happened, and what >>13091
says is just not true
>>13109>is American, anon. English is not my first language.
My point was not that you wrote erroneously, but that you were rushing to defend an indefensible person.>I don't actually like Orwell
Then why bother? Your information about Catalonians and the Generalitat is valuable, but you make yourself sound contrite by trying to say Orwell believed such things too, when he's a contradictory swine who said whatever he felt was necessary at the moment.
Pic 2 related as to the nature of Orwell's writings
Pic 1 related to posts>>13109>>13107
>>13032>How did these clearly liberal books become a symbol for libertarians
Orwell and his ilk are radlib LARPers who don't understand leftism but have contradictory "ideals" that sometimes coincide with them. Orwell was just a good writer, which is the only reason that he isn't as obvious.
>>13114>they left mollie out of the movie
I was mad when i read the book and found this out.
>>13063>And how do you know that 1984 reflects the USSR…?
lol. just read the first chapter
>Behind Winston’s back the voice from the telescreen was still babbling away about pig-iron and the overfulfilment of the Ninth Three-Year Plan
Guys we have arrived to Orwell's 2+2=5. It reminds me of when Terrence Howard thought it was weird that 1x1=1, so he ‘discovered’ a new system where 1x1=2. The irony is that modern numerals are Indo-Arabic in origin… so much for western imperialism.
It's like that parody "Jonah Ryan takes aim at Muslim Math" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embMAtagQiU&feature=youtu.be
>>13117>sakoid>on twittard no less
Their opinion is retarded and only worthy to be laugh at.
Are you referring to The original image or the post because the screencap is sakaist, the post is not.
I really like Nineteen Eighty-Four. It introduced me to a lot of interesting concepts in high school: how language relates to "political correctness", differences between the "lower" and "middle" classes and how terror/war and hedonistic pleasures (both the lack and abundance of it) are used to control them, how the mind can distort reality and how emotions can distort the mind. I've always viewed the book as a critique of some sort of "pure authoritarianism" rather than any specific society but it's pretty obvious that Orwell's personal experiences and ideology regarding the 20th century left are a part of it. Part of me wonders that if Nineteen Eighty-Four wasn't written as a hyper-pessemistic dystopia, it would be a very prescient analysis of the modern world. Telescreens are a great example of this, we pretty much have them minus a lot of the dystopian pretext. Orwell wasn't the first to come up with this stuff of course but he was clearly an intelligent person, if not a contradictory and often illogical one.
what was his personal experience and ideology
Fighting in Catalonia helped him see (what he thought was) both the best and the worse of the 20th century left, without those experiences I'm not certain that he would have been so critical of the state socialism of his time. The tense relationship between the anarchists and the communists appeared to affect him greatly, and from his perspective it was the communists who fueled it (however he emphasizes a distinction between those on the ground who he respected, and the higher ups in the party). I don't think he really had a concrete ideology as such besides some vague "democratic socialism", he wasn't much of a theory guy as far as I know. He was at the very least anti-Fascist and anti-Stalinist - Animal Farm exemplifies the latter. It's my personal opinion that Nineteen Eighty-Four tries to combine the two into some weird proto-Nazbol nightmare.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-54105672 >Official snitches on people who don't follow government propaganda>Groups of 6 or more are disallowed from gathering
Hello 1984, I wish you'd never come
Damn, I didn't know Orwell was a snitch. Why'd he do this?
Literally read the list>Robeson and Padmore bad because he nigger>anyone in a party is bad because muh communist infiltration >Deutscher bad because he’s a kike >Dover bad because muh asiatic hordes
Orwell pretty much is everything bad with British aristocrats trying leftist lifestylism. Which is ironic considering how much autistic screeching he did against proto-hipsters at the time for doing basically the same thing as him.
Irrational fears, genuine contempt for commies, and being close dying from tuberculosis.
Somewhere I've heard the phrase 'Weak people write the stories that Strong people live'
You see this with Kipling's life story. His literary works are phenomenal and thoughtful but his own life was fairly miserable and hypocritical. He was so dismayed by his own weakeness that despite not having to, he enlisted his son to fight in the Great War, where he was killed. His wife went a little insane and never forgave him for it.
On the topic of dystopias see >>1782
He was trying to get laid with the spook honeypot pretending to be his friend. Seriously, look it up, he literally sold out people because he wanted to have some sex before he died.
Ok liberal, stay mad and keep strawmanning>>13129
Wait seriously? LOL
the numbers 2 and 4 and 5 are derived from Arabic numerals, which is NOT Western. The idea that 2+2 might not equal 4 because "muh culture" is absolute brainworms and resembles Orwellian propaganda. It's also something consistent with parodies and insane people. If you're getting mad over this being pointed out… you're probably one of them.
Is there any evidence for this claim?
>>13111>hmm today I will support state atheism without explaining it to the people, that'll help the war!
<NOOOOOOO THE CATHOLICS HATE ME
<NOOOOOOO THEY ALL SUPPROTED FRANCO
<NOOOOOOO WE'RE LOSING
<QUICK COUP THE GOVERNMENT AND FILL IT WITH ANARKIDDIES AND SURRENDER
Alienating a majority of the population and driving them to Franco, "surprisingly" tipped the balance in his favour. >BUT MUH fascist aid
Of course that played a role, but without catholics being driven to Franco by anti-clericalism and anti-catholicism many of the fascist weapons would sit idle and Franco would be beheaded.
Being a leftcom =/= understanding theory or knowing its actual meaning. There are leftcoms who do know what they're talking about. There is a thread made by one on this board with whom I agree with and who is based AF, but most of them who state that "muh Orwell was just self-critiquing communists" are fucking theorylets who don't know what they're talking about.
A lot of Orwells and other anti-soviet "leftists" writing always reminded me of an old joke about repressions from the USSR. Rough translation
>Grandson: Grandpa, tell me about those times under Stalin
<Grandpa: i was a young lad at the time and I had set my eyes on a pretty girl. And so one day I got her to roll in the hay with me. But the farm guard, her father, found us. So I killed him, ибо не хуй. I ran for it.
>Grandson: and then what?
<Grandpa: well the damned communists repressed me.
>Grandson: and what happened then
<Grandpa: And then they shot me
In English it loses much of its humor, however the point is obvious. He was no innocent and he obviously wasn't executed, but he portrays himself as that.
This thread is fucking retarded.
leftcom.org loves Orwell and leftcom flags loved to post his shit all the time on 8ch leftypol
MOVE THIS BACK TO /HOBBY/
This thread should have been deleted.
Why? does it offend you?
It's low quality. The answer is obvious. Ancaps will use anything that is vaguely "anti-communist" even if it was intended as only anti-Stalinism.
How is it low quality, what kind of bogus standards do you have?
I would say a good 1/4 of the thread is made up of decent posts and content , with other ccommnets being mostly on topic and up to usual chan standard
>Ancaps will use anything that is vaguely "anti-communist"
If that was true they'd use Quiet Flows the Don and Bulgakov's literature as anticommunist too.
Some people see 1984 as an anti-communist screed and to a certain extent, it is. It was one of the first salvos of what would become the "totalitarianism" meme, a Cold War attempt to try and draw comparisons between the fascists and communists who, before that point, where seen as two inherently opposed and contrasting forces, basically night and day. And some of the communist influences on the book are undeniable. "Big Brother" is described as a mustache man with piercing blue eyes and handsome features that's clearly a reference to Stalin (and perhaps Hitler), Emmanuel Goldstein is clearly Trotsky, people call each other "comrades" and so on. But these things are mostly surface level.
Some boomers still believe 1984 is set in Russia and is a more or less accurate depiction of the Soviet Union, but it's actually set in London, within a larger superstate called "Oceania". "Oceania" is basically the British Empire merged with the United States which then conquered Latin America. And, importantly, it was ultimately supposed to be less a screed against fascism or communism, and more a prediction of where Britain was heading, at least in Orwell's eyes.
And that's why it's worth looking at. 1984 is a very Anglo dystopia and ultimately an exploration of Anglo culture and politics.
Maybe the most telling aspect of Oceanic society in that regard is the "Anti-Sex League". If nothing else does, this should tell you that this is about Anglos, it's not the Germans, Italians, Russians or Chinese who are notoriously weird and prudish about sex.
But there's other things. Even though the name for the "Ministry of Truth" was likely inspired by Pravda ("Pravda" means "Truth" in Russian), everything else about it was inspired by Orwell's time working for the BBC. The Party pushes "newspeak", a heavily abbreviated, terse form of language more or less engineered to be thought-terminating. "Stalinist" propaganda was nothing like this, it was notoriously verbose, often belaboring the point well past redundancy. On the flip side, "newspeak" had already been more or less an Anglo tradition by the time Orwell had written the book. The United States loves its acronyms so much, it's become a thing to just refer to federal agencies as "Alphabet Soup", and British tabloids are often have headlines like "BOJO'S BREXIT BOOM".
But the thing central to liberal society more generally, but Anglo states in particular is "doublethink" and the idea of having an evolving narrative where the past shifts.
With "doublethink", you have people being presented with two contradictory pieces of information, and accepting both as true. This might be most exemplified in their official slogan.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Which might as well be the official slogan of Anglo-style liberalism. The war office of the United States is still called "the Department of Defense" and it's normalized that invading and attacking other countries has something to do with defending the country and, somehow, preserving peace. All "Freedom" means in Anglo-Protestant countries is bourgeois authority, it's literally just a slogan meant to refer to the concept of the "right" of the bourgeoisie to exercise their class authority as they see fit. The freedom-mongers are often opposed to anything and everything which would give greater liberty to anyone else for, you see, that would infringe on bourgeois class authority, which is slavery. Because freedom is slavery. And, of course, these are countries where ignorance is actively praised, where simply being taught forbidden information is tantamount to corruption and true and loyal citizens simply do not know what the criticisms of their society are and do not care to know. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
And, as anyone who follows the native English speaking world knows, it is very much about controlling the past to control the present and getting people to accept an evolving narrative. Bush is actually a good guy. The Iraq War? Basically never happened at this point. Trump is bad now, but watch as his same exact policies are now progressive under Biden. And then join in the Two Minutes Hate against the Great Enemy of the week, ~Venezuela~ I mean Iran, eh I mean, Russia, excuse me, Eastasia, we were always at war with Eastasia.
And that's how I think we should view 1984. Not about fascism or communism or "totalitarianism", but a deconstruction of Anglo liberal politics.
>>13114>she's fucking the fat red faced man for sugarcubes and pretty ribbons in her mane.
It would fit the analogy she represents.
excellent post comrade
You 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.
Fuck, 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/
OP meant right-wing conservatives/"libertarians"?
because they haven't read it. they hear it's a famous novel and it's against "totalitarianism", maybe skim the wikipedia, and think that's good enough for them
Checked. SO essentially the petty bourgs selling out to richer bourgs or bootlicking proles getting a better life in return for selling out comrades?
Is the Gladiator the predecessor of "objectivist" power fantasies like that of Atlas Shrugged? The book itself seems to be a warning against it, but instead seems to be misinterpreted by idealogues. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiator_(novel)
>>13035>1984 reflects both his vision of the USSR and Capitalist Britain
More capitalist (as in, post-war social democratic) Britain than USSR. Any references to the latter are mostly superficial. But you won't find such a nuanced reading in your average American classroom.
Seriously, 1984 is more informed by Orwell's own time in Burma's colonial police and witnessing firsthand BBC's propaganda department shift its sights to Japan towards the end of the war than it has anything to do with his 'vision' of the USSR.
The dystopia genre is legitimately mostly projection.
Unique IPs: 13