[Celtic Communism]

A theme in Orwell's work that is regularly gone unnoticed is the anti-democratic nature inherent in Animal Farm. For example the peasants and women are downgraded as fools - women voters are represented by the vain pony, only caring for their looks and consuming not politics, the horse being the traditional peasant foolishly following any old leader.

On those two examples, Orwell deserves credit for his critique of women voters (even if that was not his intention, it rings true regardless). His snobbish, English-capitalistic view of the peasant must be denounced however.

[grassroots1]

^Similarly I thought that the capability of the proles was severely underestimated in 1984. It would seem to me that even a formally uneducated population is capable of self-education, knowledge of their true self-interest, and even revolution.

[Wolfman]

The key line from the whole book (for me) was "If there is hope, it lies with the Proles"

[grassroots1]

But if I remember correctly, that hope was disproven later in the book.

[Wolfman]

He rarely ever deals with the Proles.

[pugsville]

Read "down and out in paris and london".

Orwell had his faults, I doubt being a snob was one of them.

[Celtic Communism]

Read "down and out in paris and london".

Is that when he LARP being homeless, a very snobbish thing to do?

[grassroots1]

He rarely ever deals with the Proles.

I haven't read the book in too long. Regardless, I seem to remember the sense being that the Party had near total control over the proles, and this was never really questioned.

[Wolfman]

The Party rarely dealt with them. They occasionally whipped them into a nationalist furor, but for the most part rarely dealt with them.

[grassroots1]

Right, the book rarely dealt with them. I'm not going to keep arguing, I need to reread it before I can do that.

[Khalq]

If memory serves me right, the Party didn't have total control over them, it just ignored them and let them live (quite happily) in their hopeless misery. I think anti-sex laws were not even applied to them.

[grassroots1]

I admit I did a little research a few posts ago and it said they would kill the intelligent ones, there are still thought police among them, etc.

.

However, the hope of liberation through the proles clashes with O'Brien’s view that the proles can never revolt because they would never have the need to do so. The novel also appears to support the view that proles are incapable of organizing (or unwilling to organize) a revolution. It is noted that any prole who exhibits tendencies towards rabble-rousing or independent thought is simply marked down by the Thought Police to be killed, making revolution from that group even more unlikely. It is not suggested by anyone in the novel that the Party could collapse by itself. It has too tight control over the Party members who have already lost their human feelings. The younger generation, represented by Julia, showed a rapid degradation of humanity.

I know I know, wack that I'm quoting the wikipedia article on proles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proles

[SomeRandom]

That man worked for IRD says a lot about his allegiance but 1984 is a good read.

I don't think it does - although it's certainly interesting to read. I think this oft quoted line sums up Orwell:

Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it.

The link says nothing about his allegiances which you wouldn't have already gleaned from his work: he was no fan of Stalinism or its supporters.

[ness31]

Orwell's political views are closely tied if not completely identified with his views on language. That said, I have always read 1984 not as a critique of a future dystopian society (or a critique of totalitarianism) but as a critique of the (then current) trends in European societies.

I agree. The parallels between Orwells writings, particularly his letters and essays, to whats currently going on are strikingly similar. Orwell seemed to capture the mood of his day well enough for us to recognize it in our time.

I just love Orwell...he had his own brand of 'democratic socialism' which wasn't lifted from a text book. A true free thinker.

And his prose style...even if you didn't agree with him, he was just so much better at expressing his message than many of his contemporaries...

He rarely ever deals with the Proles.

but of course he did! we're all proles. his writings were a wake up call for us

[Tally-oh]

Goldstein's Book supports a essentially Marxist theory of history, albeit with the addition of a New Oppressive class replacing the capitalists. Orwell's view of Socialism was intentionally simple, he argued that rather than intending to create a "air conditioned" Brave New World Type utopia, socialism was nothing more than being more decent to others, less poverty and inequality and democracy. He regarded Communism as "counter-revolutionary" for it's role in the Spanish Civil War.

It's very important that you don't look too closely into the novels, as they are fictional, and look instead at his essays, non-fiction work and journalism to get a sense of the man's views.

[CounterChaos]

George Orwell was a Utopian Socialist...Animal Farm as well as 1984 was a warning of what could happen under totalitarianism. He was totally against any idea of armed revolution and was a firm believer in, freedom, liberty, justice and equality. Where ethics mattered little to Marx, Orwell believed very differently. Orwell believed that ethics was paramount in any socialist society, socialism needed to be achieved democratically and that violent revolution was not the answer. In other words; you need to preserve values, which he felt other socialist ideologies did not.


Utopian Socialism is the human experience, touched by reason. ~Sandori~

VP Note: English only or provide a translation. Non-English comments removed.

[Potemkin]

Is that when he LARP being homeless, a very snobbish thing to do?

Orwell wasn't the only one. It was fashionable in the 1930s for politically radicalised members of the British upper classes to try to imitate the lifestyle (as they saw it) of the working class. For example, at one time in the 1930s the poet WH Auden used to go around wearing a cloth cap and rough clothing and would deliberately eat his peas with his knife. He seemed to genuinely believe that he was expressing his political solidarity with the working class by imitating their habits. He didn't seem to understand that by doing this he was actually unconsciously mocking the working class. I would place Orwell's LARP of being a homeless prole in the same category.

[Wolfman]

I was thinking about the comment CC made. I kind of have this feeling that he's still here, reading. And if not, well, this is my general criticism of Socialists, so it works.

No one in the US, Canada or Western Europe can say Orwell was not a Socialists. Why? Because by fighting in a civil war on the side of the Anarchists, he was automatically more of a Socialist then basically any living 'Socialist'. You live comfortably in a Capitalist society, while Socialist Revolutions are being fought. If you cannot put your money where your mouth is, then Orwell is a better Socialist then you, and you have no right to criticize him.

[Lightman]

Orwell wasn't the only one. It was fashionable in the 1930s for politically radicalised members of the British upper classes to try to imitate the lifestyle (as they saw it) of the working class. For example, at one time in the 1930s the poet WH Auden used to go around wearing a cloth cap and rough clothing and would deliberately eat his peas with his knife. He seemed to genuinely believe that he was expressing his political solidarity with the working class by imitating their habits. He didn't seem to understand that by doing this he was actually unconsciously mocking the working class. I would place Orwell's LARP of being a homeless prole in the same category.

This reminds me of a book I read a few years ago, Nickel and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich; I believe she identifies as a democratic socialist, though it's possible she's merely a liberal.

[ihofidel]

Orwell conned the capitalist countries. He professed to be a disillusioned communist to bury his past. But he was working for the Soviet Union clandestinely. I too worked for them. When you are a communist during your youth, KGB would direct you to 'bury your past' and enter MI6 or CIA. These Soviet moles are the most rabid "fascists" and "pro-capitalists" just like the SAMASA youth members in Juan Ponce Enrile's staff office who buried their Maoist past..(me included; they do not know me; this website is secure) and represented the former Defence Minister.