Orwell btfo communism seventy of years ago

>Orwell btfo communism seventy of years ago
>Sociology professors still quote Marx like the bible
Why are social sciences so backwards and retarded

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=kOnIp69r6vg
newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Marx btfo Capitalism so hard it constructed nations.

Orwell beat Communism so hard it constructed basic middle school educations and not much afterwards with a legacy that falls within the boundaries of mostly on not coming true and being terribly dated

All communist nations were terrible places that only exist today because of foreign aid

Marx killed millions of people

Also it was a warning not a prophecy if it wasn't written it could have happened

Any excuse to trot this meme out again.
youtube.com/watch?v=kOnIp69r6vg

>All communist nations were terrible places that only exist today because of foreign aid

No they exist only on foreign aid because we established the dictatorships that replaced the dictatorships

See: Uzbekistan

Listen friend, you have a great deal of nerve coming here and throwing around words like "Uzbekistan". What is that supposed to mean anyway? If you think you impress anyone here with such $2 words, you are egregiously mistaken. We speak plainly here and tell simple truths. You can't obfuscate such truths by hiding behind big, difficult words, no matter how eclectic your choices might be. The truth is the truth no matter how you say it, and it's as simple as that you trogdolyte!

I love your posts

Orwell was a socialist; the book was a critique of Stalinism, not communism you normie.

> "I have got to struggle against that, just as I have got to struggle against castor oil, rubber truncheons and concentration camps. And the only regime which, in the long run, will dare to permit freedom of speech is a Socialist regime. If Fascism triumphs I am finished as a writer—that is to say, finished in my only effective capacity. That of itself would be a sufficient reason for joining a Socialist party.


> "I have put the personal aspect first, but obviously it is not the only one.

> "It is not possible for any thinking person to live in such a society as our own without wanting to change it. For perhaps ten years past I have had some grasp of the real nature of capitalist society. I have seen British imperialism at work in Burma, and I have seen something of the effects of poverty and unemployment in Britain. In so far as I have struggle against the system, it has been mainly by writing books which I hoped would influence the reading public. I shall continue to do that, of course, but at a moment like the present writing books is not enough. The tempo of events is quickening; the dangers which once seemed a generation distant are staring us in the face. One has got to be actively a Socialist, not merely sympathetic to Socialism, or one plays into the hands of our always-active enemies."

Orwell took Marx seriously, you pleb. 1984 is about totalitarianism, not communism.

>normie
And the communism sympathizer just happens to be a frogposting NEET. What a surprise, the WordPress academic who despises labor, integrity, and open markets is an adult child who wants the government to take care of him. You'll be the first sent to the gulag, twig arm Arnold.

Of course he took him seriously, Marx was hell bent on destroying Western civilization, and if it wasn't for Orwell and George Kennan he would have gotten away with it.

Orwell was a classical lib before spain and after he changed his views he never really did anything to advocate for his views

...and 1984 was written many years following Catalonia. My point still stands that the book was a critique of Stalinism, not communism.

Marx was the best diagnostician of the pathologies of capitalism who has ever lived.
Just because his prescriptive cures turned out to be a bit shit doesn't mean his critiques weren't spot on.
Especially cause the critiques were what he mostly wrote on.

this is bait right?
>1984 btfo communism

Did he mean animal farm maybe? Either way I'm upset at this motherfucker

Ever think about how many gorillion died because of Jacobinism? Those damn French republicans just want free stuff

No.

You would think on a literature board people would have the close reading skills to realize that Orwell was arguing against communism in 1984

nooooope, it was about totalitarianism

Allusions and references to communism doesn't mean that communism is what he made a point against. At the time it was written Stalinism was the most relevant totalitarian ideology, (after having won a war against another).

But with you coming from a (((politics))) board I'm not surprised if that went over your head

Oh, this is bait. I should have known better.

>It's not real socialism
I swear to God these people...

Look at history for a single fucking second.

I'll just leave this here

newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm

>>It's not real socialism
This is true but not the point that I was making.

I was talking about you misunderstanding 1984

A claim is not an argument

Orwell's personal belief in Utopian anti-authoritarian socialism isn't that relevant to his critiques of the authoritarian left, and it's almost always the authoritarian left and it's cringe worthy lackeys in the West that Orwell had in his sights.

He was a critical essayist not a theorist. His criticism (and fear) is relevant for anyone opposing the authoritarian left in any form.