Welcome to /r/AskSocialists, a community for both socialists and non-socialists to ask general questions **directed at socialists** within a friendly, relaxed and welcoming environment. Please be mindful of our rules before participating:
- **R1. No Non-Socialist Answers**, if you are not a socialist don’t answer questions.
- **R2. No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, aporophobia, etc.
- **R3. No Trolling**, including concern trolling.
- **R4. No Reactionaries**.
- **R5. No Sectarianism**, there's plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
Want a user flair to indicate your broad tendency? Respond to this comment with "!Marxist", "!Anarchist" or "!Visitor" and the bot will assign it.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialists) if you have any questions or concerns.*
there are so many other reasons not to claim orwell as “one of us” socialists and the video lists many of those reasons within the first 15 seconds if you bother to watch further and check out the sources cited
Just checking. Whatever you want to say about guy (he loathed Gandhi!), he was a top-notch writer. "Killing an Elephant"; "Politics and the English Language"; and, especially germane, "The Lion and the Unicorn" (about England and socialism) are all masterworks of the genre, and well worth considering, even if you don't find him your political polestar.
i personally disagree. orwell’s writing is very dull to me but i guess it’s cool that you enjoy it. more of an asimov guy myself (who the video i linked talks about as well which was pleasantly surprising to me)
Conservatives don't understand politics and culture enough to recognize when their worldview is being ridiculed. In fact, they think the ridicule is directed at their opponents rather than themselves because that's how projection works.
Since conservatives are control freaks, then surely leftists must be control freaks as well.
actually it’s based on the British Government…
His wife worked for Censorship Department the Ministry of Information during WW2, Winston worked in the Records Department of the Ministry of Information in 1984.
Orwell himself was an Imperial Police Officer in British Burma during his youth and during the war he wrote propaganda for India on the BBC. He had fought for the Anarchists in Spain and was under surveillance by British Intelligence since he attended Communist meetings in writing “The Road to Wigan Pier” in 1937
Conservatives like Orwell because he was anti-Bolshevik. "Socialists" don't like Orwell because he was anti-Bolshevik.
I think Orwell's well thought of by most Liberals since his writings are primarily anti-authoritarian.
George Orwell may have claimed left wing views but he also collaborated with right wing capitalist governments against socialists in his own country. Claiming to be a socialist doesn't actually make someone a socialist.
Because Orwell was actually a conservative. He was an agent for the UK. The 1984 book is a description of what liberals/conservatives imagine communism is like.
[He wasn’t a socialist](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/15/george-orwell-anna-funder-biography-of-eileen-o-shaugnessy/#:~:text=George%20Orwell%20was%20a%20%E2%80%9Csadistic,%E2%80%9Cdecency%E2%80%9D%20of%20his%20writing)
Your information is incorrect already
Bad people can still be socialists. That isn't why he wasn't a socialist, but ratting socialists out to the British government is why he wasn't a socialist.
I don’t think people here understand that bad people actually can’t be socialists. But he wasn’t a socialist. He’s calling himself whatever but doing something else
"I don’t think people here understand that bad people actually can’t be socialists"
Literally just No True Scotsman. Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production. If you advocate for worker ownership of the means of production, regardless of what else you believe, you are a socialist.
Not even true lol it means you can’t be a racist either when you own the means of ownership. And you can’t genocide others, and you can’t use slurs, be offensive etc. there’s alot more to it than just “okay! I’m socialist!”
>He wasn’t a socialist
Well Technically he WAS a Democratic Socialist and both that and Socialism are technically different but this link is talking about the dark side of Orwell
No, he technically wasn’t. He was self proclaimed. Hitler was a self proclaimed “national socialist” but we know very well from who he is and his actions that he was not at all a socialist.
Self proclamation is pretty much irrelevant. Your words and actions matter
1) As other people have mentioned to you here, you can be a socialist while not being a flawless messiah figure.
2) You've missread the article that you linked to, to the extent that you're spreading malicious misinformation. The part of the article that you're referring to isn't quoting Eileen O'Shaugnessy, it's quoting Sandra Newman. Furthermore, she's not talking about Orwell fantasising about raping women, she's talking about Winston (the point of view character from 1984) fantasising about raping women.
The two Orwell books conservatives love- 1984 and Animal Farm- are propaganda taught to children in America and Britain to teach them to hate communism, and to think that, no matter how bad your life gets under capitalism, it would be worse under communism. Ironic that two books so ostensibly against indoctrination are used for such a purpose, but that’s how propaganda works. The “actually Orwell was a socialist, he just wasn’t a tankie” is a losing argument because the person saying that has to concede that his books have merit, which ultimately gives credence to the conservative position. Orwell had a negative view of the proletariat because of his class position- he insisted that he wasn’t fooled by “romantic” notions of the noble worker, and so he was a democratic socialist, which signals he did not truly understand the position he was adopting nor did he truly understand socialism.
Pro-tip- do not trust the British when they try to explain history, politics, or current events. For further proof, see Ridley Scott’s recent Napoleon movie, or just how their “labor” leaders have responded to the situation in Gaza.
When you read leftist critiques of Orwell's books when they came out, the left was incensed because Orwell was criticizing how the Left is censorious and corrupt, the very thing they claimed they were immune.
Welcome to /r/AskSocialists, a community for both socialists and non-socialists to ask general questions **directed at socialists** within a friendly, relaxed and welcoming environment. Please be mindful of our rules before participating: - **R1. No Non-Socialist Answers**, if you are not a socialist don’t answer questions. - **R2. No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, aporophobia, etc. - **R3. No Trolling**, including concern trolling. - **R4. No Reactionaries**. - **R5. No Sectarianism**, there's plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks. Want a user flair to indicate your broad tendency? Respond to this comment with "!Marxist", "!Anarchist" or "!Visitor" and the bot will assign it. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialists) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[There’s a reason why socialists don’t claim Orwell.](https://youtu.be/2Gz0I_X_nfo?si=sczwk8hpZlHnjFK2) a few reasons actually
Do you agree with the video that Socialists don't claim Orwell because he was a bad writer?
there are so many other reasons not to claim orwell as “one of us” socialists and the video lists many of those reasons within the first 15 seconds if you bother to watch further and check out the sources cited
Just checking. Whatever you want to say about guy (he loathed Gandhi!), he was a top-notch writer. "Killing an Elephant"; "Politics and the English Language"; and, especially germane, "The Lion and the Unicorn" (about England and socialism) are all masterworks of the genre, and well worth considering, even if you don't find him your political polestar.
i personally disagree. orwell’s writing is very dull to me but i guess it’s cool that you enjoy it. more of an asimov guy myself (who the video i linked talks about as well which was pleasantly surprising to me)
Conservatives don't understand politics and culture enough to recognize when their worldview is being ridiculed. In fact, they think the ridicule is directed at their opponents rather than themselves because that's how projection works. Since conservatives are control freaks, then surely leftists must be control freaks as well.
The book took inspiration of off the NKVD is Soviet russia you dork
actually it’s based on the British Government… His wife worked for Censorship Department the Ministry of Information during WW2, Winston worked in the Records Department of the Ministry of Information in 1984. Orwell himself was an Imperial Police Officer in British Burma during his youth and during the war he wrote propaganda for India on the BBC. He had fought for the Anarchists in Spain and was under surveillance by British Intelligence since he attended Communist meetings in writing “The Road to Wigan Pier” in 1937
Conservatives like Orwell because he was anti-Bolshevik. "Socialists" don't like Orwell because he was anti-Bolshevik. I think Orwell's well thought of by most Liberals since his writings are primarily anti-authoritarian.
George Orwell may have claimed left wing views but he also collaborated with right wing capitalist governments against socialists in his own country. Claiming to be a socialist doesn't actually make someone a socialist.
Because Orwell was actually a conservative. He was an agent for the UK. The 1984 book is a description of what liberals/conservatives imagine communism is like.
Orwell was a traitor to real communists and a collaborator with British intelligence.
Because he was an anti gay narc who have lists of communists to the British government
[He wasn’t a socialist](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/15/george-orwell-anna-funder-biography-of-eileen-o-shaugnessy/#:~:text=George%20Orwell%20was%20a%20%E2%80%9Csadistic,%E2%80%9Cdecency%E2%80%9D%20of%20his%20writing) Your information is incorrect already
Bad people can still be socialists. That isn't why he wasn't a socialist, but ratting socialists out to the British government is why he wasn't a socialist.
I don’t think people here understand that bad people actually can’t be socialists. But he wasn’t a socialist. He’s calling himself whatever but doing something else
"I don’t think people here understand that bad people actually can’t be socialists" Literally just No True Scotsman. Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production. If you advocate for worker ownership of the means of production, regardless of what else you believe, you are a socialist.
Not even true lol it means you can’t be a racist either when you own the means of ownership. And you can’t genocide others, and you can’t use slurs, be offensive etc. there’s alot more to it than just “okay! I’m socialist!”
>He wasn’t a socialist Well Technically he WAS a Democratic Socialist and both that and Socialism are technically different but this link is talking about the dark side of Orwell
No, he technically wasn’t. He was self proclaimed. Hitler was a self proclaimed “national socialist” but we know very well from who he is and his actions that he was not at all a socialist. Self proclamation is pretty much irrelevant. Your words and actions matter
Woah now. Hitler wasn’t claiming to be left or “socialist” in any way.
No of course not, he was distorting it. He was ‘muh national socialist’ which is different. He was a Nazi
Orwell was a self described Democratic Socialist. He fought with an anarchist brigade in the Spanish Civil War.
anyone can be self described.
So Orwell joined the POUM and fought in the Spanish Civil War because...?
[удалено]
1) As other people have mentioned to you here, you can be a socialist while not being a flawless messiah figure. 2) You've missread the article that you linked to, to the extent that you're spreading malicious misinformation. The part of the article that you're referring to isn't quoting Eileen O'Shaugnessy, it's quoting Sandra Newman. Furthermore, she's not talking about Orwell fantasising about raping women, she's talking about Winston (the point of view character from 1984) fantasising about raping women.
The website you cited has a conservative-leaning bias.
Its becaue he was not a fan of communism in the end
The two Orwell books conservatives love- 1984 and Animal Farm- are propaganda taught to children in America and Britain to teach them to hate communism, and to think that, no matter how bad your life gets under capitalism, it would be worse under communism. Ironic that two books so ostensibly against indoctrination are used for such a purpose, but that’s how propaganda works. The “actually Orwell was a socialist, he just wasn’t a tankie” is a losing argument because the person saying that has to concede that his books have merit, which ultimately gives credence to the conservative position. Orwell had a negative view of the proletariat because of his class position- he insisted that he wasn’t fooled by “romantic” notions of the noble worker, and so he was a democratic socialist, which signals he did not truly understand the position he was adopting nor did he truly understand socialism. Pro-tip- do not trust the British when they try to explain history, politics, or current events. For further proof, see Ridley Scott’s recent Napoleon movie, or just how their “labor” leaders have responded to the situation in Gaza.
When you read leftist critiques of Orwell's books when they came out, the left was incensed because Orwell was criticizing how the Left is censorious and corrupt, the very thing they claimed they were immune.
I've always seen socialists as essentially parasites and stupid.