George Orwell was a capitalist stooge

Sorry Trots.

How did he become a neocon before those were even a thing?

Neoconism comes from Trotskyism.

No it doesn't, it comes from the Truman doctrine and Kissinger's realpolitik if anything.

I like Orwell, but I think he does exemplify how centre-left liberals can end up being useful idiots for capitalists and fascists. When he joined the Independent Labour Party and fought for the Republican army, he showed himself to be more authentically leftist than the mainstream labor party of his time. However, he was disappointed by the Soviet Union's refusal to support the Spanish Republicans, and he was disgusted by the rise of authoritarianism, both with fascism and with the Soviets. In reaction to that, he wrote a lot of material that could and is predictably used by the right wing against leftists, demonizing socialism in general. It's kind of sad. Reminds me a lot of Christopher Hitchens' move from Marxism to Neoconservatism.

I'm more sympathetic to Orwell. Hitchens also saw himself as this Orwell-like figure but he was no Orwell. For one, Hitchens was extremely popular while alive, and he was also a rank careerist while Orwell died at age 46 from tuberculosis in a nightmare waking fever dream of thinking the world was about to get nuked to bits. He basically croaked right after finishing Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Hitchens was also always name dropping that he wined and dined with blah blah. Orwell was more honest about himself I think and about the phony bullshit "scribbler" business he was in.

I think that's a good point. Orwell has never struck me as remotely insincere, while Hitchens has always played the high society political game. Hitchens' work always suffered from a complete disconnect with real people, which I think contributed to his bigotry toward the Muslim world. Regardless of how Orwell's work has been manipulated by those on the right, his work is based on his real experiences, mingling with real people.

like Animal Farm? That pathetic masturbation of Trotsky?
Also on the topic of his gallavanting in Spain. He was heavily criticized by other communists because he incited sectarianism for no decent reason other than the fact that he was salty at non-anarchist socialists. He also once caused a disaster; bored at being hidden he shot at rats and gave away the position of his comrades, resulting in an artillery strike on their position that nearly annihilated the group. Good fucking going, causing division in what ought to be a united front and being an incompetent fool who can't curb his own lack of discipline.

Then he goes home being injured and proceeds to write book after scurrilous book about "muh evul authoritarians" and how it was THEIR fault entirely that Spain fell and that socialism wasn't already in action globally.

1984 is the ONLY book of his that has anything decent and that is because it was dedicated to analyzing capitalism.

espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/espana.pdf

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (768x666, 736.03K)

It's also worth noting that none of his works were ever intended as attacks on socialism itself.
He was a non-anarchist socialist fighting with a non-anarchist unit. He was salty at the PSUC for inciting sectarianism as a matter of official policy. They literally did shit like accuse the POUM and CNT-FAI of being a pro-Franco fifth column.

...

orwell was based og antifa

The truth is he never left is job.

Where is the lie?

Attached: FB8B9D27-9675-4AC9-8FC2-6A4BCE653FDE.jpeg (800x450, 39.91K)

Jesus Christ

lol, what?
Orwell wrote works like The Road to Wigan Pier, Down and Out in Paris and London, Homage to Catalonia, and hell, even Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four are all filled with criticisms of capitalism and class society. He also wrote essays like "The Lion and the Unicorn" in which he advocated nothing short of a revolutionary socialist program that would help the UK win the war against fascism. The program he advocated included nationalizing most means of production, limiting personal incomes, etc. and essentially preparing for a post-capitalist society after the war. He stated that capitalism was no longer desireable or even viable in the post-war world.
Proof?
Again, where da proofs billy?
That's not what he wrote, although he did blame the Communists for supporting the idea that the revolution (which began to happen spontaneously) should be curbed in favor of supporting the bourgeois Spanish Republic.

The bottom line is that the smearing of the USSR by did more damage to the image of socialism than any of Stalin's actions.

If he really wanted to support socialism, he would've glorified the USSR to the public so its opinion would sway politicians to be more friendly to the communist bloc. That friendliness, would mean less soviet military expenditure and less militaristic authoritarianism due to a percieved and real threat from the west, and finally increased trade(including eastern bloc product exports which in turn would've made communist countries wealthier and more prestigious.

All idealistic socialists of the cold war, like Sartre, Orwell, Hitchens, etc were useful idiots of Western Propaganda. Their smearing of the USSR made the western empire isolate it, which caused the collapse of the only socialist superpower.

So fuck you, liberals

Attached: 29543121_187120291904670_2380852037340396409_n.jpg (480x480, 60.16K)

...

lmao

Like… that's actually an anti-Marxist position. You're buttmad about a couple of dead writers and blame them without any understanding of the larger forces and class struggles at work

Yes. After WW2 west Euros had an overall positive view of the USSR, which . Influence from liberals like orwell(and of course cornmans ideological self sabotage) ended grassroots support of the USSR, which could've been a nightmare for US imperialism by forcing west euro governments to be friendly to the Soviets and potentially limiting US military presence.

They should have shot him in the face instead of the neck.
Just a big wow and golf clap for everyone here apologizing for him. While we are at it, lets "set Adolf Hitler in context"? Then we can do Mussolini or the Vietnam war!

Stalin oversaw the liquidation of the Old Bolsheviks, the reduction of Communist parties to puppets of the Russian state, the disbandment of the Communist International, and the revision of Marxist theory. While I don't think he was single-handedly responsible for all of that, he certainly was the guy in charge when it happened. Again, it was Stalin that disbanded the 3rd International - not Orwell.
Orwell's works often encountered serious difficulties in finding a publisher willing to let him criticize the USSR, especially since they were war-time allies of Great Britain. He also wasn't very popular among the petit-bourgeois left since he criticized them for being known as cranks and hippies.

Go back to twitter.

Don't forget the complete destruction of Leninist democracy, and the abandonment of both the Spanish and Greek revolutions.

Imagine unironically believing that 1984 is an anti-communist book. Why is it that ☭TANKIE☭s and conservatives both literally believe the same things?

but that doesn't make much sense, because in the context of the book, 1917 directly lead to 1984.

Shouldn't modern socialists love him then?

No it didn’t. 1984 is more about what Orwell felt was the logical conclusion of class society, which he thought included both the capitalist west and the undemocratic socialist east. It’s as much about his own experiences in Britain as it is about Stalinism, if not more so.

get off Zig Forums george, you faggot.

Doesn't that mean that he was a snitch?

Attached: face honk hmm.jpg (892x1080, 156.03K)

Oh also fuck you for implying that ratting out soviet spies is someone a good or acceptable thing.

Lies
Democracy: clogic.eserver.org/grover-furr-stalin-and-struggle-democratic-reform-part-one-0
clogic.eserver.org/grover-furr-stalin-and-struggle-democratic-reform-part-two

Spain: espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/espana.pdf
espressostalinist.com/2014/01/18/lessons-of-peoples-war-in-spain-1936-1939/

"The Soviet Union shared with Mexico the honor of being the only governments that aided the Democratic government of Spain." - Strong, Anna L. The Soviets Expected It. New York, New York: The Dial press, 1941, p. 147

"As week succeeded week, it became obvious that the governments of Britain and France were prepared to give nothing to the Spanish people except advice. Once Stalin was convinced of this, he declared the intention of the Soviet state to give all the help it could to the Spanish loyalists." - Cole, David M. Josef Stalin; Man of Steel. London, New York: Rich & Cowan, 1942, p. 96

"I was ordered to send the planes to Alicante. But that port was blockaded by Franco’s vessels. The master of the ship made for Alicante, but had to turn back to save the ship and cargo. He attempted to head for Barcelona, but was prevented by my agent on board. My shipload of aircraft plied back and forth in the Mediterranean. Franco kept it from Alicante. Stalin kept it from Barcelona.
…The Norwegian ship finally slipped through Franco’s blockade and discharged its planes at Alicante. At the same time, other war supplies, including tanks and artillery, arrived from the Soviet Union. All loyalist Spain saw that tangible aid was actually coming from Russia. The Republicans, Socialists, anarchists, [and Trotskyists], and syndicalists had only theories and ideals to offer. The Communists were producing guns and planes to use against Franco. Soviet prestige soared." - Krivitsky, Walter G. I was Stalin’s Agent, London: H. Hamilton, 1939, p. 103

"And henceforth the Soviet government did all it could to supply the Republicans with everything they needed, from men (through the international brigades who sent some 35,000 men to Spain), to military advisers from its own army, to armaments and food." - Brar, Harpal. Trotskyism or Leninism. 1993, p. 440

"It is common knowledge that soon after the fascist rebellion and the beginning of the civil war in Spain the Soviet Union began to aid and support the Spanish Republic… By the end of 1936 the Soviet Union had supplied Spain with 106 tanks, 60 armored cars, 136 airplanes, more than 60,000 rifles, 174 field guns, 3,727 machine guns, and an unspecified amount of ammunition." - Medvedev, Roy. Let History Judge. New York: Columbia University Press, 1989, p. 724

VYSHINSKY: "In his message to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Spain addressed to Comrade Jose Diaz, Comrade Stalin said: “The toilers of the Soviet Union are merely fulfilling their duty in giving all the assistance they can to the revolutionary masses of Spain. They fully realize that the liberation of Spain from the yoke of the fascist reactionaries is not the private affair of the Spaniards, but the common cause of the whole of advanced and progressive humanity.” - Report of Court Proceedings: The case of the Anti-Soviet Trotskyite Centre–1937, Moscow: Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the U.S.S.R, p. 506

Greece: You speak of Greece as if the USSR had not JUST FINISHED WW2 and was struggling with the Geopolitics of West Europe and more importantly CHINA, which resumed its civil war. Asides from China there was also Korea whose people's republic swiftly came under attack from the USA. Or is Stalin an omnipotent god? Make up your minds.

"Here [Greece] we meet another “left” criticism of Stalin, similar to that made about his role in Spain but even further removed from the facts of the matter. As in the rest of Eastern Europe and the Balkans, the Communist had led and armed the heroic Greek underground and partisan fighters. In 1944 the British sent an expeditionary force commanded by general Scobie to land in Greece, ostensibly to aid in the disarming of the defeated Nazi and Italian troops. As unsuspecting as their comrades in Vietnam and Korea, who were to be likewise “assisted,” the Greek partisans were slaughtered by their British “allies,” who used tanks and planes in all-out offensive, which ended in February 1945 with the establishment of a right-wing dictatorship under a restored monarchy. The British even rearmed and used the defeated Nazi “Security Battalions.” After partially recovering from this treachery, the partisan forces rebuilt their guerrilla apparatus and prepared to resist the combined forces of Greek fascism and Anglo-American imperialism. By late 1948 full-scale civil war raged, with the right-wing forces backed up by the intervention of U.S. planes, artillery, and troops. The Greek resistance had its back broken by another betrayal, not at all by Stalin, but by Tito, who closed the Yugoslav borders to the Soviet military supplies that were already hard put to reach the landlocked popular forces. This was one of the two main reasons why Stalin, together with the Chinese, led the successful fight to have the Yugoslav “Communist” Party officially thrown out of the international Communist movement." - Franklin, Bruce, Ed. The Essential Stalin; Major Theoretical Writings. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1972, p. 34

Also on Greece I thought that you anarchists always complain about how Stalin took over East Europe by force?

"What is surprising is not that so-called “totalitarian” methods of winning friends and influencing people were displayed in these lands during and after their liberation, but that dictatorial devices were not employed more extensively. Moscow had the power (at the risk, to be sure, of a rupture with the Atlantic Powers) to give unqualified support to Communist groups and to Sovietize this whole vast region. With judicious moderation, it refrained from doing so. In no case did its program precipitate civil war within the lands freed by the Red Army, despite widespread resentment at requisitions by Soviet troops who lived off the land." - Schuman, Frederick L. Soviet Politics. New York: A.A. Knopf, 1946, p. 526