Was George Orwell racist?

[727Goon]

One of my favorite historical leftists is George Orwell, I like his writing as well as his stance against totalitarianism from a socialist perspective, and a lot of his comments about the left in general are wise and funny. However, I'm suspicious of him because there werent too many white people from that time period who werent racist. I know he was an anti-imperialist and against anti-semetism but did he ever talk about other forms of racism? Did he have any racial prejuidice and is there any documentation of that?

[khad]

George Orwell was an upper class Englishman of his age, with all the prejudices of an imperialist upbringing.

This is a good Irish perspective on that:

http://exiledonline.com/big-brothers-george-orwell-and-christopher-hitchens-exposed/



I’ll start with a classic Orwell essay, “Shooting an Elephant.” It’s a vivid, simple story about how the young Orwell was forced by the pressure of an expectant Burmese crowd to shoot a harmless elephant. Orwell’s surface thesis, laid out in the concluding paragraphs, is that Imperialism turns the Imperialist into a puppet in the hands of the natives. Here’s the first paragraph:

In Moulmein, in lower Burma, I was hated by large numbers of people-the only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen to me. I was sub-divisional police officer of the town, and in an aimless, petty kind of way anti-European feeling was very bitter. No one had the guts to raise a riot, but if a European woman went through the bazaars alone somebody would probably spit betel juice over her dress. As a police officer I was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe to do so. When a nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way, the crowd yelled with hideous laughter. This happened more than once. In the end the sneering yellow faces of young men that met me everywhere, the insults hooted after me when I was at a safe distance, got badly on my nerves. The young Buddhist priests were the worst of all. There were several thousands of them in the town and none of them seemed to have anything to do except stand on street corners and jeer at Europeans.

After reading the mild civic homilies of the Norton, this raw hate entranced me. Orwell talked like Ted Hughes’ hawk would after a few brandies: no mercy on the underdog Burmese, no “understanding” about their motives. And the suave way he shrugs off his notoriety with a joke-”the only time in my life I have been important enough for this to happen to me”-no young literary man could resist this persona; this is who you want to be.

Yet:I did worry about that description of the Burmese. I mean, it was sort of racist. But reading on, I saw it was just part of a strategy, a double twist where first Orwell zaps you with his anti-Burmese descriptions, then balances them with a paragraph about his loathing for “the Empire [he] served.” It was such a risky, raw strategy I felt proud to have spotted it. Moving up through the ranks, I taught “Shooting an Elephant” for years as a classic of rhetorical structure.

Now I think I read it wrong, rejecting the “obvious” in favor of cooptation by the author. In fact, I was exactly the sort of sucker Orwell had in mind, a half-bright provincial trained to miss the obvious and cleave unto the far-fetched. By teasing this sort of reader with that shock intro, then reassuring him (”Don’t worry, I’m anti-Imperialist”), Orwell got me to ignore the biggest and most important feature of the essay, Orwell’s sheer simple hate for the Burmese. It stuns me to realize that I helped a generation of students overcome their simple, correct instinct (some poor honest kid would always ask, “Isn’t this:kinda racist?” and be talked into seeing the Emperor’s glorious wardrobe by me). Ah, if only somebody rewarded grad students for seeing the obvious, instead of the febrile and unlikely.

Along with the race hatred, there’s another obvious feature of this intro: the way it dramatizes Orwell himself, a sensitive young white man alone in a crowd of evil aliens. That habit of dramatizing himself never changes. It’s a constant in Orwell’s work; the only difference is that the scene shifts from Burma to Europe, and the hostile crowd consists of fellow intellectuals trying to lure him into one of the orthodoxies they have cravenly embraced.

In “Shooting an Elephant,” his isolation is literal; no other Englishmen seem to be on duty in Moulmein on the day the elephant gets loose. Alone, Orwell succumbs to the crowd’s pressure and shoots the elephant. But he is the real victim, forced to do violence to his conscience.

The argument is contagion. The Burmese are so vile that they infect the hero; he and his comrades should give up Burma simply to avoid infection. Of course, the story hints that they don’t have a choice; the Empire is doomed anyway. In fact, the Empire is an object of pity: “I did not even know [as a young man in Burma] that the British Empire is dying, still less did I know that it is a great deal better than the younger empires that are going to supplant it.”

The Burmese are entirely devoid of sympathy; they’re the winners, recipients of free elephant steaks and spectators at a pachyderm murder free of charge. Occupation seems to be a lark for them, a chance to indulge their caddish habit of cheating at sport.

If you’ve read anything about the British conquest of Burma, you’ll have a different reaction: you’ll wonder why Orwell’s Burmese opponents didn’t jump him at midfield and gouge his eyes out. God knows, they had every right. Britain started swallowing Burma bit by bit in the early 19th century. The Raj would have preferred to take the entire country in one blow, but the Burmese managed to avoid war until 1885, when the Brits got impatient and sacked the Burmese capital, burned the palace, booted the royal family out and celebrated with an orgy of tabloid headlines and cartoons showing the Burmese as big-eyed, stupid frogs bayoneted by Tommies.

Orwell never dramatizes a moment like that in any of his works. I’m inclined to choose the dull, obvious explanation for this odd silence: the man was a reactionary, Imperialist racist.

Once you’ve admitted that possibility in reading Orwell, the evidence is everywhere. And the passages which are supposed to “balance” the anti-Burmese vitriol with anti-Imperial details look very weak-intentionally weak, perfunctory. Here’s Orwell’s list of the wrongs of empire from “Shooting an Elephant”: “:convicts huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey, cowed faces of the long-term convicts, the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos:” That’s the best he could do? Where are the actual Imperialists, George? All you’ve got here is a bunch of Burmese wretches whose crime seems to be making your younger self feel bad.

Apparently they’re not fit to have a master like you.

In fact, Orwell’s thesis, which I once found so clever, is a cliche of Imperialist apologists. I developed an eye for these the hard way; they kept coming up whenever the Irish were mentioned in my favorite British books. I’d be reading along, happy little Anglophile that I was, and suddenly my favorite authors would spew hatred for us, the Irish and the Catholics. It not only hurt, it puzzled me for years. They were the winners, the ones who did the massacres; isn’t it the victims who are supposed to be angry?

Years later I heard a joke that explained it concisely. An Irishman has been bayoneted by a British soldier, and as the Mick dies slowly in a ditch the Brit kicks him over and over, cursing him and wishing him a painful, slow death. With his last breath the Irishman asks, “Why are you so angry at us?” The Brit leans down, whispers, “You swine, we will NEVER forgive you for what we’ve done to you.”

[727Goon]

I'll have to read the story for myself and draw my own conclusion. It seems strange to me that he would reject anti-semitism, arguably the most prevalent form of racism in Europe at the time but support other forms of racism.

[727Goon]

Also if he was simply a product of his upbringing why did he reject anti semitism? I will read the Elephant essay but that was written before Orwell was a socialist so I'll take it with a grain of salt. I mean Che was racist as fuck before he became a revolutionary as well.

[khad]

Also if he was simply a product of his upbringing why did he reject anti semitism?
I suppose you missed his little list of suspected communists with suspected Jews (like Charlie Chaplin, who wasn't Jewish, btw) specifically marked.

http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/articles/col-nyrblist.htm


One aspect of the notebook that shocks our contemporary sensibility is his ethnic labeling of people, especially the eight variations of "Jewish?" (Charlie Chaplin), "Polish Jew," "English Jew," or "Jewess." Orwell's entire life was a struggle to overcome the prejudices of his class and generation; here was one he never fully overcame.

What remains most unsettling about the list he actually sent is the way in which a writer whose name is now a synonym for political independence and journalistic honesty is drawn into collaboration with a bureaucratic department of propaganda, however marginal the collaboration, "white" the propaganda, and good the cause. In the files of the IRD, you find the kind of bureaucratic language that we now habitually describe as Orwellian or Kafkaesque. Next to the very personal handwritten letter from Orwell ("Dear Celia...with love, George") in FO 1110/189 is a typewritten communication from the British embassy in Moscow: "Dear Department," it begins, and is signed, surreally, "yours ever, Chancery."

Yet perhaps we should not be surprised, for Orwell knew this kind of world from inside, and drew on it for his "awful book." While 1984 was a warning against totalitarianism of both the Nazi (that is, National Socialist) and communist (that is, Soviet Socialist) kind—hence "Ingsoc"—much of the physical detail was derived from his experience of wartime London, working in the BBC, itself a considerable British bureaucracy in close touch with the Ministry of Information and home to the original Room 101.

[727Goon]

Got a source for that?

[khad]

Got a source for that?
I linked you the article, but whatever. :rolleyes:

[727Goon]

After you went back and edited it, sure. I could be wrong but it sounds like he included the ethnicity of everyone and wasnt just singling out the Jews. I'm sure Stalinists are butthurt about him snitching on them but frankly I give a fuck about a tankie. The Stalinists probably killed one too many of his comrades in the Spanish Civil War. I need to look into the elephant essay more and I'll do that tomorrow after work and get back to you.

[khad]

After you went back and edited it, sure. I could be wrong but it sounds like he included the ethnicity of everyone and wasnt just singling out the Jews. I'm sure Stalinists are butthurt about him snitching on them but frankly I give a fuck about a tankie. The Stalinists probably killed one too many of his comrades in the Spanish Civil War. I need to look into the elephant essay more and I'll do that tomorrow after work and get back to you.
He labeled Charlie Chaplin, a man without a drop of Jewish blood in him, a Jew. Say what you will, but when you start inventing Jews as part of some conspiracy, that sets off alarm bells.

And I'm sure Charlie Chaplin and Paul Robeson were such horrible fascists who were responsible for traumatizing Orwell in Spain.

You don't need to worry about getting back to me because you're quite mistaken in believing that your opinion actually matters. I post for the edification of the public, and you're just one of many.

[727Goon]

He fucked up in labeling Charlie Chaplin and whoever else stalinists. I'm guessing it was just a mistake about his ethnicity as well, Chaplin sounds kind of jewish. And he didnt say shit about a Jewish conspiracy he just put down their ethnicity or nationality, or at least thats what your source said. Good to know that you're a douche and all I figured we were having a discussion. If I wasnt so tired right now I'd try and say something about ya mammy being just one of many for me but its whatever.

[Nolan]

How does Chaplin sound Jewish?

[727Goon]

Eh I dont know I dont know shit about Jewish people to be honest maybe its just my ignorance. I thought the dude was Jewish too until now though.

[Nolan]

And it's not like there are such things as "Jewish" names anyway. Unless you're talking about Hebrew names like Isaac, etc. And they aren't limited to Jews.

[PhoenixAsh]

His half brother and his walk were Jewish. He wasn´t.


He was however suspected by the Committee for un American activities for being a communist and was under constant surveillance by the FBI...these are the reasons he left the US for Switserland.

[727Goon]

And it's not like there are such things as "Jewish" names anyway. Unless you're talking about Hebrew names like Isaac, etc. And they aren't limited to Jews.

Alright my bad.

[Crux]

He fucked up in labeling Charlie Chaplin.
I am pretty sure Chaplin was in fact sympathetic towards the Soviet Union.

[727Goon]

Well there you go I guess. I mean I dont see the big deal of the whole list shit really. Obviously if you're a stalinist you can go and be pissed about it, but its not like he turned on his own. Its not really surprising he would snitch on Stalinists like that since he had been a big opponent of authoritarianism ever since he became a socialist. The Soviet Union cracked down on the non soviet left much harder than Britain did. For all the political oppression going on in Britain anarchists and trots werent being sent to the gulags. Since the Soviet Union was more authoritarian than Britain it would have also oppressed a true workers movement more brutally, so Orwell was right to fear soviet influence in Britain.

[Amphictyonis]

As was Jack London to an extent but the times then (no excuse as John Brown was around way before them) racism was a different stronger beast. Baby/bath water? Bakunin wasn't very fond of the Jews but I still agree with much of what he said regarding human freedom.


KBQoYlXWZyc

There's a bar in Jack London square (Oakland) where he use to write and drink- they actually brought one of his cabins there next to it, the bar is strange because it;s tilted as if it's about to fall into the bay which is right underneath it. I like that bar for the historical value racist or not. I like much of his works as well. The Iron Heel was good.

On the other hand there is a comment in that youtube comment section for the video thats telling-



The left was truly racist then. Today the left or Lomosine liberals are not as vocal with their racism. They simply pimp minorities for political gain.


mellowtribe (http://www.youtube.com/user/mellowtribe) 1 year ago

Orwell sorta ripped off The Iron Heel in 1984.

[Magón]

I don't think Orwell was anymore racist than anyone else during his time. I mean, there have been even more notable Communist/Socialists in history than him, that were racist just the same.

[synthesis]

And I'm sure Charlie Chaplin and Paul Robeson were such horrible fascists who were responsible for traumatizing Orwell in Spain.

Sorry, I've been doing the Ctrl-F on Paul Robeson and can't find any mention of him. Where does he come into the picture here?

[RedHal]

Well there you go I guess. I mean I dont see the big deal of the whole list shit really. Obviously if you're a stalinist you can go and be pissed about it, but its not like he turned on his own. Its not really surprising he would snitch on Stalinists like that since he had been a big opponent of authoritarianism ever since he became a socialist. The Soviet Union cracked down on the non soviet left much harder than Britain did. For all the political oppression going on in Britain anarchists and trots werent being sent to the gulags. Since the Soviet Union was more authoritarian than Britain it would have also oppressed a true workers movement more brutally, so Orwell was right to fear soviet influence in Britain.

So anarchists have no problem with ppl voluntarily ratting to the capitalist state, and some anarchists are cheering imperialists "humanitarian interventions. Just as I suspected, anarchism is full of liberal scum.

[khad]

Sorry, I've been doing the Ctrl-F on Paul Robeson and can't find any mention of him. Where does he come into the picture here?

If you cared that much you could have just googled for entries on Orwell's list.


CHAPLIN, Charles (Anglo-American). (Jewish?). JOBS Films

ROBESON, Paul (US Negro). JOBS Actor, Singer. REMARKS ?? (People's Convention.) Very anti-white. Wallace supporter. Henry Wallace, US Vice-President, 1941-45.

WALLACE, Henry. JOBS USA Previously vice-president. Editor in Chief New Republic. Many books (on farming etc.) Unofficial connection with PCA Progressive Citizens of America. REMARKS Probably no definite organisational connection. Very dishonest. (ie intellectually).

[synthesis]

Thanks, I tried Googling it and nothing came up right away.

[daleckian]

I don't think Orwell was anymore racist than anyone else during his time. I mean, there have been even more notable Communist/Socialists in history than him, that were racist just the same.

This is the exact same excuse American nationalists use to justify Thomas Jefferson and George Washington being slave-owning rapists...but let me guess, they weren't bad for their time, right?

[Jose Gracchus]

So anarchists have no problem with ppl voluntarily ratting to the capitalist state, and some anarchists are cheering imperialists "humanitarian interventions. Just as I suspected, anarchism is full of liberal scum.

Your man (Uncle Joe) killed more Communists than any other in human history.

[Revolutionair]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4061/4401966458_be9fa773ae.jpg

[Magón]

This is the exact same excuse American nationalists use to justify Thomas Jefferson and George Washington being slave-owning rapists...but let me guess, they weren't bad for their time, right?

Uh, it's usually bad form to try and grab at something that isn't there, so I'll have to say no, regardless.

I was just simply stating a fact, that most notable Communists/Socialists, whatever, were racist during their time in one form or another. Neither you or I can change that fact, so trying to compare what I didn't say, or intend to mean, to what White American Nationalists try justifying Thomas Jefferson or George Washington, is silly.

So unless you think that the Communists/Socialists theorists you look up to, didn't have some sort of racist bend in their life and time, you're kind of deluding yourself from the truth of who they were as a person, outside of a theorist. Orwell was just probably as racist as any other Communist/Socialist for his time, and maybe he wasn't? Either way, it's who he was and I can't change that. Even if I am a full blooded Mexican who enjoys his work, and others who may or may not have been racist and Communist/Socialist, and a person fights against Racism in all it's different forms every day.

We can't change who they were because unlike George Washington, and people like Hitler, racism for Communists/Socialists isn't their main prerogative, it's just part of their social construct.

[Franz Fanonipants]

He was a rat and has become a poster boy for ridiculous liberalism, racist or otherwise.

[Rooster]

Was Marx an anti-Semite for making all of those comments about Jews in Capital?

[TheCommonGood]

I'm not sure you or anyone can prove racism. It's ends up going down to perception essentially. I personally view racism as anyone that specifically views things a majority of the time through a racial lens.

[synthesis]

I'm not sure you or anyone can prove racism. It's ends up going down to perception essentially. I personally view racism as anyone that specifically views things a majority of the time through a racial lens.

It's hard to "prove" racism in the same sense that it's hard to "prove" evolution. Solipsism is a hell of a drug.

[727Goon]

So anarchists have no problem with ppl voluntarily ratting to the capitalist state

Yet I'm sure you'd have no problem with a loyal party member reporting an anarchist or a trot to the NKVD in the soviet union. For you it just depends on whether or not the capitalist state calls itself socialist. Why should I have any sympathy for a Stalinist when I know they would do ten times worse to us given the opportunity?

[727Goon]

He was a rat and has become a poster boy for ridiculous liberalism, racist or otherwise.

It's not like he snitched on his own, he snitched on bourgie supporters of a represive capitalist state. I'm not sure how he's become a poster boy for liberalism unless you count the misinterpretation of Animal Farm and 1984 as liberalism.

[Obs]

Yet I'm sure you'd have no problem with a loyal party member reporting an anarchist or a trot to the NKVD in the soviet union. For you it just depends on whether or not the capitalist state calls itself socialist. Why should I have any sympathy for a Stalinist when I know they would do ten times worse to us given the opportunity?

If those anarchists or trots were working subversively against the Soviet Union itself (as was often the case), then no, I wouldn't have a problem with it at all. How is this comparable again to ratting out revolutionaries in a capitalist country?

[727Goon]

lol you think bourgie stalinists were revolutionaries and that the ussr wasnt capitalist. If thats socialism count me out bro.

[Tim Finnegan]

Was Marx an anti-Semite for making all of those comments about Jews in Capital?
Marx's relationship to Jewishness was... Complex, to say the least. The odour of anti-Semitism can't be denied, but, given his own heritage and his other writings on the subject, it's hard to simply leave it at that, as one might a contemporary entirely lacking in Jewish ancestry.

[No_Leaders]

Although i do like a lot of his earlier work, especially Down and Out in Paris and London, and Homage to Catalonia, i know he did make a list of supposed "communists" I think somewhere along the line he strayed from his socialist views and saw Communism (stalinst totalitarianst variety) as something evil, rightfully so but in doing the list he turned his back on any views he once pushed and fought for i.e. the Spanish Civil War. It's nothing to do with calling someone a Stalinst, what he did was he made a list of people who did nothing to him and basically threw the "communist boggeyman" phrase at them. This is 1949/1950 we're talking about. The West saw communism as something they had to stop and crush, so of course during that time being called a communist would have very negative impact. This isn't an anarchist vs communist issue. This is an issue of someone who was supposedly a fighter of freedom and championed socialist ideology and turning his back on what he stood for and accusing others and turning snitch for the british labour government. That is inexcusable, but then again maybe that's just my opinion.

[Franz Fanonipants]

It's not like he snitched on his own, he snitched on bourgie supporters of a represive capitalist state. I'm not sure how he's become a poster boy for liberalism unless you count the misinterpretation of Animal Farm and 1984 as liberalism.

I disagree with your first point. He snitched. Period. Full fucking stop. If I knew the names and identities of a bunch of crusty, squatter, anarchists the last thing I would consider was ratting on them and they're my ideological opposites. Orwell was a rat, man.

Secondly, a lot of Orwell's work on political writing has "inspired" a lot of the politically insipid people I've encountered.

[Robocommie]

I think it's worth pointing out that George Orwell is a favorite author of many anti-communists to cite in showing how Communism is "doomed" and simply cannot succeed.

Orwell was a leftist in about the same sense that Christopher Hitchens is a leftist.

[727Goon]

I disagree with your first point. He snitched. Period. Full fucking stop. If I knew the names and identities of a bunch of crusty, squatter, anarchists the last thing I would consider was ratting on them and they're my ideological opposites. Orwell was a rat, man.

I mean I dont think its good I just dont really give a fuck. He snitched on people who he thought posed a threat to him. Stalinist forces killed his comrades during the Spanish Civil War and if Stalinism became a powerful force in Britain you know there would be repression against anarchists and trots. If you knew the names and identities of a bunch of anarchists who you thought were gonna run up on your shit, snitching would be understandable even if it wasnt right. My point is he didnt turn on anyone or switch he snitched on people who were his ideological enemies.



Secondly, a lot of Orwell's work on political writing has "inspired" a lot of the politically insipid people I've encountered


Like neo cons and liberals who misinterpret his work or actual socialists?

[727Goon]

I think it's worth pointing out that George Orwell is a favorite author of many anti-communists to cite in showing how Communism is "doomed" and simply cannot succeed.


So? We're talking about the man himself not misinterpretations of his work.



Orwell was a leftist in about the same sense that Christopher Hitchens is a leftist


Except that Hitches supports imperialism and Orwell opposesd it and Orwell wasnt a smug ass elitist prick.

[Tim Finnegan]

I think it's worth pointing out that George Orwell is a favorite author of many anti-communists to cite in showing how Communism is "doomed" and simply cannot succeed drooling idiots who don't know a critique of class society when they see one.
Fixed that for ya! ;)

[Franz Fanonipants]

Except that Hitches supports imperialism and Orwell opposesd it and Orwell wasnt a smug ass elitist prick.

You should probably read that first article that khad linked. It's a polemic, but it's pretty fucking true.

Orwell was a white man of his times. And a pigfucker at large. Sorry.

[Invader Zim]

God, another Orwell thread loaded with bullshit.

In responce to the mindless accusation that Orwell was a 'racist' because he described some individuals as being Jewish (not just Charlie Chaplin, but many different individuals - read Down and Out), but he also described plenty of people by their race or nationality, including fellow English denizens. Does this therefore imply that he also hated the English? Combine this with the fact that Orwell was an outspoken critic of anti-Semitism in a manner which was rare for an individual of his class and upbringing (Eton educated).

As for the charge that Orwell was a snitch, it is utter and complete bullshit. He didn't "snitch" on anybody, the list he produced was not based on some secret knowledge of Stalinist circles and nor was it for the purpose of informing the British security services of potential enemies at large. It was a list of people, based on reading their publically available literary and artistic contributions, that would make them unsuitable writers for the IRD; a branch of the Foreign Office tasked with producing anti-communist propaganda.

So, it wasn't a snitch list, it provided no information that was not already available - just Orwell's opinions - and nor was the list a tool designed for blacklisting individuals from publication in Britain. One also has to consider Orwell's motivations for actually helping Celia Kirwan (the IRD author to whom he authored and provided the list) which requires an examination of their relationship.

[Amphictyonis]

Although i do like a lot of his earlier work, especially Down and Out in Paris and London, and Homage to Catalonia, i know he did make a list of supposed "communists" I think somewhere along the line he strayed from his socialist views and saw Communism (stalinst totalitarianst variety) as something evil, rightfully so but in doing the list he turned his back on any views he once pushed and fought for i.e. the Spanish Civil War. It's nothing to do with calling someone a Stalinst, what he did was he made a list of people who did nothing to him and basically threw the "communist boggeyman" phrase at them. This is 1949/1950 we're talking about. The West saw communism as something they had to stop and crush, so of course during that time being called a communist would have very negative impact. This isn't an anarchist vs communist issue. This is an issue of someone who was supposedly a fighter of freedom and championed socialist ideology and turning his back on what he stood for and accusing others and turning snitch for the british labour government. That is inexcusable, but then again maybe that's just my opinion.

His experience in the Spanish Revolution probably made it easy to "snitch" on Marxists. Many liberal thinkers did end up traveling and fighting in Spain but I think Orwell was schooled by the Anarchists while he was there. According to him he accidentally ended up fighting with the Anarchists.

[Amphictyonis]

You should probably read that first article that khad linked. It's a polemic, but it's pretty fucking true.

Orwell was a white man of his times. And a pigfucker at large. Sorry.

I wouldn't go as far as to call him a pig fucker he did have some good literary contributions:

ehzC937Q9Dc

JPgIqDWBLDQ

[Invader Zim]

His experience in the Spanish Revolution probably made it easy to "snitch" on Marxists. Many liberal thinkers did end up traveling and fighting in Spain but I think Orwell was schooled by the Anarchists while he was there. According to him he accidentally ended up fighting with the Anarchists.

Orwell did not 'snitch' on Marxists, the charge is bullshit as I explained above.

[#FF0000]

I mean I dont think its good I just dont really give a fuck. He snitched on people who he thought posed a threat to him. Stalinist forces killed his comrades during the Spanish Civil War and if Stalinism became a powerful force in Britain you know there would be repression against anarchists and trots. If you knew the names and identities of a bunch of anarchists who you thought were gonna run up on your shit, snitching would be understandable even if it wasnt right. My point is he didnt turn on anyone or switch he snitched on people who were his ideological enemies.

Can we ban this guy as a security threat?

[Amphictyonis]

Orwell did not 'snitch' on Marxists, the charge is bullshit as I explained above.

I'm a Marxist and don't care. How's that? The year is 2011. They're all dead.

[Invader Zim]

I'm a Marxist and don't care. How's that? The year is 2011. They're all dead.

Then why are you posting in this thread and the other one on Orwell for that matter. After all he is dead and his opinions and legacy therefor don't matter, right?

[Amphictyonis]

Then why are you posting in this thread and the other one on Orwell for that matter. After all he is dead and his opinions and legacy therefor don't matter, right?

I was posting to highlight some contributions he made not to slander his character just as I would post in a thread concerning Bakunins antisemitism. Just as I pointed out Jack London's works shouldn't be ignored because his regressive views on race. My point in posting is not to be sectarian but to 'salvage' the people in question. When I say I don't care I meant I don't care if he actually did "snitch" on Marxists. I can be hostile if you want, but, I'm not trying to go down that road. I'd rather save my scorn for capitalists and assholes who cut me off in traffic.

[727Goon]

Can we ban this guy as a security threat?

lol its not a conversation on revleft if someones not calling for a banning or restriction because someone disagrees with them. Go ahead, ban me for my apathy towards one act of maybe snitching that happened like 60 years ago, as long as you ban all the tankies who support the rounding up of anarchists and other socialist opponents in their puppet dictatorships and in countries like Greece where the Stalinist parties are turning in anarchists to the pigs.

[727Goon]

You should probably read that first article that khad linked. It's a polemic, but it's pretty fucking true.

Orwell was a white man of his times. And a pigfucker at large. Sorry.

The article khad linked interpreted a work of fiction like it was a first person nonfiction account of actual events. Orwell was a white man of his times, but so was Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Che. The point is Orwell came to reject anti-semitism which was the most prevalent form of racism at the time, and I wanted to see his position on other forms of racism, not in vague interpretation of works of fiction he wrote before he became a socialist but in actual statements or essays like the one he wrote about antisemitism (http://www.george-orwell.org/AntiSemitism_In_Britian/0.html). I mean obviously as an authoritarian your not going to like the dude, I'm just trying to figure out his position on other forms of racism.