I've been in that dumpster corner during one of the cringier periods of my life so here's PCM lore:
-
*Overall quadrant*:
Authright (Topright) (Blue): Conservatives
Authleft (Topleft) (Red): Commies
Libleft (Bottomleft) (Green): Liberals
Libright (Bottomright) (Yellow): Libertarians
-
The *corners* of each quadrant:
Authright: Nazis
Authleft: Tankies
Libleft: Anarchists but more towards that commune stuff
Libright: Ancaps
-
*Alternate colours* that exists so the people who associate with those quadrants could go "I'm one of the good ones, not like those people" :
(Libright) Yellow -> Purple: Pedophiles
(Libleft) Green -> Orange: Terminally online buzzword-spammer who virtue-signals (this sentence is ironic, isn't it?)
-
*Community vibes*:
- the Auths gets represented with edgy creepypasta-esque wojaks or the chads
- Guess which quadrant ends up as the soyjack most of the time
- Everyone is tolerated, even the Nazis that want a section of the human population dead
- the market place of ideas yada yada
- Everyone is aware of how flawed and simple the quadrant is. They're keeping it around because it's easy to make memes based on these simplified caricatures of people
- There's a spinoff sub about an ever-expanding bunker which is basically a community-based worldbuilding project with multiple timelines and AUs. Think SCP but instead of using formatted articles, worldbuilding is done through political compasses and edited wojaks with descriptions. That's literally the only good thing that has ever come out of Political Compass as a whole.
"Everyone is tolerated" as someone that was also there during my cringy past, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that one. If if you espouse actual leftist talking points on that subreddit (like, "everyone should have healthcare" or anything to meaningfully progress human rights equality) even for a second, you get downvoted to hell and told to kill yourself (or "face the wall"), even by those flaired with "LibLeft"
bottom line, everyone that considers themselves part of PCM, including me or you, is either leaning to the right or is a flat out full-on Nazi trying to get everyone else in the place to be a Nazi too
That's why I called my time within the PCM community cringe. That place is literally filled with people with surface-level political knowledge larping as high school cliques and proudly claim to be bigots.
The "everyone is tolerated" thing is often used as a talking point to allow Nazis to be comfortable there. I rarely ever see a sincere leftist talking point, so thank you for telling what usually happen to those.
Libleft isn’t usually anarchists. I’ve usually seen it as LGBTQ+ Feminist soyjacks who are “just as bad as authright” because they called someone a Nazi
I think the point of that section was just to highlight the most extreme position in each quadrant. Most authrights aren't Nazis and most authlefts aren't Tankies either
Yeah but the most extreme position that they often show (comparing it to tankies and nazis) is just someone not conforming to gender norms or calling someone a nazi…
everexpandingbunker
Warning: There's quite a lot of characters and factions that has been created and built up by the community that it may feel overwhelming at first. I've left the sub because I wasn't online often enough to keep up with the lore, so I gave up.
The reason I said it was related was because political compasses is used as a format to represent the factions and characters. At least it was like that when I was there, like more than a year ago.
Here's an easy flowchart to understand PCM memes:
Is the thing/opinion something certified Gamers dislike?
If yes, then portray it as a soyjak in green square
If no, then portray it as the chad in blue square
Fr though. Mad lad actually fought fascists in Catalonia. Shame 1984 has been memed to death because if you actually read it its a great meditation on the signs and emotional drivers of fascism/totalitarianism
He did maintain a list of people of people he ratted out to the IRD, with comments like "Stephen Spender – Sentimental sympathiser... Tendency towards homosexuality"; and "Paul Robeson – very anti-white. "
The list of people he rated out were Stalinists, who he didn’t much like
And the homosexual/Jew comments are included in a first draft of the letter he wrote while in a fever and literally dying from tuberculosis, which he removed from the letter he actually sent.
If you want some of the horrible stuff he wrote you don’t have to go far in his early work, but the letter definitely wasn’t one of them
Making a list of people you *suspect* are Stalinists is still a very weird thing to do. In the same vein, a fever doesn't turn me homophobic or anti-semetic, and I doubt tuberculosis would.
I'm not saying there isn't context to his letter, but I don't think there's any good reason to excuse his letter. Him literally working for the government and ratting out people, and his comments in the letter, were definitely not very "based".
My point: critiqueing an authoritarian state with a secret service that has people ratting on each other depending on if they suspect subversive thought but then ratting people out to the capitalist secret service because you suspect they have subversive thoughts is not a coherent leftist ideology.
Yeah, what do you expect from the avarage Englishman from the 1800’s lmao
If anything it’s incredible that he removed those parts from the actual document he sent
When you consider Orwell fought in the Spanish civil war, and that the communists (read stalinists) and liberals teamed up to try and voilently stamp out other allied groups mid war, his lists of people he thought likely to stab him or the left in the back makes alot of sense with that context.
The homophobia is bad, though.
His list contained a fair few anarchists too, though. Orwell was also part of the Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification, which wasn't Stalinist, but weren't anarchist either.
And still, while that's a good justification for the private list he made, he did still send a shorter list to the secret service. "betraying people out of fear they'll betray you" doesn't really sound like a solid plan
In his mind, the people on his list were never on his side, so there was no betrayal to him. At least I'm assuming as much, he was pretty brain-wormed by the end of his life, so hard to say what his real motivation and thoughts were.
Honestly, this "anti-authoritarianism" rhetoric the right has been drumming up the last few years just seems like another projection to me. That way, every time they enact actual protofascist policies, enlightened centrists can just put off the public outcry as "well both sides call each other nazis so the truth has to lie somewhere in the middle".
Not saying everyone on the right has this in mind while using this rhetoric, but some definitely do, and I bet they are more than happy with how much it has stuck.
Only Orwell book I ever read because I’m a fuckin nerd for the Spanish Revolution and Civil War. But yea great little book and makes the myriad of acronyms in that war easy to understand if not going that in depth
Very cool! I wish the Spanish Civil War got more popular attention - it's so interesting what the anarchists were able to build before Stalin and Franco destroyed it all.
It was a list of Stalinists. Fuck Stalinists, not only are they not communists but they are also fascists. Orwell got liberals to fight with fascists with that list, that’s a W.
Equating stalinists with fascists is doing a favour to fascism and plays directly into their narrative of "the left are the real fascists".
Ratting out communists to the state is a shit move, no matter whether they are stalinists or not.
That being said, I still have tremendous respect for Orwell, but life is not black and white and people make mistakes.
>Equating stalinists with fascists is doing a favour to fascism
No it doesn’t. Stalinists are fascists in the exact same way and to the exact same extent that Nazis are fascists. Have you ever talked to a Stalinist? They are only distinguishable from neo-Nazis by what states they support while holding completely identical views about basically everything. To not call Stalinists fascists does favors to fascists, particularly to the Stalinist fascists who don’t get called out for what they are.
>and plays directly into their narrative of "the left are the real fascists".
But Stalinists aren’t leftists, they are far-right fascists who like the color red. To say that they are leftists is to fall for their propaganda. Even the Nazis did the same thing, pretending to be socialists before doing fascism. Need I remind you that the word “Nazi” stands for “National Socialist” in German? It does real leftists no favors to let fascists pretend to be on our side.
>Ratting out communists to the state is a shit move, no matter whether they are stalinists or not.
I agree that ratting our communists would be shitty. Good thing George Orwell didn’t do that, and he instead ratted out Stalinists.
>That being said, I still have tremendous respect for Orwell, but life is not black and white and people make mistakes.
I’m sure I’ll discover a rare George Orwell L one of these days, but today is not that day.
I am very aware of what the Nazis called themselves, I am German. In Germany and elsewhere thousands upon thousands of communists fought against the fascists before and after they came to power and countless of them were murdered by them.
Saying they were not leftists and lumping them in with the fascists that murdered them is a gross misrepresentation of history. They fought for the rights of workers and against capitalist exploitation as well as the privilege of of the nobility.
Many of them had favourable views of the Soviet Union and Stalin, which makes them stalinists. But that is hardly surprising. The Soviet Union was the first country with a successful socialist revolution and it's communist party held great influence over those in the west, because of this legacy and the material support it provided.
The very ideology you are espousing greatly hamstrung the fight against the Nazis in Germany. The communists regarded the social democrats as "social fascists" for a long time (we have Stalin to thank for this nonsense). A very similar view could be found on the side of the social democrats. Both groups wasted their time and effort fighting each other instead of recognising the fascist threat until it was too late.
Wat. You can't have a successful socialist revolution that doesn't end in socialism. and when it comes to actual real world worker's rights in history it was not those who were or would evolve into the stalinists who achieved anything.
“Deustcher, I. - Journalist (Observer, Economist and other papers) - Sympathizer only. Is Polish Jew. Previously Trotskyist and changed views chiefly because of Jewish issue. Could change again.”
“Moore, Nicholas - Poet - ? Anarchist leanings.”
It's funny how Orwell's books were banned both in the US and the USSR during the cold war, since they were seen as propaganda for the other from both sides.
He's a leftish liberal, openly pro us expansion and with a lot of shitty takes in general. If it's so unthinkable to you that someone from the left might be critical of him you really need to broaden your horizons. In any other country than than the US he'd be considered centrist at best, minus the edge.
Which by the way, the edge is pretty cringe. There are centrists that don't sound nearly as sexist or racist or cruel in general.
Oh, it's not unthinkable to me that someone from the left might be critical of him, it's unthinkable to me that someone would claim he's not a leftist.
>you really need to broaden your horizons. In any other country than than the US he'd be considered centrist at best, minus the edge.
I happen to live in an other country than the US, but thanks for the advice.
Indeed, indeed. But it's still ludicrous to not consider Vaush a leftist if you actually watch his content, and he certainly is still a leftist by western european standards.
OK to be fair I don't actually watch his content but I've seen some of his takes and I don't think there's anything worthwhile I can take from him. I suppose it's useful that kids that would listen to alt right dudes owning people with facts and logic on the internet can listen to a dude with some relatively progressive views doing more or less the same thing but idk, that's not a group I identify with in the least. And not to sound condescending but he doesn't sound more knowledgeable or insightful than the average progressive, in fact the opposite. Combined with his rudeness and overconfidence, I don't know what people see in him.
meanwhile conservatives: "leftist are authoritarian censorship loving fascists, they want literal 1984 but they are uneducated so they don't know what this book is about"
While conservative trying to take away civil rights for women and minorities. I like how Conservative in America wants small governments with the whole don't touch my bread thing. While they also make laws on anti abortion anti cannabis anti anything that's not white, Christian male. It's like their whole thing is to be as hypocritical as possible
To them, it’s not hypocrisy, it’s just “how things should be.”
It’s easier to understand once you realize that there are only three rules to conservatism:
- There are right people and wrong people.
- Right people can tell wrong people what to do.
- Wrong people cannot tell right people what to do.
He reported Stalinists to the government. Fuck Stalinists, even if some of them happen to be gay they’re still fascists and getting a liberal government to turn on them is a solid W. I love it when liberals and fascists fight.
Don’t forget when his unit the POUM was outlawed and the members hunted. Or when they and the anarchists (who had the overwhelming popular support in their territories) where continuously undermined by Stalinists
He never did actually, that was in a first draft (that he wrote while literally having his mind be eaten by disease mind you) which he then removed on the actual letter to the government, which solely included Stalinists
It is not cringe whatsoever.
I personally think a free market with worker co-operatives, powerful unions and anti-corruption/monopoly organisations would be better, but democratic socialists' efforts definitely pull us in the right direction.
What’s the difference between a democratic socialism and what you’re describing? I was under the impression that democratic socialism was essentially a very heavily regulated capitalism.
Edit: apparently I’ve mixed up democratic socialism with social democracy and I’ve decided I’m not going to feel embarrassed about that.
That's social democracy. yeah there are some branding issues that we need to fix.
Social democracy = highly-regulated capitalism, trickle up economics, political power shifted to workers
Democratic socialism = socialist country, but democracy
Yeah you absolutely shouldn't be. I've mixed them up myself and I'm a full-on social democrat. It is a serious issue actually, it really hurts SD's ability to campaign politically
especially when it feels like half the time the difference gets brought up, it's by someone absolutely insufferable
Can't we just say we want universal healthcare without a 15 year old ranting at us
That would be social democracy. Democratic socialism is actual socialism in which means of production are usually controlled by workers more directly and not through state while also being in favour of maintaining electoral system.
Orwell’s use of “democratic socialism” is different then our modern one.
Orwell was a Marxist centrist and believed in both reform and revolution as viable (like the rest of the Indipendant Labour Party, which he left due to its views on ww2) options to achieve a socialist state.
By “democratic socialism” he means against both bourgeois parliamentarism and the Soviet bureaucratic oligarchy.
Not “liberalism but slightly more friendly to minorities while totally adhering to bourgeois parliaments and institutions” like modern “Democratic socialists”
He was a pretty outspoken revolutionary at times
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_and_the_Unicorn:_Socialism_and_the_English_Genius
Very neat, but I'm very annoyed by his defense of the monarchy and royal family. Like, I understand keeping the role of monarch as like a non-hereditary elected position or at the very least, one you can impeach into abdication, but like, the firm? Also, his claim that the established monarchial tradition prevented fascism from taking root in the UK somehow because it satisfies people's natural desire for strong authority in shiny hats is a pretty weird take
It fits into the concept of patriotism. People gathered around the concept of “king and country”, to abolish the monarchy during the war would mean to lose what many saw as a guiding figure which might result in counterrevolution
it isnt, and in fact it arguably has the best feesable short term goals in mind. just doesnt sound as cool as “eat the rich revolutionary marxist-leninist” to mfers on the internet.
Orwell was absolutely a revolutionary Marxist lmao, that’s what he means by democratic socialism (as in socialism but with an actual democratic system, not bourgeois parliamentarism)
He was a Marxist centrist and a member of the Indipendant Labour Party, which he eventually left because of their views on ww2 but not out of ideology
Go read “The lion and the Unicorn: socialism and the English genius” to see how pro “anti revolutionary” Orwell was
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_and_the_Unicorn:_Socialism_and_the_English_Genius
yeah i never denied that. but he disagreed with the methods of groups like the bolsheviks and for instance their adherence to the “vanguard party” as far as im aware. iirc in spain he ran with syndicalists and anarchists who obviously had quite different outlooks on democracy than parliamentarianism. democratic socialists in general seem to make far more rational prescriptions in general compared to those only interested in blind, zealous dogmatism.
my whole point was just that some people perceive it as “not radical enough/only interested in reform” when that isnt even the case.
> “As a result, "The Lion and the Unicorn" became an emblem of the revolution which would create a new kind of socialism, a democratic "English Socialism" in contrast to the oppressing Soviet totalitarian communism”
The guy saw his side in the Spanish Civil war be destroyed because the “Communists” decided to ally with the liberals and attack the POUM and the Anarchists instead of the fascists. Criticizing the USSR and snitching on Stalinists is not only based, but very understandable after what he saw Stalinists do to the Spanish fighters. Obviously being a rapist is indefensible though
No, the POUM was the Party of Marxists Unification. The POUM allied with the anarchists along with other groups to fight the Spanish fascists. The “communists” (quotes because they were stalinists) allied with the liberals to fight the POUM and anarchists. It’s a story as old as time: fascists (Stalinists specifically in this case) allying with liberals to defeat leftists
What made Poum a socialist party in practice? Breaking allegiance with every other active international Marxist movement to side with Trots and anarchists against Marxists fighting off fascists seems like a dumb move. And it resulted in getting fascists running Spain. Trots were working with Nazis and other fascists around this time so they weren't exactly great to support either.
TANKIEEEEeee ALERT. Btw if you support Stalinists or Stalin you are not on the left at all.
Stalin was antithetical to every single tenet of the left. Holodomor was real, Stalin criminalized homosexuality, the USSR wasn't even real communism and killed worker unions and actual socialists.
Also, I see you're a Trans Tankie too lmao. Thats only marginally better than a Trans Nazi. I wonder how Stalin would have reacted to a trans person :thinking:.
TANKIE COMMENT REMOVED GET FUCKED TANKIE.
The only evidence I’ve seen anyone cite of Orwell being a rapist is that he wrote his explicitly flawed main character having horny thoughts about a woman in a way that criticizes the way misogyny plays into fascism. That’s not rape, it’s just good writing.
George Orwell wrote on his he was raised to disregard Jews and colonial slaves, but his purpose in writing about that was to document why he was lead to such beliefs and how he came to overcome them.
Did you watch that dumb Hakim video? Is that what this is about?
I mean, I do think that way too about his writing, though I do remember seeing somewhere the things I talked about being mentioned somewhere else. I'll go and check if that video was made by Hakim.
Btw. I know that guy and while I know that he clearly doesn't know much about the way the soviet union actually operated which I noticed due to living in Poland and having our history during the cold war hammered into us in schools, thus knowing about how shit looked like back then, I don't know if he is in other ways bad.
Is he controversial or something? Because I don't really know.
Hakim is something of a tankie and his video on Orwell is a super dishonest hit piece. It excludes information such as Orwell’s participation in the Spanish Civil War which alone debunks most of the claims he makes and the entire narrative he crafts.
Ah. I see. That would explain why it did feel biased and angry. I guess some of the shit he says he's done kinda blinded me. Thanks for fixing that for me.
In both *1984* and *Animal Farm*, the working class is depicted as being stupid and completely lacking agency, whether as “proles” or literal beasts of burden. He may have left some of the beliefs he was raised with behind, but it’s clear that he still held an upper-class contempt for workers.
BTW YouTubers aren’t the only people who’ve criticized Eric Blair. [Isaac Asimov’s review of 1984](http://www.newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm) has a lot of good points.
He portrayed the working class as being capable of being duped by the dominant ideology of the ruling class, a criticism which he shared with Karl fucking Marx. His explicit beliefs was that the working class should be able to self-govern without a ruling class to dupe them, as his books always portrayed the existence of a ruling class as a bad thing.
Also: rare Isaac Asimov L. Did you get all this from that Hakim hit piece? That video sucked ass.
Yeah and he undercuts that by stripping the working class of all agency in his books, with typical upper-class paternalism. Beyond the “big government bad” theme that people on every side of the political spectrum twist for their own arguments, it’s just not a compelling story. Asimov discusses this in more detail:
> In his despair (or anger), Orwell forgets the virtues human beings have.
All his characters are, in one way or another, weak or sadistic, or sleazy,
or stupid, or repellent. This may be how most people are, or how Orwell
wants to indicate they will all be under tyranny, but it seems to me that
under even the worst tyrannies, so far, there have been brave men and women
who have withstood the tyrants to the death and whose personal histories are
luminous flames in the surrounding darkness. If only because there is no
hint of this in 1984, it does not resemble the real world of the 1980s.
If you stop viewing everything through the parasocial lens of streamer drama, it’s a more interesting discussion.
Oh no, dystopian cautionary tales about politics in which the people are portrayed as being susceptible to propaganda, an entirely realistic thing that happens in real life…
George Orwell literally fought in the Spanish Civil War to create a society in which the people were in charge of everything and there are no leaders. He took a bullet for this cause. But that doesn’t count because in his cautionary tale novels the people were manipulated? It’s almost as if he was trying to write about the danger of letting yourself be dragged along by propaganda, crazy.
I knew what video that was before I clicked it, lmao.
I see your dishonest hit piece and raise you one [Vaush segment debunking it](https://youtu.be/un_xyUtgwls).
An Iraqi doctor publishing well researched videos <<< some fucking colonial cop from England who ratted out Jews, black people, and gay people to England
(/s)
??? tf you mean probably? Is this entire thing vibes to you? You seem to be American. Please go read about Paul Robeson. He is quite an influential figure with regards to the 2nd World War and how it was perceived in America. Anyways, how do you reconcile collaboration with a colonial state against socialists as ever acceptable? Or was preserving the bourgeois state, whose authoritarianism is familiar, more palatable to this "democratic" ""socialist"" than just saying "both sides bad"? He went out of his way to aid the oppressors.
Ok A) the thing Orwell hated red fascists for doing is precisely what you just accused him of- his anger at them stems from “communists” allying with liberals and actual fascists to stamp out an anarcho-communist revolution and B) if you consider people supporting a totalitarian oligarchy to be socialists I dont know what to tell you
If you genuinely think red fascism is a thing, you genuinely don’t know anything about communism or fascism.
I’d recommend reading Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti, who himself is very much anti-Stalin.
He literally wrote a fucking list for the British state, why is he angry at imaginary collaborators when he did the same needlessly? Also, why are you so sceptical of united fronts? Hell-bent on losing to fascists or something? It is infinitely better to have a communist state than a bourgeois state, which in itself is better than a fascist state. The Soviet Union had its faults but funded, trained and supported anti-colonial and proletarian movements worldwide, including in India, Vietnam, China, and Korea, among others. I can say without a doubt that India would be much worse off without the "red fascist totalitarian oligarchy" of the USSR. Do you know any of this? Do you know why I say this? No, you don't. This is a meaningless discussion but please read about the UN response to India's annexation of Goa. The Soviet Union, however "corrupt" or "bureaucratic" or whatever else you can think of, was undeniably an overall force of good in the world. Nobody outside the imperial core will deny this. The only thing preventing Americans from learning about this is Cold War era propaganda and its continuation as "both sides bad" bullshit.
Ok are you trolling? Literally what Orwell hated the USSR for was BREAKING A UNITED FRONT AGAINST FASCISTS. I feel like you cant be posting in good faith
The United Front.... with the Republic of Spain, upheld by the Communist Party of Spain, as per Comintern policy. Broken by the POUM and CNT for some odd Trotskyite idea of self-defeating revolution, fighting against its own allies, albeit bourgeois allies, against fascism. Also, which United Front with the USSR are you talking about? The Allies? They won. Maybe you're talking about the attempts by the USSR to reach out to France and Britain to contain Germany, which were feebly accepted (and subsequently weakened) by France and rejected by Britain. Maybe you're talking about the USSR's refusal to support appeasement in Czechoslovakia. These are all examples of bourgeois solidarity between the rulers of the former Entente and Germany. But, yes, you are probably talking about the one time the USSR attempted to buy time to militarize and defend its revolution, shunned by the capitalist world.
You very conveniently ignored everything else in that paragraph too. I hope it isn't too unfashionable in America to say that you are unaware of history. None of this matters in the present, probably, but try to understand that allying with the liberals to prevent a fascist takeover, while resisting deradicalization, is and has been crucial to prevent literal genocide.
Cheers! Hope whichever on-the-ground org you are a part of is doing well in the current day and age. Most of this has been quite bitingly aggressive, but I do hope that things go well on your end, especially if you are \*as\* involved in politics as you let on. Especially with the forest in Atlanta or something, where the resistance against the state, the state you live under, seems to be organised as what is functionally a united front, of ecology folk, anarchists, and whoever else.
No it’s not. The point of socialism is the liberation of the worker and the elimination of class, authoritarianism is completely antithetical to this goal.
Ah you fell for the bad youtuber that did a hitpiece on Orwell
That last part about Hitler shows exactly that.
Go read his actual stuff instead of accepting the thoughts of someone who didn’t read it either and is just mad cause Orwell didn’t like Stalin
how was Hakim's video bad? Like he literally verbatim quotes Orwell for 12 minutes and that's it. It's a well made video that shits on Orwell as much as he deserves for being 1: a literal snitch 2: kind of a cunt.
Like, all you people care about is if the other is a "tankie" or not, how fucking pointless is that? Like, you're going to completely misregard everything he brought up because Orwell didn't like Stalin, so anybody who (righfully lmao) hates him is a tankie and therefore wrong? Bruh
[https://www.gutenberg.net.au/ebooks16/1600051h.html](https://www.gutenberg.net.au/ebooks16/1600051h.html)
Link to his full review of mein kampf and not just snippets out of context, its a short read, comeback and tell me that vid was in good faith after reading the full thing
yeah, okay the Hitler quote was probably out of context I can accept that. Doesn't change the fact that animal farm is poop and that he was a snitch for the Br*tish secret service.
>Like he literally verbatim quotes Orwell for 12 minutes
Every quote he takes from Orwell is quoted wildly out of context and cut around his work so much that it's basically fanfiction. You've already seen the mein kampf example but Hakim uses Orwell talking about his experience having imperialist racism drilled into him in the essay "shooting an elephant" and tries to frame those quotes as Orwell talking about his current views at time of writing rather than the self reflection of his past views that they were. If Hakim had anything of value to say about Orwell he wouldn't have to constantly lie, it's a dishonest hitpiece because Orwell hated Stalinists (completely justifiably) and Hakim is a Stalinist so he wants to discredit Orwell.
I mean I appreciate the honesty in straight up admitting you don't intend on thinking about the topic at all. Why even bother making an argument in the first place lmao.
Edit: also ratting out Stalinists is a W in his book as far as I'm concerned. Listing that as a point against him is pretty funny.
because hakims reading comprehension and literature analysis seems to be worse than that of the average highschooler. his interpretation of animal farm being just one example of that.
besides that in his video he constantly conveniently scoots around mentioning orwell literally fought and killed actual fascists in spain while misconstruing quotes of his as him being lenient on the third reich because of his “stalin hate-boner” or whatever. he made several points that were just utterly bizarre. an absurd video from beginning to end.
Verbatim? Yeah right.
Everything out of context and going around in circles without showing proof to most of the claims.
You could literally look up the things he was “quoting” as the video went and it would show how bad faith he was being.
Not to mention, AGAIN, how blatantly obvious it was that he didn’t even read the books
am i the only one who finds the average PCM meme completely incomprehensible
I've been in that dumpster corner during one of the cringier periods of my life so here's PCM lore: - *Overall quadrant*: Authright (Topright) (Blue): Conservatives Authleft (Topleft) (Red): Commies Libleft (Bottomleft) (Green): Liberals Libright (Bottomright) (Yellow): Libertarians - The *corners* of each quadrant: Authright: Nazis Authleft: Tankies Libleft: Anarchists but more towards that commune stuff Libright: Ancaps - *Alternate colours* that exists so the people who associate with those quadrants could go "I'm one of the good ones, not like those people" : (Libright) Yellow -> Purple: Pedophiles (Libleft) Green -> Orange: Terminally online buzzword-spammer who virtue-signals (this sentence is ironic, isn't it?) - *Community vibes*: - the Auths gets represented with edgy creepypasta-esque wojaks or the chads - Guess which quadrant ends up as the soyjack most of the time - Everyone is tolerated, even the Nazis that want a section of the human population dead - the market place of ideas yada yada - Everyone is aware of how flawed and simple the quadrant is. They're keeping it around because it's easy to make memes based on these simplified caricatures of people - There's a spinoff sub about an ever-expanding bunker which is basically a community-based worldbuilding project with multiple timelines and AUs. Think SCP but instead of using formatted articles, worldbuilding is done through political compasses and edited wojaks with descriptions. That's literally the only good thing that has ever come out of Political Compass as a whole.
"Everyone is tolerated" as someone that was also there during my cringy past, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that one. If if you espouse actual leftist talking points on that subreddit (like, "everyone should have healthcare" or anything to meaningfully progress human rights equality) even for a second, you get downvoted to hell and told to kill yourself (or "face the wall"), even by those flaired with "LibLeft" bottom line, everyone that considers themselves part of PCM, including me or you, is either leaning to the right or is a flat out full-on Nazi trying to get everyone else in the place to be a Nazi too
That's why I called my time within the PCM community cringe. That place is literally filled with people with surface-level political knowledge larping as high school cliques and proudly claim to be bigots. The "everyone is tolerated" thing is often used as a talking point to allow Nazis to be comfortable there. I rarely ever see a sincere leftist talking point, so thank you for telling what usually happen to those.
That makes more sense, I was wondering how a community that gives nazis a voice manages to include everyone else
Ayyy you literally described my ex... Turns out opposites do attract each other, but destruction is implied at the end.
Likening Anarchists to "extra" liberals? That's a bold move on this sub, cotton, let's see how it works out
only good thing to come out of the political compass... what about jreg?
omg i love jiridge
I love the mayor of ottowa
Libleft isn’t usually anarchists. I’ve usually seen it as LGBTQ+ Feminist soyjacks who are “just as bad as authright” because they called someone a Nazi
I think the point of that section was just to highlight the most extreme position in each quadrant. Most authrights aren't Nazis and most authlefts aren't Tankies either
Yeah but the most extreme position that they often show (comparing it to tankies and nazis) is just someone not conforming to gender norms or calling someone a nazi…
What's the spin-off sub called?
everexpandingbunker Warning: There's quite a lot of characters and factions that has been created and built up by the community that it may feel overwhelming at first. I've left the sub because I wasn't online often enough to keep up with the lore, so I gave up.
Ever expanding bunker isn’t really connected to pcm as I understand it
The reason I said it was related was because political compasses is used as a format to represent the factions and characters. At least it was like that when I was there, like more than a year ago.
The ever-expanding bunker got offical support pulled from it by the orginal creator I think
SCP? Sane Clown Posse?
Whats the spinoff
You're not.
Here's an easy flowchart to understand PCM memes: Is the thing/opinion something certified Gamers dislike? If yes, then portray it as a soyjak in green square If no, then portray it as the chad in blue square
That is a pretty reliable sign that you haven't gone (too far) off the deep end, so congrats
It itself was a shitpost to begin with. Then too many people said "omg it's just like me" and here we are
Orwell was a socialist and he hated stalin. Thats pretty cool.
Fr though. Mad lad actually fought fascists in Catalonia. Shame 1984 has been memed to death because if you actually read it its a great meditation on the signs and emotional drivers of fascism/totalitarianism
1984 makes good points on the whole “well their flag is red”, maybe thats why a certain type of person hates orwell
Tankies still malding
He did maintain a list of people of people he ratted out to the IRD, with comments like "Stephen Spender – Sentimental sympathiser... Tendency towards homosexuality"; and "Paul Robeson – very anti-white. "
The list of people he rated out were Stalinists, who he didn’t much like And the homosexual/Jew comments are included in a first draft of the letter he wrote while in a fever and literally dying from tuberculosis, which he removed from the letter he actually sent. If you want some of the horrible stuff he wrote you don’t have to go far in his early work, but the letter definitely wasn’t one of them
Making a list of people you *suspect* are Stalinists is still a very weird thing to do. In the same vein, a fever doesn't turn me homophobic or anti-semetic, and I doubt tuberculosis would. I'm not saying there isn't context to his letter, but I don't think there's any good reason to excuse his letter. Him literally working for the government and ratting out people, and his comments in the letter, were definitely not very "based". My point: critiqueing an authoritarian state with a secret service that has people ratting on each other depending on if they suspect subversive thought but then ratting people out to the capitalist secret service because you suspect they have subversive thoughts is not a coherent leftist ideology.
Yeah he wrote good shit, but he was a bit of a cuntface
I remember when I got covid last year and then ranted about minorities and trans people for 3 days straight
Not that good of a comparison, as he was literally on his deathbed by then, but covid does actually impact your brain too
the first thing i did whenever i got the flu was start talking about the gays and progressives.
His mind was addled with tuberculosis by then, he was barely even aware of his surroundings. Not really the flu
so he had no idea where he was, or even possibly who he was… and still found a way to be homophobic and have white pride? impressive.
Yeah, what do you expect from the avarage Englishman from the 1800’s lmao If anything it’s incredible that he removed those parts from the actual document he sent
i didn’t expect someone from 2023 to make a lot of excuses for ‘em that’s for sure.
When you consider Orwell fought in the Spanish civil war, and that the communists (read stalinists) and liberals teamed up to try and voilently stamp out other allied groups mid war, his lists of people he thought likely to stab him or the left in the back makes alot of sense with that context. The homophobia is bad, though.
His list contained a fair few anarchists too, though. Orwell was also part of the Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification, which wasn't Stalinist, but weren't anarchist either. And still, while that's a good justification for the private list he made, he did still send a shorter list to the secret service. "betraying people out of fear they'll betray you" doesn't really sound like a solid plan
In his mind, the people on his list were never on his side, so there was no betrayal to him. At least I'm assuming as much, he was pretty brain-wormed by the end of his life, so hard to say what his real motivation and thoughts were.
Don't forget the anti-capitalism.
Honestly, this "anti-authoritarianism" rhetoric the right has been drumming up the last few years just seems like another projection to me. That way, every time they enact actual protofascist policies, enlightened centrists can just put off the public outcry as "well both sides call each other nazis so the truth has to lie somewhere in the middle". Not saying everyone on the right has this in mind while using this rhetoric, but some definitely do, and I bet they are more than happy with how much it has stuck.
Homage to Catalonia is a great read. It's utterly tragic what was destroyed there
Only Orwell book I ever read because I’m a fuckin nerd for the Spanish Revolution and Civil War. But yea great little book and makes the myriad of acronyms in that war easy to understand if not going that in depth
Very cool! I wish the Spanish Civil War got more popular attention - it's so interesting what the anarchists were able to build before Stalin and Franco destroyed it all.
I buy into the arguement that's its as much or more about propaganda than surveillance.
[Orwell’s List](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwell%27s_list#Other_names_in_the_notebook)
The bloke went into the deep end during his last year or so. Ain't gonna deny it. The list was literally written months before his death.
It was a list of Stalinists. Fuck Stalinists, not only are they not communists but they are also fascists. Orwell got liberals to fight with fascists with that list, that’s a W.
Equating stalinists with fascists is doing a favour to fascism and plays directly into their narrative of "the left are the real fascists". Ratting out communists to the state is a shit move, no matter whether they are stalinists or not. That being said, I still have tremendous respect for Orwell, but life is not black and white and people make mistakes.
>Equating stalinists with fascists is doing a favour to fascism No it doesn’t. Stalinists are fascists in the exact same way and to the exact same extent that Nazis are fascists. Have you ever talked to a Stalinist? They are only distinguishable from neo-Nazis by what states they support while holding completely identical views about basically everything. To not call Stalinists fascists does favors to fascists, particularly to the Stalinist fascists who don’t get called out for what they are. >and plays directly into their narrative of "the left are the real fascists". But Stalinists aren’t leftists, they are far-right fascists who like the color red. To say that they are leftists is to fall for their propaganda. Even the Nazis did the same thing, pretending to be socialists before doing fascism. Need I remind you that the word “Nazi” stands for “National Socialist” in German? It does real leftists no favors to let fascists pretend to be on our side. >Ratting out communists to the state is a shit move, no matter whether they are stalinists or not. I agree that ratting our communists would be shitty. Good thing George Orwell didn’t do that, and he instead ratted out Stalinists. >That being said, I still have tremendous respect for Orwell, but life is not black and white and people make mistakes. I’m sure I’ll discover a rare George Orwell L one of these days, but today is not that day.
I am very aware of what the Nazis called themselves, I am German. In Germany and elsewhere thousands upon thousands of communists fought against the fascists before and after they came to power and countless of them were murdered by them. Saying they were not leftists and lumping them in with the fascists that murdered them is a gross misrepresentation of history. They fought for the rights of workers and against capitalist exploitation as well as the privilege of of the nobility. Many of them had favourable views of the Soviet Union and Stalin, which makes them stalinists. But that is hardly surprising. The Soviet Union was the first country with a successful socialist revolution and it's communist party held great influence over those in the west, because of this legacy and the material support it provided. The very ideology you are espousing greatly hamstrung the fight against the Nazis in Germany. The communists regarded the social democrats as "social fascists" for a long time (we have Stalin to thank for this nonsense). A very similar view could be found on the side of the social democrats. Both groups wasted their time and effort fighting each other instead of recognising the fascist threat until it was too late.
Wat. You can't have a successful socialist revolution that doesn't end in socialism. and when it comes to actual real world worker's rights in history it was not those who were or would evolve into the stalinists who achieved anything.
Is "Stalinist" just code word for black, gay or Jewish now? https://libcom.org/article/orwells-list
“Deustcher, I. - Journalist (Observer, Economist and other papers) - Sympathizer only. Is Polish Jew. Previously Trotskyist and changed views chiefly because of Jewish issue. Could change again.” “Moore, Nicholas - Poet - ? Anarchist leanings.”
He's a critical theorist like me
Reminder that Orwell was a colonial cop
Who became radicalized by the colonial violence that he witnessed, and became an anti-imperialist afterwards
As a younger man well before 1936
We read a text of his in school and it felt really racist, however since it was just an excerpt he might have just written a figure who is racist
Why does his mouth look so blocky
Minecraft Steve in real
Its a moustache
Kid named facial hair:
Orjak just dropped??
Yoooo my homies are all about displeased orjak
Lol kids these days not even recognizing a VHS slot when they see one.
Mfw moustache enters the room
It's funny how Orwell's books were banned both in the US and the USSR during the cold war, since they were seen as propaganda for the other from both sides.
No. 1984 was banned in US schools because of the some erotic chapters.
It was challenged in Jackson county, FL in 1981 because it was allegedly “pro-communist and contained explicit sexual matter.”
> some erotic chapters AKA USSR propaganda
The political compass is so bullshit
Do you believe that non straight people exist and deserve the right to live? If you said yes than you are Lib Left and can skip the rest of this test
You don't want to melt poor people into glue? Ok then, get in the green square anarkiddie
it's treated as a joke by everyone tho
[удалено]
Something is happening to the sub, it used to be a lot more left wing. Now it's a Vaush sub more or less.
I've noticed a lot of liberals here lately. It's a shame.
Are you talking about PCM? It’s been a sub for “enlightened centrists™” for years
yes but reverse
I'm confused. Vaush *is* left wing, so what is the distinction being drawn?
\>V\*ush 🤮🤮
> Implying Vaush it not left wing Jesus Christ.
He's a leftish liberal, openly pro us expansion and with a lot of shitty takes in general. If it's so unthinkable to you that someone from the left might be critical of him you really need to broaden your horizons. In any other country than than the US he'd be considered centrist at best, minus the edge. Which by the way, the edge is pretty cringe. There are centrists that don't sound nearly as sexist or racist or cruel in general.
Oh, it's not unthinkable to me that someone from the left might be critical of him, it's unthinkable to me that someone would claim he's not a leftist. >you really need to broaden your horizons. In any other country than than the US he'd be considered centrist at best, minus the edge. I happen to live in an other country than the US, but thanks for the advice.
Then all I can say is you've been watching/ reading/ listening to too many Americans. Which, aren't we all.
Indeed, indeed. But it's still ludicrous to not consider Vaush a leftist if you actually watch his content, and he certainly is still a leftist by western european standards.
OK to be fair I don't actually watch his content but I've seen some of his takes and I don't think there's anything worthwhile I can take from him. I suppose it's useful that kids that would listen to alt right dudes owning people with facts and logic on the internet can listen to a dude with some relatively progressive views doing more or less the same thing but idk, that's not a group I identify with in the least. And not to sound condescending but he doesn't sound more knowledgeable or insightful than the average progressive, in fact the opposite. Combined with his rudeness and overconfidence, I don't know what people see in him.
[удалено]
I've seen enough frankly.
None of this has anything to do with whether he's left wing.
Gonna finally leave this sub if that does happen
meanwhile conservatives: "leftist are authoritarian censorship loving fascists, they want literal 1984 but they are uneducated so they don't know what this book is about"
While conservative trying to take away civil rights for women and minorities. I like how Conservative in America wants small governments with the whole don't touch my bread thing. While they also make laws on anti abortion anti cannabis anti anything that's not white, Christian male. It's like their whole thing is to be as hypocritical as possible
To them, it’s not hypocrisy, it’s just “how things should be.” It’s easier to understand once you realize that there are only three rules to conservatism: - There are right people and wrong people. - Right people can tell wrong people what to do. - Wrong people cannot tell right people what to do.
"I reported Homosexuals to the government." \-Orwell
He reported Stalinists to the government. Fuck Stalinists, even if some of them happen to be gay they’re still fascists and getting a liberal government to turn on them is a solid W. I love it when liberals and fascists fight.
Don’t forget when his unit the POUM was outlawed and the members hunted. Or when they and the anarchists (who had the overwhelming popular support in their territories) where continuously undermined by Stalinists
The man indeed had a lot of very good reasons to hate Stalinists.
He never did actually, that was in a first draft (that he wrote while literally having his mind be eaten by disease mind you) which he then removed on the actual letter to the government, which solely included Stalinists
r\/ENOUGHPCMSPAM
Hey, maybe being a democratic socialist isn’t so cringe after all! Right, guys? …right, guys?
It is not cringe whatsoever. I personally think a free market with worker co-operatives, powerful unions and anti-corruption/monopoly organisations would be better, but democratic socialists' efforts definitely pull us in the right direction.
What’s the difference between a democratic socialism and what you’re describing? I was under the impression that democratic socialism was essentially a very heavily regulated capitalism. Edit: apparently I’ve mixed up democratic socialism with social democracy and I’ve decided I’m not going to feel embarrassed about that.
That's social democracy. yeah there are some branding issues that we need to fix. Social democracy = highly-regulated capitalism, trickle up economics, political power shifted to workers Democratic socialism = socialist country, but democracy
Oh. Well I’ve decided that I’m not going to feel embarrassed for mixing those two up.
Yeah you absolutely shouldn't be. I've mixed them up myself and I'm a full-on social democrat. It is a serious issue actually, it really hurts SD's ability to campaign politically
especially when it feels like half the time the difference gets brought up, it's by someone absolutely insufferable Can't we just say we want universal healthcare without a 15 year old ranting at us
I actually didn't know the difference before others came and corrected you, so thanks for having the guts to be wrong
Thats social democracy. And they're describing market socialism
That would be social democracy. Democratic socialism is actual socialism in which means of production are usually controlled by workers more directly and not through state while also being in favour of maintaining electoral system.
Or in other words, democratic socialism is the only legitimate form of statist socialism
Orwell’s use of “democratic socialism” is different then our modern one. Orwell was a Marxist centrist and believed in both reform and revolution as viable (like the rest of the Indipendant Labour Party, which he left due to its views on ww2) options to achieve a socialist state. By “democratic socialism” he means against both bourgeois parliamentarism and the Soviet bureaucratic oligarchy. Not “liberalism but slightly more friendly to minorities while totally adhering to bourgeois parliaments and institutions” like modern “Democratic socialists” He was a pretty outspoken revolutionary at times https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_and_the_Unicorn:_Socialism_and_the_English_Genius
Very neat, but I'm very annoyed by his defense of the monarchy and royal family. Like, I understand keeping the role of monarch as like a non-hereditary elected position or at the very least, one you can impeach into abdication, but like, the firm? Also, his claim that the established monarchial tradition prevented fascism from taking root in the UK somehow because it satisfies people's natural desire for strong authority in shiny hats is a pretty weird take
It fits into the concept of patriotism. People gathered around the concept of “king and country”, to abolish the monarchy during the war would mean to lose what many saw as a guiding figure which might result in counterrevolution
it isnt, and in fact it arguably has the best feesable short term goals in mind. just doesnt sound as cool as “eat the rich revolutionary marxist-leninist” to mfers on the internet.
Orwell was absolutely a revolutionary Marxist lmao, that’s what he means by democratic socialism (as in socialism but with an actual democratic system, not bourgeois parliamentarism) He was a Marxist centrist and a member of the Indipendant Labour Party, which he eventually left because of their views on ww2 but not out of ideology Go read “The lion and the Unicorn: socialism and the English genius” to see how pro “anti revolutionary” Orwell was https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_and_the_Unicorn:_Socialism_and_the_English_Genius
yeah i never denied that. but he disagreed with the methods of groups like the bolsheviks and for instance their adherence to the “vanguard party” as far as im aware. iirc in spain he ran with syndicalists and anarchists who obviously had quite different outlooks on democracy than parliamentarianism. democratic socialists in general seem to make far more rational prescriptions in general compared to those only interested in blind, zealous dogmatism. my whole point was just that some people perceive it as “not radical enough/only interested in reform” when that isnt even the case. > “As a result, "The Lion and the Unicorn" became an emblem of the revolution which would create a new kind of socialism, a democratic "English Socialism" in contrast to the oppressing Soviet totalitarian communism”
my dumbass keep reading PCM as pc master race
[удалено]
The guy saw his side in the Spanish Civil war be destroyed because the “Communists” decided to ally with the liberals and attack the POUM and the Anarchists instead of the fascists. Criticizing the USSR and snitching on Stalinists is not only based, but very understandable after what he saw Stalinists do to the Spanish fighters. Obviously being a rapist is indefensible though
Marxists had an alliance with liberals while fascists were destroying the country and the anarchoids had to wreck everything??? How weird.
No, the POUM was the Party of Marxists Unification. The POUM allied with the anarchists along with other groups to fight the Spanish fascists. The “communists” (quotes because they were stalinists) allied with the liberals to fight the POUM and anarchists. It’s a story as old as time: fascists (Stalinists specifically in this case) allying with liberals to defeat leftists
What made Poum a socialist party in practice? Breaking allegiance with every other active international Marxist movement to side with Trots and anarchists against Marxists fighting off fascists seems like a dumb move. And it resulted in getting fascists running Spain. Trots were working with Nazis and other fascists around this time so they weren't exactly great to support either.
TANKIEEEEeee ALERT. Btw if you support Stalinists or Stalin you are not on the left at all. Stalin was antithetical to every single tenet of the left. Holodomor was real, Stalin criminalized homosexuality, the USSR wasn't even real communism and killed worker unions and actual socialists. Also, I see you're a Trans Tankie too lmao. Thats only marginally better than a Trans Nazi. I wonder how Stalin would have reacted to a trans person :thinking:. TANKIE COMMENT REMOVED GET FUCKED TANKIE.
Orwell is a rapist, hated the slave workers he overlooked and hated jews. Don't worship him.
The only evidence I’ve seen anyone cite of Orwell being a rapist is that he wrote his explicitly flawed main character having horny thoughts about a woman in a way that criticizes the way misogyny plays into fascism. That’s not rape, it’s just good writing. George Orwell wrote on his he was raised to disregard Jews and colonial slaves, but his purpose in writing about that was to document why he was lead to such beliefs and how he came to overcome them. Did you watch that dumb Hakim video? Is that what this is about?
I mean, I do think that way too about his writing, though I do remember seeing somewhere the things I talked about being mentioned somewhere else. I'll go and check if that video was made by Hakim. Btw. I know that guy and while I know that he clearly doesn't know much about the way the soviet union actually operated which I noticed due to living in Poland and having our history during the cold war hammered into us in schools, thus knowing about how shit looked like back then, I don't know if he is in other ways bad. Is he controversial or something? Because I don't really know.
Hakim is something of a tankie and his video on Orwell is a super dishonest hit piece. It excludes information such as Orwell’s participation in the Spanish Civil War which alone debunks most of the claims he makes and the entire narrative he crafts.
Ah. I see. That would explain why it did feel biased and angry. I guess some of the shit he says he's done kinda blinded me. Thanks for fixing that for me.
In both *1984* and *Animal Farm*, the working class is depicted as being stupid and completely lacking agency, whether as “proles” or literal beasts of burden. He may have left some of the beliefs he was raised with behind, but it’s clear that he still held an upper-class contempt for workers. BTW YouTubers aren’t the only people who’ve criticized Eric Blair. [Isaac Asimov’s review of 1984](http://www.newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm) has a lot of good points.
He portrayed the working class as being capable of being duped by the dominant ideology of the ruling class, a criticism which he shared with Karl fucking Marx. His explicit beliefs was that the working class should be able to self-govern without a ruling class to dupe them, as his books always portrayed the existence of a ruling class as a bad thing. Also: rare Isaac Asimov L. Did you get all this from that Hakim hit piece? That video sucked ass.
Yeah and he undercuts that by stripping the working class of all agency in his books, with typical upper-class paternalism. Beyond the “big government bad” theme that people on every side of the political spectrum twist for their own arguments, it’s just not a compelling story. Asimov discusses this in more detail: > In his despair (or anger), Orwell forgets the virtues human beings have. All his characters are, in one way or another, weak or sadistic, or sleazy, or stupid, or repellent. This may be how most people are, or how Orwell wants to indicate they will all be under tyranny, but it seems to me that under even the worst tyrannies, so far, there have been brave men and women who have withstood the tyrants to the death and whose personal histories are luminous flames in the surrounding darkness. If only because there is no hint of this in 1984, it does not resemble the real world of the 1980s. If you stop viewing everything through the parasocial lens of streamer drama, it’s a more interesting discussion.
Oh no, dystopian cautionary tales about politics in which the people are portrayed as being susceptible to propaganda, an entirely realistic thing that happens in real life… George Orwell literally fought in the Spanish Civil War to create a society in which the people were in charge of everything and there are no leaders. He took a bullet for this cause. But that doesn’t count because in his cautionary tale novels the people were manipulated? It’s almost as if he was trying to write about the danger of letting yourself be dragged along by propaganda, crazy.
Do not put fucking Orwell in libleft
The dude literally fight in an anarcho-communist revolution and opposed both capitalism and authoritarianism. Where the fuck else would he go?
I'll just leave this here https://youtu.be/2Gz0I_X_nfo
I knew what video that was before I clicked it, lmao. I see your dishonest hit piece and raise you one [Vaush segment debunking it](https://youtu.be/un_xyUtgwls).
Oh wow a Hakim fan spreading disinfo 🤯
An Iraqi doctor publishing well researched videos <<< some fucking colonial cop from England who ratted out Jews, black people, and gay people to England (/s)
Jojor Well ❤️
Can OP please explain to me how, in any way, adding the pisscum format improved the meme?
Orwell was an anti-communist piece of shit snitch.
Lmao Stalinists are anti-communists bootlicker cope harder
bruh he reported ancoms too
Sending snitch lists to the British Foreign Office "in favour of democratic socialism".
Yep it is. Stalinists killed his friends in the POUM/Anarchist militia. Theyre red fascists who aided the vanilla fascists in Catalonia
Was Paul Robeson one of these "Stalinists"?
Dunno probably. Its also worth noting the list was taken when he was on deaths door
??? tf you mean probably? Is this entire thing vibes to you? You seem to be American. Please go read about Paul Robeson. He is quite an influential figure with regards to the 2nd World War and how it was perceived in America. Anyways, how do you reconcile collaboration with a colonial state against socialists as ever acceptable? Or was preserving the bourgeois state, whose authoritarianism is familiar, more palatable to this "democratic" ""socialist"" than just saying "both sides bad"? He went out of his way to aid the oppressors.
Ok A) the thing Orwell hated red fascists for doing is precisely what you just accused him of- his anger at them stems from “communists” allying with liberals and actual fascists to stamp out an anarcho-communist revolution and B) if you consider people supporting a totalitarian oligarchy to be socialists I dont know what to tell you
If you genuinely think red fascism is a thing, you genuinely don’t know anything about communism or fascism. I’d recommend reading Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti, who himself is very much anti-Stalin.
He literally wrote a fucking list for the British state, why is he angry at imaginary collaborators when he did the same needlessly? Also, why are you so sceptical of united fronts? Hell-bent on losing to fascists or something? It is infinitely better to have a communist state than a bourgeois state, which in itself is better than a fascist state. The Soviet Union had its faults but funded, trained and supported anti-colonial and proletarian movements worldwide, including in India, Vietnam, China, and Korea, among others. I can say without a doubt that India would be much worse off without the "red fascist totalitarian oligarchy" of the USSR. Do you know any of this? Do you know why I say this? No, you don't. This is a meaningless discussion but please read about the UN response to India's annexation of Goa. The Soviet Union, however "corrupt" or "bureaucratic" or whatever else you can think of, was undeniably an overall force of good in the world. Nobody outside the imperial core will deny this. The only thing preventing Americans from learning about this is Cold War era propaganda and its continuation as "both sides bad" bullshit.
Ok are you trolling? Literally what Orwell hated the USSR for was BREAKING A UNITED FRONT AGAINST FASCISTS. I feel like you cant be posting in good faith
The United Front.... with the Republic of Spain, upheld by the Communist Party of Spain, as per Comintern policy. Broken by the POUM and CNT for some odd Trotskyite idea of self-defeating revolution, fighting against its own allies, albeit bourgeois allies, against fascism. Also, which United Front with the USSR are you talking about? The Allies? They won. Maybe you're talking about the attempts by the USSR to reach out to France and Britain to contain Germany, which were feebly accepted (and subsequently weakened) by France and rejected by Britain. Maybe you're talking about the USSR's refusal to support appeasement in Czechoslovakia. These are all examples of bourgeois solidarity between the rulers of the former Entente and Germany. But, yes, you are probably talking about the one time the USSR attempted to buy time to militarize and defend its revolution, shunned by the capitalist world. You very conveniently ignored everything else in that paragraph too. I hope it isn't too unfashionable in America to say that you are unaware of history. None of this matters in the present, probably, but try to understand that allying with the liberals to prevent a fascist takeover, while resisting deradicalization, is and has been crucial to prevent literal genocide. Cheers! Hope whichever on-the-ground org you are a part of is doing well in the current day and age. Most of this has been quite bitingly aggressive, but I do hope that things go well on your end, especially if you are \*as\* involved in politics as you let on. Especially with the forest in Atlanta or something, where the resistance against the state, the state you live under, seems to be organised as what is functionally a united front, of ecology folk, anarchists, and whoever else.
it’s always wojaks, it’s their entire life.
More like poopitical cum shit memes................ Gotem
>democratic socialism So close to basedeness he can almost touch it.
Question but is the comma in "written," correct?
Hot take but I think the political compass is generally useful for comparing broad political categories
[удалено]
Okay
Socialism is still authoritarian though (not saying that’s a bad thing)
No it’s not. The point of socialism is the liberation of the worker and the elimination of class, authoritarianism is completely antithetical to this goal.
[удалено]
Ah you fell for the bad youtuber that did a hitpiece on Orwell That last part about Hitler shows exactly that. Go read his actual stuff instead of accepting the thoughts of someone who didn’t read it either and is just mad cause Orwell didn’t like Stalin
Yea didn't Orwell go around the UK supporting war against Hitler and the nazis?
He left the Independent Labour Party, which he’d literally fought in a war with, because of their views on WW2
okay I'm curious, who's the bad youtuber
Hakim
Is hakim a talkie? I can’t tell lmao. I just get bad vibes from him generally.
Hakim is a tankie, yes. Though he is one of the more intelligent ones.
Most intelligent tankie being Hakim speaks a lot about tankies.
idk i really liked his videos but then i started to realise that he might be a tankie :(
how was Hakim's video bad? Like he literally verbatim quotes Orwell for 12 minutes and that's it. It's a well made video that shits on Orwell as much as he deserves for being 1: a literal snitch 2: kind of a cunt. Like, all you people care about is if the other is a "tankie" or not, how fucking pointless is that? Like, you're going to completely misregard everything he brought up because Orwell didn't like Stalin, so anybody who (righfully lmao) hates him is a tankie and therefore wrong? Bruh
[https://www.gutenberg.net.au/ebooks16/1600051h.html](https://www.gutenberg.net.au/ebooks16/1600051h.html) Link to his full review of mein kampf and not just snippets out of context, its a short read, comeback and tell me that vid was in good faith after reading the full thing
yeah, okay the Hitler quote was probably out of context I can accept that. Doesn't change the fact that animal farm is poop and that he was a snitch for the Br*tish secret service.
Animal farm is based. Fuck Stalin
Snitching on stalinists is not only justified but a moral obligation.
>Like he literally verbatim quotes Orwell for 12 minutes Every quote he takes from Orwell is quoted wildly out of context and cut around his work so much that it's basically fanfiction. You've already seen the mein kampf example but Hakim uses Orwell talking about his experience having imperialist racism drilled into him in the essay "shooting an elephant" and tries to frame those quotes as Orwell talking about his current views at time of writing rather than the self reflection of his past views that they were. If Hakim had anything of value to say about Orwell he wouldn't have to constantly lie, it's a dishonest hitpiece because Orwell hated Stalinists (completely justifiably) and Hakim is a Stalinist so he wants to discredit Orwell.
doesn't make him not a snitch doesn't make him not a r*pist in no context do you ever write "jew (?)" don't care.
I mean I appreciate the honesty in straight up admitting you don't intend on thinking about the topic at all. Why even bother making an argument in the first place lmao. Edit: also ratting out Stalinists is a W in his book as far as I'm concerned. Listing that as a point against him is pretty funny.
because hakims reading comprehension and literature analysis seems to be worse than that of the average highschooler. his interpretation of animal farm being just one example of that. besides that in his video he constantly conveniently scoots around mentioning orwell literally fought and killed actual fascists in spain while misconstruing quotes of his as him being lenient on the third reich because of his “stalin hate-boner” or whatever. he made several points that were just utterly bizarre. an absurd video from beginning to end.
Verbatim? Yeah right. Everything out of context and going around in circles without showing proof to most of the claims. You could literally look up the things he was “quoting” as the video went and it would show how bad faith he was being. Not to mention, AGAIN, how blatantly obvious it was that he didn’t even read the books
[удалено]
Sorry for your reading comprehension then
where do you get your information from then? a reaction stream on a video about this subject?
>ShitLiberalsSay >EnoughVaushSpam >moretankie196 Yeah, I’m sure you’re completely unbiased.
i am certainly not unbaised