>Reading 1984>Get to the part where Winston fucks a party slut in the field>"you've been fucked by a lot of guys right">yes>"The more guys you fucked before me the better">Viva la revolution!The first thing that popped in my head was that Orwell must be a cuck. You can tell a lot about a person based on the sexual interactions their characters play out in the books they write. Ayn Rand is another good example of this with her rape fetishes. Anyways, it turns out that he actually had an open relationship with his wife. He enjoyed it when his wife got fucked by other guys.
He was a Fabian Socialist, OP, he wrote the book more as a confession than anything. It's a plan for the future.
>>526459630He was a Democratic Socialist with Gen Alpha broccoli hair 8 decades beforehand. Of course he dipped it in other guys' sloppy second cream pies...
>>526459630Yeah man. Being an author in or before the industrial revolution means one of two things. You're old money or a flaming homosexual degenerate piece of shit who literally would get killed trying to work around other men. I don't believe Orwell is old money.
>>5264596301984 is a major borefest. Huxley was a more sophisticated writer.
>>526459702A lot of the ideas in the book seem too retarded to be viable plans for the future. Especially leaving 85% of the population to their own devices and only really oppressing party members.
>>526459630>>526459756>>526459847>>526460157https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yy-yWNvcSfA
>>526460430It was a more innocent time. Note the characters all required and were shown to have individual attention paid to them. With AI most of that can be automated now.
>>526460157Orwell gets the psychology of the oligarchs more accurately. They're sadistic psychopaths. Huxley's oligarchs are basically well-meaning, reasonable technocrats.
>>526460157Huxley was in favor of the Brave New World scenario
>>526459702>retard alert>>526460157>fun police
>>526459630Do you think anyone ever actually read any of these gay books outside of school? If scholastic institutions didn't exist, would people even know who any of these authors are? Where does their relevency come from other than being told about them in high school or whatever?
>>526463113This>>526463201(You) are too stupid for this board (which is saying something)
>>526459630It's embarrassing that I have to say this: Winston was the bad guy of the story. The whole purpose of the story is to not be like Winston. Winston is a cuckold, he's a whiny bitch, he's always allowing everyone to walk over him, he's always furthering the cause of evil men by doing nothing.
>>526463201I read both 1985 and BNW on my own.
So how SHOULD a Brit in that setting who wanted to rebel have actually gone about it anyway
>>526459630> Surrounded by political fanatic Karens his whole life> He gets off on having finally found a hot slutActually pretty believable.
>’Have you done this before?’>’Of course. Hundreds of times — well scores of times anyway ’With Party members.’>’Yes, always with Party members.’>’With members of the Inner Party?’>’Not with those swine, no. But there’s plenty that would if they got half a chance. They’re not so holy as they make out.’>His heart leapt. Scores of times she had done it: he wished it had been hundreds — thousands. Anything that hinted at corruption always filled him with a wild hope. Who knew, perhaps the Party was rotten under the surface, its cult of strenuousness and self-denial simply a sham concealing iniquity. If hecould have infected the whole lot of them with leprosy or syphilis, how gladly he would have done so! Anything to rot, to weaken, to undermine! He pulled her down so that they were kneeling face to face.>’Listen. The more men you’ve had, the more I love you. Do you understand that?’>’Yes, perfectly.’>’I hate purity, I hate goodness! I don’t want any virtue to exist anywhere. I want everyone to be corrupt to the bones.>’Well then, I ought to suit you, dear. I’m corrupt to the bones.’>’You like doing this? I don’t mean simply me: I mean the thing in itself?’>’I adore it.’>That was above all what he wanted to hear. Not merely the love of one person but the animal instinct, the simple undifferentiated desire: that was the force that would tear the Party to pieces. He pressed her down upon thegrass, among the fallen bluebells. This time there was no difficulty. Presently the rising and falling of their breasts slowed to normal speed, and in a sort of pleasant helplessness they fell apart. The sun seemed to have grown hotter.They were both sleepy. He reached out for the discarded overalls and pulled them partly over her. Almost immediately they fell asleep and slept for about half an hour.Pretty hot desu
>>526459630The Virgin 1984 Vs The Chad Brave New World Vs The Thad V for Vendetta Vs The Lad A Clockwork Orange
>br*t>imbred degeneratea real surprise>>526460157based desert kike
>>526466810Дa. бaceд
>>526459630he was basically a (((Trotskyist))), i.e. "true gommunism wasn't tried"
>>526459630It's deconstruction of classic trope "love defeats evil".Remember it has no happy end. Big Brother won.
>>526466684Never forget the most evil person in 1984 was a Jew . The character who came up with the book about revolution just to draw in supporters and cull them . Something Stein I can’t remember his last name but I found it odd back before I really understood the JQ
YES I AM A CÜCK I LIKE WHEN PEOPLE FUCK ON MY BITCH
>>526468765Wrong againHe fought in the Spanish Civil War and ended up informing on other Leftists during WW2 because he realised they were all cracked. He was famously pro liberty and pro gun.
>>526469218>I can’t rememberWe know>>526469370The point was sex, in fact most forms of pleasure had been very suppressed in the Party, while promoted to the Proles. Being promiscuous and enjoying it outside of breeding for the party was frowned upon because people's primary pleasures outside alcohol and tobacco were propagandistic. Even the pleasure response had been captured and politicised in a Pavlovian way. As usual most of you are as dull as dogshit.
>>526469454then do explain his affectionate portrayal of Snowball
>>526469641>the literary character vs the war recordNo, you explain Snowball and how it renders the author a Trostkyist you fucking pseud. Read his essays? Quotes? Of course you fucking haven't.
>>526466626>99% of women in Winston's circle: sexless Potemkin spies for the StateIt's no wonder
>>526463113No he wasn't. Moksha was his utopia novel, which is basically a prequel to Avatar
>>526460157> Huxley was a more sophisticated writer.>orgy-porgyGo back to preschool
>>526469738>the literary character vs the war recordyes, because that "literary character" was part of one of the most influential (albeit kiddie tier) books of XX century. for me it matter little if he denounced communism, in Animal Farm the message is clear:>capitalism was bad>the revolution was good>then the bad selfish revolutionaries took over and kicked out the one good revolutionary who wanted the best for his people (muh Trotsky is le good)and I'm not arguing that his works are bad, it's just that headlong worship of such works brings about the worship of the "good kikes". my children got to read both Animal Farm and 1984, but they got to understand the flaws in these pieces as well>pseudhave I called you names? have I insulted you in any way? then why did you suddenly feel the urge to pour shit on me? because you had no real argument against the Snowball question?
>>526469584Yes you’re right, not to mention the book was created by boardroom no one inner member read it in it’s entirely. It was a honey trap for those that might be able to organise resistance. Emmuuel Goldstein never existed he was like big brother a fiction a foil to have the 2minutes of hate against. Winston was fucked before the book started his neighbours son def ratted him out as a thought criminal.
