The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
George Orwell on Political Violence
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

George Orwell wrote in Coming Up for Air:

It’s a queer thing, I thought, to be known as ‘Mr So-and-so, the well-known anti-Fascist’. …

It was a voice that sounded as if it could go on for a fortnight without stopping. It’s a ghastly thing, really, to have a sort of human barrel-organ shooting propaganda at you by the hour. The same thing over and over again. Hate, hate, hate. Let’s all get together and have a good hate. Over and over. It gives you the feeling that something has got inside your skull and is hammering down on your brain. But for a moment, with my eyes shut, I managed to turn the tables on him. I got inside his skull. It was a peculiar sensation. For about a second I was inside him, you might almost say I was him. At any rate, I felt what he was feeling. …

What makes Orwell so powerful is his peculiar combination of a novelist’s ability to put himself inside other people’s heads and feel their emotions along with his ability to think objectively.

What he’s saying is merely that Hitler’s after us and we must all get together and have a good hate. Doesn’t go into details. Leaves it all respectable. But what he’s seeing is something quite different. It’s a picture of himself smashing people’s faces in with a spanner.

A spanner is English for a wrench.

Fascist faces, of course. I know that’s what he was seeing. It was what I saw myself for the second or two that I was inside him. Smash! Right in the middle! The bones cave in like an eggshell and what was a face a minute ago is just a great big blob of strawberry jam. Smash! There goes another! That’s what’s in his mind, waking and sleeping, and the more he thinks of it the more he likes it. And it’s all O.K. because the smashed faces belong to Fascists.

Of course, back then there were real Fascists.

 
Hide 109 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Off topic–

    Meet The Awan Brothers – The (Not-Russian) IT Staff Who Allegedly Hacked Congress’ Computer Systems

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-04/meet-awan-brothers-not-russian-it-staff-who-allegedly-hacked-congress-computer-syste

    In an ironic twist, it appears it may not have been ‘The Russians’ that hacked America’s political system last year. As The Daily Caller reports, three brothers (Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan) who managed office IT for members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and other lawmakers were abruptly relieved of their duties on suspicion that they accessed congressional computer networks without permission.

    Imran Awan seen below with Bill Clinton

    As Luke Rosiak repoerts, the brothers were barred from computer networks at the House of Representatives Thursday, The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group has learned.

    Three members of the intelligence panel and five members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs were among the dozens of members who employed the suspects on a shared basis. The two committees deal with many of the nation’s most sensitive issues, information and documents, including those related to the war on terrorism.

    The brothers are suspected of serious violations, including accessing members’ computer networks without their knowledge and stealing equipment from Congress.

  2. “Of course, back then there were real Fascists.”

    And real communists, real anarchists, and real imperialists.

  3. When the language is perfected we shall see the final and complete elimination of Goldsailerism!

  4. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    What came first? The fascist or the anti-fascist hate?

    Do fascists exist and draw prog hatred OR do progs feel a need to hate and conjure fascists to justify their rage?

    If fascists didn’t exist, they would have to be invented because they are the only permissible objects of hate. Since most people, esp the young, are mindless sheeple, they go along with the Narrative beamed into their minds by media and academia.

    Also, even if the progs aren’t well-read, they got their ‘anti-fascist’ attitudes from stuff like MATRIX films, PAN’S LABYRINTH, DJANGO UNCHAINED & INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO, anti-Nazi WWII video games, sci-fi spectacles, and The Clash & Rage against the Machine albums. It’s supposed to be ‘cool’. (Among them, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO may be especially influential in encouraging progs to get piercings and tattoos as the radical look.)

    In the middle ages, the only permissible target of hatred were witches, so people went after witches. Today, it’s ‘nazis’ and ‘fascists’.

    • Replies: @JohnnyD
    @Anon

    I recommend this Orwell essay, "What is Fascism?" He describes how fascism had become a meaningless word (in 1944!) used by people to smear their ideological opponents.

    http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc

    Replies: @Anon

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Anon

    Yes, this Dragon Tattoo-ism, if I may call it that, is a big thing among the young. I know one young woman, who is literally and unashamedly descended from Nazis, who nevertheless considers the Dragon Tattoo works to be thinly disguised documentaries of "what's really going on": hidden cabals of Nordic Nazi Gentlemen secretly running everything and murdering fetching young women because ... well, I'm not exactly clear why, it's just what evil Nordic Nazi Gentlemen do, dontcha know.

    And yes, disfiguring tattoos and piercings are part of the package.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    , @Anonymous
    @Anon

    All social movements need a devil.

    , @El Dato
    @Anon

    There were Nazis in the Matrix movies?

    I can only remember Agents, whcih looked like Hooverian enforcers, but were otherwise devoid of much ideology. Good machines, in a sense.

  5. I can get in Orwell’s head. “Fascists” were the assholes at his piddling prep school who made his life miserable. Not just the students, but the fawning faculty and administration as well. He was the smart kid who got to stay because he might have a shot at Oxford, but who was reminded on a frequent basis of his inferior station and reliance on “charity”.

    If you want your kid to be well-adjusted, never, ever put him in this kind of shark tank unless you can defend him. Jews have an innate advantage because they have a tribe. Lower-upper-middle-class kids like Orwell are (were) on their own.

    We’re back in that world today. Have been for about 25 years. The next George Orwell will see the contemporary elites the same way Orwell saw fascists a hundred years ago, and he will also fantasize about smashing their skulls in. Something our overlords might want to contemplate as they rush us into the abyss.

    • Replies: @anonymous reply to Bill P
    @Bill P

    Bill P - you did not understand Steve Sailer's point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things. And geniuses are never ever on their own; remember that. One should hope that one's descendants are all geniuses: for some of us that will be true. Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.

    Replies: @AKAHorace, @Bill P

    , @Cagey Beast
    @Bill P

    I think you misread the passage; Orwell was describing the other man's fantasies, not his own. Also, Orwell went to Eton, not a piddling prep school.

    Replies: @jimmyriddle, @guest

    , @David Davenport
    @Bill P

    Bill P.:

    Orwell lived during the WII era, during which time there were actual Fascists and real-life, violent anti-Fascists, as Steve says.

    I don't think that Eskimos dominated Orwell's old prep school, Eton, at least in that era.

    Perhaps you are projecting your own high school woes onto Orwell.

    Replies: @Bill P

  6. Out of the 3 24 Hour Cable News Networks (Fox, CNN, and MSNBC), Fox News is the only one that did not refer to Gavin McInnes and Milo Yiannopoulos as White nationalists, Fox News referred to them as Conservatives. It’s good to know Fox News did not throw them under the bus.

    MSNBC and CNN as usual peddle in fake news.

    To the Left anybody who is to the political Right of them is now a White nationalist ever since Donald J. Trump was elected POTUS. Just look at Nancy Pelosi who recently referred to Steve Bannon as a White nationalist.

    I am sure Gavin McInnes half White and half Native American basically Mestiza wife would be quite surprised to find out her husband is supposedly a White nationalist.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jefferson

    It's odd that Fox is not doing this. News.com.au and other Murdoch-owned Australian papers bash Trump with a constant stream negative press. Particularly hard to deal with is the bashing of Trump over Turnbull's bad deal to palm off the economic migrants in detention, that was finalized with lame duck Obama after Trump was elected. Only someone as smug as Turnbull could think that this would be a great way to greet an incoming president. "Here you go Mr Trump, have some of our wretched refuse! Not good enough for Australia, but clearly good enough for you! I'll just sit back and wait for my Time Magazine cover..."

    Replies: @anon

  7. Western governments now are more fascist than Mussolini or Hitler ever were…but we mustn’t say that….

  8. @Bill P
    I can get in Orwell's head. "Fascists" were the assholes at his piddling prep school who made his life miserable. Not just the students, but the fawning faculty and administration as well. He was the smart kid who got to stay because he might have a shot at Oxford, but who was reminded on a frequent basis of his inferior station and reliance on "charity".

    If you want your kid to be well-adjusted, never, ever put him in this kind of shark tank unless you can defend him. Jews have an innate advantage because they have a tribe. Lower-upper-middle-class kids like Orwell are (were) on their own.

    We're back in that world today. Have been for about 25 years. The next George Orwell will see the contemporary elites the same way Orwell saw fascists a hundred years ago, and he will also fantasize about smashing their skulls in. Something our overlords might want to contemplate as they rush us into the abyss.

    Replies: @anonymous reply to Bill P, @Cagey Beast, @David Davenport

    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things. And geniuses are never ever on their own; remember that. One should hope that one’s descendants are all geniuses: for some of us that will be true. Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.

    • Agree: NickG
    • Replies: @AKAHorace
    @anonymous reply to Bill P


    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things.

     

    anonymous,

    sorry to be a bit of a pedant, but Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay "Such such were the joys".

    Orwell was an anti Nazi, but I think that the message we should take from Steve's quote from him is that on what level How you believe is as important as What you believe. Orwell hated Nazisim but could be dispassionate and honest about it's appeal to people.

    Replies: @SFG, @Jonathan Mason

    , @Bill P
    @anonymous reply to Bill P


    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school
     
    You don't understand my point. Orwell wrote a long essay, replete with fascist imagery, about how miserable his life was in prep school.

    Here's a quote:

    That was the pattern of school life — a continuous triumph of the strong over the weak. Virtue consisted in winning: it consisted in being bigger, stronger, handsomer, richer, more popular, more elegant, more unscrupulous than other people — in dominating them, bullying them, making them suffer pain, making them look foolish, getting the better of them in every way. Life was hierarchical and whatever happened was right. There were the strong, who deserved to win and always did win, and there were the weak, who deserved to lose and always did lose, everlastingly.
     
    You really think a guy who wrote that didn't care about the "little losers" at his prep school? Orwell himself was the little loser! And he continued to be so almost until the end of his life, when he finally got some respect and made some money. And that never would have happened were it not for the Cold War.

    His most famous novel, 1984, draws not only on his experience working for the BBC during WWII, but also his childhood. That's as plain as day.

    Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.
     
    You really don't know Orwell at all, do you? Have you even read one of his books, or are you just trolling here?

    Replies: @res

  9. @Bill P
    I can get in Orwell's head. "Fascists" were the assholes at his piddling prep school who made his life miserable. Not just the students, but the fawning faculty and administration as well. He was the smart kid who got to stay because he might have a shot at Oxford, but who was reminded on a frequent basis of his inferior station and reliance on "charity".

    If you want your kid to be well-adjusted, never, ever put him in this kind of shark tank unless you can defend him. Jews have an innate advantage because they have a tribe. Lower-upper-middle-class kids like Orwell are (were) on their own.

    We're back in that world today. Have been for about 25 years. The next George Orwell will see the contemporary elites the same way Orwell saw fascists a hundred years ago, and he will also fantasize about smashing their skulls in. Something our overlords might want to contemplate as they rush us into the abyss.

    Replies: @anonymous reply to Bill P, @Cagey Beast, @David Davenport

    I think you misread the passage; Orwell was describing the other man’s fantasies, not his own. Also, Orwell went to Eton, not a piddling prep school.

    • Replies: @jimmyriddle
    @Cagey Beast

    A prep school in England is for younger children (6-10 year olds), before they go on to public (ie private) school.

    Orwell's was pretty terrible. He wrote about it in "Such Were The Joys".

    Then he went to Wellington, a school consisting mostly of army brats. He got into Eton pretty late on a scholarship.

    He's the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

    Replies: @Bill B.

    , @guest
    @Cagey Beast

    "Orwell was describing the other man's fantasies, not his own."

    Presumably Orwell had his own fantasies upon which to draw. He went to actual war against fascists in Spain (as recounted in Homage to Catalonia, published prior to Coming up for Air), where he might have thrown grenades instead of spanners at their heads.

    Replies: @AKAHorace, @syonredux

  10. What he’s saying is merely that Hitler’s after us and we must all get together and have a good hate. Doesn’t go into details. Leaves it all respectable. But what he’s seeing is something quite different. It’s a picture of himself smashing people’s faces in with a spanner.

    A spanner is English for a wrench.

    Fascist faces, of course. I know that’s what he was seeing. It was what I saw myself for the second or two that I was inside him. Smash! Right in the middle! The bones cave in like an eggshell and what was a face a minute ago is just a great big blob of strawberry jam. Smash! There goes another! That’s what’s in his mind, waking and sleeping, and the more he thinks of it the more he likes it. And it’s all O.K. because the smashed faces belong to Fascists.

    Yes, clearly an early go at the Two Minutes Hate in 1984. And it’s not hard to find examples of the same kind of thing on the internet. So, culled from the Leftist sub- Lumpengentsia :

    Stop saying “this is what they want” when people act violently against nazis. What they want is a debate. They want genocide to be something polite society can agree or disagree with. They want to be elevated to the general public discourse by having their ideas argued with. Violence is the exact opposite of what they want. Richard Spencer didn’t want to get punched in the face, he wanted good people to keep quiet, to respect his rights and let him calmly discuss white nationalism. Violence throws a wrench in all their plans. It shows them their carefully planned tactics to infiltrate mainstream discussion are utterly failing. Punching a nazi will get you in legal trouble but don’t let people tell you it’s what they want.

    I’m pretty pacifist but this is the first nazi-punching discourse post that’s made me go “this this THIS.”

    Punching keeps genocide out of a reasonable conversation.

    There are good reasons to not want to personally punch a Nazi in the face but let’s be clear, none of them are because a Nazi doesn’t deserve it.

    I remain staunchly pro-choice on Nazi punching.

    “Should I, personally, punch a Nazi right now?” That’s up to you, whether or not you feel safe in doing so, your own personal beliefs on violent vs non-violent protest, etc.

    “Should people, in general, punch Nazis?” Yes.

    I keep telling you guys, do not punch Nazis in the face. Punching people in the face is a movie thing. Elbow Nazis in the face, headbutt a Nazi, no punching. Don’t break your hand on a Nazi like a fool.

    After one solid clock to the jaw, now memed into perpetuity, Dick Spencer is afraid to show his Nazi face in public. Direct action gets the goods.

    And then there’s the Nazi punching computer game:

    Earlier this week, Cafe released a charming riff on Mike Tyson’s Punch-Out!! called Pepe’s Punch-Out!!, in which players could choose to engage in a maddening dialogue with the cartoon frog that serves as the “alt-right” mascot, or just punch the shit out of it. Now, Super Deluxe has one-upped this effort with Punch-A-Nazi!!, a rhythm-based game that uses both a computer monitor and the user’s phone as a Wii-like facsimile for a fist. Retro-style recreations of Spencer, Yiannopoulos, and their supreme leader—no, not Steve Bannon—Hitler all present their willing, punchable faces

    http://www.avclub.com/article/live-dream-punching-richard-spencer-milo-and-hitle-249591

  11. that being said, Bill P, your good advice on keeping one’s children out of shark tanks is admirable. I hope that you will have as many thousands of descendants as I hope (and am likely, thank God) to have!

  12. I’m sure readers here will also know of Orwell’s disdain for the word fascism

    http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc

    and for political language in general

    http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit/

    Sailer seems to be something of a weak Sapir-Whorfian, so his appreciation of Orwell makes a lot of sense.

  13. @Bill P
    I can get in Orwell's head. "Fascists" were the assholes at his piddling prep school who made his life miserable. Not just the students, but the fawning faculty and administration as well. He was the smart kid who got to stay because he might have a shot at Oxford, but who was reminded on a frequent basis of his inferior station and reliance on "charity".

    If you want your kid to be well-adjusted, never, ever put him in this kind of shark tank unless you can defend him. Jews have an innate advantage because they have a tribe. Lower-upper-middle-class kids like Orwell are (were) on their own.

    We're back in that world today. Have been for about 25 years. The next George Orwell will see the contemporary elites the same way Orwell saw fascists a hundred years ago, and he will also fantasize about smashing their skulls in. Something our overlords might want to contemplate as they rush us into the abyss.

    Replies: @anonymous reply to Bill P, @Cagey Beast, @David Davenport

    Bill P.:

    Orwell lived during the WII era, during which time there were actual Fascists and real-life, violent anti-Fascists, as Steve says.

    I don’t think that Eskimos dominated Orwell’s old prep school, Eton, at least in that era.

    Perhaps you are projecting your own high school woes onto Orwell.

    • Replies: @Bill P
    @David Davenport


    Orwell lived during the WII era, during which time there were actual Fascists and real-life, violent anti-Fascists, as Steve says.

    I don’t think that Eskimos dominated Orwell’s old prep school, Eton, at least in that era.
     
    Before Eton, Orwell went to St. Cyprian's, which he hated. No, there probably weren't many Jews there, but I didn't mean to say there were. Only that being a boy on a scholarship around a bunch of richer kids is pretty awful, unless you have a strong community to protect you. Jews have a strong identity and community, so it isn't so hard for them.

    Perhaps you are projecting your own high school woes onto Orwell.
     
    I was happy in high school, but before I got there I had to go through roughly the same thing Orwell did. And yes, it still brings back uncomfortable memories, just as Orwell's childhood did for him.

    Replies: @syonredux

  14. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jefferson
    Out of the 3 24 Hour Cable News Networks (Fox, CNN, and MSNBC), Fox News is the only one that did not refer to Gavin McInnes and Milo Yiannopoulos as White nationalists, Fox News referred to them as Conservatives. It's good to know Fox News did not throw them under the bus.

    MSNBC and CNN as usual peddle in fake news.

    To the Left anybody who is to the political Right of them is now a White nationalist ever since Donald J. Trump was elected POTUS. Just look at Nancy Pelosi who recently referred to Steve Bannon as a White nationalist.

    I am sure Gavin McInnes half White and half Native American basically Mestiza wife would be quite surprised to find out her husband is supposedly a White nationalist.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    It’s odd that Fox is not doing this. News.com.au and other Murdoch-owned Australian papers bash Trump with a constant stream negative press. Particularly hard to deal with is the bashing of Trump over Turnbull’s bad deal to palm off the economic migrants in detention, that was finalized with lame duck Obama after Trump was elected. Only someone as smug as Turnbull could think that this would be a great way to greet an incoming president. “Here you go Mr Trump, have some of our wretched refuse! Not good enough for Australia, but clearly good enough for you! I’ll just sit back and wait for my Time Magazine cover…”

    • Replies: @anon
    @Anonymous


    It’s odd that Fox is not doing this. News.com.au and other Murdoch-owned Australian papers bash Trump with a constant stream negative press.
     
    It's the combination of two things.

    Anti-Trumpism has two strands, the SJW strand and the cheap labor strand. The media is owned by the cheap labor strand but use SJW arguments as camouflage.

    That's the first thing.

    Separately when SJW went anti-Israel (BDS etc) an anti-SJW strand popped up in the media which is seen as part of the alt-right because they attack a lot of the same targets but isn't WN at all, at least not directly; it's a pro-Israel thing in disguise.

    Hence Fox being out of sync with the rest of the media on Milo and McInnes. Fox is generally more pro-Israel and therefore supports the attack on SJWs.

    In a nutshell it's more evidence of a growing split between the banking mafia faction and the pro-Israel faction.
  15. “The situation was ripe for Mussolini’s ascent. On the twenty-eighth of October 1922, he launched
    the famous March on Rome, directing black-shirted Fascist squadrons to advance on the capitol.”

    page 37

    The Pope of Physics: Enrico Fermi and the Birth of the Atomic Age

  16. It’s all Two Minutes’ Hate–“sex gone sour” as Julia explained it.

    This accounts as well for the hyper-caricaturing of sex and sexuality, and the constant drive to more and more extreme and marginal forms of libido/appetites and their expression.

    We might more productively look at their behavior as what happens to people whose natural biological drives to create, thrive, dominate, procreate, discriminate, etc., are twisted and knotted toward lucrative consumerism, politics, and utopian impossibility.

    But that would involve Noticing who runs the hidden pretzel factories.

    To me the most interesting thing about HBD isn’t that it exists. Biodiversity is a fact.

    To me the most interesting thing is how we aren’t allowed to consider it where humans are concerned.

    To me the most interesting thing is how different populations institutionalize their population genetic warfare against others. It isn’t all Panzer tanks and Luftwaffes. In fact for some time now I’ve suspected that overt, honest warfare is an entirely different phenomenon than the March Through Institutions.

    Then there’s the fact that for a lot of these “anti-fascists,” they’ve been snowflakes all their lives, have been bred and domesticated to avoid anything that looks like genuine conflict…and so are especially ripe for exploitation for doing the PretzelMasters’ bidding.

    How to sort all this out from the Mass Media–or indeed the production of centralized texts and exegeses–is the challenge I see facing the smartest of the smart fraction today.

  17. @Cagey Beast
    @Bill P

    I think you misread the passage; Orwell was describing the other man's fantasies, not his own. Also, Orwell went to Eton, not a piddling prep school.

    Replies: @jimmyriddle, @guest

    A prep school in England is for younger children (6-10 year olds), before they go on to public (ie private) school.

    Orwell’s was pretty terrible. He wrote about it in “Such Were The Joys”.

    Then he went to Wellington, a school consisting mostly of army brats. He got into Eton pretty late on a scholarship.

    He’s the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

    • Replies: @Bill B.
    @jimmyriddle


    He’s the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

     

    John Maynard Keynes, Aldous Huxley, Ian Fleming?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @El Dato, @jimmyriddle

  18. A spanner wrench is an American thing, too.

  19. @Anon
    What came first? The fascist or the anti-fascist hate?

    Do fascists exist and draw prog hatred OR do progs feel a need to hate and conjure fascists to justify their rage?

    If fascists didn't exist, they would have to be invented because they are the only permissible objects of hate. Since most people, esp the young, are mindless sheeple, they go along with the Narrative beamed into their minds by media and academia.

    Also, even if the progs aren't well-read, they got their 'anti-fascist' attitudes from stuff like MATRIX films, PAN'S LABYRINTH, DJANGO UNCHAINED & INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO, anti-Nazi WWII video games, sci-fi spectacles, and The Clash & Rage against the Machine albums. It's supposed to be 'cool'. (Among them, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO may be especially influential in encouraging progs to get piercings and tattoos as the radical look.)

    In the middle ages, the only permissible target of hatred were witches, so people went after witches. Today, it's 'nazis' and 'fascists'.

    Replies: @JohnnyD, @Almost Missouri, @Anonymous, @El Dato

    I recommend this Orwell essay, “What is Fascism?” He describes how fascism had become a meaningless word (in 1944!) used by people to smear their ideological opponents.

    http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc

    • Replies: @Anon
    @JohnnyD

    I recommend my insistence that I'm the only true fascist.

    Only I get it.

    Replies: @SFG

  20. “Of course, back then there were real Fascists.”

    And with the left becoming what it is becoming, so there shall be again.

  21. Orwell ! The mid right’s favorite . 1984 , OMG it’s here ! Wigan Pier , the working poor . What a tragedy . Well in America we have hundreds of Wigan’S Piers . Trailer parks . The poor aren’t there because the elite has driven them down . They are there because they are stupid and lazy f**k ups that would trade their and their spawns future for a six pack and a nickle bag . And they can’t learn their multiplication tables . What with all the booze and drugs . F**king hell man even I know through the alcoholic fog that 2+2 is 6 or 8 or whatever . No , wait it’s 4 ! 2+2 is 4 .

    • Replies: @donut
    @donut

    Violence is in our nature , our basic nature . How ironic that the "Nazi's" are afraid to use it against our racial enemies . There is only the dark and the light . Forget the Republic , Brutus , Cassius and Cato are dead , good riddance . Hail Caesar when he comes . Trump is only Galba , Otho or Vitellius . We wait for Trajan .

    , @Cortes
    @donut

    Glad someone got there before me.

    Here's John Dolan (probably better known as The War Nerd) on "Saint" George Orwell:

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

    Contains useful collateral damage to the pitiful Hitchens (though less entertainingly than the unwise decision of Hitchens to debate with George Galloway - true slow drive by a horrible motorway/freeway multiple vehicle disaster piece of video.

  22. @Anon
    What came first? The fascist or the anti-fascist hate?

    Do fascists exist and draw prog hatred OR do progs feel a need to hate and conjure fascists to justify their rage?

    If fascists didn't exist, they would have to be invented because they are the only permissible objects of hate. Since most people, esp the young, are mindless sheeple, they go along with the Narrative beamed into their minds by media and academia.

    Also, even if the progs aren't well-read, they got their 'anti-fascist' attitudes from stuff like MATRIX films, PAN'S LABYRINTH, DJANGO UNCHAINED & INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO, anti-Nazi WWII video games, sci-fi spectacles, and The Clash & Rage against the Machine albums. It's supposed to be 'cool'. (Among them, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO may be especially influential in encouraging progs to get piercings and tattoos as the radical look.)

    In the middle ages, the only permissible target of hatred were witches, so people went after witches. Today, it's 'nazis' and 'fascists'.

    Replies: @JohnnyD, @Almost Missouri, @Anonymous, @El Dato

    Yes, this Dragon Tattoo-ism, if I may call it that, is a big thing among the young. I know one young woman, who is literally and unashamedly descended from Nazis, who nevertheless considers the Dragon Tattoo works to be thinly disguised documentaries of “what’s really going on”: hidden cabals of Nordic Nazi Gentlemen secretly running everything and murdering fetching young women because … well, I’m not exactly clear why, it’s just what evil Nordic Nazi Gentlemen do, dontcha know.

    And yes, disfiguring tattoos and piercings are part of the package.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @Almost Missouri

    Judging by their tastes and hobbies, I think their antifascism might be more strongly informed by Pasolini's (dreadful, gratuitously self-indulgent and empty-headed) film Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom than any dusty old political book (invariably written by some dead white male, and therefore contemptible).
    Books are such hard going, aren't they? Twitter's much more accessible, and therefore More True, in their world. The little blue bird decides who is, and is not, a Nazi. Twitfinder General.

  23. @anonymous reply to Bill P
    @Bill P

    Bill P - you did not understand Steve Sailer's point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things. And geniuses are never ever on their own; remember that. One should hope that one's descendants are all geniuses: for some of us that will be true. Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.

    Replies: @AKAHorace, @Bill P

    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things.

    anonymous,

    sorry to be a bit of a pedant, but Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay “Such such were the joys”.

    Orwell was an anti Nazi, but I think that the message we should take from Steve’s quote from him is that on what level How you believe is as important as What you believe. Orwell hated Nazisim but could be dispassionate and honest about it’s appeal to people.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @AKAHorace

    Orwell's an interesting figure because he's a socialist who fought against fascism and communism. This lets both the right and left claim him.

    There was also his mockery of SJW-snowflake types avant la lettre--the left picks up every "fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, 'Nature Cure' quack, pacifist, and feminist in England." Obviously this makes him fun to quote for both alt-righters and Jacobin types.

    It's also amusing how many of the items in his list are true in altered form--the left now picks up vegans, body-positive types, Birkenstock-wearers, sex-maniacs of every type, Quakers, anti-vaxxers, pacifists, and of course huge numbers of feminists.

    Though nudism was picked up from Germany (they have a whole nudist subculture, FKK or Freikorperkultur) and mercifully hasn't become popular again.

    Replies: @syonredux

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @AKAHorace


    Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay “Such such were the joys”.
     
    In that essay he did actually write about a school bully, called Johnnie Hall as I recall, though it is many years since I read that work, who delighted in inflicting pain on smaller boys.The bully was stopped in his tracks by a sudden unexpected punch in the face from the blind side. Orwell expected retribution, but it never came. That was the lesson.

    Many years later I felt that John Kerry should have delivered the same treatment to those who orchestrated a campaign accusing him of cowardice in Vietnam. It probably would have shut them up. Ignoring them just gave them courage.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  24. @donut
    Orwell ! The mid right's favorite . 1984 , OMG it's here ! Wigan Pier , the working poor . What a tragedy . Well in America we have hundreds of Wigan'S Piers . Trailer parks . The poor aren't there because the elite has driven them down . They are there because they are stupid and lazy f**k ups that would trade their and their spawns future for a six pack and a nickle bag . And they can't learn their multiplication tables . What with all the booze and drugs . F**king hell man even I know through the alcoholic fog that 2+2 is 6 or 8 or whatever . No , wait it's 4 ! 2+2 is 4 .

    Replies: @donut, @Cortes

    Violence is in our nature , our basic nature . How ironic that the “Nazi’s” are afraid to use it against our racial enemies . There is only the dark and the light . Forget the Republic , Brutus , Cassius and Cato are dead , good riddance . Hail Caesar when he comes . Trump is only Galba , Otho or Vitellius . We wait for Trajan .

  25. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    US ended up with black problem cuz of slave trade.

    In contrast, there was NO REASON for Europe to let this happen, especially as Third World nations told the Europeans to Go Home.

    So, they went home. Why did they have to bring over the very people who told them to go home?

    Imagine there is an Algerian and Frenchman in Algeria.

    Algerian: “French pig, go home!”

    Frenchman goes back to France and then…

    Algerian: “Frenchman, let me into your nation.”

    Frenchman: “Algerian, come to France.”

    WTF is that?

    Are Europeans trying to gain moral advantage over the Third World?

    The moral logic being…

    “You xenophobic third worlders kicked us proto-globalist Europeans out, BUT we inclusive and tolerant Europeans invite you.”

    That way, the ex-imperialists are vindicated over the anti-imperialist third world nationalists.

    Whereas the anti-imperialist nationalists were ‘racist’, ‘intolerant’, and ‘xenophobic’ in kicking out the European foreigners, the Europeans are so ‘inclusive’ and ‘welcoming’ of the foreign non-whites.

    Maybe Europeans will gain moral pokemon points… but they’ll lose their homeland in the process.

    Is it worth losing one’s homeland to feel glibly virtuous?

  26. @Cagey Beast
    @Bill P

    I think you misread the passage; Orwell was describing the other man's fantasies, not his own. Also, Orwell went to Eton, not a piddling prep school.

    Replies: @jimmyriddle, @guest

    “Orwell was describing the other man’s fantasies, not his own.”

    Presumably Orwell had his own fantasies upon which to draw. He went to actual war against fascists in Spain (as recounted in Homage to Catalonia, published prior to Coming up for Air), where he might have thrown grenades instead of spanners at their heads.

    • Replies: @AKAHorace
    @guest

    What is really interesting about the later scenes is 1984 is that they were written by someone who had been briefly been picked up by political police in Barcelona, but who had also been a colonial policeman in Burma. Sorry if this is off topic.

    , @syonredux
    @guest


    “Orwell was describing the other man’s fantasies, not his own.”

    Presumably Orwell had his own fantasies upon which to draw. He went to actual war against fascists in Spain (as recounted in Homage to Catalonia, published prior to Coming up for Air), where he might have thrown grenades instead of spanners at their heads.
     
    Sure. To understand hatred, you must possess the ability to hate. To understand love, you must possess the ability to love. To understand greed, etc

    Jonathan Haidt has done interesting work stripping down human morality to six core intuitions: care/harm, fairness /cheating, liberty/oppression, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation. His studies indicate that SJWs are stunted in their perceptions, really only responding to care/harm and fairness /cheating. Conservatives, in contrast, feel the pull of all six. Hence, SJWs can't truly understand Conservative morality, whereas Conservatives are capable of understanding SJWs.
  27. @JohnnyD
    @Anon

    I recommend this Orwell essay, "What is Fascism?" He describes how fascism had become a meaningless word (in 1944!) used by people to smear their ideological opponents.

    http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc

    Replies: @Anon

    I recommend my insistence that I’m the only true fascist.

    Only I get it.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Anon

    What, Nietzsche's quip about Jesus?

    Replies: @Desiderius

  28. @guest
    @Cagey Beast

    "Orwell was describing the other man's fantasies, not his own."

    Presumably Orwell had his own fantasies upon which to draw. He went to actual war against fascists in Spain (as recounted in Homage to Catalonia, published prior to Coming up for Air), where he might have thrown grenades instead of spanners at their heads.

    Replies: @AKAHorace, @syonredux

    What is really interesting about the later scenes is 1984 is that they were written by someone who had been briefly been picked up by political police in Barcelona, but who had also been a colonial policeman in Burma. Sorry if this is off topic.

  29. @guest
    @Cagey Beast

    "Orwell was describing the other man's fantasies, not his own."

    Presumably Orwell had his own fantasies upon which to draw. He went to actual war against fascists in Spain (as recounted in Homage to Catalonia, published prior to Coming up for Air), where he might have thrown grenades instead of spanners at their heads.

    Replies: @AKAHorace, @syonredux

    “Orwell was describing the other man’s fantasies, not his own.”

    Presumably Orwell had his own fantasies upon which to draw. He went to actual war against fascists in Spain (as recounted in Homage to Catalonia, published prior to Coming up for Air), where he might have thrown grenades instead of spanners at their heads.

    Sure. To understand hatred, you must possess the ability to hate. To understand love, you must possess the ability to love. To understand greed, etc

    Jonathan Haidt has done interesting work stripping down human morality to six core intuitions: care/harm, fairness /cheating, liberty/oppression, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation. His studies indicate that SJWs are stunted in their perceptions, really only responding to care/harm and fairness /cheating. Conservatives, in contrast, feel the pull of all six. Hence, SJWs can’t truly understand Conservative morality, whereas Conservatives are capable of understanding SJWs.

  30. Isnt’ it kind of hypocritical of Unz.com to praise Orwell?

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/homage-to-orwell-1.154592

    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    @anony-mouse

    No.

  31. Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that’s gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven’t seen it

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Trelane

    "Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that’s gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven’t seen it"

    Gavin McInnes has admitted that women are his version of the Jews. He blames everything bad that happens in the world on women. He believes the worst thing to ever happen to The United States was the government giving women the legal right to vote.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @MBlanc46

    , @donut
    @Trelane

    The poor fool I'm sure that she and I would be so much happier if I were looking at the top of her head . And BTW I can't get the image of Gavin with Milo's tongue in his mouth out of my mind . She is not a raving lunatic , just a poor confused unattractive girl . But not a hysterical leftist . Gavin on the other hand is obsessed with anal sex and a bully as well . The poor girl , she doesn't know shit . She , oh wait their bodies . Well you all know the donut likes a chubby , to each his own right ? But while this poor girl is miss guided , confused and easily corrected Gavin is like all bullies a coward . Beat your meat Gavin not her . He has no gentlemanly instincts . Shit how did this f88kwit get on Takimag ? . While he bullies this poor girl I feel more sympathy for her . I guess while there is some remanent of a man in me ( is that possible ?) Gavin's manhood is fragile and always in doubt . Do you want traditional values Gavin ? If so then treat her like a lady . Hey Gavin try this :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gEnQ8VVWEU

    Replies: @guest

    , @donut
    @Trelane

    The poor fool I'm sure that she and I would be so much happier if I were looking at the top of her head . And BTW I can't get the image of Gavin with Milo's tongue in his mouth out of my mind . She is not a raving lunatic , just a poor confused unattractive girl . But not a hysterical leftist . Gavin on the other hand is obsessed with anal sex and a bully as well . The poor girl , she doesn't know shit . She , oh wait their bodies . Well you all know the donut likes a chubby , to each his own right ? But while this poor girl is miss guided , confused and easily corrected Gavin is like all bullies a coward . Beat your meat Gavin not her . He has no gentlemanly instincts . Shit how did this f88kwit get on Takimag ? . While he bullies this poor girl I feel more sympathy for her . I guess while there is some remanent of a man in me ( is that possible ?) Gavin's manhood is fragile and always in doubt . Do you want traditional values Gavin ? If so then treat her like a lady . Hey Gavin try this :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gEnQ8VVWEU

    Gavin is too old to be afraid of girls . Shit I tried to f**K my baby sitter in Venezuela when I was 7.

    , @Jim Smith
    @Trelane

    Good interview. Gavin hit Miss Scholl with a lot of strong points, and given the inherent problems of defending a difficult-to-defend point-of-view I thought she made made a game effort, apart from a few awkward retreats on her part. But alas, for all of Gavin's efforts, I found a photo of her at her website (heathermariescholl.com) holding a sign reading "Alt-Right=Neo-Nazi," which looked like it may have been taken at the Inauguration (it sounded like the interview was in 2015). Another photo from the website pictures the notorious "white lives matter too much" slogan, which Richard Spencer will not forget, and which may have originally been coined by Miss Scholl. Finally, I found evidence (again on the website) as to why Gavin's mock overtures to her toward the end were met so resolutely: two photos of Miss Scholl with a black woman who I was given to think may be her girlfriend. "Feminist Full" apparently equals "Brick Wall."

  32. What makes Orwell so powerful is his peculiar combination of a novelist’s ability to put himself inside other people’s heads and feel their emotions along with his ability to think objectively.

    Nah. He’s a good writer, but the thing that makes Orwell powerful as a political commentator is the ongoing belief by everyone that he’s on their side. Leftists love quoting Orwell, so when you turn the tables, it creates cognitive dissonance. That is all.

    If that passage had been written by a banker instead of the author of 1984, no one would care about it.

    • Replies: @NeonBets
    @Chrisnonymous


    He’s a good writer, but the thing that makes Orwell powerful as a political commentator is the ongoing belief by everyone that he’s on their side.
     
    It's all about the name. Orwell: It is just begging for eponymous expansion. Orwellian.

    A few decades back, it didn't matter what was actually being discussed...just go Full-Orwell and strategically drop an 'Orwellian' reference. Nobody knew what you meant by 'Orwellian', but they dared not ask, either. As a result, you 'owned' that conversation. It was all so easy.

    Where have you gone George Orwell
    Half the nation turns its lonely eyes to you.


    But I have to tip my hat to the Left--they are exceptional at sniffing out the fashionable trends. Regardless of what the man actually wrote, Orwell emerged as an oracle of all things left.

    Unfortunately, the intellectual potency of gratuitous 'Orwellian' references has been played out; a kind of 'entropy', I suppose. Now, even people with mere GEDs drop Orwell references. Orwell is to the Left what Metallica was to loyal fans right after it released 'The Unforgiven' ballad. Before 'The Unforgiven', Metallica fandom used to mean something. But now that my little sister is buying their album, it just ain't the same, man.

    There's an irony here: The author who wrote about the fact that the term 'Nazi' has lost its meaning, suffers the same fate.

    So the Left doesn't use Orwell so much anymore--unless, the speaker decides to drop an 'Orwelluvian' bomb. [Quick Quiz: What is the ideological lean of the speaker who utters the following: "It had an antediluvian-Orwelluvian ethos that was just so refreshing" ?
    We now have three stone-cold locks: Death. Taxes. And that speaker is a Leftist.]

    This fetish of dropping smart-sounding words wouldn't be so bad if it was reserved to the names of a few authors. But-- as I demonstrated with my exuberant effort to word-drop entropy into this post--it's not just the names of authors.

    MISOGYNY

    Now we have to suffer through leftists incessantly wanking on their own drawstrings, like some demented Howdy Doody doll in a Title IX t-shirt: "Misogyny! I hate Misogyny! Trump is a Misogynist!"

    Replies: @El Dato

  33. For you George Orwell fans, read “Down and out in Paris and London” sometime. A quick read.
    Here it is in PDF http://www.planetebook.com/ebooks/Down-and-Out-in-Paris-and-London.pdf

    Down and Out in Paris and London is the first full-length work by the English author George Orwell, published in 1933. It is a memoir[2] in two parts on the theme of poverty in the two cities. The first part is an account of living on the breadline in Paris and the experience of casual labour in restaurant kitchens. The second part is a travelogue of life on the road in and around London from the tramp’s perspective, with descriptions of the types of hostel accommodation available and some of the characters to be found living on the margins.
    wikipedia

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    @Clyde

    In my own rankings, I put Down and Out just behind Homage to Catalonia and ahead of 1984 and Animal Farm, with the WW2 BBC speeches in the middle. I'm never sure where to put Wigan Pier and Keep the Aspidastra Flying.

  34. @anony-mouse
    Isnt' it kind of hypocritical of Unz.com to praise Orwell?

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/homage-to-orwell-1.154592

    Replies: @Stebbing Heuer

    No.

  35. The remarkable thing about Orwell is not that he was a great thinker and deeply insightful—he was—but that he did his thinking with so much heart, honesty and good faith.

    It should be a commonplace trait among intellectuals, but sadly, it remains the rarest of qualities among them.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  36. As for the question what was older, fascist or anti-fascist violence.

    For Germany this can be answered rather simply. Fascism began under the socialist/communist republic of Munich. In most cases local fascism began with an assembly which was disrupted and fascists reacted with forming a group of militants to protect their own assemblies and to retaliate against the assemblies of the others. This led to a swift escalation. Here the experience of real fights formed the political worldview and preceded the definite political ideas.

    In the Anglosphere things were somewhat different. Fascism was imported as an outgrown political program which included restrictionist measures against Jews and Communists, even if (of course) not genocide. But in every other aspect syonredux’ description of affairs is correct: Anti-fascist violence was not so much a product of escalating local disruptions, but a measure to prevent a debate about the fascist program, in particular its restrictionist parts.

  37. @Almost Missouri
    @Anon

    Yes, this Dragon Tattoo-ism, if I may call it that, is a big thing among the young. I know one young woman, who is literally and unashamedly descended from Nazis, who nevertheless considers the Dragon Tattoo works to be thinly disguised documentaries of "what's really going on": hidden cabals of Nordic Nazi Gentlemen secretly running everything and murdering fetching young women because ... well, I'm not exactly clear why, it's just what evil Nordic Nazi Gentlemen do, dontcha know.

    And yes, disfiguring tattoos and piercings are part of the package.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    Judging by their tastes and hobbies, I think their antifascism might be more strongly informed by Pasolini’s (dreadful, gratuitously self-indulgent and empty-headed) film Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom than any dusty old political book (invariably written by some dead white male, and therefore contemptible).
    Books are such hard going, aren’t they? Twitter’s much more accessible, and therefore More True, in their world. The little blue bird decides who is, and is not, a Nazi. Twitfinder General.

  38. @Trelane
    Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that's gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven't seen it

    https://youtu.be/MFFJWzgUmTE?t=31

    Replies: @Jefferson, @donut, @donut, @Jim Smith

    “Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that’s gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven’t seen it”

    Gavin McInnes has admitted that women are his version of the Jews. He blames everything bad that happens in the world on women. He believes the worst thing to ever happen to The United States was the government giving women the legal right to vote.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Jefferson

    Either that or direct election of Senators.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Jim Don Bob

    , @MBlanc46
    @Jefferson

    Maybe not the worst. But on the shortlist.

  39. OT, the Guardian have a pro-Trump opinion piece, to balance the 3,286 abusive anti-Trump pieces. It’s pretty good. John Daniel Davidson.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions

    “Even now, recent polls show that more Americans support Trump’s executive order on immigration than oppose it, but you wouldn’t know it based on the media coverage.

    Support for Trump’s travel ban, indeed his entire agenda for immigration reform, is precisely the sort of thing mainstream media, concentrated in urban enclaves along our coasts, has trouble comprehending. The fact is, many Americans who voted for Trump, especially those in suburban and rural areas across the heartland and the south, have long felt disconnected from the institutions that govern them. On immigration and trade, the issues that propelled Trump to the White House, they want the status quo to change.

    During his first two weeks in office, whenever Trump has done something that leaves political and media elites aghast, his supporters cheer.”

    • Replies: @res
    @Anonymous Nephew

    Did you read the comments? It's a sacrificial opinion piece put out there to serve as a hate totem AFAICT.

  40. Coming Up For Air is one of the most under-rated novels ever.

  41. I read the whole page. It’s got the tone of a coming of age, except it’s for a middle-aged man.

  42. Also OT, NOAA climate scientist (just retired) says that they cherrypicked unverified data to produce the 2015 “No global warming pause” paper.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html

    “In an exclusive interview, Dr Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data – the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) – of ‘insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximised warming and minimised documentation… in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming pause, rushed so that he could time publication to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy’.

    Dr Bates was one of two Principal Scientists at NCEI, based in Asheville, North Carolina.

    Official delegations from America, Britain and the EU were strongly influenced by the flawed NOAA study as they hammered out the Paris Agreement – and committed advanced nations to sweeping reductions in their use of fossil fuel and to spending £80 billion every year on new, climate-related aid projects.”

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Anonymous Nephew

    Thanks for mentioning this. It's good that it's a guy straight out of NOAA itself doing the exposé. There's absolutely nothing surprising about what NOAA did -- they, and other nations' meteorology agencies, have been manipulating surface temperature records with merry abandon for years.

    So I'm wondering how much impact this scandal is going to make. The climategate email scandal several years ago involving many of the global warming high priests was damning, but it failed to derail the climate change movement, although perhaps it did do it some long-term, below-the-waterline damage.

    I'll be interested to see if this story makes it beyond the DM, and into the minds of any of the climate change believers I know.

  43. @anonymous reply to Bill P
    @Bill P

    Bill P - you did not understand Steve Sailer's point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things. And geniuses are never ever on their own; remember that. One should hope that one's descendants are all geniuses: for some of us that will be true. Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.

    Replies: @AKAHorace, @Bill P

    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school

    You don’t understand my point. Orwell wrote a long essay, replete with fascist imagery, about how miserable his life was in prep school.

    Here’s a quote:

    That was the pattern of school life — a continuous triumph of the strong over the weak. Virtue consisted in winning: it consisted in being bigger, stronger, handsomer, richer, more popular, more elegant, more unscrupulous than other people — in dominating them, bullying them, making them suffer pain, making them look foolish, getting the better of them in every way. Life was hierarchical and whatever happened was right. There were the strong, who deserved to win and always did win, and there were the weak, who deserved to lose and always did lose, everlastingly.

    You really think a guy who wrote that didn’t care about the “little losers” at his prep school? Orwell himself was the little loser! And he continued to be so almost until the end of his life, when he finally got some respect and made some money. And that never would have happened were it not for the Cold War.

    His most famous novel, 1984, draws not only on his experience working for the BBC during WWII, but also his childhood. That’s as plain as day.

    Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.

    You really don’t know Orwell at all, do you? Have you even read one of his books, or are you just trolling here?

    • Replies: @res
    @Bill P

    It is fascinating how some commenters at unz.com (e.g. the anonymous arguing with Bill P, to prevent any mistake) dig in and argue positions which are completely untenable given the facts.

  44. @David Davenport
    @Bill P

    Bill P.:

    Orwell lived during the WII era, during which time there were actual Fascists and real-life, violent anti-Fascists, as Steve says.

    I don't think that Eskimos dominated Orwell's old prep school, Eton, at least in that era.

    Perhaps you are projecting your own high school woes onto Orwell.

    Replies: @Bill P

    Orwell lived during the WII era, during which time there were actual Fascists and real-life, violent anti-Fascists, as Steve says.

    I don’t think that Eskimos dominated Orwell’s old prep school, Eton, at least in that era.

    Before Eton, Orwell went to St. Cyprian’s, which he hated. No, there probably weren’t many Jews there, but I didn’t mean to say there were. Only that being a boy on a scholarship around a bunch of richer kids is pretty awful, unless you have a strong community to protect you. Jews have a strong identity and community, so it isn’t so hard for them.

    Perhaps you are projecting your own high school woes onto Orwell.

    I was happy in high school, but before I got there I had to go through roughly the same thing Orwell did. And yes, it still brings back uncomfortable memories, just as Orwell’s childhood did for him.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Bill P

    Orwell on St Cyprian's


    St Cyprian's was an expensive and snobbish school which was in process of becoming more snobbish, and, I imagine, more expensive. The public school with which it had special connexions was Harrow, but during my time an increasing proportion of the boys went on to Eton. Most of them were the children of rich parents, but on the whole they were the un-aristocratic rich, the sort of people who live in huge shrubberied houses in Bournemouth or Richmond, and who have cars and butlers but not country estates. There were a few exotics among them — some South American boys, sons of Argentine beef barons, one or two Russians, and even a Siamese prince, or someone who was described as a prince.
    Sambo had two great ambitions. One was to attract titled boys to the school, and the other was to train up pupils to win scholarships at public schools, above all at Eton. He did, towards the end of my time, succeed in getting hold of two boys with real English titles. One of them, I remember, was a wretched drivelling little creature, almost an albino, peering upwards out of weak eyes, with a long nose at the end of which a dewdrop always seemed to be trembling. Sambo always gave these boys their titles when mentioning them to a third person, and for their first few days he actually addressed them to their faces as ‘Lord So-and-so.’ Needless to say he found ways of drawing attention to them when any visitor was being shown round the school. Once, I remember, the little fair-haired boy had a choking fit at dinner, and a stream of snot ran out of his nose on to his plate in a way horrible to see. Any lesser person would have been called a dirty little beast and ordered out of the room instantly: but Sambo and Flip laughed it off in a ‘boys will be boys' spirit.
    All the very rich boys were more or less undisguisedly favoured. The school still had a faint suggestion of the Victorian ‘private academy’ with its ‘parlour boarders’, and when I later read about that kind of school in Thackeray I immediately saw the resemblance. The rich boys had milk and biscuits in the middle of the morning, they were given riding lessons once or twice a week, Flip mothered them and called them by their Christian names, and above all they were never caned. Apart from the South Americans, whose parents were safely distant, I doubt whether Sambo ever caned any boy whose father's income was much above £2,000 a year. But he was sometimes willing to sacrifice financial profit to scholastic prestige. Occasionally, by special arrangement, he would take at greatly reduced fees some boy who seemed likely to win scholarships and thus bring credit on the school. It was on these terms that I was at St Cyprian's myself: otherwise my parents could not have afforded to send me to so expensive a school.
     
    http://orwell.ru/library/essays/joys/english/e_joys
  45. @Trelane
    Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that's gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven't seen it

    https://youtu.be/MFFJWzgUmTE?t=31

    Replies: @Jefferson, @donut, @donut, @Jim Smith

    The poor fool I’m sure that she and I would be so much happier if I were looking at the top of her head . And BTW I can’t get the image of Gavin with Milo’s tongue in his mouth out of my mind . She is not a raving lunatic , just a poor confused unattractive girl . But not a hysterical leftist . Gavin on the other hand is obsessed with anal sex and a bully as well . The poor girl , she doesn’t know shit . She , oh wait their bodies . Well you all know the donut likes a chubby , to each his own right ? But while this poor girl is miss guided , confused and easily corrected Gavin is like all bullies a coward . Beat your meat Gavin not her . He has no gentlemanly instincts . Shit how did this f88kwit get on Takimag ? . While he bullies this poor girl I feel more sympathy for her . I guess while there is some remanent of a man in me ( is that possible ?) Gavin’s manhood is fragile and always in doubt . Do you want traditional values Gavin ? If so then treat her like a lady . Hey Gavin try this :

    • Replies: @guest
    @donut

    If she doesn't want to be bullied, she can stay out of the arena. No man anywhere has an obligation to go easy on any woman in any head-on debate, ever. That will learn them either to debate like a man or stick to their own things.

    Now, if you'd characterize Gavin's behavior as bullying and ungentlemanly if aimed against a man of similar confusion and pitifulness, that's another matter. But I'd tell those men to be prepared. I don't care a fig about "poor" males or females who wander into Thunderdomes unprepared. Feminists in particular have had a century and more to learn how to deal with masculinist bullies. If they won't bother, back to the kitchen with them.

  46. @Trelane
    Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that's gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven't seen it

    https://youtu.be/MFFJWzgUmTE?t=31

    Replies: @Jefferson, @donut, @donut, @Jim Smith

    The poor fool I’m sure that she and I would be so much happier if I were looking at the top of her head . And BTW I can’t get the image of Gavin with Milo’s tongue in his mouth out of my mind . She is not a raving lunatic , just a poor confused unattractive girl . But not a hysterical leftist . Gavin on the other hand is obsessed with anal sex and a bully as well . The poor girl , she doesn’t know shit . She , oh wait their bodies . Well you all know the donut likes a chubby , to each his own right ? But while this poor girl is miss guided , confused and easily corrected Gavin is like all bullies a coward . Beat your meat Gavin not her . He has no gentlemanly instincts . Shit how did this f88kwit get on Takimag ? . While he bullies this poor girl I feel more sympathy for her . I guess while there is some remanent of a man in me ( is that possible ?) Gavin’s manhood is fragile and always in doubt . Do you want traditional values Gavin ? If so then treat her like a lady . Hey Gavin try this :

    Gavin is too old to be afraid of girls . Shit I tried to f**K my baby sitter in Venezuela when I was 7.

  47. @Trelane
    Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that's gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven't seen it

    https://youtu.be/MFFJWzgUmTE?t=31

    Replies: @Jefferson, @donut, @donut, @Jim Smith

    Good interview. Gavin hit Miss Scholl with a lot of strong points, and given the inherent problems of defending a difficult-to-defend point-of-view I thought she made made a game effort, apart from a few awkward retreats on her part. But alas, for all of Gavin’s efforts, I found a photo of her at her website (heathermariescholl.com) holding a sign reading “Alt-Right=Neo-Nazi,” which looked like it may have been taken at the Inauguration (it sounded like the interview was in 2015). Another photo from the website pictures the notorious “white lives matter too much” slogan, which Richard Spencer will not forget, and which may have originally been coined by Miss Scholl. Finally, I found evidence (again on the website) as to why Gavin’s mock overtures to her toward the end were met so resolutely: two photos of Miss Scholl with a black woman who I was given to think may be her girlfriend. “Feminist Full” apparently equals “Brick Wall.”

  48. @AKAHorace
    @anonymous reply to Bill P


    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things.

     

    anonymous,

    sorry to be a bit of a pedant, but Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay "Such such were the joys".

    Orwell was an anti Nazi, but I think that the message we should take from Steve's quote from him is that on what level How you believe is as important as What you believe. Orwell hated Nazisim but could be dispassionate and honest about it's appeal to people.

    Replies: @SFG, @Jonathan Mason

    Orwell’s an interesting figure because he’s a socialist who fought against fascism and communism. This lets both the right and left claim him.

    There was also his mockery of SJW-snowflake types avant la lettre–the left picks up every “fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist, and feminist in England.” Obviously this makes him fun to quote for both alt-righters and Jacobin types.

    It’s also amusing how many of the items in his list are true in altered form–the left now picks up vegans, body-positive types, Birkenstock-wearers, sex-maniacs of every type, Quakers, anti-vaxxers, pacifists, and of course huge numbers of feminists.

    Though nudism was picked up from Germany (they have a whole nudist subculture, FKK or Freikorperkultur) and mercifully hasn’t become popular again.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @SFG

    Frankly, most of the academic Leftists that I know regard Orwell as "problematic." His distaste for homosexuality, for example, looms increasingly large.

    Replies: @Dr Hook, @SFG, @Ivy, @Old Palo Altan

  49. @Chrisnonymous

    What makes Orwell so powerful is his peculiar combination of a novelist’s ability to put himself inside other people’s heads and feel their emotions along with his ability to think objectively.
     
    Nah. He's a good writer, but the thing that makes Orwell powerful as a political commentator is the ongoing belief by everyone that he's on their side. Leftists love quoting Orwell, so when you turn the tables, it creates cognitive dissonance. That is all.

    If that passage had been written by a banker instead of the author of 1984, no one would care about it.

    Replies: @NeonBets

    He’s a good writer, but the thing that makes Orwell powerful as a political commentator is the ongoing belief by everyone that he’s on their side.

    It’s all about the name. Orwell: It is just begging for eponymous expansion. Orwellian.

    A few decades back, it didn’t matter what was actually being discussed…just go Full-Orwell and strategically drop an ‘Orwellian’ reference. Nobody knew what you meant by ‘Orwellian’, but they dared not ask, either. As a result, you ‘owned’ that conversation. It was all so easy.

    Where have you gone George Orwell
    Half the nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

    But I have to tip my hat to the Left–they are exceptional at sniffing out the fashionable trends. Regardless of what the man actually wrote, Orwell emerged as an oracle of all things left.

    Unfortunately, the intellectual potency of gratuitous ‘Orwellian’ references has been played out; a kind of ‘entropy’, I suppose. Now, even people with mere GEDs drop Orwell references. Orwell is to the Left what Metallica was to loyal fans right after it released ‘The Unforgiven’ ballad. Before ‘The Unforgiven’, Metallica fandom used to mean something. But now that my little sister is buying their album, it just ain’t the same, man.

    There’s an irony here: The author who wrote about the fact that the term ‘Nazi’ has lost its meaning, suffers the same fate.

    So the Left doesn’t use Orwell so much anymore–unless, the speaker decides to drop an ‘Orwelluvian‘ bomb. [Quick Quiz: What is the ideological lean of the speaker who utters the following: “It had an antediluvian-Orwelluvian ethos that was just so refreshing” ?
    We now have three stone-cold locks: Death. Taxes. And that speaker is a Leftist.]

    This fetish of dropping smart-sounding words wouldn’t be so bad if it was reserved to the names of a few authors. But– as I demonstrated with my exuberant effort to word-drop entropy into this post–it’s not just the names of authors.

    MISOGYNY

    Now we have to suffer through leftists incessantly wanking on their own drawstrings, like some demented Howdy Doody doll in a Title IX t-shirt: “Misogyny! I hate Misogyny! Trump is a Misogynist!”

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @NeonBets

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4668-the-60th-anniversary-of-orwells-1984


    Sixty years following its first publication and twenty-five since the fateful year, George Orwell’s 1984 remains a mystery to the experts. They convene often in exotic places to agree that Orwell wrote a dystopia on the communist take-over of Britain and America. They concur how he reversed the final two digits of the year he wrote the book — 1948 — to arrive at the title 1984. They write that Orwell was not a prophet and few predictions fill his volume. These consensus beliefs on 1984 by the experts still shape the views of tens of millions of citizens who read Orwell’s work in the public schools and colleges.

    As we shall see, 1984 is, in fact, not a vilification of the Soviet dictator Stalin. Nor was the title chosen by reversing the final two digits of the year in which the book was written. Rather, the book is satire of the highest order written against Fabian socialists. They are the breed of English socialists seeking to reform the British economic system, favoring public ownership of the means of production. They also favor state-controlled schools, nationalization of land ownership, and the welfare state. Their foreign policy is internationalist. Orwell wrote his powerful satire to show how Fabian socialism could reform the world until it resembled Stalin’s Soviet Union, even if it took 100 years. Moreover, Orwell’s scenario is chock full of “predictions” — 137 of them — that describe the daily life of citizens in Anglo-America living in a socialist state modeled after the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin.
     
  50. @Bill P
    @David Davenport


    Orwell lived during the WII era, during which time there were actual Fascists and real-life, violent anti-Fascists, as Steve says.

    I don’t think that Eskimos dominated Orwell’s old prep school, Eton, at least in that era.
     
    Before Eton, Orwell went to St. Cyprian's, which he hated. No, there probably weren't many Jews there, but I didn't mean to say there were. Only that being a boy on a scholarship around a bunch of richer kids is pretty awful, unless you have a strong community to protect you. Jews have a strong identity and community, so it isn't so hard for them.

    Perhaps you are projecting your own high school woes onto Orwell.
     
    I was happy in high school, but before I got there I had to go through roughly the same thing Orwell did. And yes, it still brings back uncomfortable memories, just as Orwell's childhood did for him.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Orwell on St Cyprian’s

    St Cyprian’s was an expensive and snobbish school which was in process of becoming more snobbish, and, I imagine, more expensive. The public school with which it had special connexions was Harrow, but during my time an increasing proportion of the boys went on to Eton. Most of them were the children of rich parents, but on the whole they were the un-aristocratic rich, the sort of people who live in huge shrubberied houses in Bournemouth or Richmond, and who have cars and butlers but not country estates. There were a few exotics among them — some South American boys, sons of Argentine beef barons, one or two Russians, and even a Siamese prince, or someone who was described as a prince.
    Sambo had two great ambitions. One was to attract titled boys to the school, and the other was to train up pupils to win scholarships at public schools, above all at Eton. He did, towards the end of my time, succeed in getting hold of two boys with real English titles. One of them, I remember, was a wretched drivelling little creature, almost an albino, peering upwards out of weak eyes, with a long nose at the end of which a dewdrop always seemed to be trembling. Sambo always gave these boys their titles when mentioning them to a third person, and for their first few days he actually addressed them to their faces as ‘Lord So-and-so.’ Needless to say he found ways of drawing attention to them when any visitor was being shown round the school. Once, I remember, the little fair-haired boy had a choking fit at dinner, and a stream of snot ran out of his nose on to his plate in a way horrible to see. Any lesser person would have been called a dirty little beast and ordered out of the room instantly: but Sambo and Flip laughed it off in a ‘boys will be boys’ spirit.
    All the very rich boys were more or less undisguisedly favoured. The school still had a faint suggestion of the Victorian ‘private academy’ with its ‘parlour boarders’, and when I later read about that kind of school in Thackeray I immediately saw the resemblance. The rich boys had milk and biscuits in the middle of the morning, they were given riding lessons once or twice a week, Flip mothered them and called them by their Christian names, and above all they were never caned. Apart from the South Americans, whose parents were safely distant, I doubt whether Sambo ever caned any boy whose father’s income was much above £2,000 a year. But he was sometimes willing to sacrifice financial profit to scholastic prestige. Occasionally, by special arrangement, he would take at greatly reduced fees some boy who seemed likely to win scholarships and thus bring credit on the school. It was on these terms that I was at St Cyprian’s myself: otherwise my parents could not have afforded to send me to so expensive a school.

    http://orwell.ru/library/essays/joys/english/e_joys

  51. Of course, back then there were real Fascists.

    Steve, you need to get your chicken and egg adage in right and revisioned order.

    You can slack and pretend that all you know about Zer Godwin’s Collaterally Topic was obtained mainly from a required high school curriculum based on cousin Mike’s c0-staffer’s historical archives, or you can be a genuine iSteve and get your suckererpunch time-line straighten up.

    Modern Evolutionary Behavioral History Science claims that it was a proto-chicken of (((cosmopoliethnocentric))) totalitarian ideology, aka Communism, that hatched particular failed journalist and even more particular failed painter, eventually causing them both to embrace a spanner as their primary political tool.

    Random Exhibit 1:

    Béla Kohn’s Hollyhood-Steampunk styled Antifada haters of Western Civilization were punching Fascists almost ten years after Benito was already porking a Jewish Grandmother of Fascism Margherita Sarfatti , and some five years before he figured out that going full Johnny Cash and shaving his head would make him look even more menacing*.

    *From A. James Gregor’s “Young Mussolini and the Intellectual Origins of Fascism”:

    “…The opposition and attacks by the anti-interventionist revolutionary socialists against the Fascists and other interventionists were so violent that even democratic socialists who opposed the war such as Anna Kuliscioff said that the Italian Socialist Party had gone too far in a campaign of silencing the freedom of speech of supporters of the war.

    These early hostilities between the Fascists and the revolutionary socialists shaped Mussolini’s conception of the nature of Fascism in its support of political violence.”

    Random Exhibit 2:

    Lenin Boys Leader’s advice to the young & restless from February of 1919:

    “Everywhere counter-revolutionaries run about and swagger; beat them down!

    Beat their heads where you find them!

    If counter-revolutionaries were to gain the upper hand for even a single hour, there will be no mercy for any proletarian.

    Before they stifle the revolution, suffocate them in their own blood!”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibor_Szamuely

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin_Boys

    • Replies: @SFG
    @bored identity

    Wha...?

    He said 'back then'.

    Of course Fascism was at least in part a response to Communism. Communism's dead. What we have now is global capitalism in drag.

    Replies: @bored identity

  52. @SFG
    @AKAHorace

    Orwell's an interesting figure because he's a socialist who fought against fascism and communism. This lets both the right and left claim him.

    There was also his mockery of SJW-snowflake types avant la lettre--the left picks up every "fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, 'Nature Cure' quack, pacifist, and feminist in England." Obviously this makes him fun to quote for both alt-righters and Jacobin types.

    It's also amusing how many of the items in his list are true in altered form--the left now picks up vegans, body-positive types, Birkenstock-wearers, sex-maniacs of every type, Quakers, anti-vaxxers, pacifists, and of course huge numbers of feminists.

    Though nudism was picked up from Germany (they have a whole nudist subculture, FKK or Freikorperkultur) and mercifully hasn't become popular again.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Frankly, most of the academic Leftists that I know regard Orwell as “problematic.” His distaste for homosexuality, for example, looms increasingly large.

    • Replies: @Dr Hook
    @syonredux

    My favourite Orwell quote;

    "Where's the pink who'd think it odd of me,
    To write a shelf in praise of sodomy."

    (Orwell used words like pink and pinko long the John Birchers got going)

    , @SFG
    @syonredux

    Forgot about that. Makes sense--fewer and fewer writers of the past haven't committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    , @Ivy
    @syonredux

    English prep and public schools had many deviant students and staff. See Eton Voices book for reference.

    Orwell was on scholarship, so among the Togati (Tugs) named for the togas that classic students would have worn a few millennia ago. Tugs were a type of second class student (not quite affirmative action since meritorious, but subject to much snobbery) compared to the standard Eton students destined to be future statesmen, dictators, aesthetes and others.

    , @Old Palo Altan
    @syonredux

    Recently the unreconstructed Leftists who run the BBC refused to place a bust of Orwell in their new headquarters in London.
    They announced that it had been decided that Orwell was "too Left-wing" but everyone understood that it was because he liked Stalin no more than Hitler and was therefore dangerously unsound.

  53. @Anonymous Nephew
    OT, the Guardian have a pro-Trump opinion piece, to balance the 3,286 abusive anti-Trump pieces. It's pretty good. John Daniel Davidson.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/trump-not-fascist-champion-for-forgotten-millions


    "Even now, recent polls show that more Americans support Trump’s executive order on immigration than oppose it, but you wouldn’t know it based on the media coverage.

    Support for Trump’s travel ban, indeed his entire agenda for immigration reform, is precisely the sort of thing mainstream media, concentrated in urban enclaves along our coasts, has trouble comprehending. The fact is, many Americans who voted for Trump, especially those in suburban and rural areas across the heartland and the south, have long felt disconnected from the institutions that govern them. On immigration and trade, the issues that propelled Trump to the White House, they want the status quo to change.

    During his first two weeks in office, whenever Trump has done something that leaves political and media elites aghast, his supporters cheer."
     

    Replies: @res

    Did you read the comments? It’s a sacrificial opinion piece put out there to serve as a hate totem AFAICT.

  54. @Bill P
    @anonymous reply to Bill P


    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school
     
    You don't understand my point. Orwell wrote a long essay, replete with fascist imagery, about how miserable his life was in prep school.

    Here's a quote:

    That was the pattern of school life — a continuous triumph of the strong over the weak. Virtue consisted in winning: it consisted in being bigger, stronger, handsomer, richer, more popular, more elegant, more unscrupulous than other people — in dominating them, bullying them, making them suffer pain, making them look foolish, getting the better of them in every way. Life was hierarchical and whatever happened was right. There were the strong, who deserved to win and always did win, and there were the weak, who deserved to lose and always did lose, everlastingly.
     
    You really think a guy who wrote that didn't care about the "little losers" at his prep school? Orwell himself was the little loser! And he continued to be so almost until the end of his life, when he finally got some respect and made some money. And that never would have happened were it not for the Cold War.

    His most famous novel, 1984, draws not only on his experience working for the BBC during WWII, but also his childhood. That's as plain as day.

    Not for Jew-haters and Christia-haters and similar bigots, though. Orwell understood that.
     
    You really don't know Orwell at all, do you? Have you even read one of his books, or are you just trolling here?

    Replies: @res

    It is fascinating how some commenters at unz.com (e.g. the anonymous arguing with Bill P, to prevent any mistake) dig in and argue positions which are completely untenable given the facts.

  55. @Clyde
    For you George Orwell fans, read "Down and out in Paris and London" sometime. A quick read.
    Here it is in PDF http://www.planetebook.com/ebooks/Down-and-Out-in-Paris-and-London.pdf

    Down and Out in Paris and London is the first full-length work by the English author George Orwell, published in 1933. It is a memoir[2] in two parts on the theme of poverty in the two cities. The first part is an account of living on the breadline in Paris and the experience of casual labour in restaurant kitchens. The second part is a travelogue of life on the road in and around London from the tramp's perspective, with descriptions of the types of hostel accommodation available and some of the characters to be found living on the margins.
    wikipedia
     

    Replies: @Hunsdon

    In my own rankings, I put Down and Out just behind Homage to Catalonia and ahead of 1984 and Animal Farm, with the WW2 BBC speeches in the middle. I’m never sure where to put Wigan Pier and Keep the Aspidastra Flying.

  56. The Soviets and their puppets were in the habit of calling the West “fascist” and Western leaders and prominent persons “fascist” without any real regard to their domestic politics in their home nations. I believe the moniker was employed within the Soviet Union to political dissidents, and further applied the epithet in intraparty disagreements. “Fascist” simply came to mean anyone around the world who was not completely in line with the Revolution (without regard for what the Revolution had gotten itself up to recently).

    The Left in the United States (see above, “puppets”) took up this habit sometime in the 1970s if I recall correctly. It really just applies to anyone who exercises authority (or supports the exercise of authority) outside of the aegis of the revolutionary Left.

    This is why not wanting to pay for someone else’s birth control is fascist, but summarily depriving a man of liberty or property on the sayso of a scorned woman without due process, a presumption of guilt, a reversed burden of production, no legal representation, no ability to see evidence against him or confront witnesses, and without the ability to introduce exculpatory evidence does not ring any “fascism” bells for these same people. “Fascism” is just what they call the other tribe in order to give historical meaning to their own movement while indicting the other tribe with a bill of thousands of historical crimes (of which the alleged anti-fascists heartily partook themselves).

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Alec Leamas

    I remember when the ChiComms were in full throat under Mao and used to talk about the "running dogs of imperialism" and "capitalist roaders" and people could be sent to jail for "hooliganism".

  57. Anonymous [AKA "johngeard"] says:
    @Anon
    What came first? The fascist or the anti-fascist hate?

    Do fascists exist and draw prog hatred OR do progs feel a need to hate and conjure fascists to justify their rage?

    If fascists didn't exist, they would have to be invented because they are the only permissible objects of hate. Since most people, esp the young, are mindless sheeple, they go along with the Narrative beamed into their minds by media and academia.

    Also, even if the progs aren't well-read, they got their 'anti-fascist' attitudes from stuff like MATRIX films, PAN'S LABYRINTH, DJANGO UNCHAINED & INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO, anti-Nazi WWII video games, sci-fi spectacles, and The Clash & Rage against the Machine albums. It's supposed to be 'cool'. (Among them, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO may be especially influential in encouraging progs to get piercings and tattoos as the radical look.)

    In the middle ages, the only permissible target of hatred were witches, so people went after witches. Today, it's 'nazis' and 'fascists'.

    Replies: @JohnnyD, @Almost Missouri, @Anonymous, @El Dato

    All social movements need a devil.

  58. I have to admit that I’ve never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century’s mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers.

    • Replies: @Jake
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century’s mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers."

    I agree. Lewis is a great apologist, but only if he is used to lead the reader to Aquinas and Augustine.

    Orwell is fun to read, but he is limited, in that typical English way.

    Replies: @David Davenport

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Intelligent Dasein


    Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century’s mightiest apologist
     
    I agree. I think Lewis's Christian apologetics are feeble and the fact that he is still highly regarded in some circles speaks very poorly of those who have come after him.

    For example Lewis's famous analogy that we must either regard Jesus as crazy as a man who says he is a poached egg, or we must regard him as a supernatural savior is one of the silliest things I have ever heard. This line of argument demonstrates zero knowledge of the history of religion, of biblical studies, or of mental illness, for that matter. Lewis should have been ashamed of himself.

    By the way, Orwell despised Lewis.

    http://www.telelib.com/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19441027.html

    , @David Davenport
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I have to admit that I’ve never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Herr Dasein:

    Why do you use a pseudonym which name-drops Martin Heidegger?

    Is that supposed to lend your words some additional cachet? Why do you think that would work?

    By the way, Googling "Dasein," the second entry is:

    Dasein Handbags - Overstock.com Shopping - Stylish Designer Bags.
    https://www.overstock.com/Clothing-Shoes/Handbags/Dasein,/brand,/111/dept.html
    Results 1 - 60 of 439 - Dasein Handbags: Free Shipping on orders over $45! Find totes, satchels, and more from Overstock.com Your Online Clothing & Shoes .

    I doubt that this entry is the allusion you want.

    , @SFG
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Orwell wasn't a conservative. He went after commies and that's why conservatives quote him, but he was a man of the left.

    What's your disagreement with Lewis?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Chrisnonymous

  59. @bored identity

    Of course, back then there were real Fascists.
     
    Steve, you need to get your chicken and egg adage in right and revisioned order.

    You can slack and pretend that all you know about Zer Godwin's Collaterally Topic was obtained mainly from a required high school curriculum based on cousin Mike's c0-staffer's historical archives, or you can be a genuine iSteve and get your suckererpunch time-line straighten up.

    Modern Evolutionary Behavioral History Science claims that it was a proto-chicken of (((cosmopoliethnocentric))) totalitarian ideology, aka Communism, that hatched particular failed journalist and even more particular failed painter, eventually causing them both to embrace a spanner as their primary political tool.


    Random Exhibit 1:

    Béla Kohn's Hollyhood-Steampunk styled Antifada haters of Western Civilization were punching Fascists almost ten years after Benito was already porking a Jewish Grandmother of Fascism Margherita Sarfatti , and some five years before he figured out that going full Johnny Cash and shaving his head would make him look even more menacing*.


    *From A. James Gregor's "Young Mussolini and the Intellectual Origins of Fascism":

    "...The opposition and attacks by the anti-interventionist revolutionary socialists against the Fascists and other interventionists were so violent that even democratic socialists who opposed the war such as Anna Kuliscioff said that the Italian Socialist Party had gone too far in a campaign of silencing the freedom of speech of supporters of the war.

    These early hostilities between the Fascists and the revolutionary socialists shaped Mussolini's conception of the nature of Fascism in its support of political violence."

     
    Random Exhibit 2:

    Lenin Boys Leader's advice to the young & restless from February of 1919:



    "Everywhere counter-revolutionaries run about and swagger; beat them down!

    Beat their heads where you find them!

    If counter-revolutionaries were to gain the upper hand for even a single hour, there will be no mercy for any proletarian.

    Before they stifle the revolution, suffocate them in their own blood!"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibor_Szamuely

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin_Boys

     

    Replies: @SFG

    Wha…?

    He said ‘back then’.

    Of course Fascism was at least in part a response to Communism. Communism’s dead. What we have now is global capitalism in drag.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @bored identity
    @SFG

    Back then...
    Real Fascists...


    I don't know from which time traveling capsule both of you were smoking whatever you smoked...but I can tell you that revisioning good chunk of histerical data of the last hundred years could be a healthy mental cleansing activity.

    I've never met " a real fascist from beck then", but it's been about a quarter of century that mediocre human beings are imposing Godwin's Law and chilling effect on me by discovering real- fascists-from-back-then popping from everywhere.

    It just doesn't work anymore.



    Communism was never about redistribution of wealth to poor; total displacement of Western Civilization and Christianity was and is the ultimate goal.

    The point is that if the narrative from the Europe of 1920's and 1930's was fed to my parents and me by the very same institutionalized media conglomerates (while back then they have had a full control of information distribution ) that are trying to brainwash my children today, why would anyone take for granted NYT front page from 1924?



    Why would I shit my pants over tribal historical interpretations of News & Academia two percenters whose professional integrity and allegiance to this country will always be undermined by their cosmopoliethnocentrical interests and desire to control the past so they can control the future.?

    That's why they can't allow Trump to control the present...

    And that's why questionable flashbacks from 1938. will continue to stroboscope on our children's children hypothalami until each of them submits their souls to the new normal.



    WHO PUNCHED FASCISTS IN THE PAST,WILL PUNCH FASCISTS IN THE FUTURE,

    WHO PUNCHES FASCISTS IN THE PRESENT, ALSO PUNCHES FASCISTS IN THE PAST!



    Now class,repeat after me!

  60. Interesting perspective coming from Orwell.

    I recall decades ago my father suggesting that the core motivation of the left is hatred, and that of the right, greed (as generalisations, obviously). This was in the left/right political context of the latter half of the C20th.

    I think he attributed it to someone (perhaps even Orwell), but I don’t recall whom. It stuck with me because it was so directly counter to the left’s own opinion of its motivation, as being caring and loving in contrast to the hatred of the right.

    Over the years as the left has become ever more culturally and politically dominant in my country (and in the US), I have seen the truth of the first part, at least, demonstrated ever more clearly.

  61. @Jefferson
    @Trelane

    "Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that’s gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven’t seen it"

    Gavin McInnes has admitted that women are his version of the Jews. He blames everything bad that happens in the world on women. He believes the worst thing to ever happen to The United States was the government giving women the legal right to vote.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @MBlanc46

    Either that or direct election of Senators.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Jim Don Bob

    "Either that or direct election of Senators."

    I wish there were term limits for Non POTUS political office so that we are not stuck with the likes of Nancy Pelosi who plans to be a congresswoman until she drops dead from old age. What if we are stuck with her for another 10-to-15 years or even 20 years? Who knows how long that bitch is going to live.

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Jim Don Bob

    The Supreme Court in the mid-90s struck down 5-4 the term limits that had been enacted by several states despite that fact that the Constitution leaves matters of elections largely to the states. That decision. and many other 5-4 ones, would probably have been different had Robert Bork been confirmed to the Supremes.

  62. @syonredux
    @SFG

    Frankly, most of the academic Leftists that I know regard Orwell as "problematic." His distaste for homosexuality, for example, looms increasingly large.

    Replies: @Dr Hook, @SFG, @Ivy, @Old Palo Altan

    My favourite Orwell quote;

    “Where’s the pink who’d think it odd of me,
    To write a shelf in praise of sodomy.”

    (Orwell used words like pink and pinko long the John Birchers got going)

  63. @Alec Leamas
    The Soviets and their puppets were in the habit of calling the West "fascist" and Western leaders and prominent persons "fascist" without any real regard to their domestic politics in their home nations. I believe the moniker was employed within the Soviet Union to political dissidents, and further applied the epithet in intraparty disagreements. "Fascist" simply came to mean anyone around the world who was not completely in line with the Revolution (without regard for what the Revolution had gotten itself up to recently).

    The Left in the United States (see above, "puppets") took up this habit sometime in the 1970s if I recall correctly. It really just applies to anyone who exercises authority (or supports the exercise of authority) outside of the aegis of the revolutionary Left.

    This is why not wanting to pay for someone else's birth control is fascist, but summarily depriving a man of liberty or property on the sayso of a scorned woman without due process, a presumption of guilt, a reversed burden of production, no legal representation, no ability to see evidence against him or confront witnesses, and without the ability to introduce exculpatory evidence does not ring any "fascism" bells for these same people. "Fascism" is just what they call the other tribe in order to give historical meaning to their own movement while indicting the other tribe with a bill of thousands of historical crimes (of which the alleged anti-fascists heartily partook themselves).

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    I remember when the ChiComms were in full throat under Mao and used to talk about the “running dogs of imperialism” and “capitalist roaders” and people could be sent to jail for “hooliganism”.

  64. I have to admit that I’ve never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Orwell served as a colonial policeman in Burma where he was in charge of security at one of the world’s biggest oil refineries that was under terrorist threat, fought against fascism as a volunteer in the Spanish Civil War where he was shot through the throat and lucky to survive, lived through the Blitz in London during World War II, and wrote and broadcast wartime propaganda for the BBC.

    He also lived as a hobo among the poor and homeless in London and Paris, worked as a dishwasher, worked as an itinerant hop-picker, ran a one-man convenience store for a while, and went down coal mines where he had to crawl on his hands and knees for miles to see at first hand the conditions at the coal face.

    In his spare time he wrote two of the most seminal books ever written, Nineteen-Eighty Four and Animal Farm, as well as a number of other excellent and fascinating books including Burmese Days, Coming Up For Air, The Road to Wigan Pier, Homage to Catalonia, some of the best essays ever written in the English language on subjects as diverse as how to make a cup of tea, personal observations of a hanging, and brilliant dissection of Charles Dickens and Leo Tolstoy. He also wrote many brilliant journalistic columns.

    He died at the age of 47 from tuberculosis, which he probably picked up during his hobo days in homeless shelters.

    Now tell me which US pundits volunteered to join the Contras in Nicaragua to fight communism?

    Almost everything that happens in US politics today in some way reflects ideas that Orwell wrote about or predicted before his death in 1950. That is why he is still incredibly important, and no one can really be politically literate without knowing his writings. Even his essay A Hanging is still mandatory reading for anyone who wants to discuss capital punishment.

    It is curious, but till that moment I had never realized what it means to destroy a healthy, conscious man. When I saw the prisoner step aside to avoid the puddle, I saw the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness, of cutting a life short when it is in full tide. This man was not dying, he was alive just as we were alive. All the organs of his body were working — bowels digesting food, skin renewing itself, nails growing, tissues forming — all toiling away in solemn foolery. His nails would still be growing when he stood on the drop, when he was falling through the air with a tenth of a second to live. His eyes saw the yellow gravel and the grey walls, and his brain still remembered, foresaw, reasoned — reasoned even about puddles. He and we were a party of men walking together, seeing, hearing, feeling, understanding the same world; and in two minutes, with a sudden snap, one of us would be gone — one mind less, one world less.

  65. @Intelligent Dasein
    I have to admit that I've never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century's mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers.

    Replies: @Jake, @Jonathan Mason, @David Davenport, @SFG

    “Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century’s mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers.”

    I agree. Lewis is a great apologist, but only if he is used to lead the reader to Aquinas and Augustine.

    Orwell is fun to read, but he is limited, in that typical English way.

    • Replies: @David Davenport
    @Jake

    Orwell is fun to read, but he is limited, in that typical English way.

    Please explain to us the typical, English limitations Orwell had.

  66. @AKAHorace
    @anonymous reply to Bill P


    Bill P – you did not understand Steve Sailer’s point at all, did you ? George Orwell worked hard to understand the world he lived in and you owe it to him to try a little harder than you did. Hint: Orwell was a genius and he did not care at all about the little losers at his prep school. There are many things that geniuses care about but high school losers are not one of those things.

     

    anonymous,

    sorry to be a bit of a pedant, but Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay "Such such were the joys".

    Orwell was an anti Nazi, but I think that the message we should take from Steve's quote from him is that on what level How you believe is as important as What you believe. Orwell hated Nazisim but could be dispassionate and honest about it's appeal to people.

    Replies: @SFG, @Jonathan Mason

    Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay “Such such were the joys”.

    In that essay he did actually write about a school bully, called Johnnie Hall as I recall, though it is many years since I read that work, who delighted in inflicting pain on smaller boys.The bully was stopped in his tracks by a sudden unexpected punch in the face from the blind side. Orwell expected retribution, but it never came. That was the lesson.

    Many years later I felt that John Kerry should have delivered the same treatment to those who orchestrated a campaign accusing him of cowardice in Vietnam. It probably would have shut them up. Ignoring them just gave them courage.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Jonathan Mason

    Who exactly accused Kerry of "cowardice" in Vietnam?

  67. @Jefferson
    @Trelane

    "Gavin McInnes vs. Feminist is comedy gold (that’s gold Jerry, gold!) if you haven’t seen it"

    Gavin McInnes has admitted that women are his version of the Jews. He blames everything bad that happens in the world on women. He believes the worst thing to ever happen to The United States was the government giving women the legal right to vote.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @MBlanc46

    Maybe not the worst. But on the shortlist.

    • Agree: BB753
  68. @Intelligent Dasein
    I have to admit that I've never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century's mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers.

    Replies: @Jake, @Jonathan Mason, @David Davenport, @SFG

    Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century’s mightiest apologist

    I agree. I think Lewis’s Christian apologetics are feeble and the fact that he is still highly regarded in some circles speaks very poorly of those who have come after him.

    For example Lewis’s famous analogy that we must either regard Jesus as crazy as a man who says he is a poached egg, or we must regard him as a supernatural savior is one of the silliest things I have ever heard. This line of argument demonstrates zero knowledge of the history of religion, of biblical studies, or of mental illness, for that matter. Lewis should have been ashamed of himself.

    By the way, Orwell despised Lewis.

    http://www.telelib.com/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19441027.html

  69. @donut
    @Trelane

    The poor fool I'm sure that she and I would be so much happier if I were looking at the top of her head . And BTW I can't get the image of Gavin with Milo's tongue in his mouth out of my mind . She is not a raving lunatic , just a poor confused unattractive girl . But not a hysterical leftist . Gavin on the other hand is obsessed with anal sex and a bully as well . The poor girl , she doesn't know shit . She , oh wait their bodies . Well you all know the donut likes a chubby , to each his own right ? But while this poor girl is miss guided , confused and easily corrected Gavin is like all bullies a coward . Beat your meat Gavin not her . He has no gentlemanly instincts . Shit how did this f88kwit get on Takimag ? . While he bullies this poor girl I feel more sympathy for her . I guess while there is some remanent of a man in me ( is that possible ?) Gavin's manhood is fragile and always in doubt . Do you want traditional values Gavin ? If so then treat her like a lady . Hey Gavin try this :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gEnQ8VVWEU

    Replies: @guest

    If she doesn’t want to be bullied, she can stay out of the arena. No man anywhere has an obligation to go easy on any woman in any head-on debate, ever. That will learn them either to debate like a man or stick to their own things.

    Now, if you’d characterize Gavin’s behavior as bullying and ungentlemanly if aimed against a man of similar confusion and pitifulness, that’s another matter. But I’d tell those men to be prepared. I don’t care a fig about “poor” males or females who wander into Thunderdomes unprepared. Feminists in particular have had a century and more to learn how to deal with masculinist bullies. If they won’t bother, back to the kitchen with them.

  70. @Intelligent Dasein
    I have to admit that I've never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century's mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers.

    Replies: @Jake, @Jonathan Mason, @David Davenport, @SFG

    I have to admit that I’ve never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Herr Dasein:

    Why do you use a pseudonym which name-drops Martin Heidegger?

    Is that supposed to lend your words some additional cachet? Why do you think that would work?

    By the way, Googling “Dasein,” the second entry is:

    Dasein Handbags – Overstock.com Shopping – Stylish Designer Bags.
    https://www.overstock.com/Clothing-Shoes/Handbags/Dasein,/brand,/111/dept.html
    Results 1 – 60 of 439 – Dasein Handbags: Free Shipping on orders over $45! Find totes, satchels, and more from Overstock.com Your Online Clothing & Shoes .

    I doubt that this entry is the allusion you want.

  71. @syonredux
    @SFG

    Frankly, most of the academic Leftists that I know regard Orwell as "problematic." His distaste for homosexuality, for example, looms increasingly large.

    Replies: @Dr Hook, @SFG, @Ivy, @Old Palo Altan

    Forgot about that. Makes sense–fewer and fewer writers of the past haven’t committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @SFG


    Forgot about that. Makes sense–fewer and fewer writers of the past haven’t committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.
     
    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality, which was illegal anyway, and this was long before the days that all homosexuals wanted to do was to fall in love and marry each other and have wedding cakes. On the other hand, the Roman authors like Catullus might appeal more to contemporary sensibilities.

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @syonredux

  72. @Intelligent Dasein
    I have to admit that I've never been a fan of George Orwell, or the legions of libertarian keyboard cowboys who like to preface their blog posts by spouting some quote of his, as if that lends their own words some additional cachet. Why do they think that would work? Who the hell is George Orwell?

    Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century's mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers.

    Replies: @Jake, @Jonathan Mason, @David Davenport, @SFG

    Orwell wasn’t a conservative. He went after commies and that’s why conservatives quote him, but he was a man of the left.

    What’s your disagreement with Lewis?

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @SFG

    Lewis was an Anglican by rite and something of a pan-Christian generalist, so I do have theological disagreements with him, but that isn't what this about. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing. It's about style.

    Lewis was every inch of him the Oxbridge don. His lifestyle colored his sentiments to no small degree. His entire apologetical approach breathes the atmosphere of the English university. It would be correct to say, as he himself said on various occasions, that literature was his spiritual practice, the framework of his own personal piety.

    That's fine as far as it goes. But I think that modern readers of Lewis tend to mistake the lifestyle for the religion. They see the English countryside, the comfy armchair, the roaring fire, the cup of tea, and the big pile of books and endless leisure with which to read them, as Christianity itself.

    This whole way of life was somewhat overripened to begin with, and could survive only in the hothouse, hyper-literate environment of the twilight of the British Empire. It is distinctly out of place in this day and age, but clutched at all the more due to its redolence of grander ages. It signifies the last time that tired, merely habitual and cultural Christianity might have sufficed, and consequently has a natural appeal for lazy Christians who don't want to be bothered to do much of anything for the faith except read a bunch of great books.

    Don't even get me started on G.K. Chesterton.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Dan Hayes

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @SFG

    Lewis is great to read if you enjoy the time and place he lived, but his apologetics are a hodgepodge of his own ideas based on his own experience, own opinions about literature, etc. Americans love him in part because he maintained a distance from the formal institutions of his church. When it comes to something like theodicy, however, he's rather unconvincing if you aren't predisposed to agree with him.

  73. @SFG
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Orwell wasn't a conservative. He went after commies and that's why conservatives quote him, but he was a man of the left.

    What's your disagreement with Lewis?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Chrisnonymous

    Lewis was an Anglican by rite and something of a pan-Christian generalist, so I do have theological disagreements with him, but that isn’t what this about. It’s not about agreeing or disagreeing. It’s about style.

    Lewis was every inch of him the Oxbridge don. His lifestyle colored his sentiments to no small degree. His entire apologetical approach breathes the atmosphere of the English university. It would be correct to say, as he himself said on various occasions, that literature was his spiritual practice, the framework of his own personal piety.

    That’s fine as far as it goes. But I think that modern readers of Lewis tend to mistake the lifestyle for the religion. They see the English countryside, the comfy armchair, the roaring fire, the cup of tea, and the big pile of books and endless leisure with which to read them, as Christianity itself.

    This whole way of life was somewhat overripened to begin with, and could survive only in the hothouse, hyper-literate environment of the twilight of the British Empire. It is distinctly out of place in this day and age, but clutched at all the more due to its redolence of grander ages. It signifies the last time that tired, merely habitual and cultural Christianity might have sufficed, and consequently has a natural appeal for lazy Christians who don’t want to be bothered to do much of anything for the faith except read a bunch of great books.

    Don’t even get me started on G.K. Chesterton.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @Intelligent Dasein


    They see the English countryside, the comfy armchair, the roaring fire, the cup of tea, and the big pile of books and endless leisure with which to read them, as Christianity itself.
     
    Obviously, confusing the church with heaven.
    , @Dan Hayes
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Intelligent Dasein:

    Why don't you get started on G K Chesterton?

    I am under the impression that Steve may admire/respect GKC.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

  74. @SFG
    @syonredux

    Forgot about that. Makes sense--fewer and fewer writers of the past haven't committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Forgot about that. Makes sense–fewer and fewer writers of the past haven’t committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.

    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality, which was illegal anyway, and this was long before the days that all homosexuals wanted to do was to fall in love and marry each other and have wedding cakes. On the other hand, the Roman authors like Catullus might appeal more to contemporary sensibilities.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    @Jonathan Mason

    For what it is worth, I recall Orwell also seemed to feel that the moral panic about homosexuality - which he associated with masturbation - was much out of proportion out of commonality, if not harm.

    Replies: @syonredux

    , @syonredux
    @Jonathan Mason


    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality,
     
    Well, not publicly.....but there was a coterie of patrician "inverts"......love between fellows.....the "higher sodomy", etc

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  75. Orwell’s great

  76. @SFG
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Orwell wasn't a conservative. He went after commies and that's why conservatives quote him, but he was a man of the left.

    What's your disagreement with Lewis?

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Chrisnonymous

    Lewis is great to read if you enjoy the time and place he lived, but his apologetics are a hodgepodge of his own ideas based on his own experience, own opinions about literature, etc. Americans love him in part because he maintained a distance from the formal institutions of his church. When it comes to something like theodicy, however, he’s rather unconvincing if you aren’t predisposed to agree with him.

  77. @Intelligent Dasein
    @SFG

    Lewis was an Anglican by rite and something of a pan-Christian generalist, so I do have theological disagreements with him, but that isn't what this about. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing. It's about style.

    Lewis was every inch of him the Oxbridge don. His lifestyle colored his sentiments to no small degree. His entire apologetical approach breathes the atmosphere of the English university. It would be correct to say, as he himself said on various occasions, that literature was his spiritual practice, the framework of his own personal piety.

    That's fine as far as it goes. But I think that modern readers of Lewis tend to mistake the lifestyle for the religion. They see the English countryside, the comfy armchair, the roaring fire, the cup of tea, and the big pile of books and endless leisure with which to read them, as Christianity itself.

    This whole way of life was somewhat overripened to begin with, and could survive only in the hothouse, hyper-literate environment of the twilight of the British Empire. It is distinctly out of place in this day and age, but clutched at all the more due to its redolence of grander ages. It signifies the last time that tired, merely habitual and cultural Christianity might have sufficed, and consequently has a natural appeal for lazy Christians who don't want to be bothered to do much of anything for the faith except read a bunch of great books.

    Don't even get me started on G.K. Chesterton.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Dan Hayes

    They see the English countryside, the comfy armchair, the roaring fire, the cup of tea, and the big pile of books and endless leisure with which to read them, as Christianity itself.

    Obviously, confusing the church with heaven.

  78. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    @Jefferson

    It's odd that Fox is not doing this. News.com.au and other Murdoch-owned Australian papers bash Trump with a constant stream negative press. Particularly hard to deal with is the bashing of Trump over Turnbull's bad deal to palm off the economic migrants in detention, that was finalized with lame duck Obama after Trump was elected. Only someone as smug as Turnbull could think that this would be a great way to greet an incoming president. "Here you go Mr Trump, have some of our wretched refuse! Not good enough for Australia, but clearly good enough for you! I'll just sit back and wait for my Time Magazine cover..."

    Replies: @anon

    It’s odd that Fox is not doing this. News.com.au and other Murdoch-owned Australian papers bash Trump with a constant stream negative press.

    It’s the combination of two things.

    Anti-Trumpism has two strands, the SJW strand and the cheap labor strand. The media is owned by the cheap labor strand but use SJW arguments as camouflage.

    That’s the first thing.

    Separately when SJW went anti-Israel (BDS etc) an anti-SJW strand popped up in the media which is seen as part of the alt-right because they attack a lot of the same targets but isn’t WN at all, at least not directly; it’s a pro-Israel thing in disguise.

    Hence Fox being out of sync with the rest of the media on Milo and McInnes. Fox is generally more pro-Israel and therefore supports the attack on SJWs.

    In a nutshell it’s more evidence of a growing split between the banking mafia faction and the pro-Israel faction.

  79. @Intelligent Dasein
    @SFG

    Lewis was an Anglican by rite and something of a pan-Christian generalist, so I do have theological disagreements with him, but that isn't what this about. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing. It's about style.

    Lewis was every inch of him the Oxbridge don. His lifestyle colored his sentiments to no small degree. His entire apologetical approach breathes the atmosphere of the English university. It would be correct to say, as he himself said on various occasions, that literature was his spiritual practice, the framework of his own personal piety.

    That's fine as far as it goes. But I think that modern readers of Lewis tend to mistake the lifestyle for the religion. They see the English countryside, the comfy armchair, the roaring fire, the cup of tea, and the big pile of books and endless leisure with which to read them, as Christianity itself.

    This whole way of life was somewhat overripened to begin with, and could survive only in the hothouse, hyper-literate environment of the twilight of the British Empire. It is distinctly out of place in this day and age, but clutched at all the more due to its redolence of grander ages. It signifies the last time that tired, merely habitual and cultural Christianity might have sufficed, and consequently has a natural appeal for lazy Christians who don't want to be bothered to do much of anything for the faith except read a bunch of great books.

    Don't even get me started on G.K. Chesterton.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Dan Hayes

    Intelligent Dasein:

    Why don’t you get started on G K Chesterton?

    I am under the impression that Steve may admire/respect GKC.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @Dan Hayes


    I am under the impression that Steve may admire/respect GKC.
     
    This is a delicate subject because it is easily misunderstood. I'm not just trying to pooh-pooh eminent men of letters here. Despite my comments above, I actually enjoy reading Lewis and I own a copy of just about everything he ever published. My point, very simply, is that he isn't really what he is generally taken to be. If you want somebody to welcome you into the Church with a hearty back-slap and a beer, go to Lewis. If you want real theology, you had better go elsewhere.

    GKC was even more of a hyper-literate hothouse flower than Lewis was. He was a genuine speed reader who could browse through half a dozen books on an unfamiliar subject in an hour and come away with enough comprehension of their contents to write a book of his own about it. It is said that he could write one essay himself while simultaneously dictating another one to his secretary. As a wordsmith he was technically perfect. His long, complicated sentences, full of multiple semicolons and subordinate clauses, were never unbalanced or confusing. He had a flair for descriptive language that was thoroughly, literally, and self-consciously Dickensian in its scope.

    But because of all that, he gave off the impression of never having set foot in the material world. Obviously a mind like his is good for nothing except writing. The slightest stimulation---a mustard advertisement, a child's shabby dress---would send him like a sounding brass into one of his colossal, world-encompassing excogitations. The fact that the everlasting gobstoppers which, after much cranking and hissing, came dropping out of his Rube Goldberg apparatus were some of the finest polished gems of Edwardian prose does not mean that they are very applicable in the actual life of faith as it is lived out by most people. Chesterton is often styled as the "Prince of Paradox" due to the heavily ironical nature of his prose. If alliterative sobriquets are the order of the day, I think belletristic banality has at least an equal claim to the truth of the matter.

    I would suggest here, quite Nietzschean-wise, that the very attractiveness of Lewis and Chesterton are temptations to be avoided once one has attained to a certain state of maturity. They are honey-traps for the philosophical mind and are impediments for developing the simplified, robust, and manly character which is necessary for penetrating further.

    Replies: @Old Palo Altan

  80. @Jim Don Bob
    @Jefferson

    Either that or direct election of Senators.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Jim Don Bob

    “Either that or direct election of Senators.”

    I wish there were term limits for Non POTUS political office so that we are not stuck with the likes of Nancy Pelosi who plans to be a congresswoman until she drops dead from old age. What if we are stuck with her for another 10-to-15 years or even 20 years? Who knows how long that bitch is going to live.

  81. @jimmyriddle
    @Cagey Beast

    A prep school in England is for younger children (6-10 year olds), before they go on to public (ie private) school.

    Orwell's was pretty terrible. He wrote about it in "Such Were The Joys".

    Then he went to Wellington, a school consisting mostly of army brats. He got into Eton pretty late on a scholarship.

    He's the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

    Replies: @Bill B.

    He’s the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

    John Maynard Keynes, Aldous Huxley, Ian Fleming?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Bill B.

    Hugh Laurie (Dr. House), Hugh Hudson (movie director) , Sir Ranulf Fiennes (explorer) , Prince William, Prince Harry, Guy Burgess (spy and Russian double agent), Percy Bysshe Shelley (author of Ozymandias), Beau Brummell (dandy).


    We can leave out David Cameron and Harold MacMillan as they were Prime Ministers.

    , @El Dato
    @Bill B.


    John Maynard Keynes
     
    Please.

    An intellectual midget dusting off worn theories and wrapping them into pseudo-intellectual but saleable verbiage at the moment when politicians needed them most?

    Yes.That guy.

    , @jimmyriddle
    @Bill B.

    I'll give you Huxley and Keynes. But Ian Flemming. No.

    If it had been Alexander Flemming, perhaps.

  82. @syonredux
    @SFG

    Frankly, most of the academic Leftists that I know regard Orwell as "problematic." His distaste for homosexuality, for example, looms increasingly large.

    Replies: @Dr Hook, @SFG, @Ivy, @Old Palo Altan

    English prep and public schools had many deviant students and staff. See Eton Voices book for reference.

    Orwell was on scholarship, so among the Togati (Tugs) named for the togas that classic students would have worn a few millennia ago. Tugs were a type of second class student (not quite affirmative action since meritorious, but subject to much snobbery) compared to the standard Eton students destined to be future statesmen, dictators, aesthetes and others.

  83. @syonredux
    @SFG

    Frankly, most of the academic Leftists that I know regard Orwell as "problematic." His distaste for homosexuality, for example, looms increasingly large.

    Replies: @Dr Hook, @SFG, @Ivy, @Old Palo Altan

    Recently the unreconstructed Leftists who run the BBC refused to place a bust of Orwell in their new headquarters in London.
    They announced that it had been decided that Orwell was “too Left-wing” but everyone understood that it was because he liked Stalin no more than Hitler and was therefore dangerously unsound.

  84. @Dan Hayes
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Intelligent Dasein:

    Why don't you get started on G K Chesterton?

    I am under the impression that Steve may admire/respect GKC.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    I am under the impression that Steve may admire/respect GKC.

    This is a delicate subject because it is easily misunderstood. I’m not just trying to pooh-pooh eminent men of letters here. Despite my comments above, I actually enjoy reading Lewis and I own a copy of just about everything he ever published. My point, very simply, is that he isn’t really what he is generally taken to be. If you want somebody to welcome you into the Church with a hearty back-slap and a beer, go to Lewis. If you want real theology, you had better go elsewhere.

    GKC was even more of a hyper-literate hothouse flower than Lewis was. He was a genuine speed reader who could browse through half a dozen books on an unfamiliar subject in an hour and come away with enough comprehension of their contents to write a book of his own about it. It is said that he could write one essay himself while simultaneously dictating another one to his secretary. As a wordsmith he was technically perfect. His long, complicated sentences, full of multiple semicolons and subordinate clauses, were never unbalanced or confusing. He had a flair for descriptive language that was thoroughly, literally, and self-consciously Dickensian in its scope.

    But because of all that, he gave off the impression of never having set foot in the material world. Obviously a mind like his is good for nothing except writing. The slightest stimulation—a mustard advertisement, a child’s shabby dress—would send him like a sounding brass into one of his colossal, world-encompassing excogitations. The fact that the everlasting gobstoppers which, after much cranking and hissing, came dropping out of his Rube Goldberg apparatus were some of the finest polished gems of Edwardian prose does not mean that they are very applicable in the actual life of faith as it is lived out by most people. Chesterton is often styled as the “Prince of Paradox” due to the heavily ironical nature of his prose. If alliterative sobriquets are the order of the day, I think belletristic banality has at least an equal claim to the truth of the matter.

    I would suggest here, quite Nietzschean-wise, that the very attractiveness of Lewis and Chesterton are temptations to be avoided once one has attained to a certain state of maturity. They are honey-traps for the philosophical mind and are impediments for developing the simplified, robust, and manly character which is necessary for penetrating further.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Etienne Gilson considered Chesterton's little book on St Thomas pure genius.
    I have myself always preferred his superb illustrations to Belloc's political novels to any of his writings.

  85. @Bill B.
    @jimmyriddle


    He’s the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

     

    John Maynard Keynes, Aldous Huxley, Ian Fleming?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @El Dato, @jimmyriddle

    Hugh Laurie (Dr. House), Hugh Hudson (movie director) , Sir Ranulf Fiennes (explorer) , Prince William, Prince Harry, Guy Burgess (spy and Russian double agent), Percy Bysshe Shelley (author of Ozymandias), Beau Brummell (dandy).

    We can leave out David Cameron and Harold MacMillan as they were Prime Ministers.

  86. @SFG
    @bored identity

    Wha...?

    He said 'back then'.

    Of course Fascism was at least in part a response to Communism. Communism's dead. What we have now is global capitalism in drag.

    Replies: @bored identity

    Back then…
    Real Fascists…

    I don’t know from which time traveling capsule both of you were smoking whatever you smoked…but I can tell you that revisioning good chunk of histerical data of the last hundred years could be a healthy mental cleansing activity.

    I’ve never met ” a real fascist from beck then”, but it’s been about a quarter of century that mediocre human beings are imposing Godwin’s Law and chilling effect on me by discovering real- fascists-from-back-then popping from everywhere.

    It just doesn’t work anymore.

    Communism was never about redistribution of wealth to poor; total displacement of Western Civilization and Christianity was and is the ultimate goal.

    The point is that if the narrative from the Europe of 1920’s and 1930’s was fed to my parents and me by the very same institutionalized media conglomerates (while back then they have had a full control of information distribution ) that are trying to brainwash my children today, why would anyone take for granted NYT front page from 1924?

    Why would I shit my pants over tribal historical interpretations of News & Academia two percenters whose professional integrity and allegiance to this country will always be undermined by their cosmopoliethnocentrical interests and desire to control the past so they can control the future.?

    That’s why they can’t allow Trump to control the present…

    And that’s why questionable flashbacks from 1938. will continue to stroboscope on our children’s children hypothalami until each of them submits their souls to the new normal.

    WHO PUNCHED FASCISTS IN THE PAST,WILL PUNCH FASCISTS IN THE FUTURE,

    WHO PUNCHES FASCISTS IN THE PRESENT, ALSO PUNCHES FASCISTS IN THE PAST!

    Now class,repeat after me!

  87. @Anon
    What came first? The fascist or the anti-fascist hate?

    Do fascists exist and draw prog hatred OR do progs feel a need to hate and conjure fascists to justify their rage?

    If fascists didn't exist, they would have to be invented because they are the only permissible objects of hate. Since most people, esp the young, are mindless sheeple, they go along with the Narrative beamed into their minds by media and academia.

    Also, even if the progs aren't well-read, they got their 'anti-fascist' attitudes from stuff like MATRIX films, PAN'S LABYRINTH, DJANGO UNCHAINED & INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO, anti-Nazi WWII video games, sci-fi spectacles, and The Clash & Rage against the Machine albums. It's supposed to be 'cool'. (Among them, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON ASS TATTOO may be especially influential in encouraging progs to get piercings and tattoos as the radical look.)

    In the middle ages, the only permissible target of hatred were witches, so people went after witches. Today, it's 'nazis' and 'fascists'.

    Replies: @JohnnyD, @Almost Missouri, @Anonymous, @El Dato

    There were Nazis in the Matrix movies?

    I can only remember Agents, whcih looked like Hooverian enforcers, but were otherwise devoid of much ideology. Good machines, in a sense.

  88. @Bill B.
    @jimmyriddle


    He’s the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

     

    John Maynard Keynes, Aldous Huxley, Ian Fleming?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @El Dato, @jimmyriddle

    John Maynard Keynes

    Please.

    An intellectual midget dusting off worn theories and wrapping them into pseudo-intellectual but saleable verbiage at the moment when politicians needed them most?

    Yes.That guy.

  89. @donut
    Orwell ! The mid right's favorite . 1984 , OMG it's here ! Wigan Pier , the working poor . What a tragedy . Well in America we have hundreds of Wigan'S Piers . Trailer parks . The poor aren't there because the elite has driven them down . They are there because they are stupid and lazy f**k ups that would trade their and their spawns future for a six pack and a nickle bag . And they can't learn their multiplication tables . What with all the booze and drugs . F**king hell man even I know through the alcoholic fog that 2+2 is 6 or 8 or whatever . No , wait it's 4 ! 2+2 is 4 .

    Replies: @donut, @Cortes

    Glad someone got there before me.

    Here’s John Dolan (probably better known as The War Nerd) on “Saint” George Orwell:

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

    Contains useful collateral damage to the pitiful Hitchens (though less entertainingly than the unwise decision of Hitchens to debate with George Galloway – true slow drive by a horrible motorway/freeway multiple vehicle disaster piece of video.

  90. @NeonBets
    @Chrisnonymous


    He’s a good writer, but the thing that makes Orwell powerful as a political commentator is the ongoing belief by everyone that he’s on their side.
     
    It's all about the name. Orwell: It is just begging for eponymous expansion. Orwellian.

    A few decades back, it didn't matter what was actually being discussed...just go Full-Orwell and strategically drop an 'Orwellian' reference. Nobody knew what you meant by 'Orwellian', but they dared not ask, either. As a result, you 'owned' that conversation. It was all so easy.

    Where have you gone George Orwell
    Half the nation turns its lonely eyes to you.


    But I have to tip my hat to the Left--they are exceptional at sniffing out the fashionable trends. Regardless of what the man actually wrote, Orwell emerged as an oracle of all things left.

    Unfortunately, the intellectual potency of gratuitous 'Orwellian' references has been played out; a kind of 'entropy', I suppose. Now, even people with mere GEDs drop Orwell references. Orwell is to the Left what Metallica was to loyal fans right after it released 'The Unforgiven' ballad. Before 'The Unforgiven', Metallica fandom used to mean something. But now that my little sister is buying their album, it just ain't the same, man.

    There's an irony here: The author who wrote about the fact that the term 'Nazi' has lost its meaning, suffers the same fate.

    So the Left doesn't use Orwell so much anymore--unless, the speaker decides to drop an 'Orwelluvian' bomb. [Quick Quiz: What is the ideological lean of the speaker who utters the following: "It had an antediluvian-Orwelluvian ethos that was just so refreshing" ?
    We now have three stone-cold locks: Death. Taxes. And that speaker is a Leftist.]

    This fetish of dropping smart-sounding words wouldn't be so bad if it was reserved to the names of a few authors. But-- as I demonstrated with my exuberant effort to word-drop entropy into this post--it's not just the names of authors.

    MISOGYNY

    Now we have to suffer through leftists incessantly wanking on their own drawstrings, like some demented Howdy Doody doll in a Title IX t-shirt: "Misogyny! I hate Misogyny! Trump is a Misogynist!"

    Replies: @El Dato

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4668-the-60th-anniversary-of-orwells-1984

    Sixty years following its first publication and twenty-five since the fateful year, George Orwell’s 1984 remains a mystery to the experts. They convene often in exotic places to agree that Orwell wrote a dystopia on the communist take-over of Britain and America. They concur how he reversed the final two digits of the year he wrote the book — 1948 — to arrive at the title 1984. They write that Orwell was not a prophet and few predictions fill his volume. These consensus beliefs on 1984 by the experts still shape the views of tens of millions of citizens who read Orwell’s work in the public schools and colleges.

    As we shall see, 1984 is, in fact, not a vilification of the Soviet dictator Stalin. Nor was the title chosen by reversing the final two digits of the year in which the book was written. Rather, the book is satire of the highest order written against Fabian socialists. They are the breed of English socialists seeking to reform the British economic system, favoring public ownership of the means of production. They also favor state-controlled schools, nationalization of land ownership, and the welfare state. Their foreign policy is internationalist. Orwell wrote his powerful satire to show how Fabian socialism could reform the world until it resembled Stalin’s Soviet Union, even if it took 100 years. Moreover, Orwell’s scenario is chock full of “predictions” — 137 of them — that describe the daily life of citizens in Anglo-America living in a socialist state modeled after the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin.

  91. Here’s John Dolan (probably better known as The War Nerd) on “Saint” George Orwell:

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

    One would think the “war nerd” has some kind of closet liberal issues, disapproving of casual “racism” (or “race hate”) in an english gentlemen (which may or may not be Orwell or may or may not harbor the thoughts of Orwell about the matter at hand) working in Burma in the early 1900s.

    Just another “literary desconstruction” experiment. And not even particularly good.

    Yeah, Orwell has good stuff and less good stuff. Like Clemenceau.

    Disregard.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @El Dato

    El Dato:

    Somehow or other I had missed this essay by the War Nerd (aka, John Dolan).

    As an avid War Nerd devotee I has always suspected the WN's Irish sympathies. Now my suspicions were readily and unequivocally confirmed.

    All I can say is BRAVO John Dolan and BRAVO War Nerd!

  92. @Anon
    @JohnnyD

    I recommend my insistence that I'm the only true fascist.

    Only I get it.

    Replies: @SFG

    What, Nietzsche’s quip about Jesus?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @SFG

    Which was?

  93. @SFG
    @Anon

    What, Nietzsche's quip about Jesus?

    Replies: @Desiderius

    Which was?

  94. Orwell would probably be called a fascist today, due to his inability to stop noticing.

  95. @El Dato

    Here’s John Dolan (probably better known as The War Nerd) on “Saint” George Orwell:

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

    One would think the "war nerd" has some kind of closet liberal issues, disapproving of casual "racism" (or "race hate") in an english gentlemen (which may or may not be Orwell or may or may not harbor the thoughts of Orwell about the matter at hand) working in Burma in the early 1900s.

    Just another "literary desconstruction" experiment. And not even particularly good.

    Yeah, Orwell has good stuff and less good stuff. Like Clemenceau.

    Disregard.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

    El Dato:

    Somehow or other I had missed this essay by the War Nerd (aka, John Dolan).

    As an avid War Nerd devotee I has always suspected the WN’s Irish sympathies. Now my suspicions were readily and unequivocally confirmed.

    All I can say is BRAVO John Dolan and BRAVO War Nerd!

  96. I honestly don’t think fascism is that far behind us in the rearview mirror. The tenets of the Ba’ath Party: Nationalism mixed with the leader-principle, mixed economy subordinated to the interests of the state, and a general MO of ruthless police-state tyranny (Iraq and Syrian branches specialized in it) pretty much fits the Musolini-Hitler model.

    It was GW Bush that opened my eyes to the realization that there are worse things than fascism. Unending, bloody chaos of all against all seems much worse.

    Here’s a question, did any of these AntiFas support the Iraq War (assuming they were old enough)? Bush killed a hell of a lot of fascists (and a hell of a lot of everybody else) over there. Eggs and omelets you know, arch-anti-fascist Joseph Stalin assures us they go together.

  97. @Jake
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "Are we ever going to be free of the scourge of these more-or-less Leftist British authors and their bookish monopoly over the discontented critical chattering classes? Just as there will never be a real resurgence of apostolic Christianity as long as that blockheaded bookworm, C.S. freaking Lewis, is still regarded as the last century’s mightiest apologist, there will never be a real conservative politics as long as Orwell is still considered the prophet modern political dangers."

    I agree. Lewis is a great apologist, but only if he is used to lead the reader to Aquinas and Augustine.

    Orwell is fun to read, but he is limited, in that typical English way.

    Replies: @David Davenport

    Orwell is fun to read, but he is limited, in that typical English way.

    Please explain to us the typical, English limitations Orwell had.

  98. @Anonymous Nephew
    Also OT, NOAA climate scientist (just retired) says that they cherrypicked unverified data to produce the 2015 "No global warming pause" paper.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html

    "In an exclusive interview, Dr Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data – the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) – of ‘insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximised warming and minimised documentation… in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming pause, rushed so that he could time publication to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy’.

    Dr Bates was one of two Principal Scientists at NCEI, based in Asheville, North Carolina.

    Official delegations from America, Britain and the EU were strongly influenced by the flawed NOAA study as they hammered out the Paris Agreement – and committed advanced nations to sweeping reductions in their use of fossil fuel and to spending £80 billion every year on new, climate-related aid projects."
     

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    Thanks for mentioning this. It’s good that it’s a guy straight out of NOAA itself doing the exposé. There’s absolutely nothing surprising about what NOAA did — they, and other nations’ meteorology agencies, have been manipulating surface temperature records with merry abandon for years.

    So I’m wondering how much impact this scandal is going to make. The climategate email scandal several years ago involving many of the global warming high priests was damning, but it failed to derail the climate change movement, although perhaps it did do it some long-term, below-the-waterline damage.

    I’ll be interested to see if this story makes it beyond the DM, and into the minds of any of the climate change believers I know.

  99. @Intelligent Dasein
    @Dan Hayes


    I am under the impression that Steve may admire/respect GKC.
     
    This is a delicate subject because it is easily misunderstood. I'm not just trying to pooh-pooh eminent men of letters here. Despite my comments above, I actually enjoy reading Lewis and I own a copy of just about everything he ever published. My point, very simply, is that he isn't really what he is generally taken to be. If you want somebody to welcome you into the Church with a hearty back-slap and a beer, go to Lewis. If you want real theology, you had better go elsewhere.

    GKC was even more of a hyper-literate hothouse flower than Lewis was. He was a genuine speed reader who could browse through half a dozen books on an unfamiliar subject in an hour and come away with enough comprehension of their contents to write a book of his own about it. It is said that he could write one essay himself while simultaneously dictating another one to his secretary. As a wordsmith he was technically perfect. His long, complicated sentences, full of multiple semicolons and subordinate clauses, were never unbalanced or confusing. He had a flair for descriptive language that was thoroughly, literally, and self-consciously Dickensian in its scope.

    But because of all that, he gave off the impression of never having set foot in the material world. Obviously a mind like his is good for nothing except writing. The slightest stimulation---a mustard advertisement, a child's shabby dress---would send him like a sounding brass into one of his colossal, world-encompassing excogitations. The fact that the everlasting gobstoppers which, after much cranking and hissing, came dropping out of his Rube Goldberg apparatus were some of the finest polished gems of Edwardian prose does not mean that they are very applicable in the actual life of faith as it is lived out by most people. Chesterton is often styled as the "Prince of Paradox" due to the heavily ironical nature of his prose. If alliterative sobriquets are the order of the day, I think belletristic banality has at least an equal claim to the truth of the matter.

    I would suggest here, quite Nietzschean-wise, that the very attractiveness of Lewis and Chesterton are temptations to be avoided once one has attained to a certain state of maturity. They are honey-traps for the philosophical mind and are impediments for developing the simplified, robust, and manly character which is necessary for penetrating further.

    Replies: @Old Palo Altan

    Etienne Gilson considered Chesterton’s little book on St Thomas pure genius.
    I have myself always preferred his superb illustrations to Belloc’s political novels to any of his writings.

  100. @Jonathan Mason
    @SFG


    Forgot about that. Makes sense–fewer and fewer writers of the past haven’t committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.
     
    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality, which was illegal anyway, and this was long before the days that all homosexuals wanted to do was to fall in love and marry each other and have wedding cakes. On the other hand, the Roman authors like Catullus might appeal more to contemporary sensibilities.

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @syonredux

    For what it is worth, I recall Orwell also seemed to feel that the moral panic about homosexuality – which he associated with masturbation – was much out of proportion out of commonality, if not harm.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Daniel Chieh

    Here's an interesting discussion on Orwell and homosexuality:


    Orwell harbored no unreasoning, visceral horror of homosexuality and he did not strive to overcome his disapproval of it. The evidence suggests that, if anything, he was less inclined to any such shuddering than most heterosexuals. His descriptions of his encounters with homosexuality are always cool, dispassionate, even sympathetic. His disapproval of homosexuality was rooted in his convictions. He was intellectually and morally opposed to it.
     

    Orwell’s anti-homosexual position (definitely not ‘homophobia’, which would suggest irrational fear) flowed naturally from beliefs and values about which he was quite forthcoming, though he never provided a systematic exposition. Orwell held that modern machinery and urbanization were inhuman and degrading. City life was rootless, alienating, and demoralizing. Although there was no going back to the organic rural community which had been shattered by the industrial revolution, any more than there was any going back to religious faith, both losses were sad and wrenching––in this respect, Orwell’s outlook is akin to that of Mr. and Mrs. Leavis. Industrial and scientific progress could not be stopped without unacceptable consequences, but were essentially malign.
     

    Orwell was decidedly against birth control as well as feminism and homosexuality.[1] He singled out “philoprogenitiveness” (a high valuation for having children) as one of a handful of essential precepts of any viable society. He believed (as did most intellectuals in the 1940s) that western society was beset by a crisis of declining fertility. He routinely equated decency with masculinity and masculinity with virility and physical toughness. He expressed contempt for people who took aspirin. He did not welcome reductions in the working day or increasing affluence, because more leisure and more comforts were liable to lead to ennervating softness and a life of meaningless vacuity. As was remarked by someone who knew him well, his human ideal would have been a big-bodied working-class female raising twelve children.[2]

    Though I cannot unpack all this here,[3] it forms part of a coherent and cogent worldview, and relates Orwell to the “anti-degenerate” thinking of influential writers like Max Nordau. During the Second World War, Orwell repeatedly insinuated, or more than insinuated, that “pacifists” were homosexuals and therefore cowards. The “nancy poets,” Auden and his friends, were a favorite target.

     

    http://www.la-articles.org.uk/orwell.htm
  101. @Jonathan Mason
    @SFG


    Forgot about that. Makes sense–fewer and fewer writers of the past haven’t committed some sort of sin by 21st-century standards.
     
    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality, which was illegal anyway, and this was long before the days that all homosexuals wanted to do was to fall in love and marry each other and have wedding cakes. On the other hand, the Roman authors like Catullus might appeal more to contemporary sensibilities.

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @syonredux

    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality,

    Well, not publicly…..but there was a coterie of patrician “inverts”……love between fellows…..the “higher sodomy”, etc

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @syonredux

    There were plenty of British writers of Orwell's day who were homosexuals (e.g., Auden, much of Bloomsbury) and a surprising number who shifted from homosexuality to heterosexuality (e.g., Spender, Waugh, Keynes).

    Replies: @syonredux

  102. @Daniel Chieh
    @Jonathan Mason

    For what it is worth, I recall Orwell also seemed to feel that the moral panic about homosexuality - which he associated with masturbation - was much out of proportion out of commonality, if not harm.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Here’s an interesting discussion on Orwell and homosexuality:

    Orwell harbored no unreasoning, visceral horror of homosexuality and he did not strive to overcome his disapproval of it. The evidence suggests that, if anything, he was less inclined to any such shuddering than most heterosexuals. His descriptions of his encounters with homosexuality are always cool, dispassionate, even sympathetic. His disapproval of homosexuality was rooted in his convictions. He was intellectually and morally opposed to it.

    Orwell’s anti-homosexual position (definitely not ‘homophobia’, which would suggest irrational fear) flowed naturally from beliefs and values about which he was quite forthcoming, though he never provided a systematic exposition. Orwell held that modern machinery and urbanization were inhuman and degrading. City life was rootless, alienating, and demoralizing. Although there was no going back to the organic rural community which had been shattered by the industrial revolution, any more than there was any going back to religious faith, both losses were sad and wrenching––in this respect, Orwell’s outlook is akin to that of Mr. and Mrs. Leavis. Industrial and scientific progress could not be stopped without unacceptable consequences, but were essentially malign.

    Orwell was decidedly against birth control as well as feminism and homosexuality.[1] He singled out “philoprogenitiveness” (a high valuation for having children) as one of a handful of essential precepts of any viable society. He believed (as did most intellectuals in the 1940s) that western society was beset by a crisis of declining fertility. He routinely equated decency with masculinity and masculinity with virility and physical toughness. He expressed contempt for people who took aspirin. He did not welcome reductions in the working day or increasing affluence, because more leisure and more comforts were liable to lead to ennervating softness and a life of meaningless vacuity. As was remarked by someone who knew him well, his human ideal would have been a big-bodied working-class female raising twelve children.[2]

    Though I cannot unpack all this here,[3] it forms part of a coherent and cogent worldview, and relates Orwell to the “anti-degenerate” thinking of influential writers like Max Nordau. During the Second World War, Orwell repeatedly insinuated, or more than insinuated, that “pacifists” were homosexuals and therefore cowards. The “nancy poets,” Auden and his friends, were a favorite target.

    http://www.la-articles.org.uk/orwell.htm

  103. @Bill B.
    @jimmyriddle


    He’s the only really significant man that school produced in the 20th century (give or take the odd pol or archbishop).

     

    John Maynard Keynes, Aldous Huxley, Ian Fleming?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @El Dato, @jimmyriddle

    I’ll give you Huxley and Keynes. But Ian Flemming. No.

    If it had been Alexander Flemming, perhaps.

  104. @syonredux
    @Jonathan Mason


    Orwell died in 1950. Almost no one of his time was pro homosexuality,
     
    Well, not publicly.....but there was a coterie of patrician "inverts"......love between fellows.....the "higher sodomy", etc

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    There were plenty of British writers of Orwell’s day who were homosexuals (e.g., Auden, much of Bloomsbury) and a surprising number who shifted from homosexuality to heterosexuality (e.g., Spender, Waugh, Keynes).

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Steve Sailer


    There were plenty of British writers of Orwell’s day who were homosexuals (e.g., Auden, much of Bloomsbury) and a surprising number who shifted from homosexuality to heterosexuality (e.g., Spender, Waugh, Keynes).
     
    Yeah. It's interesting how the Tory-minded aesthete Waugh was more sympathetic towards homosexuals than the socialist Orwell.....
  105. @Steve Sailer
    @syonredux

    There were plenty of British writers of Orwell's day who were homosexuals (e.g., Auden, much of Bloomsbury) and a surprising number who shifted from homosexuality to heterosexuality (e.g., Spender, Waugh, Keynes).

    Replies: @syonredux

    There were plenty of British writers of Orwell’s day who were homosexuals (e.g., Auden, much of Bloomsbury) and a surprising number who shifted from homosexuality to heterosexuality (e.g., Spender, Waugh, Keynes).

    Yeah. It’s interesting how the Tory-minded aesthete Waugh was more sympathetic towards homosexuals than the socialist Orwell…..

  106. @Jim Don Bob
    @Jefferson

    Either that or direct election of Senators.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Jim Don Bob

    The Supreme Court in the mid-90s struck down 5-4 the term limits that had been enacted by several states despite that fact that the Constitution leaves matters of elections largely to the states. That decision. and many other 5-4 ones, would probably have been different had Robert Bork been confirmed to the Supremes.

  107. @Jonathan Mason
    @AKAHorace


    Orwell wrote a long article about people who made his life hell during his pre Eton school. Check the essay “Such such were the joys”.
     
    In that essay he did actually write about a school bully, called Johnnie Hall as I recall, though it is many years since I read that work, who delighted in inflicting pain on smaller boys.The bully was stopped in his tracks by a sudden unexpected punch in the face from the blind side. Orwell expected retribution, but it never came. That was the lesson.

    Many years later I felt that John Kerry should have delivered the same treatment to those who orchestrated a campaign accusing him of cowardice in Vietnam. It probably would have shut them up. Ignoring them just gave them courage.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Who exactly accused Kerry of “cowardice” in Vietnam?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS