Blair's Babe [Did love turn Orwell into a government stooge?]

The Guardian (UK) ^ | 6/21/03 | John Ezard

[William McKinley]

If if he had recovered from TB, and you and I had been sitting with him five years later, I think he might have said 'It was a mistake'."

Or, he might have said "I was right". Orwell hated communists, Mr. Ash.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Ah yes, the left's continuing struggle to keep Orwell as one of "theirs", and in doing so keep 1984 as a vision of the right in power. (despite all evidence to the contrary)

[freebilly]

the comedian Charlie Chaplin, the bestselling novelist JB Priestley, the actor Michael Redgrave, the Soviet historian EH Carr, the historian of Trotsky, Isaac Deutscher, and the leftwing Labour MP Tom Driberg.

You mean they weren't commie symps?

[William McKinley]

One thing this article fails to mention is that another name on Orwell's list was Walter Duranty.

[henderson field]

Was Chuck Schumer's name on that list?

[T'wit]

I just sent the story to a retired intelligence agent who's a living encyclopedia in the field. I'll be interested in his take. I myself don't see any "mistakes."

[headsonpikes]

"I was right."

I suppose that all the scurrying leftist rats will now paint Orwell as a McCarthyite.

That might prove to be a two-edged sword. ;^)

[irv]

"What remains unsettling about the actual list sent to Celia is the way in which this symbol of political independence and journalistic honesty is drawn into collaboration with a bureaucratic department of propaganda, however marginal the collaboration"

What would be unsettling about this whole article, if it were not so common, is the assumption that taking a stand against the total evil of Communism is inconsistent with "journalistic honesty."

Note the use of the word "collaboration." One collaborates with oppressors, such as the Nazis after they conquered France. If he had named patriots opposed to Communism, he would not be a collaborator, but a hero.

[William McKinley]

Looking forward to hearing his take.

[Sam Cree]

"What would be unsettling about this whole article, if it were not so common, is the assumption that taking a stand against the total evil of Communism is inconsistent with "journalistic honesty."

Yeah, well put. Orwell just went up a little in my estimation.

[Savage Beast]

Orwell was brilliant and visionary--unlike the lunatics at The Guardian.

Also unlike them, he recognized Marxism/communism/socialism as the prototype of the horrifying world he described in 1984 and Animal Farm (something that is beyond the comprehension of the lunkheads at The Guardian, who obviously can't grasp reality much less learn from experience).

"Liberals"/socialists/communists ignore that fact that 1984-type totalitarianism is a requisite and an essential part of the Marxist "paradise" that they envision.

They also ignore the fact that it has always failed and that failure is inherent in its concept.

They also ignore the fact that Animal Farm is an inevitability to the revolution that they envision.

The jerks at The Gardian are so lost in their "Liberal" delusions (I know; it's a redundancy) that they cannot understand this either:

Orwell was much smarter than they are, and

Orwell knew what he was doing.

[Prodigal Son]

What the Guardian fails to mention here is why Orwell was up to turning in names of communists in the first place. It wasn't for love. This is to demean his reasons.

Orwell was a hardcore leftist who went off to fight against Franco in Spain. He was wounded their by a sniper. He believed in the leftist cause. But then he saw that the communists were not interested in uplifting the little man but simply in attaining power and they were willing to be just as or more ruthless as any other despot to get it.

This was an epiphany for Orwell. He devoted his writing thereafter to trying to demonstrate what was wrong with Marxist movement. It's the leftists own fault that he came out hard against them after Spain. He meant his books as a warning against the very ideology he had held dear and for which he had shed blood.

[Sam Cree]

I am thinking that Orwell was something of a paradox, in that I believe he personally was a socialist, yet put in words so eloquently the horrors of socialism.

[Sam Cree]

"the very ideology he had held dear and for which he had shed blood"

Did he no longer hold it dear then? I had supposed he remained a socialist to the end.

[Prodigal Son]

wounded their= wounded there (d'oh!)

[Paul Atreides]

Well, if Michael Redgrave wasn't one, Vanessa is enough for the both of them.

[Southack]

Blair once proposed marriage to Celia Kirwan, but the fact that should resonate with spy-watchers is that Celia had a twin sister (twins are beloved by spy agencies) who was not so coincidentally married to Arthur Koestler, the author of that other famous disquisition on Stalinism, Darkness at Noon.

Thus, *both* 1984 and Darkness had more than a little connection to MI6, and both turned out to be rather true, though in the case of Blair/Orwell's 1984 slam against the Soviets, perhaps it should have been called 1989 (i.e. the year the CCCP finally collapsed). He only missed it by 5 years.

And for the record, McCarthy was right, too.

[Prodigal Son]

It's hard to say what lay in the man's heart at the end. He never gave up on the idea of socialism. But knowing a thing or two about human nature- this is somewhat understandable. It is almost impossible sometimes for people to give up totally on an ideology they had built their entire lives around. Blair/Orwell was obviously an intelligent man. Lord only knows what intellectual contortions he got up to in his own thoughts that allowed him to denounce the communists while still believeing in socialism. Perhaps he saw them as "those radicals"- "those radicals will the doom of us all", while pardoning himself for believing in some pure form of the philosophy.

But I have to say, the last thing I want to do is sit around and make excuses for the man. Regardless of his own personal leanings, he understood communism inside out and although this might be because he was one himself, it also allowed him to create 1984 and Animal Farm in the chilling manner he did.

Personally, I'm willing to let the man's deeds (his works) speak for themselves. I believe in the end he did us more service than evil.

[Sam Cree]

I believe in the end he did us more service than evil.

Agreed.

[Southack]

"Orwell was a hardcore leftist who went off to fight against Franco in Spain. He was wounded there by a sniper. He believed in the leftist cause. But then he saw that the communists were not interested in uplifting the little man but simply in attaining power and they were willing to be just as or more ruthless as any other despot to get it."

Franco is *STILL* not a subject that Leftists permit their journalists to discuss today. He's far too inconvenient for them. Hitler sent troops and planes to help the fellow national socialist, yet Franco spurned Hitler's cause and ideology as well as spurned Germany itself when it was in its time of need, so Communist sympathizers in the media can't paint Franco as being a Fascist. That makes him very inconvenient.

Franco was clearly a socialist, yet he was opposed to Communism but nor would he side with Fascism. Clearly this painted a dilema for the Communists of that day. Apparently it was also difficult for the earlier Blair to sufficiently hate Franco enough to overcome the warts that he saw in Communism (thankfully).

So Franco was/is inconvenient to the Left. He certainly doesn't get much historical coverage today.