Socialists never learn
Discussion
My favourite author is George Orwell. Many years ago (too close to 40 for comfort!) I read all his novels and his main non fiction. I am in the process of rereading it all. Most I had forgotten but also interesting coming at them from a very different perspective.
I’ve just finished The Road to Wigan Pier. I cannot recommend it highly enough. The first half is a description of his travels in around 1935 in the North of England. The second half is primarily a discussion on why Socialism as an idea was losing ground in the U.K., and the dangers of Fascists becoming popular.
The first half is shocking in its description of the conditions that working class people had to live in at that time. Really puts into perspective our current problems. What surprised me most though was the realisation that the time from when Orwell wrote the book to when I first read it is almost the same as that first reading to today. Yet the U.K. of 1936 seems unrecognisable from that of the late seventies / early eighties. The conditions in the thirties for the working class remind me more of my visits to India.
The second half is fascinating in how it is still relevant. Orwell lamented that Socialism, as an idea, should appeal to the majority as fundamentally it was about justice and the fight against tyranny. Yet the biggest enemy of Socialism, in his view, were socialists themselves - at least socialist/Marxist intellectuals and Labour politicians. He pointed out that to the average person socialists came across as cranks - he was very dismissive, throwing them in with “juice drinkers, sandal-wearers and feminists”. What frustrated him was the inability of socialists of his era to recognise that the average person, who might well be sympathetic to the main aims of Socialism, were put off by their rhetoric.
I can’t help think that if Orwell were alive today he would be similarly dismissive and annoyed by Corbyn and his followers and that the left have disappeared down the rabbit hole of identity politics, asylum seekers and LGBT rather than trying to build consensus within the 90%.
I’ve just finished The Road to Wigan Pier. I cannot recommend it highly enough. The first half is a description of his travels in around 1935 in the North of England. The second half is primarily a discussion on why Socialism as an idea was losing ground in the U.K., and the dangers of Fascists becoming popular.
The first half is shocking in its description of the conditions that working class people had to live in at that time. Really puts into perspective our current problems. What surprised me most though was the realisation that the time from when Orwell wrote the book to when I first read it is almost the same as that first reading to today. Yet the U.K. of 1936 seems unrecognisable from that of the late seventies / early eighties. The conditions in the thirties for the working class remind me more of my visits to India.
The second half is fascinating in how it is still relevant. Orwell lamented that Socialism, as an idea, should appeal to the majority as fundamentally it was about justice and the fight against tyranny. Yet the biggest enemy of Socialism, in his view, were socialists themselves - at least socialist/Marxist intellectuals and Labour politicians. He pointed out that to the average person socialists came across as cranks - he was very dismissive, throwing them in with “juice drinkers, sandal-wearers and feminists”. What frustrated him was the inability of socialists of his era to recognise that the average person, who might well be sympathetic to the main aims of Socialism, were put off by their rhetoric.
I can’t help think that if Orwell were alive today he would be similarly dismissive and annoyed by Corbyn and his followers and that the left have disappeared down the rabbit hole of identity politics, asylum seekers and LGBT rather than trying to build consensus within the 90%.
The problem is that the vast majority of people who call themselves socialists in 2021 are privileged, middle class and private school educated. There are exceptions but most of what they have is handed to them on a silver plate with silver spoon.
They have for the most part never experienced what it is to be working class but seem to think they have all the answers.
They have for the most part never experienced what it is to be working class but seem to think they have all the answers.
Esceptico said:
I can’t help think that if Orwell were alive today he would be similarly dismissive and annoyed by Corbyn and his followers and that the left have disappeared down the rabbit hole of identity politics, asylum seekers and LGBT rather than trying to build consensus within the 90%.
Orwell was probably one of the greatest political prophets ever.He saw how the Soviet Union would go in 1945 when he wrote Animal farm, and at a time when it was wildly popular in left wing circles. He also identified the fundamental problem with many left wing intellectuals at the same time which have reached their peak with today's identity politics.
If 1984 had been named 2024 that would have been closer to today's realities as well.
Esceptico said:
I can’t help think that if Orwell were alive today he would be similarly dismissive and annoyed by Corbyn and his followers and that the left have disappeared down the rabbit hole of identity politics, asylum seekers and LGBT rather than trying to build consensus within the 90%.
Starmer is even worse than Corbyn; a socialist seeking / accepting a knighthood, for heaven's sake.sutoka said:
The problem is that the vast majority of people who call themselves socialists in 2021 are privileged, middle class and private school educated. There are exceptions but most of what they have is handed to them on a silver plate with silver spoon.
They have for the most part never experienced what it is to be working class but seem to think they have all the answers.
No stereotypes there then.They have for the most part never experienced what it is to be working class but seem to think they have all the answers.
It's a bit like saying you can't call yourself a Tory unless you've got at least a couple of failed small businesses under you belt & a hoist in your wine cellar.
I haven't read The Road to Wigan Pier since school and probably didn't fully appreciate it at that time. Fair to say though that the UK experienced a jump in quality of life from a material perspective that lasted from the mid-50s until about the mid-00s. However I would caution against drawing any parallels because the ideological concearns of the book where rooted in the philosophical battles of the time. In the interim our understanding of business and economics has substantially changed the nature of the philosophical conversations we are currently having to be more nuanced and less abstract.
Also the impact of the post-GFC wage depression has impacted groups in differing ways. Fortuitously for many asset price inflation has substantially bolstered their apparent wealth even as incomes have stagnated, myself included. However for those entering the workforce or trying to climb the property ladder since the mid-00s they are making far less progress than we might expect. In the short term this wasn't an issue, people expected wages to recover rapidly but that has not happened yet. So we're being increasingly pressed by younger people who will not accept the societal equilibriums struck in previous generations. The only certainty I have is that it won't be blind ideology that progresses this change.
Also the impact of the post-GFC wage depression has impacted groups in differing ways. Fortuitously for many asset price inflation has substantially bolstered their apparent wealth even as incomes have stagnated, myself included. However for those entering the workforce or trying to climb the property ladder since the mid-00s they are making far less progress than we might expect. In the short term this wasn't an issue, people expected wages to recover rapidly but that has not happened yet. So we're being increasingly pressed by younger people who will not accept the societal equilibriums struck in previous generations. The only certainty I have is that it won't be blind ideology that progresses this change.
speedy_thrills said:
Also the impact of the post-GFC wage depression has impacted groups in differing ways. Fortuitously for many asset price inflation has substantially bolstered their apparent wealth even as incomes have stagnated, myself included. However for those entering the workforce or trying to climb the property ladder since the mid-00s they are making far less progress than we might expect. In the short term this wasn't an issue, people expected wages to recover rapidly but that has not happened yet. So we're being increasingly pressed by younger people who will not accept the societal equilibriums struck in previous generations. The only certainty I have is that it won't be blind ideology that progresses this change.
One of the main reasons why that it happening though is the preoccupation of supposedly "left wing" thinkers with identity politics. Raising the living standards of ordinary working people is shunted off to one side while the focus is on the grievances of favoured groups within society. This has also happened while many supposedly "left wing" people have benefited immensely from the rampant asset price inflation associated with the age of globalisation, and ultra loose monetary policy, as they are part of the affluent middle classes.
Increasingly our society is starting to resemble the UK before the impact of more redistributionist policies, where what matters most is wealth, often inherited or gifted, and the ability to better oneself through work recedes every year.
zygalski said:
sutoka said:
The problem is that the vast majority of people who call themselves socialists in 2021 are privileged, middle class and private school educated. There are exceptions but most of what they have is handed to them on a silver plate with silver spoon.
They have for the most part never experienced what it is to be working class but seem to think they have all the answers.
No stereotypes there then.They have for the most part never experienced what it is to be working class but seem to think they have all the answers.
It's a bit like saying you can't call yourself a Tory unless you've got at least a couple of failed small businesses under you belt & a hoist in your wine cellar.
Anyway, shouldn't this thread be in The Lounge or the books/literature section?
JagLover said:
One of the main reasons why that it happening though is the preoccupation of supposedly "left wing" thinkers with identity politics. Raising the living standards of ordinary working people is shunted off to one side while the focus is on the grievances of favoured groups within society.
This has also happened while many supposedly "left wing" people have benefited immensely from the rampant asset price inflation associated with the age of globalisation, and ultra loose monetary policy, as they are part of the affluent middle classes.
Increasingly our society is starting to resemble the UK before the impact of more redistributionist policies, where what matters most is wealth, often inherited or gifted, and the ability to better oneself through work recedes every year.
The sooner the Tories are in power the better then, oh wait they have been for the last decade.This has also happened while many supposedly "left wing" people have benefited immensely from the rampant asset price inflation associated with the age of globalisation, and ultra loose monetary policy, as they are part of the affluent middle classes.
Increasingly our society is starting to resemble the UK before the impact of more redistributionist policies, where what matters most is wealth, often inherited or gifted, and the ability to better oneself through work recedes every year.
George Orwell was massively homophobic, sexist and, whilst economically left wing, was most definitely socially conservative.
Cry’s of “identity politics” are simply ways to hide ones prejudice behind a seemingly innocuous phrase. The inclusion of attacks on the LGBT equality movement make clear the prejudice barely hidden and the contempt.
Cry’s of “identity politics” are simply ways to hide ones prejudice behind a seemingly innocuous phrase. The inclusion of attacks on the LGBT equality movement make clear the prejudice barely hidden and the contempt.
Edited by Electro1980 on Saturday 6th February 08:11
grumbledoak said:
The Road to Wigan Pier is still on my list.
That said, I think the question misses the point, and the answer is to be found within
"The Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions" and "On the backs of the discontented shall ye rise to power"
I love aphorisms. They give all the appearance of intelligence without the tedium of actually thinking.That said, I think the question misses the point, and the answer is to be found within
"The Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions" and "On the backs of the discontented shall ye rise to power"
The Road to Hell, etc, sounds great, but it falls apart under scrutiny. Does it mean that those who have bad intentions are 'saved'? It's similar to the disparaging term, 'Do Gooder', as if doing bad was superior. Or, worse still in many ways, someone feeling pleased with themselves for doing nothing.
Do gooders, those with good intentions, have revolutionised the world, and generally for the better. It was do gooders who put a stop to the industrial slave trade, who stopped people being punished because of their sexual orientation. There were children killed in factories, and up chimneys, until those with good intentions took an interest and took risks in many cases.
There are no answers in aphorisms. Those with good intentions are saviours rather than devils.
Electro1980 said:
George Orwell was massively homophobic, sexist and, whilst economically left wing, was most definitely socially conservative.
Orwell was born into a lower upper class family and indoctrinated with the morals of the period and his class - which at that time were (by today’s standards) horribly homophobic, sexist, classist, racist, anti Semitic. Have a read of Burmese Days (based on his experiences in Burma). It doesn’t paint a pretty picture. What marks Orwell out is that he fought to change his outlooks and his prejudices. He went against his upbringing, class and prevailing views. Nobody was woke in the 1930s and it is bad faith to judge him using today’s standards.
He recognised that his upbringing had left him different from the working class - how could have not done so? That is addressed in The Road to Wigan Pier.
There is a concensus amongst the 90% and that is to try to get into the 10%, strategy seems to be failing though as quite a lot of the 90% think lottery tickets are the answer.
I used to go to Wigan Pier quite often as a kid, at that time the roads were paved with other kids gurning and listening to hardcore techno too loud in Mk1 Fiestas.
I used to go to Wigan Pier quite often as a kid, at that time the roads were paved with other kids gurning and listening to hardcore techno too loud in Mk1 Fiestas.
Esceptico said:
Electro1980 said:
George Orwell was massively homophobic, sexist and, whilst economically left wing, was most definitely socially conservative.
Orwell was born into a lower upper class family and indoctrinated with the morals of the period and his class - which at that time were (by today’s standards) horribly homophobic, sexist, classist, racist, anti Semitic. Have a read of Burmese Days (based on his experiences in Burma). It doesn’t paint a pretty picture. What marks Orwell out is that he fought to change his outlooks and his prejudices. He went against his upbringing, class and prevailing views. Nobody was woke in the 1930s and it is bad faith to judge him using today’s standards.
He recognised that his upbringing had left him different from the working class - how could have not done so? That is addressed in The Road to Wigan Pier.
Have you got to the Lion and the Unicorn yet? I found that fascinating.
What always strikes me about reading Orwell's essays is how familiar it all is. I tend to imagine the left of the 30s and 40s to be no nonsense men with moustaches who wanted to take over big industries and run them better for the benefit of the workers, locals and the wider public. I don't think that's the right approach but when you read Wigan Pier you can understand it. In fact they mostly weren't though. They were obsessed with their own silly diversions then too.
I think the refusal to accept reality is what drives a lot of people to be left wing in the first place. It can be a useful trait for driving major changes and creating a big vision. It isn't a coincidence that self made billionaires tend to be more progressive.
The trouble is it leads to these mad diversions which their constituents, by and large don't give a toss about or actively hate.
I would love to de-merge economic socialism and social liberalism so we could have a proper liberal party for the big vision progressive stuff and a working class party who would find their market was interventionist in economics (though not communist) but socially conservative.
What always strikes me about reading Orwell's essays is how familiar it all is. I tend to imagine the left of the 30s and 40s to be no nonsense men with moustaches who wanted to take over big industries and run them better for the benefit of the workers, locals and the wider public. I don't think that's the right approach but when you read Wigan Pier you can understand it. In fact they mostly weren't though. They were obsessed with their own silly diversions then too.
I think the refusal to accept reality is what drives a lot of people to be left wing in the first place. It can be a useful trait for driving major changes and creating a big vision. It isn't a coincidence that self made billionaires tend to be more progressive.
The trouble is it leads to these mad diversions which their constituents, by and large don't give a toss about or actively hate.
I would love to de-merge economic socialism and social liberalism so we could have a proper liberal party for the big vision progressive stuff and a working class party who would find their market was interventionist in economics (though not communist) but socially conservative.
Electro1980 said:
George Orwell was massively homophobic, sexist and, whilst economically left wing, was most definitely socially conservative.
Cry’s of “identity politics” are simply ways to hide ones prejudice behind a seemingly innocuous phrase. The inclusion of attacks on the LGBT equality movement make clear the prejudice barely hidden and the contempt.
Identity politics is a cancer to the socialist movement. It is a result of hyper individualism. Socialism is about the group over the individual. Therefore individual rights come second to the rights of the group. Especially when the rights of the individual undermine the group.Cry’s of “identity politics” are simply ways to hide ones prejudice behind a seemingly innocuous phrase. The inclusion of attacks on the LGBT equality movement make clear the prejudice barely hidden and the contempt.
Edited by Electro1980 on Saturday 6th February 08:11
The left is in turmoil because it is trying to accommodate a complete corruption of the ideology.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff