Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

is Orwell's ''1984'' a defamation of Stalin ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61

    Comment


    • #62
      I see no 'M's or 'I's there. And you should be careful- '200820082008' could be interpreted as a carefully crafted subliminal message...
      Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
      (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

      Comment


      • #63
        the subliminal message of these figures is that the next year is 2008.
        suppose - we start to celebrate it already now !!
        why wait till 31.12.2007 ???

        Comment


        • #64
          btw, the movie's trailer :



          the entire movie is on youtube.

          Comment


          • #65
            PINK FLOYD - THE WALL - 1980

            Comment


            • #66
              That was a good one. Somewhat prophetic, both musically and in other directions too...
              Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
              (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by stalin View Post
                it is impossible that everything is so bad that even gin and cigarettes are bad, that even movies and hallways stink,
                that even children are bad.
                all this is impossible simply due to the fact that life itself is imperfect.

                there's no perfect evil as there's no perfect good.
                that's why ''1984'', imo, somewhat lacks certain depth...
                Not only were the children bad in both Orwell's fictional Oceania and Stalin's USSR, such bad children were elevated to near saintly status: Pavlik Morozov, of whom Stalin quipped, "what a little swine, but we have to use his example nevertheless."

                Orwell's Newspeak dictionary editor Syme was a composite of real Soviet linguists, working in at least Russian and Ukrainian, if not other languages, who were busily deleting words from the language, even going so far as to delete letters from the alphabet.

                From 1929 until the fall of the Communist Party there were chronic shortages of foodstuffs, consumer goods, and urban residential housing. Soviet economics simply could not consistanly meet the needs of its people in a timely and efficient manner.

                With the exception of some of the technology, such as telescreens, pretty much the whole of 1984 should be read as an history, not a novel.

                Now if one truly wishes to "defame" Stalin, one might propagate the rumor that he raped Nadezhda Sergeevna Alliluyeva when she was his secretary during the Civil War while Stalin was clearing out the Tsaritsyn front prior to their marriage. I for one don't believe that story, but it would certainly qualify as "defamation." The rest, the mass arrests, the mass death warrants, the mass executions, the deportations, etc, etc, are unfortunately all quite true.
                I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                  With the exception of some of the technology, such as telescreens, pretty much the whole of 1984 should be read as an history, not a novel.
                  I'd buy this big time, though of course in a centralised and communist economy it might of course not be allowed...
                  Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
                  (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                    ... Pavlik Morozov, of whom Stalin quipped, "what a little swine, but we have to use his example nevertheless."
                    Stalin did never say anything like that.
                    i also noticed that sayings deemed in the west russian - are, in fact, never heard of in Russia.

                    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                    Orwell's Newspeak dictionary editor Syme was a composite of real Soviet linguists, working in at least Russian and Ukrainian, if not other languages, who were busily deleting words from the language, even going so far as to delete letters from the alphabet.
                    well, the only decent thing the bolsheviks did was a reform of russian language.

                    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                    From 1929 until the fall of the Communist Party there were chronic shortages of foodstuffs, consumer goods, and urban residential housing. Soviet economics simply could not consistanly meet the needs of its people in a timely and efficient manner.
                    that's a myth made up by western propoganda for braiwash of own people.

                    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                    ... Stalin...the mass arrests, the mass death warrants, the mass executions, the deportations, etc, etc, are unfortunately all quite true.
                    all of the above is a set of sweeping generalisations.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by stalin View Post
                      Stalin did never say anything like that [about Pavlik Morozov.]
                      At least two Stalin biographers, Alex de Jonge and Robert Conquest, roughly seven years apart repeated that same tale, which they atributed to either Molotov or Krushchev, I can't recall which at the moment.

                      i also noticed that sayings deemed in the west russian - are, in fact, never heard of in Russia.
                      For instance . . . . ?

                      well, the only decent thing the bolsheviks did was a reform of russian language.
                      While this is only a matter of opinion, I find today's iteration of the Russian language to be without nuance or beauty, but laced with profanity and endless vulgarity. It's downright unpleasant to listen to. While it may be hard to find, and even harder to digest, I'd recommend any of Vladimir Nabakov's novels written in Russian. Content aside, there's an example of pre-revolutionary Russian at its very best.

                      that's a myth made up by western propoganda for braiwash of own people.
                      I live in a place where the population of Russians has exploded over the last decade and a half, and without prompting all of them tell the same tale: there were regular shortages of foodstuffs, consumer goods, and housing stock. Here's the word from a survivor. And here's the word from an aid worker, and an economist. Even Yuri Andropov admitted privately that the Soviet economy was not meeting the needs of the people. The long lines, the empty shelves, it was hardly a secret.

                      And you got what to back up your claims?

                      the mass arrests, the mass death warrants, the mass executions, the deportations, etc, etc, are unfortunately all quite true.
                      all of the above is a set of sweeping generalisations.
                      Just out of curiousity, how do you sleep at night?
                      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                        At least two Stalin biographers, Alex de Jonge and Robert Conquest, roughly seven years apart repeated that same tale...
                        don't trust them, they fool you as they fooled the rest of their readers.

                        Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                        For instance . . . . ?
                        for instance, Stalin did never say that ''death of one man is a tragedy, but death of the millions is mere statistics.''

                        Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                        ... I find today's iteration of the Russian language to be without nuance or beauty, but laced with profanity and endless vulgarity...
                        you hate all things russian, don't you ?

                        Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                        I live in a place where the population of Russians has exploded over the last decade and a half, and without prompting all of them tell the same tale: there were regular shortages of foodstuffs, consumer goods, and housing stock...
                        there's a rule: never trust the immigrants.
                        in order to succeed, they defame Russia because they know - you, westerners, love to feel superior.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by stalin View Post
                          ...you, westerners, love to feel superior.
                          Perhaps there's one or more reasons for that. And I wouldn't call it 'superior', maybe 'proud' would be a better word for Western accomplishments, some of which Russia shares.

                          But I don't believe we are out to defame Russian language or culture, which I personally admire, even to include some of the achievements that went on in Russia during the Soviet period.

                          Just in my personal case I try consciously to defame the Totalitarian regimes of the 20th Century and beyond, because I consider them such a threat to the future of humanity.

                          That's why we're here discussing 1984 and the defamation of Stalin and Orwell I presume.
                          Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
                          (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by General Staff View Post
                            Just in my personal case I try consciously to defame the Totalitarian regimes of the 20th Century and beyond, because I consider them such a threat to the future of humanity.
                            hmm...
                            life is diverse, so it is not about the ''democracy for all'' or ''totalitarism for all'' way of seeing it.

                            for some countries such as England - democracy is naturally appropriate.
                            whereas, for the countries like Russia - totalitarism is the only acceptable political system.
                            so, we better leave the things the way they are - i.e.: England being democratic and Russia - totalitarian.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by stalin View Post
                              for instance, Stalin did never say that ''death of one man is a tragedy, but death of the millions is mere statistics.''
                              If I recall correctly, Stalin likened mass murder to a haircut, something along the lines of "there's no point worrying about the loss of a lock of hair when the whole head is in jeopardy," or something to that effect.

                              you hate all things russian, don't you ?
                              That's pretty funny. That would be like saying that I hate my grandparents, or my godparents, or my Church, or my heritage. I probably spoke Russian before I spoke English, but please do continue on with your ignorant line of commentary. That combined with your dogged defense of Stalin I find illuminating in the extreme.

                              there's a rule: never trust the immigrants.
                              in order to succeed, they defame Russia because they know - you, westerners, love to feel superior.
                              You obvioulsy haven't been the United States recently, where it is rather in vogue, among the native-born and immigrants alike to be cynically critical not of Russia, but the US. Some of the criticism is justified, some gratuitous, but it's plenty abundant. Besides, it was from such immigrants that all Americans, including yours truly, sprung. I see no intrisic reason to find immigrants untrustworthy. Perhaps you find Russian emigres untrustworthy because it is they who have taken their fate into their hands and left a moribund Russia to find their fortunes, and their futures, elsewhere. That's called jealousy. If there's anyone who is intrinsically untrustworthy, it is one who is jealous.

                              Originally posted by stalin View Post
                              don't trust [Stalin biographers Alex de Jonge and Robert Conquest] they fool you as they fooled the rest of their readers.
                              That's real interesting, since you later go on to ape the very conclusion of de Jonge's work when you said:

                              Originally posted by stalin View Post
                              for some countries such as England - democracy is naturally appropriate.
                              whereas, for the countries like Russia - totalitarism is the only acceptable political system.
                              so, we better leave the things the way they are - i.e.: England being democratic and Russia - totalitarian.
                              De Jonge, himself the issue of Rusian escapees, concludes his biography of Stalin by noting that Russians have no need of, indeed, no use for or even appreciation of, freedom. He was wrong. There were Russians once who not only appreciated freedom, but revelled in it. Russians in Novgorod, Vyatka, along the Dniper and the Don, and points further east, who exercised a freedom that most Anglo-Saxons would deride as anarchy. They often practiced a form of democracy that was raw and vital, that would have done any ancient Athenian proud. They were wild and woolly, bare frontiersmen in an unknown land often times, not unlike the American pioneers who headed west during the 19th century. Where are these Russians today, men of wit and industry, who live by their own wiles? Did Stalin succeed in bringing about their extinction in their native land? If attitiudes like yours and de Jonge's are representative then one can only conclude that the only free Russians left in circulation exist outside of Russia's borders: a more pathetic state of affairs cannot be imagined.
                              I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                                1) ...who exercised a freedom that most Anglo-Saxons would deride as anarchy.
                                2) Where are these Russians today, men of wit and industry, who live by their own wiles?
                                1) Anglo-Saxon? Yes. Derision. No. Freedom? Anarchy? Why these were my first two toys and all the womenfolk in my tribe possess them. What's wrong with that?
                                2) Around and be careful. I've met one or two and very clever chaps they seem to me. Best to look for them in winter, when they stand out from the snow and wit can pass for industry.
                                Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
                                (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X