131–137 of 137 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
'George Orwell' is a fictional character. Real name: 'Eric Blair' who went to Church every Sunday, though I think he was kind of an Atheist. Not the same dude as Orwell. He had complicated views, and was not a 'socialist' in the more popular sense. Remember in 1984 that the 'bad guys' ideology is 'IngSoc', i.e. 'English Socialism'. So not exactly a big Social Dem supporter of the era.
A pen name is not the same as a fictional character. And the point of IngSoc is that it rejects socialist principles, while doing so in the same of Socialism - much like many socialists viewed the Bolsheviks and/or the Stalinists. I don't think this is complicated; in-fighting amongst left-wing/socialist groups is a staple ever since the term was coined. Socialism never had a single main ideology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
George Orwell was against all kinds of authoritarianism. A large portion of the left has always disavowed authoritarianism as well, so there is no conflict here.
A significant portion of the left in North American and Western Europe avows a collective authoritarianism of a mob which uses tactics of toxicity, vandalism, and violence to de-platform, intimidate, and de-facto censor. There is a huge conflict there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It won't work, China is perfectly happy to block every external Web site as necessary. They're fine with relying solely on their internal network, they've structured things to that end as it is now. Censorship does work if you're willing to insulate your nation from external media, as they prove time and time again that they are. That's why censorship has worked in North Korea for nearly 70 years. It works if you're…
Or maybe not. As Oliver was mentioning, China is shifting from self focus to expansion. This is already something I thought when I saw the China sea quarrels. If it's the case, it's not just only their population opinion that matters, but they need to have a good reputation in the world - that is, if they really want to be a part of it. With US withdrawing from the world, China has a good opportunity. But the tyranny…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A pen name is not the same as a fictional character. And the point of IngSoc is that it rejects socialist principles, while doing so in the same of Socialism - much like many socialists viewed the Bolsheviks and/or the Stalinists. I don't think this is complicated; in-fighting amongst left-wing/socialist groups is a staple ever since the term was coined. Socialism never had a single main ideology.
"A pen name is not the same as a fictional character" I agree and I wish I had the reference, but I think Orwell was used as an identity, not just a pen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PBS still isn’t 100% unbiased like what you said would have to be the case for not technically propaganda. Seems a bit extreme and ridiculous to define propaganda as that.
>PBS still isn’t 100% unbiased like what you said would have to be the case for not technically propaganda. Seems a bit extreme and ridiculous to define propaganda as that. You realize that _I_ am not defining anything, right? I suggest you write Webster. I think the problem is the pedantry of your typical engineer. No one is saying that all propaganda is equal, or that it is all inherently bad. Per a literal reading…