Mike (the Paladin)’s review of The Communist Manifesto > Likes and Comments
139 likes · Like
Nice quote at the end.
I tend to miss the Reagan era.
Yeah I know, I'm evil.
Well spoken Mike. I still can't believe such a small quote could be so relevant in today's political climate.
I always thought it was a common sense thing. Like, if you have common sense, and you think about communism for a bit...
Me to... I was in high school in the '60s and had friends who were caught up in what has become "the new left". I always wondered if they just never read history or simply didn't think.
Ill stick with Fulton Sheen who manages to make marx look like a fool in some of his books
I also liked Robert Heinlein's take on it. He compared the communist out look to the idea or replacing skilled individuals with lots and lots of unskilled workers under the direction or an unskilled dictator. LOL
Funny thing: you, in the capitalist US, say many high school students read it; while around the (former) communist countries, almost no one ever read Marx. After the fall of communism because we hated anything connected to it, and before that because in each Red dictstorship, the leader (Stalin in Russia, Mao in China, Ceausescu in my country an so on) had their own "holy" book about ideology, which were supposedly so great, brilliant and advanced into Socialism that one did not need reading the original. It was actually suspicious to do so: why would you need Marx? Was not Stalin's/Mao's/Ceausescu's genius already enough for you? What, were you checking on the Great Leader? How dared you?
As for Heinlein's take: that's exactly what was tried again and again and again and again in all Communist states, usually while also killing the skilled "bourgeois". The result was always the same: total moral and economical collapse - then a revival of a new skilled class, but usually discarding the moral part forever.
Miloș wrote: "As for Heinlein's take: that's exactly what was tried again and again and again and again in all Communist states, usually while also killing the skilled "bourgeois". The result was always the same..."
Interesting comments, Milos.
It's notable that the modern west does not have to build walls to stop people leaving.
My comments are based on my own first-hand experience of growing up as a brainwashed communist in a country at the time considered a worse dictatorship than the Ussr, and also on havind read countless memoirs and historical recountings of victims of communism, from many communist countries. It's hard to imagine for someone in a democracy how easily and completely people can get brainwashed... If I'd ever write non-fiction I'd probably be a Gulag expert :) As for walls stopping people from leaving: the west did not get the barbed wire treatment simply because it did not fell under the red tide occupation. Where it did, it got them: the most famous wall for keeping people inside is the Berlin Wall, and Germany definitely IS west.
What I meant is the difference is not west vs east, as all peoples, cultures and religions are equally vulnerable to enforced distopia, but democracy vs totalitarianism. Democracy does not need walls against its own citizens, wherever it stands, and totalitarianism does, wherever it crawls.
Miloș wrote: "What I meant is the difference is not west vs east, as all peoples, cultures and religions are equally vulnerable to enforced distopia, but democracy vs totalitarianism. Democracy does not need wal..."
Well said, Milos.
Orwell was a socialist, though not extreme. However he was anti-communism.
Orwell was a socialist. Here is a quote from (and a link to) the preface go the Ukranian edition to Animal Farm:
Indeed, in my opinion, nothing has contributed so much to the corruption of the original idea of Socialism as the belief that Russia is a Socialist country and that every act of its rulers must be excused, if not imitated.
"And so for the past ten years I have been convinced that the destruction of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the Socialist movement."
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-...
It bums me that a lot of people mistake his work for being anti-socialist. It was clearly anti-soviet communism. As a young man, Orwell saw the horrible condition of the workers, which made him develop a lot of sympathy for socialist movements and his subsequent participation in the Spanish Civil War. This eventually lead to his disillusionment about communism and the writing of 1984 and Animal Farm.
Orwell literally fought with a Trotskyist faction in the Spanish Civil War against fascists, he's definitely not anti-Marxist
According to Wikipedia, George Orwell was affiliated with the, "Independent Labour Party." And, according to, "Encylopedia.com":
By 1935, the ILP...assumed a neo-Marxist character....
Orwell was a democratic socialist. Sometimes an unconventional one, true, but he was definitely a socialist. He was hostile to Soviet communism though.
"vuvuzula 1000000009 gabillion dead etc " do yall ever make new arguements or is it gonna be this same trash take for centuries. Everyday the average person loses power and the 1% gain more. If socialism is destined for failure why does the United States feel the need to intervene and try to destroy every attempt wouldnt that happen automatically? I guess you wouldnt know with your elementary school understanding of history.
Actually I'm fairly well read in History, it was my minor. I also read quite widely. Of course your post reveals you probably don't even have a elementary understanding of English so you buying into the Socialism myth is understandable.
You are aware of what Stalin called American socialists right? Useful Idiots.
History is not my strong suit, although I'm trying to learn more. I would have to say Orwell seems to have described socialism with precise accuracy in his books, and always as a precursor to communism. Because it is. Socialism is the bait in the trap to communism and will always fail.
Everyone wants to eat. Few go out to hunt or gather. Communism baits people with food and then snatches it away to get coersion. But Mike, you're the expert. So correct me if I misspoke.
Due to the state of our schools most people don't realize that socialism was the first organized form of government tried her in the "Americas". Jamestown was originally set up yo be a pure socialist settlement. The first year some people worked hard, long hours and got a good crop, others not so much. Then the crops were "divided". Those who'd worked harder saw no reward for their extra sweat. Those who'd not done as much (or anything) got an equal share.
By the next winter the crop production was down and it only continued to drop. Starvation set in and there are reports of cannibalism.
Then John Smith took over and made a simple rule. If you won't work, you won't eat. Jamestown survived.
Thumbnail sketch but it makes the point. Russia went from producing enough grain to feed millions to cooperative farms that led to starvation and the country importing grain.
I actually have heard that about Jamestown. Super interesting.
Not something most school kids learn about.
1. My english is bad because it wasent my first language.
2. A simple division of crops isnt socialism.
3. The entire great men view of history is a nonsensical farce, the situation at jamestown was alot more complicated than great man comes along and saves everyone.
4. You know fucking nothing of history if you believe the USSR ruined russia in the 1910s Russia was a backwaters hellhole that still allowed serfdom. The fact it industrialized to the point of surviving the nazi onslaught was not some miracle. It was the work of cooperation.
5. The profit motif did not exist in the early stages of humanity yet massive strides were made without it.
6. We are entering an era where about 10 companies control a vast majority of all goods.
7. If you system is so perfect why is there a major recession or crisis like clockwork and why during these recessions do the rich gain more power while the poor lose power.
8. I realize its probably pointless to argue with someone who calls themselves a "paladin" but here I am anyway.
Also lastely Russia having to now import grain is a weird take for as how socialism "ruined" Russia. The majority of the USSR/Tsarist Russian grain came from the Ukrainian region. Which is no longer a part of its modern territory. A loss of territory is a very clear reason for this needed importation.
Also lastely Russia having to now import grain is a weird take for as how socialism "ruined" Russia. The majority of the USSR/Tsarist Russian grain came from the Ukrainian region. Which is no longer a part of its modern territory. A loss of territory is a very clear reason for this needed importation. Also "Debunking howard Zinn" is a trash book and your rating of it as 5 stars shows how useless your history minor actually was. Eat the state department slop and worship the modern evil empire somemore I guess.
I think you have to study the difference between socialism and communism. You in America enjoyed 150 years inner peace in a wast continent where you can go anywhere. Look around in Detroit mate. Thats. Your capitalism. Your companies outsourcing every jobs to china or eastern europe, or india. You will need to study socialism mate because the jobless millions who cant work anymore, because some hungarian or indian dude will do a their job for 25% wage will be hungry. So please with common sense write this to Milton Friedman books too. Oh and yes All of marx books are bad, and filled with logical fallacies. Just like the libertarians. The writers preconception made these books totally biased. Oh Ronald Reagan was a puppet, and his movies are suck. It said anything from the american consumerism that you make him a president after you had a Franklin D. Roosevelt, or an Abraham Lincoln.
Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism as I understand it.
George Orwell
Although I have my own critique of Marx and especially Engles but communism has absolutely never been tried before. What you're referring to is socialism and the issue was not the system but the corruption of man. Not to be harsh but how have you not realized that by reading this? Also by his own account Orwell although a hypocrite was in support of socialism. Although an inaccurate portrayal of soviet history animal farm is about totalitarianism and how it comes to power not the critique of socialism.
i feel like this review has a lack of understanding of marxism and how to differentiate between communism and socialism, with the goal of communism creating a classless society dependent on the work of the people in the society, creating a interconnected system that has the well being of one person be dependent on the other, with a socialist state being a state/government that uses marxist ideas of taxes and worker solidarity with ultimate goal of communist society. the idea that there is a specific group of people who are the sole benefactors of communism is inherently against the idea of a class society without need for a formal government as the system in place would be a strong foundation of interconnected people working for a common goal. definitely not ideas without flaw but it is interesting you talk about the atrocities of communism and quote reagan when reagan’s administration cut funding to aids research in the 80’s and his administration would ridicule the people dying in new york calling it the “gay plague.” i think your review is reductive and lacking in nuance and while there are many parts of communism to criticize i don’t believe you truly understand the parts that can and should be
Not you quoting Reagan, one of the worst person that ever existed lmao
To support the points of the other commenters, I have a quote from neh.gov which states, "As a self-described democratic socialist, Orwell believed in active government, yet his alertness to the excesses of official power informed Animal Farm and 1984, his two masterpieces about totalitarianism." As shown in the quote, Orwell was a socialist, and it's confirmed that the Orwell in the quote is George Orwell when his works are mentioned.
If you read the part of Animal Farm after the book ends, it’s very interesting and it details Orwell’s life and reveals that he was indeed a socialist at the time of writing the book. He wrote the book to undermine “Russian socialism” which he thought he wasn’t equal at all but completely totalitarian. He wanted to uncover the Russian socialist facade, but believed in true socialism and equality.
If you quoting Reagan, you a lost cause Reagan was the devil. Also Orwell was socialist, he was just against using hierarchy to achieve communism, he was an anarchist, that's it.
saying George Orwell wasn't a socialist when he openly described himself as one is next level coping
You act like you already know everything, disgusting take
Orwell said himself that he was a democratic socialist, which is another (non-communist) movement Marx name drops in this book.
You’re just a brainwashed capitalistic peasant pawn.
You don’t even know what communism is, or means.
The problems that you claim “are caused by or happen under communism” is literally what is going on in our capitalist world right now.
The United States, the most aggressive colonial and imperialist capitalist country in the entire galaxy, with very low regulations and weak barriers to prevent heavy exploitation, has 3 men in their country as of August of 2025 owning more wealth than the bottom 60% of the US combined. We are in end-stage capitalism, and the results are horrendous. Tax cuts for billionaires to screw over the other 99.99%.
Almost two-thirds of Americans live paycheque to paycheque, and have no safety nets. People can barely afford necessities.
But sure, keep telling yourself that true socialism or communism is bad.
By the way, no country in the history of mankind has ever been truly and fully communist; no country has had a stateless and classless society, all the while the workers collectively having ownership of the means of production, which is very different from state ownership.
Reagan started this whole mess too, and his trickle down economics have only flowed upwards.
Orwell was a socialist. Use google you Invertebrate slime. Quoting Ronald Reagan is so ironic.
I'm very sorry but Orwell WAS A SOCIALIST. And if you are quoting Reagan in your defence, you have axiomatically lost the argument.
Why quote Reagan? Do you think he was a good leader? And saying Orwell was not a socialist would be funny if you weren’t so misinformed he was a democratic socialist. Animal farm is a Stalinism critique and Orwell himself said this “Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism.” This review is so bad it’s embarrassing.
hahahaha, Orwell literally fought the Nazis in Spain being part of the Marxist Communists.
back to top
message 1:
by
Graeme
(new)
Sep 11, 2019 02:23PM
Nice quote at the end.
reply
|
flag
I tend to miss the Reagan era.Yeah I know, I'm evil.
Well spoken Mike. I still can't believe such a small quote could be so relevant in today's political climate.
I always thought it was a common sense thing. Like, if you have common sense, and you think about communism for a bit...
Me to... I was in high school in the '60s and had friends who were caught up in what has become "the new left". I always wondered if they just never read history or simply didn't think.
Ill stick with Fulton Sheen who manages to make marx look like a fool in some of his books
I also liked Robert Heinlein's take on it. He compared the communist out look to the idea or replacing skilled individuals with lots and lots of unskilled workers under the direction or an unskilled dictator. LOL
Funny thing: you, in the capitalist US, say many high school students read it; while around the (former) communist countries, almost no one ever read Marx. After the fall of communism because we hated anything connected to it, and before that because in each Red dictstorship, the leader (Stalin in Russia, Mao in China, Ceausescu in my country an so on) had their own "holy" book about ideology, which were supposedly so great, brilliant and advanced into Socialism that one did not need reading the original. It was actually suspicious to do so: why would you need Marx? Was not Stalin's/Mao's/Ceausescu's genius already enough for you? What, were you checking on the Great Leader? How dared you?
As for Heinlein's take: that's exactly what was tried again and again and again and again in all Communist states, usually while also killing the skilled "bourgeois". The result was always the same: total moral and economical collapse - then a revival of a new skilled class, but usually discarding the moral part forever.
Miloș wrote: "As for Heinlein's take: that's exactly what was tried again and again and again and again in all Communist states, usually while also killing the skilled "bourgeois". The result was always the same..."Interesting comments, Milos.
It's notable that the modern west does not have to build walls to stop people leaving.
My comments are based on my own first-hand experience of growing up as a brainwashed communist in a country at the time considered a worse dictatorship than the Ussr, and also on havind read countless memoirs and historical recountings of victims of communism, from many communist countries. It's hard to imagine for someone in a democracy how easily and completely people can get brainwashed... If I'd ever write non-fiction I'd probably be a Gulag expert :) As for walls stopping people from leaving: the west did not get the barbed wire treatment simply because it did not fell under the red tide occupation. Where it did, it got them: the most famous wall for keeping people inside is the Berlin Wall, and Germany definitely IS west.
What I meant is the difference is not west vs east, as all peoples, cultures and religions are equally vulnerable to enforced distopia, but democracy vs totalitarianism. Democracy does not need walls against its own citizens, wherever it stands, and totalitarianism does, wherever it crawls.
Miloș wrote: "What I meant is the difference is not west vs east, as all peoples, cultures and religions are equally vulnerable to enforced distopia, but democracy vs totalitarianism. Democracy does not need wal..."Well said, Milos.
Orwell was a socialist, though not extreme. However he was anti-communism.
Orwell was a socialist. Here is a quote from (and a link to) the preface go the Ukranian edition to Animal Farm:Indeed, in my opinion, nothing has contributed so much to the corruption of the original idea of Socialism as the belief that Russia is a Socialist country and that every act of its rulers must be excused, if not imitated.
"And so for the past ten years I have been convinced that the destruction of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the Socialist movement."
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-...
It bums me that a lot of people mistake his work for being anti-socialist. It was clearly anti-soviet communism. As a young man, Orwell saw the horrible condition of the workers, which made him develop a lot of sympathy for socialist movements and his subsequent participation in the Spanish Civil War. This eventually lead to his disillusionment about communism and the writing of 1984 and Animal Farm.
Orwell literally fought with a Trotskyist faction in the Spanish Civil War against fascists, he's definitely not anti-Marxist
According to Wikipedia, George Orwell was affiliated with the, "Independent Labour Party." And, according to, "Encylopedia.com":By 1935, the ILP...assumed a neo-Marxist character....
Orwell was a democratic socialist. Sometimes an unconventional one, true, but he was definitely a socialist. He was hostile to Soviet communism though.
"vuvuzula 1000000009 gabillion dead etc " do yall ever make new arguements or is it gonna be this same trash take for centuries. Everyday the average person loses power and the 1% gain more. If socialism is destined for failure why does the United States feel the need to intervene and try to destroy every attempt wouldnt that happen automatically? I guess you wouldnt know with your elementary school understanding of history.
Actually I'm fairly well read in History, it was my minor. I also read quite widely. Of course your post reveals you probably don't even have a elementary understanding of English so you buying into the Socialism myth is understandable.You are aware of what Stalin called American socialists right? Useful Idiots.
History is not my strong suit, although I'm trying to learn more. I would have to say Orwell seems to have described socialism with precise accuracy in his books, and always as a precursor to communism. Because it is. Socialism is the bait in the trap to communism and will always fail. Everyone wants to eat. Few go out to hunt or gather. Communism baits people with food and then snatches it away to get coersion. But Mike, you're the expert. So correct me if I misspoke.
Due to the state of our schools most people don't realize that socialism was the first organized form of government tried her in the "Americas". Jamestown was originally set up yo be a pure socialist settlement. The first year some people worked hard, long hours and got a good crop, others not so much. Then the crops were "divided". Those who'd worked harder saw no reward for their extra sweat. Those who'd not done as much (or anything) got an equal share. By the next winter the crop production was down and it only continued to drop. Starvation set in and there are reports of cannibalism.
Then John Smith took over and made a simple rule. If you won't work, you won't eat. Jamestown survived.
Thumbnail sketch but it makes the point. Russia went from producing enough grain to feed millions to cooperative farms that led to starvation and the country importing grain.
I actually have heard that about Jamestown. Super interesting.
Not something most school kids learn about.
1. My english is bad because it wasent my first language. 2. A simple division of crops isnt socialism.
3. The entire great men view of history is a nonsensical farce, the situation at jamestown was alot more complicated than great man comes along and saves everyone.
4. You know fucking nothing of history if you believe the USSR ruined russia in the 1910s Russia was a backwaters hellhole that still allowed serfdom. The fact it industrialized to the point of surviving the nazi onslaught was not some miracle. It was the work of cooperation.
5. The profit motif did not exist in the early stages of humanity yet massive strides were made without it.
6. We are entering an era where about 10 companies control a vast majority of all goods.
7. If you system is so perfect why is there a major recession or crisis like clockwork and why during these recessions do the rich gain more power while the poor lose power.
8. I realize its probably pointless to argue with someone who calls themselves a "paladin" but here I am anyway.
Also lastely Russia having to now import grain is a weird take for as how socialism "ruined" Russia. The majority of the USSR/Tsarist Russian grain came from the Ukrainian region. Which is no longer a part of its modern territory. A loss of territory is a very clear reason for this needed importation.
Also lastely Russia having to now import grain is a weird take for as how socialism "ruined" Russia. The majority of the USSR/Tsarist Russian grain came from the Ukrainian region. Which is no longer a part of its modern territory. A loss of territory is a very clear reason for this needed importation. Also "Debunking howard Zinn" is a trash book and your rating of it as 5 stars shows how useless your history minor actually was. Eat the state department slop and worship the modern evil empire somemore I guess.
I think you have to study the difference between socialism and communism. You in America enjoyed 150 years inner peace in a wast continent where you can go anywhere. Look around in Detroit mate. Thats. Your capitalism. Your companies outsourcing every jobs to china or eastern europe, or india. You will need to study socialism mate because the jobless millions who cant work anymore, because some hungarian or indian dude will do a their job for 25% wage will be hungry. So please with common sense write this to Milton Friedman books too. Oh and yes All of marx books are bad, and filled with logical fallacies. Just like the libertarians. The writers preconception made these books totally biased. Oh Ronald Reagan was a puppet, and his movies are suck. It said anything from the american consumerism that you make him a president after you had a Franklin D. Roosevelt, or an Abraham Lincoln.
Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism as I understand it.George Orwell
Although I have my own critique of Marx and especially Engles but communism has absolutely never been tried before. What you're referring to is socialism and the issue was not the system but the corruption of man. Not to be harsh but how have you not realized that by reading this? Also by his own account Orwell although a hypocrite was in support of socialism. Although an inaccurate portrayal of soviet history animal farm is about totalitarianism and how it comes to power not the critique of socialism.
i feel like this review has a lack of understanding of marxism and how to differentiate between communism and socialism, with the goal of communism creating a classless society dependent on the work of the people in the society, creating a interconnected system that has the well being of one person be dependent on the other, with a socialist state being a state/government that uses marxist ideas of taxes and worker solidarity with ultimate goal of communist society. the idea that there is a specific group of people who are the sole benefactors of communism is inherently against the idea of a class society without need for a formal government as the system in place would be a strong foundation of interconnected people working for a common goal. definitely not ideas without flaw but it is interesting you talk about the atrocities of communism and quote reagan when reagan’s administration cut funding to aids research in the 80’s and his administration would ridicule the people dying in new york calling it the “gay plague.” i think your review is reductive and lacking in nuance and while there are many parts of communism to criticize i don’t believe you truly understand the parts that can and should be
Not you quoting Reagan, one of the worst person that ever existed lmao
To support the points of the other commenters, I have a quote from neh.gov which states, "As a self-described democratic socialist, Orwell believed in active government, yet his alertness to the excesses of official power informed Animal Farm and 1984, his two masterpieces about totalitarianism." As shown in the quote, Orwell was a socialist, and it's confirmed that the Orwell in the quote is George Orwell when his works are mentioned.
If you read the part of Animal Farm after the book ends, it’s very interesting and it details Orwell’s life and reveals that he was indeed a socialist at the time of writing the book. He wrote the book to undermine “Russian socialism” which he thought he wasn’t equal at all but completely totalitarian. He wanted to uncover the Russian socialist facade, but believed in true socialism and equality.
If you quoting Reagan, you a lost cause Reagan was the devil. Also Orwell was socialist, he was just against using hierarchy to achieve communism, he was an anarchist, that's it.
saying George Orwell wasn't a socialist when he openly described himself as one is next level coping
You act like you already know everything, disgusting take
Orwell said himself that he was a democratic socialist, which is another (non-communist) movement Marx name drops in this book.
You’re just a brainwashed capitalistic peasant pawn. You don’t even know what communism is, or means.
The problems that you claim “are caused by or happen under communism” is literally what is going on in our capitalist world right now.
The United States, the most aggressive colonial and imperialist capitalist country in the entire galaxy, with very low regulations and weak barriers to prevent heavy exploitation, has 3 men in their country as of August of 2025 owning more wealth than the bottom 60% of the US combined. We are in end-stage capitalism, and the results are horrendous. Tax cuts for billionaires to screw over the other 99.99%.
Almost two-thirds of Americans live paycheque to paycheque, and have no safety nets. People can barely afford necessities.
But sure, keep telling yourself that true socialism or communism is bad.
By the way, no country in the history of mankind has ever been truly and fully communist; no country has had a stateless and classless society, all the while the workers collectively having ownership of the means of production, which is very different from state ownership.
Reagan started this whole mess too, and his trickle down economics have only flowed upwards.
Orwell was a socialist. Use google you Invertebrate slime. Quoting Ronald Reagan is so ironic.
I'm very sorry but Orwell WAS A SOCIALIST. And if you are quoting Reagan in your defence, you have axiomatically lost the argument.
Why quote Reagan? Do you think he was a good leader? And saying Orwell was not a socialist would be funny if you weren’t so misinformed he was a democratic socialist. Animal farm is a Stalinism critique and Orwell himself said this “Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism.” This review is so bad it’s embarrassing.
hahahaha, Orwell literally fought the Nazis in Spain being part of the Marxist Communists.
