Nicolas Deffet’s Reviews > Animal Farm > Status Update

Un peu lente la progression

À chier ce livre wallah surcoté

Unon Gion

Si, honnêtement la critique du communisme est tellement superficielle. Ca creuse quasi rien. Cst le bête argument "communism = corruption = bad", sans aucune profondeur. Alors certes, l'allégorie du commisme de par une ferme est bien astucieuse, mais pas de quoi en faire l'éloge nn plus

Tu dois remettre le livre dans son contexte stout

Qui est? En quoi son contexte justifie la médiocrité de son argumentation ?

Avis d'un mec sur le net que je trouve pertinente par rapport à ce que tu dis.

Animal Farm, for those who don’t know, is a book written by George Orwell. It’s a satirical piece focusing on the transformation of the Soviet Union from a revolution to a dictatorship. Each of the major characters in Animal Farm represents a certain faction in Russia. For instance, Napoleon the pig represents Joseph Stalin, the ruthless dictatorship of the Soviet Union. And Boxer, the tireless horse, represents the average communist supporters.

Animal Farm is so important because it illustrates how history repeats itself. If you look a bit closer, you can see how certain trends in society surface again over time. For a better example, please read the following essay written by yours truly.

“Dictators never invent their own opportunities,” stated R. Buckminster Fuller, an American inventor.

In George Orwell’s witty satire Animal Farm, the characters in this story clearly illustrated this sentiment. The story begins with Major, an elderly pig, describing a utopian fantasy where animals ruled Manor Farm. Shortly after Major’s death, two pigs, Napoleon and Snowball, lead a revolution that overthrows the humans. As the story progresses, Napoleon becomes increasingly autocratic, driving off Snowball and ruthlessly cutting down his opposition. Eventually, he becomes the dictator of Animal Farm.

Orwell’s fictional Animal Farm represents the real-life Soviet Union, from the Bolshevik Revolution to Joseph Stalin’s tyrannical dominance. While it is generally agreed that the characters in Animal Farmrepresent real-life figures, it is disputed over which character contributed most to Napoleon and Stalin’s ascension to power. Representing the average communist supporter in Russia, Boxer’s support of Napoleon contributed most to his rise to power because Boxer and the average communist supporters never questioned their leaders, constantly had a battlefield mentality, and quickly bought into their propaganda.

Boxer’s unquestioning support of Napoleon primarily contributed to his rise to power. When the animals constructed the windmills, Boxer “worked harder than ever” to haul the stone used for the windmill (Orwell 87). Throughout the story, Boxer blindly backs Napoleon, even though he murdered animals and flouted the Constitution-like rules of Animalism. Perhaps the clearest example of this was Boxer’s famous sayings: “I will work harder” and “Napoleon is always right” (Orwell 92). Until his untimely death, which was orchestrated by Napoleon, Boxer obeyed and supported Napoleon, even in the face of scandal and law-breaking.

Because the other animals looked to Boxer as the standard, Boxer’s unwavering support of Napoleon definitely aided Napoleon’s unchallenged ascension to power. In real life, the average communist supporters followed Stalin without second thought, even as the Soviet dictator ordered millions of them killed. Even as he backstabbed them, they applauded and supported him, blind to his flaws. Without their support, Stalin would not have risen to power as easily or as effectively as he did. Thus, Boxer’s unquestioning support of Napoleon directly correlates to Napoleon’s ruinous rise.

By constantly have a “us vs. them” mentality, Boxer’s actions contributed the most to the creation of Napoleon’s dictatorship. While this was originally justified due to the existential threat of the “evil” human beings, this mindset later became dated and obsolete; however, Boxer continued to adhere to it (Orwell 10). During the formation of Animal farm, the animals lived constantly under the threat that “Jones would come back” (Orwell 29).

Once it was clear that Jones would not return, Boxer did not abandon the “us vs. them” mentality, continuing to say that “Napoleon is always right,” a decision that ended with Napoleon orchestrating his death (Orwell 92). This sort of mindset suppresses constructive dialogue and hinders progress because progress happens when people challenge norms in order to improve society. By rallying around Napoleon and by assuming it was unpatriotic to oppose Napoleon, Boxer’s actions inevitably led to Animal Farm’s shift from a republic to an autocracy. Even today, leaders whose followers continue to believe that said leaders cannot fail ascend to power that they do not deserve to wield. Demonstrated excellently by Boxer’s actions and mindset, a “us vs. them” mindset leads to autocracy and calamity because it undermines the very idea of a republic, which is that no person is infallible and should lead unopposed.

Finally, because Boxer was easily fooled by Napoleon’s propaganda, he clearly contributed the most to the formation of Napoleon’s autocracy. Helmed by Squealer, a “brilliant talker,” Napoleon spread propaganda among the animals, deceiving them about the laws, Snowball, and the humans (Orwell 13). When Napoleon bended the truth to fit his purposes, Boxer, as one of the original members of Animal Farm, should have realized Napoleon’s schemes. Unfortunately, Boxer did not, and he believed everything that Napoleon said. When even a founding member couldn’t recall the truth and was being educated through propaganda, the rest of the animals quickly fell in line. When Boxer bought into Napoleon’s lies and deceit, he paved the way for Napoleon’s rise to power and the fall of Animal Farm.

However, some do not believe that Boxer contributed the most to Napoleon’s rise to power. They argue that Boxer wasn’t at fault; rather, it was the elitist pigs that contributed the most to Napoleon’s rise. While it is true that the pigs were elitists and led the autocracy, without Boxer, and by default the average working-class supporters, the pigs’ schemes would have failed without a strong following. Therefore, this reasoning is invalid.

These dissenters also contend that Boxer was not at fault because it was the concept of Animalism that led to autocracy. They argue that Animalism was unrealistic and offered the animals a welfare state that would disincentivize work and would always have led to autocracy. This argument is fallacious since the social security net envisioned by the animals would not have disincentivized work. Furthermore, a dictatorship cannot be created if there is no one who supported it in the beginning. Thus, neither the argument that the elitists were the problem nor the argument that Animalism itself was the greatest issue has much value upon examination.

Because Boxer and the average, working-class, communist supporters, never questioned their leaders, constantly had a battlefield mentality, and quickly bought into Napoleon’s propaganda, they contributed the most to Napoleon and Stalin’s ascension to power.

By far, the most crucial of these was their commitment to the dictators’ propaganda. Had they been well-informed of the rules and reality, they might have questioned and opposed Napoleon and Stalin, thus preventing the rise of a dictatorship. This idea clearly is useful in twenty-first century America as a large section of the voting population fails to diversify their information sources and consistently believes false and misleading information, which leads them to blindly follow divisive and corrupt leaders. This is best summarized in the Washington Post’s motto: Democracy Dies in Darkness.

The point of this is that blind loyalty is dangerous. And in today’s society, this type of blind loyalty is prevalent in many countries. Take American politics. In America today, our politics have divided us severely. Many Americans follow blindly after their party and its spokespeople.

Of course, that is not to say that the working people alone contributed to the rise of Napoleon. As Sid Kemp put it, when evil triumphs everyone is complicit, and Orwell’s works especially should motivate us to inspect our own character to see how we fail.

So yes, Animal Farm is tremendously important for society today. Many of the events in that book are actually taking place today. Things like blind loyalty, unflinching support, and propaganda are everywhere today, especially in this digital age with social media and clickbait.

Civility. Honesty. Diversity.

Andrew Steiner

Oui donc ce qu'il highlight cst l'importance de la remise en question, la transparence, etc. sans quoi une société est menée trop facilement à une dictature. C'est certes une hypothèse viable, mais la manière dont il la prouve est juste trop simpliste. Il fait une bête preuve par l'exemple, en caricaturisant les humains à l'aide d'animaux. Le soucis de ça cst qu'une caricature néglige toutes les subtilités de la vraie vie, et donc toutes les potentielles burfications qu'une situation réelle pourrait prendre. Donc il est trop facile de répondre à cette preuve par "bah pas spécialement, regarde dans ce cas y". Fin bwef je dois pas t'expliquer l'irrecevabilité d'une preuve par l'exemple, d'autant plus quand cet exemple est inventé et construit avec des clichés.

Ce que je veux dire cst que cst un argument que j'aurais pu construire quand j'avais 14 ans et que je commençais à m'intéresser à toussa. Le "well, everytime communism was tried, it turned bad kek". Je cherchais un bail un peu plus transcendant, une raison irréfutable pour laquelle le communisme est mauvais, ainsi qu'une raison pour laquelle ce qu'on apelle "mauvais", est réellement mauvais (certaines personnes disent que le communisme est pas si mal malgré tout). Je cherchais qlq chose comme 1984 qui traitait de choses moins obvious avec le contrôle de l'histoire et du language, la manipulation psychologique, les thoughtcrimes, etc.

Allez Agree to disagree

T'es perdu