He refuses to show only one side, he leaves nothing out (even his painful memories of a childhood without a father or of his first experience masturbating)
The Commissar: :jesse-wtf:
The commissar, the man with no face, turns out to be his direct superior Man. Yet, this does not stop Man from subjecting him to torture as part of his reeducation. First, he must admit his crime of being complicit in the torturing and raping of a female communist agent. Then he must realize that he took part, albeit unconsciously, in the murder of his father. Lastly, he must learn Man's final lesson that a revolution fought for independence and freedom could make those things worth less than nothing, that nothingness itself was more precious than independence and freedom. The novel ends with the narrator among a crowd of boat people at sea.
This literally just sounds like the 1984 monologue, hack writing.
Yeah. The usual "communist throw away their humanity and muh freedumbs all in the name of the revolution" tripe that all of these hacks love to harp on.
My dad usually watches TCM and they played the movie, on the anniversary of the First Russian Revolution no less, and yeah. It's a clusterfuck. If anything it just leaves me with the impression that succdems/bourgeois 'allies' of socialist revolutions have a poor understanding of materialism and what needs to occur during a revolution.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sympathizer
I might be wrong, but based on the summary this just about sounds like a Vietnamese Doctor Zhivago.
The Commissar: :jesse-wtf:
This literally just sounds like the 1984 monologue, hack writing.
Yeah. The usual "communist throw away their humanity and muh freedumbs all in the name of the revolution" tripe that all of these hacks love to harp on.
I can't even parse what Doctor Zhivago is even about. The plot seems incoherent apparently on purpose???
My dad usually watches TCM and they played the movie, on the anniversary of the First Russian Revolution no less, and yeah. It's a clusterfuck. If anything it just leaves me with the impression that succdems/bourgeois 'allies' of socialist revolutions have a poor understanding of materialism and what needs to occur during a revolution.