Image: the last sight of many a commie.
Please pronounce his name wrong to make the title pun work better.
Anyway - Javier Milei, a caricature of a libertarian invented deep in the Hexbear Bit Factory, has won the Argentinian general election; and with a 12 point lead over Massa, it wasn't even particularly close. There are several analogies for this situation - Trump beating Hillary, Bolsonaro winning in 2018, or the alternate universe where Le Pen beat Macron. Massa is not a great guy. The last couple years have been difficult for Argentina, facing massive inflation and the same general economic downturns that are happening everywhere.
Milei is an... interesting person. To name just a couple things going on in his deeply bizarre life, he has a very special relationship with his sister, and an even more special relationship with his mastiff, Conan. When Conan died in 2017, he was so utterly distraught that he had him cloned into four new dogs, named Murray, Milton, Robert, and Lucas, for his economist idols. And he uses mediums to speak to his dead dog. This is probably the closest we're ever going to get to having a dog be president of a country.
Milei wants to essentially collapse the economy even harder. Playing off the general public sentiment of "dollar = good, peso = bad", he has vowed to make the national currency of Argentina the US dollar, thus eagerly giving a massive amount of control over the Argentinian economy directly to America. He wants to take a chainsaw to the status quo, cut off trade with communist countries like China, and demolish the Central Bank. Will Argentinian capitalists and the Senate let him do this? Probably not. What happens with their membership in BRICS+? Who knows. Where does Peronism go from here? Who can say.
But he still won, and will now be president. I suppose that every dog has its day.
Friendly reminder: when commenting about a news event, especially something that just happened, please provide a source of some kind. While ideally this would be on nitter or archived, any source is preferable to none at all given.
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA daily-ish reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news (and has automated posting when the person running it goes to sleep).
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Various sources that are covering the Ukraine conflict are also covering the one in Palestine, like Rybar.
The Country of the Week is Argentina! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants. More detail here.
Here is the map of the Ukraine conflict, courtesy of Wikipedia.
Links and Stuff
The bulletins site is down.
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Add to the above list if you can.
Resources For Understanding The War
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Telegram Channels
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
Pro-Russian
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
Last week's discussion post.
Ours was reading 1984 and animal farm
True media literacy classes would also teach how the CIA and other spook agencies promoted Jorjor Binks’ “literature”. Reposting from an old comment of mine:
If you strip out the "Communism Bad!" agitprop, that's not the worst place to start. Orwell does a great job of enumerating methods of media manipulation and exemplifying them. What's more, the material itself is an excellent example of media manipulation. And Orwell's own history is littered with examples of manipulation and agitprop.
So, in the proper context, yeah. Fucking include it. Maybe run "The Jungle", "The Wizard of Oz", and "Letters from Birmingham Jail" beside it, along with a bunch of those late-19th/early-20th political cartoons, into the curriculum as well. But Orwell absolutely deserves to be a part of any critical understanding of media manipulation.
I think the only thing 1984 should be studied for is it’s history of promotion by spooks. If you strip out the “communism bad” you’re just left with Orwell’s self-insert sexual fantasies. And him complaining about the decline of language I guess, but Asimov did a better critique on this aspect. If you strip out the anticommunist brainworms you get a light pamphlet.
There are infinitely better ways to study media manipulation. Orwell was not uniquely insightful. Anticommunism is literally the heart and soul of 1984. It’s like trying to remove the Marxism from “Capital”. The best you’re left with is a wishy-washy pamphlet that says nothing in particular.
I don’t get this trend of trying to “fix” Orwell. Is it not ok to just leave it as the anticommunist propaganda it so obviously is?
Like, take any Disney film about the Japanese during WWII for example. Nobody would try to remove the racism from those and go “see? the moral is that bombing ships is bad.” Divorcing 1984 from its context, like if you divorced those propaganda films from theirs is historical revisionism, minimizes Orwell’s role as a snitch for MI6, validates and strengthens his image as an anticommunist “intellectual” (even if that’s not your intention), and what you’re left with is a contextless polemic about a nebulous something that is never quite revealed. Every line in 1984 is written with the anticommunist goal in mind. If you took “Mein Kampf” and removed every reference to Germany or communism or nazism, you can still tell what it’s about (I mean you couldn’t, because there wouldn’t be anything left, but you get the point). And if you take it at face value, you are still internalizing the message of the original text.
Its kinda weird that leftists are trying to rehabilitate Orwell before he’s even been properly cancelled.
Not to mention, as Asimov pointed out, 1984 is not how media and mass manipulation actually works. The only thing you can actually learn from 1984 is what western stereotypes of the USSR in the 1940s were. 1984 and Animal Farm are, at their core, attacks on the communist project. No amount of alteration can change that, and if you’re trying that hard you might as well write a new book at that point.
Eh. That's a very shallow historical reading. The book isn't just some leaflet agitprop, its a time capsule of all the paranoia and hysteria of the 1950s embedded in it. Orwell planted the seeds of modern Libertarianism via the cognitive dissonance of both lusting for and fearing the specter of the Police State. The fact that it was so heavily republished and distributed is itself a topic of discussion. As was the life of a colonial era failson turned spook turned celebrity, as it relates to the paranoia the book espouses.
There are few books that embody both the ideas of modern media manipulation and the actualization of those strategies in practice, as 1984. Maybe you could look to Rand or Heinlein, but their writing is significantly worse and far more difficult to digest. Orwell's pieces are exceptional vectors for the ideologue of the era as evidenced by their successful penetration and endurance.
I think leftists tend to read Orwell as an anti-communist polemic exclusively. But what he's laid out is at least as influential as Machiavelli's The Prince or Sun Tsu's Art of War, at least in so far as it gets people to read it and incorporate the stated strategies into their plan of governance. His politics is incidental to the strategies he proposes and the degree to which people have eagerly adopted them.
Again, if we were talking Atlas Shrugged or An Excess Male or some rewriting of the Anastasia myth, sure. They're all self-indulgent rants and reactionary hagiographies. But I think 1984 lays out, in a very tangible way, the implications of mass surveillance and media lead hysterics and historical revisionism. Is it for babies? Sure. But everyone's a baby at some point. And put within its historical role, the book practically defines the idea of Double-Speak within itself.
At least within the modern moment, it is a relatable narrative. A middle-class professional bumping up against the walls of an invisible prison of which he is both resident and warden. The perspective of someone whose life is getting marginally worse, day by day, thanks to his nation's endless lust for war. Someone whose position in society is predicated on working towards its destruction, but who is unable to find any way to rebel without provoking the wrath of a ruthless police state.
How can you not read 1984 today and see it is a picture of Western living? And that's long before you get into the gritty politics surrounding the novel, and how it is used reliably by the apparatus of the state to vilify dissidents, justify a larger police state, and sublimate revolutionary tendencies with the next generation? It is an embodiment of its own message. Very hard to simply ignore.
Forewarning: I’m autistic so I don’t know the boundaries between firm and rude, I swear I’m not trying to be an asshole. It’s almost always a surprise when people tell me I’m being one. TLDR I’m an oblivious idiot when it comes to expressions.
It was published in 1949 and has its roots in Orwell’s vendetta against what would be called “tankies” today. It reflects Orwell’s bitter sectarianism. It’s not exactly a forecast of the McCarthy era either.
Except Orwell gets media manipulation wrong. And you don’t have to exclusively read fiction. If you really need a “babby’s first media literacy” it should be Parenti’s “Inventing Reality”. Sure, it’s not a complete picture, but it’s concrete examples and criticisms sure as hell beat the vibes-based paranoia of 1984.
It’s endured because it is the go-to “communism bad” book and has been continually pushed by intelligence agencies and because it’s a part of everyone’s high-school curriculum. It is certainly not because of the quality of the writing. Having a message or being able to use allegories is the bare minimum an author should be able to do, not the inherent mark of high quality writing. 1984 is a mediocre blend of nostalgia for a non-existent past and anticommunist paranoia. It’s not a “bad” book but it’s on the level of a book I’d read to pass time on a flight. I reread it recently and it’s a slog to get through. I felt like following Julia’s example and just going to sleep. I’m not a “curtains are blue” person either, I majored in English even though I never did anything with the degree.
I’m not sure what you’re talking about here maybe you’re referencing another work?; I don’t know of any Orwellian “strategies” or that anyone anywhere has incorporated whatever they may be into their “principles of governance”.
Because… it isn’t? I mean, you can read it that way but then you’re fighting tooth-and-nail against what every sign in the book is pointing to. Pointing out that propaganda ironically depicts its creators instead of the intended target is different than taking the propaganda at face value. It gives legitimacy to the anticommunist aspect.
Liberals and conservatives are hypocrites, don’t need 1984 to see that.
I’m of the opinion that it would be easier to simply write a better book than to try and save 1984, at the very least simply to distance it from the anticommunist legacy. I’m not saying you can’t study it, just that trying to put it into a generalist anti-authoritarian mould is counterproductive.
Not at all. Mass surveillance to track and intimidate locals, brutal police tactics used to silence dissidents, and endless waves of misinformation to obliterate the historical record from memory are all tactics modern nation-states use to dominate a fractious public. Orwell was spot on in this regard. The rhetorical inventions of foreign adversaries advancing on our borders while a phantom menace undermines us at home have permeated Western discourse since the American Colonial Era. Hell, they go back to antiquity.
By all means, read Parenti. But "Inventing Reality" is a conversation about the thing, it is not the thing itself. Orwell's 1984 is both a discussion of propaganda and a deeply influential work of propaganda.
What makes it the "go-to" when the topic has been flogged for over a century?
Sounds like a skills issue. shrug
Its a light read by any definition. Fairly short, fast paced, and with all the elements of a Hollywood Thriller. I didn't have any more trouble with 1984 than The Good Earth or Of Mice and Men. If anything, Orwell's complete lack of subtlety makes it fly by.
Then I don't know what to tell you. Again, he isn't subtle. Doublespeak as a turn-of-phrase very neatly encompasses how modern media uses terms like "woke" or "liberal" or "fascism" or "freedom". The Israel-Palestine conflict brings this into high relief, with Palestinians Dying while Israelis Are Killed. The description of minorities - particularly Muslims - in Europe relative to China, really highlights how they are simultaneously this existential threat to civilization and this constant victim of state oppression.
And then you have our modern understanding of war. Nations falling into and out of our sphere of influence shift from friends and allies to nefarious foes within a matter of months, if not days. How many Russian Resets have we endured since the collapse of the USSR? Nevermind detente under Nixon and Carter, or the muddled policies dating back to FDR. China is, similarly, described as on the verge of kicking off WW3 one minute and the lynchpin to a global consensus on this or that ecological concern the next. As one specter rises, the other retreats, in the same manner Orwell describes the perennial war between super-states. We're always winning, but never free from the threat of imminent defeat.
Orwell's description of the Two Minute Hate very neatly matches modern Talk Radio and Daytime TV. Whether we're in a Satanic Panic or a War on Christmas or a Trans Invasion, there's always some vaguely defined cohort of Others that we're supposed to instinctively revile. Whipping people up into a lather and marching them off in a fruitless protest until they're burned out is straight out of the CIA counterintelligence field manual
Endless wars, chronic domestic shortages, brutal police violence, a steady erosion of the historical record, and a deliberate inflaming of tensions between races, genders, and religious cohorts are all endemic in modern western life.
You need books like 1984 to lay out the methodology, both in the writing and in the utilization of the writing to displace blame. The history of the book tells a story of propaganda as well as the book itself.
That’s not exactly working in its favor. It’s a work of propaganda directed entirely and exclusively at the Soviet Union. That’s what the entirety of the “discussion” is framed around. I’m not sure how this is supposed to make it better than Inventing Reality.
If being referenced in almost every “communism bad rant”, being on every literature curriculum in the country and being a literal synonym for authoritarianism doesn’t make it go-to then I don’t know what would.
Orwell’s lack of subtlety made him come off like a redditor ranting about the Soviets. The terrible writing is like a bonus little turd on the side.
Orwell describes a world where superpowers are literally in a constant direct, non-proxy, peer-to-peer war. Needless to say this has not materialized. His point is that the communists and inscrutable orientals need to rely on war to exist. He’s not making some generic “propaganda contradicts itself” point. Yes alliances change and old friendships fade away but you can literally find pictures of old newspapers praising Bin Laden on the internet right now. The information is out there if you’re willing to look for it. This is practically the opposite of the world of 1984 where all of history has been erased by the conniving government. It reinforces the dubious “brainwashing” narratives that permeate the western world. Grand coverups obviously happen but the power of willful ignorance and refusal to acknowledge history is almost always good enough. Orwell obfuscates how propaganda really functions. Even when confronted with undeniable historical contradictions liberals will continue to insist on the propaganda line. It’s hidden in plain sight.
And conservatives use this example to demonstrate the supposed viciousness of “cancel culture”. As it stands it is evidently a commentary on the Great Purge. I guess you could interpret it that way but I don’t know why you must source this analogy from 1984.
Sure, if you ignore the obvious word-for-word USSR stereotype analogy that 1984 is, you get a generic “government bad” book that can be mapped onto any government someone doesn’t like. It’s a Barnum statement in novel form.
We’ll just have to disagree here…
Since the USSR dissolved 30 years ago, its officially directed at no one. Even beyond that, parallels between 1984 and the Drug War were prominent well before then. And in the modern moment, there are plenty of parallels - up to and including the book being banned in US schools and libraries.
It is neither the only "communism bad" book nor exclusively referenced in that capacity.
That's pure hyperbole.
It is happening in Ukraine right now.
The book takes place in England.
You increasingly cannot. Large public central repositories of historical records are being shut down via lawsuit while private vendors are paywalling and purging their own backlogs. Algorithmic manipulation has made certain images and records more difficult to find over time. Indeed, just a few weeks ago, some viral content revisiting Bin Laden's history was loudly criticized by national media as "praise for Bin Laden on TikTok". This concern trolling further polluted the information stream and resulted in another round of flagging and purging of information related to Bin Laden on the grounds of it being "radicalizing" and "disinformation".
Nobody reading the novel today has a USSR to reference as an analog. We barely even teach the Cold War in history classes before college. This, again, goes back to the methodical purging and occluding of the historical record. In a perverse way, 1984's accusations and stereotypes are but a few of the reference points anyone interested in the old USSR history can easily obtain.
I guess so.
What? It’s no longer directed at the USSR because they stopped existing? I guess all the other anti-USSR propaganda just stopped being that as well? Is “Maus” directed at nobody because Nazi Germany collapsed 78 years ago?
Good thing that’s not what I said then. It is the #1 “communism bad” book. It’s almost become a synonym for “communism” in the west. No other anti communist book can compete. It runs completely counter to reality to deny this.
Which part of Ukraine is a direct, non-proxy war?
It’s almost as if a book can have commentary on things beyond the geographical limits of its setting. You’re in denial if you refuse to acknowledge the obvious slighting of communism as an “eastern” ideology:
This is quite different from 1984. I don’t recall the part where the government publicly and loudly acknowledges the history they want to erase to attack it as disinformation. It’s just gone. The goal of revisionism might be the same but the tactic is different. Killing the Bin Laden letter is just standard censorship of antigovernment texts. It is quite different from completely altering history to “we had always been at war with Bin Laden”. There are pro-regime people who justify previously being allied with Bin Laden. Real-life revisionism is about emphasis as well as injecting counterfactual interpretations of historical events into the mainstream. Coverups obviously happen, but they were never public in the first place. If anything, 1984 implies that censorship requires top-down organization when all it really needs is for capitalists to have a financial stake in engaging in it. Quite idealistic. Capitalist privatization and destruction of historical records are a feature of capitalism. Capitalists would kill their own children if they could cut their losses by an extra dollar in doing so. There is a more scientific way to approach this.
Please find me a single literature class in the entire country where discussion of the book doesn’t immediately pivot to the USSR and how the book is about it. And your last sentence contradicts your “directed at no one” claim from earlier. The USSR doesn’t need to exist for anti-USSR propaganda to work. It attacks the communist project at large through the USSR. You are kidding yourself if you think any high school literature class isn’t talking about how 1984 depicts communism. Almost everyone except a few western socialists treat it as a book about the USSR because that’s what it is. The USSR collapsing does not retroactively undo the purpose of the book. It is a piece of Cold War propaganda and it is taught as if it accurately depicted the Soviet reality and “dream”.
This is in line with watching “Birth of a Nation” as a somehow antiracist film because the Confederacy didn’t exist anymore.
If your take on 1984 is that its racist against communists... :-|