Wednesday, June 7, 2017

George Orwell's 1984 is a pile of shit

With deep, solemn sorrow, I am informing you, oh dear reader, that, in this sometimes-yellow, sometimes-blue century we're living in, the book "1984" has become a synonym for fascism and dystopia. And isn't that, in itself, a dystopia of sorts?

I mean, seriously, what the fuck are we thinking? We glorified this pile of shit book? Let's start with clearing the premises, there is so much horse shit in one place, it's hard to begin working with it.

First, the writing style. This shitty style gives this book a feeling that you are reading Cosmo or a cooking magazine. It's like stagnant water. With a buffalo horde passing through, and shitting wherever they feel like. George Orwell has no idea how to establish pacing, or control the atmosphere with dynamic and lively sentences. Don't fucking tell me, that this is the point of the style! I don't want to hear. If the "point of his writing style" (non-existent) was to feel like a coloring book, that isn't the peak of human achievements in literature, and it should be burned. The events in the book, they don't feel, they just happen in a boring manner. It is as forgettable as a sitcom moment. It doesn't matter what's going on, it is the same, dull, prolonged stream of shit, slowly coming out of a constipated elephant ass.

Next, the characters. Considering this is a 21st century pop literature work, you won't expect much, assuming you had the patience to read more than 50 words of this shit. And you won't be surprised, these characters hold nothing unique or interesting, and they resemble a "fill" character you'd meet in a good book, that appears only once, and exists only to fill space by talking to the main character, as the writer is building tension for something bigger behind the curtains.

But, the worst part, is, obviously, the ideology of this book. It is an alternative future, where time is stuck in one place, and people keep getting dumber in order to maintain low-middle-high class structure. This way, time freezes, and humans are numbed to work assets, existing for no reason.

What Mr. George failed to realize, is that, a society like this is impossible. There will never be a society which doesn't favor intellect and improvisation. The same reason a society like this can't be, are found in our very own history, our breakthrough from the dark ages. It may be centuries, while we are stuck in a dark age, and in that dark age, ancient art will be sacrificed, but, intellect and individualism will always prosper, in the end. George Orwell is telling us to act, as if we are threatened by a mass government brutality, forcing us to obey, or die. However, he is too blind to see, that exterminating a characteristic, such as individuality is impossible, mainly because he didn't have it. He acts as if his world has a solution for every type of act an individual can take. Well, fear not, if you are able, you will never have to fear such environment, it won't happen.

The last thing I dispute, is the leading quote throughout the book, line by line:

"War is peace" - those are just antonyms, you haven't said anything of essence. The retarded explanation in the book doesn't make up for it.
"Freedom is slavery" - same, more pseudo-intellectual garbage for retarded teenagers to post on social media.
"Ignorance is strength" - not only did Orwell not say this first, but it's also a very easily disputable quote. If ignorance was strength, then, you would not have been reading his book in the first place. It is supposed to imply something else, but, really, don't look for it. There is no depth, anyway, it is just something repeated a lot throughout the book to make it seem intelligent.

Yea, don't read this, if you want anything of philosophical, political or literature meaning or art. Bye.

Friday, June 2, 2017

The ways and means of the two-party system as seen in America.

Most of the people that would read this would find nothing new in the text, they know what it will be all about in the title, just expressed differently. However, we are still living in a society of drooling morons who is willing to be slandered and is unable to see through the ulterior motives. In my opinion, this is because flocking is a natural human survival instinct, and seeing through what a "sheep" would do is much harder than a piece of paper. The case, here, however, is more severe. It is not a matter of just being a sheep or not, sometimes it is just a matter of being unable.
Here, you will find, what the methods are of the two-party system in America, and how the two parties are actually just best friends, regardless of what you see in the election statistics and outside.

Method 1: Making the individual oblivious to a third option.
I know that I sound like a broken record, but this is performed in a way that many people fail to see through. The main tactic here is the question "What if the other wins, what then?" This mollifies the initial, true instinct of rejecting both options and in this confused state of mind, you make a mistake and go out to vote and, even support the motherfuckers. X is worse than Y, in reality, however, doesn't work because of the fact that the main tool for a politician to success is the people, not himself. They aren't shit without you, don't wear the wrath of the second candidate's ignorance. The individualists always prosper, don't flock!

Method 2: Pushing a negative policy in the agenda among the ones that are supposed to be "good".
This is so classic, yet we want to be ignorant to this politician ingenuity. It doesn't matter what campaign you supported, with little, almost invisible letters, in the agenda, you will find evil. You decide to let it slip because you feel that you'll let a greater evil otherwise. Don't!

Method 3: Forcing you to feel that you need to stand behind your decision.
The politician is a fox. If you are a fucking retarded 250kg pig, you won't catch him and he'll steal your dinner. You are not obligated to stand behind what you said about a politician. You are fighting against a mind with no principle or ethics, if you chose to vote or said something, reevaluate the situation. Don't be stubborn!

So, that is all I feel like saying, I have more thoughts, but fuck it, if the first paragraph was not enough, nothing will be. To wrap everything up, all I will add is two things: Twelve angry men and look for initiative in different places.