<div dir="ltr">I might suggest that this is not one of Orwell's finest moments. <div>Too much here on how disparate the use is, which is a concession to </div><div>the misuse of language which he elsewhere is so smart on. </div><div><br></div><div>And that we can't define Fascism---because we have to make 'admissions'</div><div>that no groups want to make? </div><div><br></div><div>Orwell more usually tried to make such 'admissions'. </div><div><br></div><div>Maybe a bad war-weary day. </div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:09 AM, ish mailian <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ishmailian@gmail.com" target="_blank">ishmailian@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yet underneath all this mess there does lie a kind of buried meaning.<br>
<br>
George Orwell.   What is Fascism?  TRIBUNE  1944<br>
<br>
<br>
It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely<br>
meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly<br>
than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social<br>
Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922<br>
Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek,<br>
homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology,<br>
women, dogs and I do not know what else.<br>
<br>
Yet underneath all this mess there does lie a kind of buried meaning.<br>
To begin with, it is clear that there are very great differences, some<br>
of them easy to point out and not easy to explain away, between the<br>
régimes called Fascist and those called democratic. Secondly, if<br>
‘Fascist’ means ‘in sympathy with Hitler’, some of the accusations I<br>
have listed above are obviously very much more justified than others.<br>
Thirdly, even the people who recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in<br>
every direction attach at any rate an emotional significance to it. By<br>
‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous,<br>
arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except<br>
for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any<br>
English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That<br>
is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.<br>
<br>
But Fascism is also a political and economic system. Why, then, cannot<br>
we have a clear and generally accepted definition of it? Alas! we<br>
shall not get one — not yet, anyway. To say why would take too long,<br>
but basically it is because it is impossible to define Fascism<br>
satisfactorily without making admissions which neither the Fascists<br>
themselves, nor the Conservatives, nor Socialists of any colour, are<br>
willing to make. All one can do for the moment is to use the word with<br>
a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done,<br>
degrade it to the level of a swearword.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:45 AM, ish mailian <<a href="mailto:ishmailian@gmail.com">ishmailian@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Dogs are used and are valuable in the war. Foxes? Lions? Princes?<br>
> Leaders may have their foxes and lions.<br>
><br>
> Humans are valuable. For killing, dying, working.<br>
><br>
> And they are in short supply, in high demand.<br>
><br>
> Children?<br>
> When you look a bit closer, the first question that strikes you is:<br>
> Why is it worse to kill civilians than soldiers? Obviously one must<br>
> not kill children if it is in any way avoidable, but it is only in<br>
> propaganda pamphlets that every bomb drops on a school or an<br>
> orphanage.<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19440519.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19440519.html</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/07_14_44.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/07_14_44.html</a><br>
><br>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 5:52 AM, Mark Kohut <<a href="mailto:mark.kohut@gmail.com">mark.kohut@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Pointsman gathers dogs (for his experiments). Pointsman calls his patients<br>
>> Foxes. "anything but humans" gets said.....<br>
>> how about an octopus "they don't bark"....<br>
>><br>
>> He can't experiment on a human...."is this ethical" asks<br>
>> Spectro.....[measurer for measurer].....raising his hand ...in almost a<br>
>> Fascist salute.<br>
>><br>
>> Foxes are smart, elusive, skilled at escape, a prey in fox-hunting; but<br>
>> Slothrop may be like a fox, hunting his own prey [Jamf].<br>
>><br>
>> How often have we read/heard that scientific 'experiments on animals do not<br>
>> necessarily say anything about human beings reactions.".<br>
>><br>
>> Yes, unless we humans are reduced to animals...<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Monte Davis <<a href="mailto:montedavis49@gmail.com">montedavis49@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> SPOILERS (if that matters to you)<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> ***<br>
>>><br>
>>> I like Laura's brown fox and lazy dog, but GR is going to recycle both in<br>
>>> more complex configurations than just Slothrop vs lab dogs... not least<br>
>>> because, as noted before, both dogs and foxes can appear as prey or<br>
>>> predators depending on context (remember Mike Jing's recent query about the<br>
>>> imagined "personal Rockets" that will track each of us like hounds).<br>
>>><br>
>>> A few of the later fox references that seem especially salient (Viking<br>
>>> edition pagination):<br>
>>><br>
>>> 53.30<br>
>>> the snow tracked over by foxes, rabbits, long‑lost dogs, and winter birds<br>
>>> but no humans.<br>
>>><br>
>>> 58.28<br>
>>> A skulk of foxes, a cowardice of curs are tonight’s traffic whispering in<br>
>>> the yards and lanes.<br>
>>><br>
>>> 131.19<br>
>>> The true king only dies a mock death. Remember. Any number of young men<br>
>>> may be selected to die in his place while the real king, foxy old bastard,<br>
>>> goes on.<br>
>>><br>
>>> 138.19 They gather, thicker as the days pass, English ghosts, so many<br>
>>> jostling in the nights, memories unloosening into the winter, seeds that<br>
>>> will never take hold, so lost, now only an every-so-often word, a clue for<br>
>>> the living—â€Foxes,†calls SpectroE across astral spaces, the word intended<br>
>>> for Mr. Pointsman who is not present, who won’t be told because the few Psi<br>
>>> Section who’re there to hear it get cryptic debris of this sort every<br>
>>> sitting—if recorded at all it finds its way into Milton Gloaming’s<br>
>>> word-counting project—“Foxes,†a buzzing echo on the afternoon, Carroll<br>
>>> Eventyr, “The White Visitationâ€â€™s resident medium, curls thickly tightened<br>
>>> across his head, speaking the word “Foxes,†out of very red, thin lips<br>
>>><br>
>>> 242.24<br>
>>> [General Wivern:] “Slothrop, there are no ‘SG’ documents.â€<br>
>>> First impulse is to rattle the parts list in the man’s face, but today he<br>
>>>Â is the shrewd Yankee foxing the redcoats.<br>
>>><br>
>>> 450.16 [re the facilities of the toiletship Rucksichtslos]<br>
>>> “Crew morale,†whispered the foxes at the Ministry meetings, “sailors’<br>
>>> superstitions. Mirrors at high midnight. We know, don’t we?â€<br>
>>><br>
>>>       The officers’ latrines, by contrast, are done in red velvet.<br>
>>> The decor is 1930s Safety Manual. That is, all over the walls,<br>
>>> photograffiti, are pictures of Horrible Disasters in German Naval History.<br>
>>> Collisions, magazine explosions, U-boat sinkings, just the thing if you’re<br>
>>> an officer trying to take a shit. The Foxes have been busy. Commanding<br>
>>> officers get whole suites, private shower or sunken bathtub...<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
-<br>
Pynchon-l / <a href="http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>