George Orwell

Terms coined in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four are the main vocabulary of anybody with any grasp of the evolving global political situation. The year 1984 is quite arbitrary, it is said that George Orwell simply reversed the last two numbers of the year he wrote it, 1948.

Alex Jones has said repeatedly that Eric Arthur Blair, who used the nom de plume George Orwell, was variously a member of MI5, a Communist and various other ad hoc nefarious affiliations, depending on Jones' mood, stating that the claims are 'documented' or that it has been 'admitted' though no evidence is ever presented. Any attempt at verifying these claims simply refers back to InfoWars or one of its clones or pages on sites which are not by any stretch of the imagination, reliable sources.

Maybe at the heart of this problem is the universally accepted truism that Americans don't get irony. It has to be explained in pictures on a case by case basis. Given that irony is an integral part of satire, it is easy to understand why Orwell's work could easily be misunderstood by somebody from Texas.

Nineteen Eighty-Four was part of the English Literature syllabus for many years, I don't think that anybody who read it at the age of 14 or 15 had any doubt that it was a cautionary dystopian novel which extrapolated the contemporaneous conditions of the period it was written to project a disturbing vision of the future. Orwell's life experience was a rich seem of material from which to mine and many key aspects of the novel were based on specific chapters in his own life, most notably perhaps, the Ministry of Truth which was a representation of the BBC.

To suggest that Orwell was forwarding his nightmare vision as a template is not only ridiculous but an insult to the work itself. It could not be clearer and, indeed, it has been for decades held as a warning beacon by those campaigning against totalitarian power. Jones himself leans heavily on imagery from Nineteen Eighty-Four. What evidence is there to support the claim that is, as Jones suggests, a manifesto?

Jones has also been heard claiming that Orwell was a British Intelligence Officer and a member of the Communist Party with the usual Jones stamp of 'documented'. On what basis does he make these spurious claims? It is documented that Special Branch, a British Intelligence agency, held files on Orwell stating that he had 'advanced communist views' and that he was seen at communist party meetings but MI5 stated that from analysis of his work, 'The Lion and the Unicorn', 'It is evident that he does not hold with the Communist Party nor they with him'. In fact, his opposition to the Communist Party was the cause of numerous personal disagreements. To study or even attend meetings of any person or group is not evidence of supporting them, how else is one supposed form an opinion of something without understand it?

It has also been said by Jones that Orwell was paid by the Communists in the Spanish Civil War. Has Jones ever read 'Homage to Catalonia'? Any payment Orwell received was in bread and tobacco. He was there fighting with the republicans against the Fascist Regime as part of the International Brigade. Jones says he has studied British and European history but he seems to be ignorant about one of the most significant periods of the twentieth century.

Jones passes judgement on Orwell having read one or two (if he has also read Animal Farm) books. He makes himself look like an ignoramus. Much of what is discussed on InfoWars is evidently true and is backed by mountains of evidence. Hearing him spouting such errant nonsense is a prime reason why I do not refer friends to his site or broadcasts because it seriously undermines his credibility and acts as a deterrent for people to even consider the compelling and real evidence of 9/11, the New World Order etc.