Animal Farm, Oakland-style

C.M. Woodhouse, in his Introduction to George Orwell’s 1946 masterpiece, Animal Farm, remarks, “It is impossible for anyone who has read ‘Animal Farm’ to listen to the demagogues’ claptrap about equality without also hearing the still, small voice that adds: ‘but some are more equal than others.’”

Animal Farm, which Orwell called a “fairy-story,” in fact was a stinging indictment of the Soviet Union’s Communism in the 1930s and 1940s. With all their talk about equality and a classless society, the Soviet rulers made sure their own lifestyles were liberally sprinkled with the things they castigated Western capitalists for: mansions, good food and drink, dachas in Crimea, fancy cars, servants, and, of course, unlimited power over the masses they claimed to be liberating. Orwell’s unsparing eye saw through the hypocrisy and claptrap while his superb literary talent allowed us readers to also see it.

In so many ways the situation in Oakland resembles that of Animal Farm. We have, on the part of the progressives, their blather about “equality,” “social justice,” and “revolution,” with which they constantly appeal to the liberal impulses of the masses that elect them. Their rhetoric, like that of the pigs in Animal Farm, is idealistic, aspirational and apocalyptic, designed to foster class division so that the animals’ oppressor—Man—can be overthrown, and a true classless society achieved. In the novel’s end, of course, nothing of the sort has been accomplished, except to substitute one demagogic oppressor—Man—with another—the Pig. And “it was impossible to say which was which.”

The irony of “but some are more equal than others” is Animal Farm’s great contribution to our understanding of the contradictions of militant egalitarianism. Revolutionary authoritarians conspire to unite the masses into a force which an oppressive power structure cannot resist, such is its might and historical inevitability. Always spurring the masses on with slogans about equality or, lately, “equity,” the authoritarians appeal to peoples’ class resentments and feelings that they—the people—are, always have been and always will be taken advantage by Man, who swindles them of their just rewards and keeps it all for himself. From the progressive point of view, if you substitute “Man” with “White Power Structure,” the message is the same as that of Animal Farm: only a revolution can assuage the “miserable lives” of the animals. “Only get rid of the White Power Structure,” to paraphrase the boar’s incendiary speech to the animals, “and almost overnight we could become rich and free.”

Orwell’s point was that the pigs, who were the cleverest of all the animals and urged the others to overthrow Farmer Jones, the Man, never intended for everyone to actually be free and equal after the revolution. No, the pigs’ hidden agenda was to seize power and then enslave the other animals, while their propaganda would prevent the other animals from even realizing what had happened. In that way, the pigs would run Animal Farm, and the naïve cows, ducks, sheep, chickens and horses would think that this was simply the way things had to be--would never realize they had been hoodwinked. They would, in fact, be grateful to their new oppressors.

This is how Oakland progressives operate. People like Sheng Thao, Carroll Fife, Nikki Bas, Pamela Price and Dan Kalb have convinced a lot of people that, since all animals are created equal, the disparities in income and incarceration we see must be the deliberate result of racist oppressors. Their remedy is to make a revolution, by any means necessary, so that all Oaklanders finally are ruthlessly equalized. The catch: some Oaklanders will be more equal than others. Among these more privileged beings are those described by progressives as “victimized” or “marginalized” and, of course, the progressives themselves, the new elite who run Oakland’s own version of Animal House. As for the rest of us peon animals, we’ll need to be content with whatever scraps the ruling pigs throw our way.

Steve Heimoff