Karl Marx’s Views on Society and George Orwell’s Animal Farm

Karl Marx’s Views on Society and George Orwell’s Animal Farm

Dr. Satyendra Kant Maurya

Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology Sarvodaya Post-Graduate College, Ghosi, Mau, U.P., PIN: 275105

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.907000286

Received: 06 July 2025; Accepted: 13 July 2025; Published: 13 August 2025

ABSTRACT

This study adopts the literary text hermeneutics perspective. The investigator will analyze a piece of literature according to the text and explicate the term “sociological” by Marxist literary theories. The paper aims to shed light on the relevant sociological significance of myths in “Animal Farm”. Animals were the major characters in the world-famous satirical English novel, Animal Farm. Using animal metaphors, George Orwell painted the post-revolution Stalinist Soviet Union society, where the poor ignorant populace lace-stabbed their own brethren without discernment, all in the name of defending their government. This paper classified the proper characters of the novel and then interpreted the true meaning of animal farm via specific analysis of each character and the corresponding realistic representative.

Keywords: Rebellion, conspiracy, manipulation, discrimination, slaughter, revolution power, corruption.

INTRODUCTION

Karl Marx, Talcott Parsons, Georg Simmel, Herbert Spencer, Max Weber, Harriet Martineau Emily Greene Balch, etc are very famous sociologists who propounded different social theories. There are several theories about society, but when people read George Orwell’s Animal Farm, they find also his ideas about, man, the crucial nature of man, the concept of equality and social justice. This is a short book of fiction with a global readership and translated into several languages. It is a very famous work and has long been ranked among the best books of the twentieth century. Its general readers are much more than that of students and teachers of English literature. Animal Farm functions as a social and political allegory that examines themes of Classless Society, totalitarianism, the degradation of ideals, and the potency of language for the fulfilment of the purpose.

Human nature is a beautiful body made up of many components such as our mind, our emotions, and our actions that are considered to be naturally like humans. This concept is closely linked to the fact that we are human beings and references to the true meaning of human nature. Understanding human nature is one of the most difficult things as it is as hard as possible to find these unique characteristics and even more to be able to know that only humans have them. Some people argue that it is the basis of the logic that makes us human, while others say that it is that we can laugh, make tools or walk on two feet. Some folks think that the essence of being human is helping others, showing understanding, and giving them a hand. Besides, others would say that human nature is constituted by a mix of latent qualities such as compassion, attachment, variety, kindness and a capacity to form connections.

In Marx’s theory, however, and with the story portrayed in Animal Farm, something fundamentally contradicts the aspiration against reality, as it attacks – oriented power and twists ideology. While Marx had this vision of a society founded on inequality and cooperation coming in the way of a complete reorganization of economic relations above, Orwell clamours for highly developed human character consciousness toward power grabs and an omnipresent risk of ideology being twisted to authoritarian purposes. It is often clear that Marx’s actual vision centred on a genuine human desire for a good world bypassing the very human inclinations of greed, ambition, and manipulation of others. The actual portrayal is not necessarily opposed to Marx’s concerns about economic inequality or the demand for social justice, yet it pointedly underscores the existence of multiple daunting problems involved in creating the ideal society, certainly far more complicated than simply organizing the economic system. It requires moral leadership, unyielding commitment to the tenets of equality and justice, and constant alertness to the inherent threat arising from excessive power. This strongly resonates with Gandhian tenets, which lay equal emphasis on ends and means, individual moral responsibility, and the nonviolent aspect of the justice struggle. In various ways, both Marx and Orwell provide old yet contemporary lessons that humanity needs to learn about the still-ongoing struggle for a more just and equitable world, urging continued and rigorous engagement between aspirations and their concrete actualizations. Ejeh Paulinus Chikwado rightly observes in his article entitled A Critical Analysis of Karl Marx’s Conception of Society and Individual:

“The Marxist goal is a classless society in which everybody will be free and happy. […] The final goal of the Marxist is a classless and stateless society in which there will be no more conflicts, no more struggle, no more exploitation, no more suffering, no more poverty; a society where everybody will live in peace with his fellow men. It will be a society made up of freed and regenerated men.”¹

Let’s set afloat this intricate and profound journey of exploring Marx’s view of an ideal society through a prism that intends to be pleasurable and beautiful, interesting, moral, social, human-real- and perhaps even Gandhian in aspiration. This is tough work since maturity has mainly rendered its vision in harsh, economic, and political construals, while at the core wells a problem of the most precious human regard: liberation and equality. We shall strive really hard to uncover that sixth perspective of those different humanism visions and stand before that unduly noble courageous spirit of critical and constructive engagement.

Marx states, at the very core of his theory, that historical processes are determined by quite stringent material conditions: namely, the mode through which particular social formations have organized production and distribution of their resources thus far. He claimed that, throughout history, different modes of production have created ongoing class struggles: from feudalism to capitalism.

In Marx’s analysis, capitalism represents the exploitation of the proletariat (the working class) by the bourgeoisie (a class that owns the means of production). This exploitation, according to him, was not an economic form but terribly dehumanizing, cutting workers off from their work, their fellow humans, and their own potential. He diagnosed this system, for all its overwhelming productive work, as inherently unsustainable, full of contradictions that were bound to lead to its ruin. From the ashes of this despotic system, Marx foresaw the rise of a beautiful vision of a free state: not as a blueprint, but as a dynamic technique – processes that a state end in itself.

The ideal society for Marx is communism, which does not take into account the communist experiment of 20^th-century state totalitarianism. Instead, it projects into the future where the stage lies beyond capitalism with the means of production being owned and controlled collectively. Private property, as the engine of class division and exploitation, would have been abolished in its most direct embodiment. This is no simple act of robbery; it is no mere distribution of all goods equally. Instead, it is a fundamental transformation in the social relations of production. The slogan would be, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”. Imaging a world in which work is no hardship no longer a necessity of life but rather an expression of the joy and creativity inherent in the human spirit and soul. Workers would no longer suffer alienation because people would find joy in their work again, providing a conscious contribution of their talents to the greater good. More than material wealth, this concerns a complete liberation in spirit and emotional development; a society in which the individual can finally discover and develop his full humanity without the shackles of class, poverty, or suppressive social structures. Ejeh Paulinus Chikwado rightly observes in his article entitled A Critical Analysis of Karl Marx’s Conception of Society and Individual:

“Marx sees man as a doer, an active social being who engages in social activities and can change his conditions of life. He is equally a thinking and a feeling being. These qualities are inseparably interconnected. The Marxists therefore, define the essence of man and human personality as concretely historical in its approach.”²

The disappearance of class, which inherently contains inequalities, is on its own a phenomenon that forces the state to wither that is, a mechanism for class rule. In the ideal communist society, the government would not be imposed from outside but would be generated spontaneously by the community itself, once the consent of its constituents has been informed. There would no longer be the separation of society into the “rulers” and the “ruled.” This idea is extremely ambitious, even utopian. It involves a social consciousness and collective spirit that is beyond our current environment of individualism and competition, hence almost outside the realm of imagination. At the same time, this very concept possesses an enormously strong moral component, which not only impels us but also challenges us to envision a world deprived of exploitation and inequality. Although a Marxian approach might be dispassionate and deterministic at times, still one may be lost in the quest for emotions, love and human connection. Where do we find the heart, the compassion, the human connection? This is what a Gandhian viewpoint will provide to our perspective. Gandhi, who harshly criticized the capitalist system, approached societal transformation differently. He used non-violence to appeal to the transformative nature of love and empathy, he went further to explain why the ethical conduct of individuals is important, as well as the other through this kind of activity. While Marx oriented his work towards changing the system, Gandhi focused on the moral improvement of individuals. Might we develop the idea of a compassionate communist society that is not only economically fair but that is also based on the idea of “Sarvodaya” (the well-being of all), which is the core of the society? The Gandhian rule of “Ahimsa” – non-violence – corrects the interpretations of Marxism that have been advocating for the means of violent revolution. According to this perspective, the true revolution is beyond the transformation of structures but also the conversion of souls. Mahatma Gandhi says:

“…a stateless society does not exist anywhere in the world. If such a society is possible it can be established first only in India. For attempts have been made in India towards bringing about such a society.” ³

Inspired but altered by Meditation, a perfectly wonderful society would have to prioritize humane relationships, community, and the care of all. It would be a case of not only collective ownership but also mutual responsibility, not the only issue. That is, foster spiritual growth and not just fulfil their needs. This would be a society where we treat each other not as competitors but as people travelling the path of life. This approach implies the acceptance of the fact that material conditions are, of course, extremely important, but they are not the only type of oppression. We need to also examine issues like race, gender, and other social inequality. The correct ideal society must address all of these interconnected forms of domination. No questions about Marx but real-world difficulties and challenges naturally come with applying his ideas. The 20^th-century Marxist regimes make the best evidence for the side effects of increased power and less individual freedom. Anthony Imoisi Ilegbinosa rightly observes:

“To Marx, the major characteristic of capitalism is the separation between owners of the means of production and non–owners of the means of production i.e. capitalist and worker. The exchange between capitalist and worker results in the bargaining of wages […] The wage of labour is the contradiction between labour value and the labour power. Labour is a commodity or the only factor of production, which is able to produce more than what goes into the produce itself. That is, labour is the only source of surplus and labour power is the value-producing aspect.”⁴

This doesn’t mean that Marx’s ability to fight against capitalism is ignored or the attractiveness of his ideas has disappeared, but it forces us to make deep reflections. How can we assure the citizens’ participation in a collective economy? How will we prevent the new types of unequal distribution of power and the resulting oppression of some people? How are we going to teach the youth about the ethical and moral values that are fundamental for a true and just society? These issues are not abstract thoughts; they are very close to reality in today’s society.

It is not some model system to be adopted utterly in describing the Marxist communist society; it is, rather, a call into action meant to call for the reworking of the way people relate with one another and with their world. It’s not about imposing a utopia, but about the ongoing struggle to create a more just and humane world. From an ethical and humane perspective, it provides the profound underpinning to take up the glaringly unequal indirections of today’s world, instil in us empathy, and foster a future where human potential can bloom for all and not for the few.  The confluence of Marx’s brilliant analysis of systemic oppression and Gandhi’s onerous commitment to ethical action and human liberation offers therefore an eloquent and enchanting baseline for the convoluted journey to an absolutely ideal society.  The path, however, is not paved with effortless solutions, but with dedicated work, critical thought and collective will. Gandhi believed that the concept of a classless society is not possible and practical. He says:

“Bolshevik regime in its present from cannot last for long. For it is my firm conviction that nothing enduring can be built on violence. But be that as it may there is no questioning the fact that the Bolshevik ideal has behind it the purest sacrifice of countless men and women.”⁵

 Animal Farm is an allegorical, satirical, Socialist-Democratic work wherein Orwell not only criticizes Communism but also goes further to question the practicality of capitalism. George Orwell in Animal Farm used animals to symbolize the Russian Revolution while continuing with a satirical narrative that uses animals to reflect on the situation then in Russia. Through the character of the animals, Orwell shows the way deception occurs amongst the characters, the way one becomes dominant over another, and how the characters in this story illustrate the way communists and capitalists pull the strings from behind. This work represents the lines in power between the animals, and a few ideologies are delineated within it much the same way some classes are less than others: some, in origin, truth, and wisdom, stand tall and mighty. Other characters, some trying to openly conquer others, are caught in the crossfire of an ideological struggle. In other words, Napierkowski considered that the main issue of this novel belongs to the upper-class discourse on the class structure. This speaks to the uppermost height of social class status in any status disease in this novel with the most certain raises for the study of the poor, the meek, and who can work only like serfs. Based upon this assertion, an exploration into classless communities as represented in George Orwell’s Animal Farm serves as the seemingly purposive line of intention for this book.

There is a great view of a classless society in Animal Farm. Using allegorical style in Animal Farm, Orwell desires to criticize the Classless Society or, as in the concept of Marxism, called Communism. The predictions that Orwell made in his writing about Animal Farm have been demonstrated. The Soviet Union broke up in the 1980s to 1990s and changed into Russia. During that time, Russia attempted to proceed against Communism and become a capitalistic country.

Orwell describes a character named Major, an old and respected white pig on the farm – essentially, one of the true voices of satire. The animals on the farm were summoned to hear Major recount his peculiar dream. The address made by the Old Major to other animals carries significance. His speech stirred something in all animals regarding the horrors committed by humans. His speech mainly concerned the animals that must rebel against Humans (Mr Jones) who have profited from their sweat. The address describes the equality of all animals and the fact that all humans are enemies.

The revolts led by Snowball and Napoleon began. After fierce fighting, they finally succeeded in driving Jones and his cronies off the farm. They had made the first step towards freedom and agreed on the principles put forth in the Seven Commandments as follows:

 “The Seven Commandments:

1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
2. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
3. No animal shall wear clothes.
4. No animal shall sleep in a bed
5. No animal shall drink alcohol
6. No animal shall kill any other animal.
7. All animals are equal.” ⁶

By the standards of the Seven Commandments, they manage the farm well and hence live happily. The animals rejoice for they had never thought this could happen. Every bite is a feast, and now each one of them knows, that everything they need is its own food, produced by them and consumed by themselves, no longer apportioned to them by the master, whom it had known best.

The successes of the revolution on the farm did not cease with that; Snowball embarked on teaching the organization of welfare improvement for animals to better first-hand knowledge. Better animal welfare is now in sight. They assist one another to complete all the heavy workloads. They still have a long way to go to fortify and protect the accomplishments they have made. The order of life at Animal Farm, with a foundation that emerges from volunteerism for realizing justice and prosperity, lasted not very long. For power is indeed intoxicating. One would also have easily noted the dawning realization of the need for a heavy hand of power that was Faustian in passion amongst the occupants of Animal Farm. The disharmony that started emerging between the two powers between Snowball and Napoleon is now a conspiratorial one. In a meeting of all the inhabitants of Animal Farm, Napoleon staged a coup took overall power and violently ousted Snowball from the farms, dramatically portrayed by Orwell. He writes:

“One of them all but closed his jaws on Snowball’s tail, but Snowball whisked it free just in time. Then he put on an extra spurt and, with a few inches to spare, slipped through a hole in the hedge and was seen no more.”⁷

Napoleon had become the absolute ruler of all animals at Animal Farm since the removal of Snowball. In addition, the spirit of rebellion began to slowly fade away along with freedom. This was effectively taken over by Napoleon and the pigs. Animals that were once in a state of being appreciated had become slaves to senseless suffering. They had to work so hard that their labour served purposes quite alien to them, and food rations were limited too much for animals that did not obey. The cries for democracy had turned into a dictatorship again. George Orwell writes:

‘Napoleon and the pigs are always right.’⁸

Obviously, Snowball was a strong force at Animal Farm, but his influence was contested and diminished by Napoleon and his party through stories impugning his actions with enemies. Napoleon employed Squealer, who possessed a fair measure of rhetorical skill as a master of lies, to turn events around to make the animals by and large believe it. And never mind that the other animals did not see him as a smuggler; they took him at his word.

Napoleon and his supporters began to violate the fundamental rules contained in the Seven Commandments, and Napoleon undertook a sort of long-distance relationship with humans, and Mr Whymper was now the intermediary between Animal Farm and the outside world. Every Monday morning, Mr Whymper arrives at Animal Farm to get orders from Napoleon. Orwell writes:

“A Mr. Whymper, a solicitor living in Willingdon, had agreed to act as intermediary between Animal Farm and the outside world, and would visit the farm every Monday morning to receive his instructions.”⁹

The memories of the animals then began to recall everything that Major had said in his speech about the noble ideal for them. They remembered the past speeches about a just life without oppression and slavery between them – which became a dream now. They never thought that their fellow animals would end up killing each other, and this was not their goal all these years of falling against human rule. And this was not the aim of Major to ignite a rebellion in them. On another note, Orwell went ahead to sharpen his criticism – using an example of a society that has no prosperous class to demonstrate the onset of conscious realization. The animals first worked together towards independence after they had initially overthrown Mr Jones. With time, the comforts of life were getting better. Pigs had started acting things out in a way of ruling that resembled that of man instead. Even the whole book of The Seven Commandments forbade animals from performing any human tricks all that belonged to pigs. Orwell writes:

“One Sunday morning Squealer announced that the hens, who had just cone in to  lay again, must surrender their eggs.”¹⁰

This novel concludes in utter chaos in a situation where animal farmers, with Napoleon conspiring with a group of people, are thought to be enemies. They usually have dark meetings on architecting businesses oblivious to other animals. Has Animal Farm had a complete breakdown of ideas and values? With the gradual development of the citizens, Animal Farm, instead of collaborating, continues to gain affluence, even though it belongs to Napoleon and his humans. Other animals cannot tell this. They are still labouring to produce as much as they can for the estate.

“As for the others, their life, so far as they knew, was as it had always been. They were generally hungry, they slept on straw, they drank from the pool, they laboured in the fields; in winter they were troubled by the cold, and in summer by the flies.”¹¹ 

The Seven Commandments which was originally reversed by Napoleon in new interests. At the end of the story, it leaves no more. They are known when Benjamin and old Clover walked around and saw the large barn wall where The Seven Commandments were written. Despite not being literate, Clover asked Benjamin to read the page. Thereafter, they found that there was no more need for The Seven Commandments, which was now nothing but a single sentence that harassed the others.

“All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others”¹²  

All the situations in the story of Animal Farm are every day in human life. The stories contained here are; Rebellion, conspiracy, manipulation, discrimination, slaughter, and so on. Orwell describes the takeover by these animals in an allegorical sense, portraying all the human aspects mentioned above.

The slicing wind that blew across Manor Farm, a wind that brought along the scent of corruption and a simmering discontent, symbolizes the very condition of society, as illustrated by Orwell in Animal Farm. The animals, pushed over the edge by human oppressors, raw from a tedious workload and with empty stomachs, were asking for a better life. It is that yearning for a viable future; it is the age-old desire for fairness and justice that has always been resounding in a battle against the inequality inherent in hierarchical systems since the birth of human history. Orwell writes:

“In April, Animal Farm was proclaimed a Republic, and it became necessary to elect a President. There was only one candidate, Napoleon, who was elected unanimously.”¹³

The original uprising, a joyous and indiscriminate explosion of pent-up feelings, speaks to the power of mass action, the latent power that exists in a population uniting. Old Major’s dream is as good an idealistic representation of utopia, to have a farm run by animals for animals and free from the manufacture of an acquiring human, but a potent icon of the seductive promise of a mind where all who work share the fruits and everyone is equal in deciding on virtually anything. However, this dream soon becomes a war zone of counter-ideologies and the slow gnawing of power itself.

The pigs representing the mightiest, most intelligent, and most able, symbolize elite class under a dark cloak. The elite gradually gained domination over the system, overbearing with a perception of superiority. Those minimalistic but gradually eroding ideals which are represented by the appropriation of milk and apples are microcosmically termed as modest – a turning point so very subtle that it leads to the implosion of the very principles of liberty and equality.

The pigs’ swaying of words, and the rewriting of the Seven Commandments by the pigs to make way for their unfurling newer whims, clearly demonstrate how propaganda can work, and how language can be perverted to serve any agenda of those in power. And this is by no means limited to the animals; this is a cruel observation of how political discourse is manipulated to justify injustice and silence dissent in our world.

Incomplete, the zeal for the unspeakable task of improvement in the farm, the great mammoth windmill scheme, and the brighter conditions of life is sum totalized here as Snowball, an example of the progressive leadership of which passion is not deprived; leadership because sincere attention is given to the plight of the comrades. The expulsion of Snowball shows, in truly tragic ways, why the revolutionary fervour is undermined when other alternatives are dealt with through force and brute intimidation.

Napoleon, with his degree of cold-hearted pragmatism and extensive reliance on fear and manipulation, is a chilling representation of the corrupting influence of absolute power. His training of the dogs to be his personal enforcers, a brutal and inflexible security force, is but a reminder of how authoritarians readily employ violence and coercion to rise above dissent. The systematic stripping of the freedoms of the animals, the ever-wider rift between the lives of the pigs and those of the other animals, is a painful representation of the sad, yet inevitable decay of revolutions when the price paid for sleeping vigilance and accountability has been taken in blind faith and as a sacrifice to critical thinking.

The rewriting of history; the villainization of Snowball; is an awkward mirror raised before society’s proclivity to be affected by carefully crafted tales, even though those tales may be proven false in due time. Boxer’s fresh blood and toil as a dedicated and reciprocal cart – horse are a true personification of the valiant working class; his altruistic spirit, which incites him to an unflinching loyalty to the cause, will be repaid in abuse and, true to his way of life, a tragic demises. His unassailable commitment to Napoleon as a leader, echoed often in the words, “I shall work harder,”¹⁴ highlights the horrifying trap of blind loyalty and the circumstance in which the best of intentions may, in some tragic way, end up being twisted by those who seek power for their own sake. Orwell writes:

“Napoleon, with the dogs following him, now mounted on to the raised portion of the floor where Major had previously stood to deliver his speech. He announced that from now on the Sunday-morning Meetings would come to an end. They were unnecessary.”¹⁵

The pigs finally have become indistinguishable imitations of the humans whom they originally aimed to overthrow – a condemnation so deeply felt that walking on two legs, wearing clothes, and dealing with the neighbouring farms can be taken as prime evidence of the cyclical nature of power. They are the very words that express how easily the oppressed become the oppressors, that revolutionary zeal can be corrupted by individual ambition, and the initial dream of a just society can decay into an existence that is even more nightmarish than the one they attempted to replace.

The last scene – when the other animals can no longer tell who is who, pigs or men – is great and haunting proof that real freedom means not only overthrowing tyranny but pestering ourselves every day with how insidious power is. Not just a story, Animal Farm rises – as a commentary on society and a timeless reminder against the enchanting lures of totalitarianism, the hazards of unchecked ambition, and the vital requirements for critical engagement with the structures and systems that regulate our lives. It’s a call to keep in mind that real revolution is not about switching one set of masters for another; it’s about building a society in which justice, equality, and freedom are not mere slogans but the very foundations of its existence. Orwell writes:

“The creatures outside looked from pig to man and man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”¹⁶

CONCLUSION

Thus, the animals represent human beings in an allegoric way; the apparent idea is that animals and humans cannot be distinguished least, clear at the end of ‘Animal Farm.‘ This highlights the unique literary qualities of satirical allegory novels with a great social theory. The portrayal of animals reflects human characteristics, and their behaviours mirror those of people. Orwell employed these animal figures to critique individuals and totalitarian societies, creating a powerful image and message. As a result, Animal Farm has been recognized as one of the most significant social and political fables since its release, holding a crucial place in the history of modern literature also propounding a social theory.

These visions come down against the complex and oftentimes unforeseen burdens of human nature. Karl Marx, one of the giants of 19th-century Thought, envisioned a utopia, a communist society free of the shackles of capitalist exploitation. He touted what he styled ‘a classless world’ where, for once, the property would be collectively owned and goods would be distributed according to need; a society characterized by life: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.¹⁷ This ideal, steeped in equality and social justice, painted a minimalist-utopic world of harmony where the human potential could flourish free from the burden produced by economic disparity. Marx’s theory arose from quite genuine sympathy for the working class, to rectify the systemic injustices he observed, and ushered in an era wherein cooperation and solidarity replaced competition and alienation. It was, at its core, a profoundly humanistic endeavour to liberate him from the dehumanizing forces of capitalism.

However, as tragically illustrated in history and forcefully fictive by George Orwell’s Animal Farm, the road to such a utopia is replete with hazards. Even when establishing the new order in which man becomes an enemy to all species, the other side speaks through the animals’ revolution against their human oppressors. All thanks to the warning-allegorical writing, the book is like an indirect feedback against the attractive wile of power and the ease with which revolutionary ideals may be perverted. Similarly to the great Marx, the animals very quickly see that each animal on Earth must enjoy equality and freedom – this quickly dissolves into a second form of tyranny from the tillers of the animals – they will be in the assurance of pigs – which gradually take on the form of oppressors by extorting the other animals for their own benefit. The infamous phrase: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”¹⁸ chillingly captures the swelling horridness of how some ideas are turned into their oppositional placements. Animal Farm seems more like a cautionary tale as it discusses how thin the bone of even the fiercest intention could be on power and the inherent drawbacks of human – and in this case, animal nature.

One of the messages of the book is about how power can corrupt and oppress. Even when a revolution has the best of intentions the greater social good – all animals are equal – it can devolve into a government that is just as bad as the oppressive regime that it overthrows. Over some time, the pigs put themselves on higher ground together with the people, and this establishes the hierarchy which was supposed to have been removed by the revolution and divides the animals, that is, they were not all equal anymore.

Animal Farm reflects propaganda as a tool to manipulate the citizens of any group or government. To consolidate their power, Napoleon and Squealer forge the commandments from time to time. By the end of the book, the commandments suggest less about equality and happiness for all animals and more about the establishment of privileges for pigs over all other animals. Not only do Napoleon and Squealer change the commandments; but also they rewrite history to suit their version of the tale. Previously, Snowball was the unassailable hero of the Battle of the Cowshed because Squealer would vilify Snowball with praise for Napoleon while rewriting the old myth forever, driving Snowball out and declaring Napoleon to be a hero of the battle.

Thus, Orwell’s Animal Farm communicates how a total revolution, with the noble intention of equality and welfare for society, can, through propaganda and fear, degenerate into an oppressive state. Another message within that is how power tends toward corruption. Napoleon’s regime brought a great deal of power and privilege; this also brought with it large-scale corruption.

Obviously “Animal Form’’does not depict Marxism”s unavoidable defeat,but rather the degradation of it’s virtuons principles in Russia to a bloody perversion . In this state of unconsciousness, all major’s equality parading is turned into a nightmare of terror by Napolean and his leader’s workship. Orwell is the anthor who graphically itlustrates the way in which unlimited power eventually changes otherwise idealistic people into oppressive ones, and the ultimate result is the corruption of the very principles that once were communism’s power .

It is also clear that “Totaliarism’’ in “Animal Form’’is just that sneakey . The rebels who had good intentions from the start saw their movement as ironic and cannibalistic, and they removed the Emperor just to place a dictator their own. The Maxim of equality was reduced to a force with a phrase, “ All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” Orwell is the anthor who vividly outlines how absolute power corrupts absolutely, this sparking off a continuous cycle of oppression that is our how masters becoming indistinguishable from the old ones.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Research Gate. A Critical Analysis of Karl Marx’s Conception of Society and Individual. Ejeh Paulinus Chikwado. IJSAR Journal of Law and Allied Discipline (IJSAR-JLAD) ISSN: 2408-7629 Volume 4, Issue 3 (September, 2017), 114-119 http://www.mdcjournals.org/ijsar-jlad…html < file:///C:/Users/lkjuiop/Downloads/ACriticalAnalysisofKarlMarx.pdf > accessed on 20 Jan. 2025, p.3.
2. Ibid, p.4.
3. Raghvan Iyer, The Essential Writings of Mahatma Gandhi, (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2007), p.6.
4. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online) Vol.3, No.5, 2012 1 An Analysis of Karl Marx’s Theory of Value on the Contemporary Capitalist Economy, Anthony Imoisi Ilegbinosa, < https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234645542.pdf > accessed on 25 Jan. 2025, p.2.
5. Raghvan Iyer, 2007, op. cit., p.395.
6. George Orwell, Animal Farm, (Hapud: Tingle Books, 2020), p.17.
7. Ibid, p.34.
8. Ibid, p.36.
9. Ibid, p.40.
10. Ibid, p.47.
11. Ibid, p.78.
12. Ibid, p.81.
13. Ibid, p.70.
14. Ibid, p.75.
15. Ibid, p.35.
16. Ibid, p.85.
17. Wikipedia, < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs#:~:text=%22From%20each%20according%20to%20his,of%20goods%2C%20capital%20and%20services. > accessed on 25 Jan. 2025, p.1.
18. George Orwell, 2020, op. cit., p.81.

ABOUT THE RESEARCHER:  Dr. Satyendra Kant Maurya, who is still known with some quiet respect in the hallowed homo of Sarvodaya Post-Graduate College, is a light of sociological wisdom in Ghosi, Mau, India. His sociological vision as Assistant Professor shines through, being surpassed only by these two articles that bear his name. These jackets are as valuable as diamonds; the impression is left that there runs an unspeakable depth of understanding and detailed scrutiny of the human condition, whereupon he will shine brightly in his professional career with some remarkable contributions in the years to come. He is not just an academic; he is thought to think-er, patiently constructing bridges of knowledge, one insightful observation at a time.