 
Touring The Animal Farm

Christian Reflections on a George Orwell Classic

by Richie Cooley

Licensed by:

Richie Cooley (2019); [edited: (2020)]

Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 International

Email: richieacooley@live.com

Table of Contents

I. Introduction: Human Crookedness

II. Reflections upon Provisions: Chapters 1-4

III. Reflections upon Promises: Chapters 5-7

IV. Reflections upon Exaltation: Chapters 8-10

V. Citations

VI. Works by Me

Before getting started, let's review a few notes that are common to my writings...

*British spelling is often used, except for the quoted material, which normally employs U.S. spelling.

*Old Testament Scripture is normally taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE® (NASB), copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.

*New Testament Scripture is normally taken from the Analytical-Literal Translation of the New Testament: Third Edition (ALT3). Copyright © 2007 by Gary F. Zeolla of Darkness to Light ministry. Previously copyrighted © 1999, 2001, 2005 by Gary Zeolla.

*The terms LORD, GOD, and Hashem are all ways to describe the personal name of God, also rendered as Yahweh or Jehovah.

*The ALT3 distinguishes between singular and plural second-person pronouns by means of an asterisk (*).

*Divine pronouns are normally not capitalized, unless they appear that way in Bible versions or other quotes.

*As a general rule, words that appear in brackets within quotes are not found in the original texts, and were added by the translators or are my personal comments, etc.

I. Introduction: Human Crookedness

Thousands of years passed between the creation of Adam and the advent of Christ. Millions of people were born during that interval, with man's offspring displacing the world's blankness. Over time, the flora and the fauna looked different in each region. The occupational opportunities and foodstuffs varied somewhat. There were differences in climate and temperament—and even in religious knowledge. Despite the gradual drifts in ecosystem and culture, one thing remained the same—mankind possessed a rottenness within his core that tainted his every domain.

This same sin principle is common to us all, and any religion or heady philosophy can only mask it...

"Although you wash yourself with lye and use much soap, the stain of your iniquity is before Me," declares the Lord GOD. -- Jeremiah 2:22

This principle found a home in every heart among ancient man; then—Jesus Christ was born. His Father was Almighty God himself, thus he didn't have the primal fallenness. The principle within him can simply be described as a perpetual, unstainable, unquenchable righteousness. The holy, perfect operative force from the Most High had become joined to the human flesh from Mary's womb...

...His seed abides in him, and he is not able to be sinning, because he has been begotten from God. \-- 1 John 3:9

Jesus Christ was the God-filled, God-empowered, theanthropic Messiah, and he was also the perfectly obedient servant of Jehovah. To have a heavenly vocation—a divine calling—is only half the Messianic puzzle. Effective, blessed leadership itself is blunted and limp if it isn't wed to perfect uprightness. Well-laid plans are often thwarted. Unseen pressures are as common as the morning dew. Feelings of self-loathing and inadequacy may flood the soul, while fatigue and stress weaken the heart's dam. Then what?

Thus, Jesus Christ was tested throughout his life. He was put through the paces in a variety of situations in order to give assurances to the people of God that the Messiah had truly come—and that he was fully worthy of obeisance and worship. He rebuked sycophants and endured mockery. He denounced false teachers and raised lowly publicans. He was a proper earthly son, the everlasting Heavenly Son, an earthly sibling, a spiritual brother, a carpenter, teacher, leader, friend, and Saviour. He always remained consistent, whether while drowsy upon the sea's waves or while shamed, sore, and parched upon the cross.

Indeed, most famously, even before his ministry officially began he had to face the severe temptations in the wilderness. The Temptations of Christ were recorded in two of the Gospels (Matthew and Luke). After having endured fasting for forty days, Satan met him in the wilderness and tested him three times. Although both Matthew and Luke feature the exact same stories told in pretty much the exact same way, they are listed in different orders by each.

It's impossible to know if either author intentionally changed the order. The themes of both books seem to make intentional orderings reasonable. Matthew's Gospel was focused on Jesus Christ as the rightful Jewish heir to the Davidic throne. The first temptation depicted the Devil telling Jesus Christ to turn stones into bread in order to satisfy his hunger. The second temptation featured the Devil telling Jesus Christ to throw himself off the Temple, for his Father would surely protect him. The third temptation had the Devil telling Jesus Christ to bow before him in order to be given authority over all the nations.

Thus, Matthew closed the temptations with the note of kingly obeisance and regal authority (just as his Gospel finishes with the Great Commission among the nations). Luke's thematic interests were much more priestly, focusing on Jesus Christ as the sacerdotal Saviour of universal potency. In keeping with this, the Temple/Jerusalem would have been more significant to Luke. Therefore, he concluded the temptations with the depiction of the Devil telling Jesus Christ to throw himself off the Temple (just as his Gospel closes in the Temple).

So in the Lukan order there is the temptation about turning stones into bread (1), about bowing before the Devil to receive power over every nation (2), and finally about throwing himself off the Temple in order to test God's salvific, glorifying power (3).

Since our subject matter is also universal in scope, we'll use this list of trials as our outline.

So let's just take a step back and think about the moral significance of these three trials. What character traits were under the microscope?

There isn't just one simple answer for each. It's more complex than that, as moral choices often hinge upon many considerations. However, I'll focus on three for the sake of framing the following discussion. The stone/bread temptation was about trusting God for provisions. The bowing/nations temptation was about trusting God to give unto the Messiah his rightful, promised kingdom. The falling/Temple temptation was about trusting God as the salvific exalter.

That last point might seem to be a minor one, yet think about how sweet it is to be justified after having endured slighting from others. All of God's people are set to be glorified (as to Christ, see 2 Thessalonians 1:10; as to Christians, see Romans 8:30)—some after having received a lifetime of ridicule for the sake of the Kingdom of God.

I'll try to keep those themes at the forefront as we tour Animal Farm. For the Temptations of Christ are the Bible's premier account about testing the character of the perfect human and the perfect leader. On the flip side, Animal Farm is perhaps the greatest short satire depicting human depravity and corrupt leadership.

In every quarter and throughout every epic, leaders cast their shadows upon their lands. The past hundred years of human history have demonstrated just how many tens of millions may perish and hundreds of millions may be horrifically oppressed via the crooked hearts of tyrants.

In a limited way Animal Farm may be described as a parable about the crooked path of the Russian Revolution and Joseph Stalin. It's much broader than that though. Using the events surrounding the early Soviets, George Orwell strongly criticizes totalitarianism in general—to include communism, fascism, and even capitalism.

It's helpful to have at least a barebones understanding of the immediate historical details that Orwell had in mind. Yet, we shouldn't allow ourselves to be bogged down by too many details. It's not even possible to draw parallels too sharply.

For example, the character most commentators associate with Lenin dies when the satire begins (i.e., "old Major;" don't worry, we'll get there soon). Yet, if Orwell was trying to be super-strict with his allegory, old Major wouldn't have died until much, much later. Also, there's a lot of dispute about some of the finer points of the parable (such as which fictitious animal battle exactly lines up to which Russian skirmish). I don't see the point in wrangling. We'll keep the historical references set to informed—yet loose.

Our main purpose is to use Orwell's masterpiece to discuss Biblical themes that touch universal morality. We don't want to focus merely on Stalin or Hitler—or any particular leader. Rather, we want to examine that seed of corruption.

Eric Blair (the author's real name) was a wise man, a world traveler, and a person who experienced everything from serving as a colonialist to fighting in the Spanish Civil War. He was an Eton graduate, a Burmese police officer, a Parisian scullion, a Spanish anti-fascist soldier, a British war correspondent, a socialist, a mocker of communism—and many things besides. He was a man, take him for all in all; we shall probably never look upon his literary like again.

What did he know about this seed of corruption? What did he know about this dark fallenness that plagues humanity? Ultimately, that's what Animal Farm is really about...

Animal Farm demonstrates the idea that power always corrupts. The novella's heavy use of foreshadowing, especially in the opening chapter, creates the sense that the events of the story are unavoidable. Not only is Napoleon's rise to power inevitable, the novella strongly suggests that any other possible ruler would have been just as bad as Napoleon. Although Napoleon is more power-hungry than Snowball, plenty of evidence exists to suggest that Snowball would have been just as corrupt a ruler. Before his expulsion, Snowball goes along with the pigs' theft of milk and apples, and the disastrous windmill is his idea. Even old Major is not incorruptible. Despite his belief that "all animals are equal," (Chapter 1) he lectures the other animals from a raised platform, suggesting he may actually view himself as above the other animals on the farm. In the novel's final image the pigs become indistinguishable from human farmers, which hammers home the idea that power inevitably has the same effect on anyone who wields it.1

Now you may be saying, "Napoleon, Snowball, old Major, and farmers? Who are these characters?"

Ah, welcome to Animal Farm!

Let's get stuck in...

II. Reflections upon Provisions: Chapters 1-4

A. The Lord Jesus Christ

So let's begin by recalling the moral lessons from the Temptations of Christ. It's important always to keep universal themes front and centre, despite their being considered truisms or tired bits of repetition. If an author is repetitious for the sake of laziness, that is a great shame. If an author is repetitious for the sake of stressing a universal theme, that is greatly commendable. The way to ruin a culture is to "push the envelope" incessantly. Western culture may realize too late that a sensationalist-paradigm isn't sustainable.

Moving on, let's look at the first temptation...

Then Jesus, full of [the] Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan [River] and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, being tempted forty days by the Devil. And He did not eat anything in those days, and they [fig., those days] having been completed, afterward He was hungry. And the Devil said to Him, "Since You are God's Son, speak to this stone that it shall become bread." And Jesus answered to him, saying, "It has been written, 'A person will not live on bread only, but on every word of God.'" [Deuteronomy 8:3] -- Luke 4:1-4

The Devil caused the hunger to swell. He wafted the thought of satisfying bread in the nostrils of the Saviour. The dam of desire threatened to burst. The Lord had the means to give in. He didn't. He stayed hungry in order to be obedient to God's will. His power as Messiah wasn't for his personal pleasure, but rather to shepherd his people to fertile pastures.

He always had all the provisions he truly needed, for the only "food" that he panted after was fulfilling the commands of God (John 4:34).

Political revolutionaries however have much different goals...

B. Old Major and Company

From chapter 1...

Our story begins with farmer Jones retiring to bed where Mrs. Jones is already snoring. Before settling, he has a drink from a beer barrel. Dissipation among the ruling class plays a massive part in the story, just as it has played a massive part in human history.

As the bucolic couple settle in for the night, the animals gather secretly in the big barn. Old Major, a "prize Middle White boar, had had a strange dream on the previous night and wished to communicate it to the other animals." This boar was soon to die, and he wished to leave his peers with a grandiose vision.

As the animals file into the meeting, we are introduced to the major players in the narrative. We'll just elaborate on a few of the characters now. Chiefly important to the future wellbeing of the farm is a great horse named Boxer...

Boxer was an enormous beast, nearly eighteen hands high, and as strong as any two ordinary horses put together. A white stripe down his nose gave him a somewhat stupid appearance, and in fact he was not of first-rate intelligence, but he was universally respected for his steadiness of character and tremendous powers of work.

His great strength will be relied upon more and more as the story unfolds. He was very important to all the animals, yet seemed unable to think sharply and critically about the cunning of the eventual overlord-antagonists. In modern Western culture, political parties are heavily dependent upon their Boxers. No matter how strange and corrupt their leaders are, there always seems to be a strong, dim-witted group of faithful supporters. They put up with corrupt heads, and it's really hard to see why. Orwell witnessed a horse being whipped by a puny boy, and this strange scene furnished a lot of inspiration for Animal Farm.2 Boxer's plight is noteworthy indeed.

The next character of interest is a donkey named Benjamin...

Benjamin was the oldest animal on the farm, and the worst tempered. He seldom talked, and when he did, it was usually to make some cynical remark—for instance, he would say that God had given him a tail to keep the flies off, but that he would sooner have had no tail and no flies [this is reminiscent of Orwell's famous quip about his throat wound sustained in the Spanish War]. Alone among the animals on the farm he never laughed. If asked why, he would say that he saw nothing to laugh at. Nevertheless, without openly admitting it, he was devoted to Boxer; the two of them usually spent their Sundays together in the small paddock beyond the orchard, grazing side by side and never speaking.

Benjamin is perhaps the only commendable protagonist in the story. Mind you, he never does much that is heroic, but he is certainly indifferent honest. He is attracted more to the wholesome simplicity of Boxer rather than to the corrupt leadership, but he still maintains his cynical distance.

The last character we'll look at here is another horse named Mollie. She is Boxer's antithesis...

At the last moment Mollie, the foolish, pretty white mare who drew Mr. Jones's trap, came mincing daintily in, chewing at a lump of sugar. She took a place near the front and began flirting her white mane, hoping to draw attention to the red ribbons it was plaited with.

Her love of sugar makes her more in step with Jones, who was introduced alongside his love of alcohol. The theme is repeated over and over again that the faults of the animals and the faults of the humans were often the same. This saps old Major's forthcoming speech of any ultimate validity, as there are no real differences between the two classes of sentient beings (i.e., the farmers and the fictitious talking animals).

Anyway, all the animals settle in and old Major begins to relate his dream and ultimate hope. Old Major is best seen as a mixture between Marx and Lenin.3 In his dream, he was able to recall a song from his youth. Not only did he recover what he had lost through time, but he was even miraculously given the ability to recite the entirety of the song (which he formerly never knew). Although it might not be the point, it's practically impossible to erase notions of supernatural intervention even among the most virulent atheists (cf. Lenin and Marx).

Before he tells of the song though he first sets the stage. He begins by expounding the misery of their existence...

Now, comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short. We are born, we are given just so much food as will keep the breath in our bodies, and those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength; and the very instant that our usefulness has come to an end we are slaughtered with hideous cruelty. No animal in England knows the meaning of happiness or leisure after he is a year old. No animal in England is free. The life of an animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth.

And from whence comes the misery? That's simple (too simple). There is a single hitch. There is one lone problem. There is one enemy: mankind...

Why then do we continue in this miserable condition? Because nearly the whole of the produce of our labour is stolen from us by human beings. There, comrades, is the answer to all our problems. It is summed up in a single word—Man. Man is the only real enemy we have. Remove Man from the scene, and the root cause of hunger and overwork is abolished for ever.

How often are complex issues negated by the nonsensical blame-game that abounds in party politics? What's the big problem these days? Surely it's the billionaires; or perhaps it's the patriarchal set-up of the West; or perhaps it's the haughtiness of man lording dominion over the orangutans and elephants. Surely it's something—and surely that something is incredibly simple. Aye, merry well it is: the real problem is the incurable, convoluted set of cancers known as sin.

His rousing speech goes on for a while, as he stokes the fires of revolution...

Is it not crystal clear, then, comrades, that all the evils of this life of ours spring from the tyranny of human beings? Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labour would be our own. Almost overnight we could become rich and free. What then must we do? Why, work night and day, body and soul, for the overthrow of the human race! That is my message to you, comrades: Rebellion!

He concludes with a summary statement that is met with thunderous approval...

All men are enemies. All animals are comrades.

The animals cheer. Grand truths have just been declared! Philosophical perfection has just been achieved! Oh, but wait; at that very moment some rats were encouraged and made themselves visible. Were they comrades too? The haplessness of over-simplification and the intellectual nullity of easy answers are recurring themes.

Just in case you were wondering, a vote was taken, and the rats were declared comrades. It's hard to see how that farm would function ergonomically.

Old Major goes on to explain a bit further the enmity that must be maintained between animals and humans. He asserts that "whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend." Moreover, to stay away from human debauchery, no animal should ever...

...Live in a house, or sleep in a bed, or wear clothes, or drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco, or touch money, or engage in trade. All the habits of Man are evil. And, above all, no animal must ever tyrannise over his own kind. Weak or strong, clever or simple, we are all brothers. No animal must ever kill any other animal. All animals are equal.

We'll see how that goes.

He concludes the meeting by recounting that quasi-supernatural song from the better days of yore. It describes the Utopia that will exist if the glorious animals can merely rid themselves of their single, fully-evil enemy. The animals love the song, and they sing it enthusiastically many times.

The singing rouses Jones. The farmer fires recklessly into the night, spraying the wall of the barn with pellets from the shot. Although it might be carrying the allegory too far, this act might be evoking the Bloody Sunday massacre that was blamed on Nicholas II. Whether that's the case or not, commentators universally point to Jones as being representative of Nicholas II, who was the last Tsar (emperor) of Russia before the Revolution.4

From chapter 2...

Old Major dies at the onset of this chapter. His successors among the animals are introduced. There are two young boars who shall take the mantle of leading the rebellion. Enter Napoleon and Snowball...

Napoleon was a large, rather fierce-looking Berkshire boar, the only Berkshire on the farm, not much of a talker, but with a reputation for getting his own way. Snowball was a more vivacious pig than Napoleon, quicker in speech and more inventive, but was not considered to have the same depth of character.

As the narrative trots on, these two will eventually fall out with each other, as their distinctive characteristics will arrive at an impasse. It's universally surmised that Napoleon stands for Joseph Stalin, while Snowball represents Leon Trotsky. Russian history was very similar to U.S. and French history. After the dawning of the "Enlightenment" (scare quotes added), monarchies were on the chop-block (often more-or-less literally). Just as the New England colonies rejected the English crown and just as the French rejected Louis XVI, so did the Russians reject Nicholas II. However, when Louis XVI was deposed, this merely paved the way for Napoleon to arise and make things worse. Even so, when Jones/Nicolas II was harassed, this merely paved the way for Napoleon/Stalin.

As to why Orwell named Trotsky "Snowball," I'm not really sure. Again, we can press the allegory too far if we examine it too closely. Perhaps Snowball not only represented Trotsky but the whole counter-narrative to Stalin, ranging from the Mensheviks to the White Russian Armies. After all, as we'll see, the focus of the relationship between Napoleon and Snowball is supposed to picture the Russian Civil War, which of course is commonly seen as the Reds versus the Whites. Even though Trotsky technically led the Red Army, he eventually is seen as the antithesis of the hard-line Stalin.

We are also introduced to the great nuisance known as "Squealer" in this chapter...

All the other male pigs on the farm were porkers. The best known among them was a small fat pig named Squealer, with very round cheeks, twinkling eyes, nimble movements, and a shrill voice. He was a brilliant talker, and when he was arguing some difficult point he had a way of skipping from side to side and whisking his tail which was somehow very persuasive. The others said of Squealer that he could turn black into white.

Squealer was the resident propagandist. He was the farm's Joseph Goebbels. By the time the story is over you just want to turn the wee windbag into a BLT. According to the blogosphere, many surmise that he actually represents a Russian politician named Molotov, whose name comes up a lot in WWII history. Still, I'll stick with the mental image of putting Goebbels' visage on a smelly hog body. It's very easy done.

Between Napoleon, Snowball, and Squealer, a new religious/political philosophy was birthed named "Animalism." The porkers go about instilling this new ideology into the collective psyche of the farm. Understandably, Mollie (the pretty horse) has a few concerns...

The stupidest questions of all were asked by Mollie, the white mare. The very first question she asked Snowball was: "Will there still be sugar after the Rebellion?"

"No," said Snowball firmly. "We have no means of making sugar on this farm. Besides, you do not need sugar. You will have all the oats and hay you want."

"And shall I still be allowed to wear ribbons in my mane?" asked Mollie.

"Comrade," said Snowball, "those ribbons that you are so devoted to are the badge of slavery. Can you not understand that liberty is worth more than ribbons?"

Mollie agreed, but she did not sound very convinced.

It's easy to wax eloquent when asking others to abandon their pleasures. We'll see that this self-righteous penchant has a funny way of acting-the-boomerang.

During this incipient section of Animal Farm I want particularly to direct your attention to the first universal theme from Luke; namely, if you'll recall, the stone/bread temptation was about trusting God for provisions. Given that the bloodthirsty American, French, and Russian Revolutions post-Enlightenment all had personal economic stimuli, trusting God for provisions is the direct refutation to old Major's sermon and the uprising of the animals.

Digressing, the next critter on our present radar is the raven, Moses. It's doubtless that Orwell was poking fun at a religion that taught the notion of a transcendent Heaven. That's fine. We Christians are made of tougher stuff, and we shan't write whiney letters of complaint—demanding tar and feather supplies from Fortune 500 companies and A-list celebrities—just because someone insults our personal values. However, there's more going on with the raven than merely making fun of a Christian's "Pie-In-the-Sky" hopes (or, as Orwell put it, "Sugarcandy Mountain;" okay, it stings a bit).

The rest of Orwell's intention was to make allusion to Rasputin, the weird "Christian" leader friendly to the family of Nicholas II. Orwell showed that this raven drank rather heavily (as far as birds are able, anyway). Rasputin was notorious for debauchery. Mainly however the similarity between the raven and Rasputin can be seen in that Moses is said to have run off with Mrs. Jones later in the chapter, after the revolution had begun...

Moses sprang off his perch and flapped after her, croaking loudly.

Rasputin would align himself closely with the wife of Nicolas II—very closely...

The Russian people never took to the Empress, granddaughter of Britain's Queen Victoria. They found her aloof and, as a German, doubted her loyalty and resented her relationship with Grigory Rasputin, a starets, a wandering faith healer. Rasputin managed to maintain an influence over the royal family by his mysterious knack of treating the tsar's haemophiliac son, Alexei, heir to the Romanov throne. Only Rasputin, it seemed, could stem the poor boy's bleeding. Protected by the Imperial Family, Rasputin enjoyed a debauched lifestyle that further alienated the resentful people from their tsar.5

Anyway, the animals sought provisions. Jones was too busy drinking and sleeping to care. That's how the great rebellion at Manor Farm/Animal Farm took place...

June came and the hay was almost ready for cutting. On Midsummer's Eve, which was a Saturday, Mr. Jones went into Willingdon and got so drunk at the Red Lion that he did not come back till midday on Sunday. The men had milked the cows in the early morning and then had gone out rabbiting, without bothering to feed the animals. When Mr. Jones got back he immediately went to sleep on the drawing-room sofa with the News of the World over his face, so that when evening came, the animals were still unfed. At last they could stand it no longer. One of the cows broke in the door of the store-shed with her horn and all the animals began to help themselves from the bins. It was just then that Mr. Jones woke up. The next moment he and his four men were in the store-shed with whips in their hands, lashing out in all directions. This was more than the hungry animals could bear. With one accord, though nothing of the kind had been planned beforehand, they flung themselves upon their tormentors. Jones and his men suddenly found themselves being butted and kicked from all sides.

The slackness of Jones and the neglect of the animals is how many people viewed the proclivities of the old monarchies. People saw the ruling class as distant, aloof, and debauched...

The main thing leading up to the rebellion was the poor treatment of Mr. Jones. He was ignorant to the animals' needs, and never took care of what needed to be done. This was the same as Czar Nicholas, who ruled Russia. He lived in luxury while his people starved to death.6

Anyway, the rebellion on Animal Farm was a success. Jones and his ilk fled, and these beasts of England acquired their flitting Utopia.

Something noteworthy happened when the animals surveyed their spoils and approached the old farmhouse...

A unanimous resolution was passed on the spot that the farmhouse should be preserved as a museum. All were agreed that no animal must ever live there.

Keeping certain things as museums/museum pieces can turn out to be a dodgy idea. Assuredly, many find the commandments in the Torah regarding pagan deities to be insensitive, harsh, and anti-intellectual...

These are the statutes and the judgments which you shall carefully observe in the land which the LORD, the God of your fathers, has given you to possess as long as you live on the earth. You shall utterly destroy all the places where the nations whom you shall dispossess serve their gods, on the high mountains and on the hills and under every green tree. You shall tear down their altars and smash their [sacred] pillars and burn their Asherim with fire, and you shall cut down the engraved images of their gods and obliterate their name from that place. -- Deuteronomy 12:1-3

This civic command of ancient Israel may seem insensitive to you. If so, I invite you to plug into the world of neo-paganism. Good grief; every odd goddess and silly god the world has ever known is being feared and revered among apostates in the West. People laugh at the belief in the Bible's perspicuity, and then ardently voice respect for the Hawaiian goddess Pele. Appreciating pagan cultures is a short step away from reverting back to such profane nonsense. Modern history has at least proven that much.

Anyway, the revolution progressed mightily. They changed the name on the sign from "Manor Farm" to "Animal Farm," and even posted a list of their heady ideals upon the side of the barn...

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.

Zounds! So that's what Utopia looks like!

The ending of the chapter brings us back down to earth however. Before going out to work the harvest, it was noted that the cows needed milked. Having finished the task, the animals naturally wondered how this caloric boon would be distributed...

"Never mind the milk, comrades!" cried Napoleon, placing himself in front of the buckets. "That will be attended to. The harvest is more important. Comrade Snowball will lead the way. I shall follow in a few minutes. Forward, comrades! The hay is waiting."

So the animals trooped down to the hayfield to begin the harvest, and when they came back in the evening it was noticed that the milk had disappeared.

Jones is no longer the hand that feeds them. They've smashed up his regime. They can fend for themselves. They can procure their own provisions.

At least, some of them can.

From chapter 3...

The harvest began in earnest and the animals had great success at their homemade husbandry. Some toiled harder than others...

The pigs did not actually work, but directed and supervised the others. With their superior knowledge it was natural that they should assume the leadership.

This is one of the great problems with proletarian revolutions and various brands of socialistic philosophies. We are all incredibly lazy creatures. Don't get me wrong, many of us live a very active life from the cradle to the grave—yet we still incessantly look for cessation from any and all labour. Although Roman Catholic theology is largely arbitrary in nature, some of their lists and notions are pithy and Biblical.

The ancient list of seven deadly sins is a bit silly, as all sins are deadly, and there are many more than seven. Still, it does highlight cogently some of the bigger issues of the law. It's initially striking to find "sloth" on that list. How can that compare to murder or theft? Yet, as one grows older and gains experience, it becomes obvious that not only does "sloth" belong on the list, but it should perhaps head the list.

Why do we argue? We constantly fight in petulance because we don't want to try hard to put forth the energy to be kind and placating. Why do we shout continually at our kids? We bellow, for it's an easier route than dealing thoughtfully and diplomatically. Why do we fall out with people at work? We cause factions and fractures because we don't want to put forth the energy to be pleasant peacemakers. Why do we steal? We swipe petty objects lying about the workshop or download things illegally, for it's easier and quicker than travelling and purchasing, or dealing with the supply department, or signing up for a subscription service, etc. We could go on and on and on...

Sloth certainly belongs on the list of weighty immorality. This is the problem with socialism. If sloth is humanity's biggest problem, then how can you found a political science that pretends everyone wants to grab a hammer and build their neighbour a home?

Rather, Orwell knew the truth about the stodgy heart of people...

As winter drew on, Mollie became more and more troublesome. She was late for work every morning and excused herself by saying that she had overslept, and she complained of mysterious pains, although her appetite was excellent. On every kind of pretext she would run away from work and go to the drinking pool, where she would stand foolishly gazing at her own reflection in the water. -- from chapter 5

As did the writer of Proverbs...

The desire of the sluggard puts him to death, for his hands refuse to work; all day long he is craving, while the righteous gives and does not hold back. -- Proverbs 21:25-26

The heart of humanity wants to take everything unto itself—while sitting on its haunches. Remember the Lord Jesus Christ in the first temptation. He was the exact opposite of this condemnation in Proverbs. Having spent over a month in destitution in order to fulfil his ministerial initiation, he refused even basic gratification.

Moving on, things went well enough on the farm for several seasons. Boxer worked harder than ever...

His answer to every problem, every setback, was "I will work harder!"—which he had adopted as his personal motto.

Then there was wonderful Benjamin...

Old Benjamin, the donkey, seemed quite unchanged since the Rebellion. He did his work in the same slow obstinate way as he had done it in Jones's time, never shirking and never volunteering for extra work either. About the Rebellion and its results he would express no opinion. When asked whether he was not happier now that Jones was gone, he would say only "Donkeys live a long time. None of you has ever seen a dead donkey," and the others had to be content with this cryptic answer.

There is also focus now on how the animals spent their Sundays. The activities of this day will continually change as the tale unfolds. At this time Sundays involved genial fellowship for their fledgling kingdom. There was no work and they all had a bit of a slack morning. Then there was the patriotic hoisting of their homemade standard. Finally there was a general assembly in the big barn where the plans for the upcoming week were discussed—supposedly with equality among the participants. It didn't work out this way though...

Snowball and Napoleon were by far the most active in the debates. But it was noticed that these two were never in agreement: whatever suggestion either of them made, the other could be counted on to oppose it.

Here we see a key omen of things to come, and so it would be with the Russian Revolution. Not long after the Revolution there would come the Russian Civil War. Funny, not long after the American Revolutionary War came the American Civil War. In some ways, I don't think this particular Civil War has ever really ended.

Surely Utopia is tucked away in their somewhere. Surely.

As the farm became more organized (which quite often accompanies a decrease in early zeal), there were various initiatives formed to overcome shortcomings within the animal kingdom itself. They basically tried to reform the lot. This reeks of Enlightenment optimism, which still pervades the justice system...

On the whole, these projects were a failure. The attempt to tame the wild creatures, for instance, broke down almost immediately. They continued to behave very much as before, and when treated with generosity, simply took advantage of it. The cat joined the Re-education Committee and was very active in it for some days. She was seen one day sitting on a roof and talking to some sparrows who were just out of her reach. She was telling them that all animals were now comrades and that any sparrow who chose could come and perch on her paw; but the sparrows kept their distance.

Modernity has tried to teach us that there is no "good and bad." (Of course, this doesn't seem to be an acknowledged principle whenever the opposition leader is corrupt. Never mind that now.) Modernity has taught us indeed that there is absolutely no such thing as evil. Some people are whole, and some are broken—yet these are just varying degrees of human divinity. (And all the animals are divine too and should be given full, equal rights; yet again, let's put that to one side). Modernity has indeed surely taught us that there is nothing but the educated and uneducated. Thus, prisoners shouldn't be punished, but reformed. Ultimately therefore, unrequited crimes, grieving families, endangered communities, and free criminals are obviously the highest virtues of true enlightenment.

There were many committees introduced by the pigs in order to improve their peers. The push to make the animals literate was one of their more successful endeavours—although it too had its limitations. This semi-failure posed a bit of a problem. How could the pigs rally the other animals around their new religion (I mean, their scientific, thoughtful, political philosophy) if no one could even read the commandments? The pigs had to change their tactics from thoughtful ideals to pithy slogans...

After much thought Snowball declared that the Seven Commandments could in effect be reduced to a single maxim, namely: "Four legs good, two legs bad." This, he said, contained the essential principle of Animalism.

This attempt at catchy propaganda has been hoisted upon the public via governments and advertising firms the world over. There's rarely a need anymore for a detailed explanation of policies or products; just come up with a jingle (and the kissing women; gotta have the kissing women). Even the Russian Revolution featured such banality...

...The Bolsheviks were able to throw insults at the coalition government and bandy about slogans that appealed to the disillusioned masses, such as 'Peace, bread and land.'7

Finally, the question of what happen to the provision of milk comes to the fore again. The pigs were consuming the whole of it every day. To make matters worse, they added the windfall apples of the farm onto their exclusive menu. Some of the other animals complained, and the resident propagandist set the disgruntled grumblers straight...

"Comrades!" he cried. "You do not imagine, I hope, that we pigs are doing this in a spirit of selfishness and privilege? Many of us actually dislike milk and apples. I dislike them myself. Our sole object in taking these things is to preserve our health. Milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig. We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organisation of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for YOUR sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples. Do you know what would happen if we pigs failed in our duty? Jones would come back! Yes, Jones would come back! Surely, comrades," cried Squealer almost pleadingly, skipping from side to side and whisking his tail, "surely there is no one among you who wants to see Jones come back?"

You gotta love the appeal to science. That's the end of every discussion; right?

Squealer clearly had selfish reasons to lie, as he was receiving a portion of the misappropriated goods. Of course, he was working for crooks, and so his behaviour was inevitable...

If a ruler pays attention to falsehood, all his ministers [become] wicked. -- Proverbs 29:12

History has been replete with such villainy, and we can be sure via the Bible that the future fates more of the same.

On an aside, there are three interesting men who touch each other in two points. Richard III, Stalin, and the Antichrist of the Eschaton were/shall be men of deformity, and of bloodthirstiness. Handicaps and hardships place pressure upon the heart; this pressure can easily turn people into saintly souls or soulless ghouls. (Forget not that the God of glory is forever scarred.)

Squealer's ability to be easily bribed is reminiscent of some of the scoundrels whom Shakespeare penned as serving the interest of Richard III. In the following scene, two murderers discuss carrying out a political assassination at Richard's behest. One of the murderers has an attack of conscience; that is, until the reward is called to mind...

[SECOND MURDERER] What, shall I stab him as he sleeps?

[FIRST MURDERER] No. He'll say 'twas done cowardly, when he wakes.

[SECOND MURDERER] Why, he shall never wake until the great Judgment Day.

[FIRST MURDERER] Why, then he'll say we stabbed him sleeping.

[SECOND MURDERER] The urging of that word "judgment" hath bred a kind of remorse in me.

[FIRST MURDERER] What, art thou afraid?

[SECOND MURDERER] Not to kill him, having a warrant, but to be damned for killing him, from the which no warrant can defend me.

[FIRST MURDERER] I thought thou hadst been resolute.

[SECOND MURDERER] So I am—to let him live.

[FIRST MURDERER] I'll back to the Duke of Gloucester [i.e., Richard III] and tell him so.

[SECOND MURDERER] Nay, I prithee stay a little. I hope this passionate humor of mine will change. It was wont to hold me but while one tells twenty.

[FIRST MURDERER] How dost thou feel thyself now?

[SECOND MURDERER] Faith, some certain dregs of conscience are yet within me.

[FIRST MURDERER] Remember our reward when the deed's done.

[SECOND MURDERER] Zounds, he dies! I had forgot the reward.8

The scoundrels lost sight of that ultimate judgment to come, as Shakespeare alludes to a bit later, with the assassins ready to strike...

[CLARENCE] Are you drawn forth among a world of men to slay the innocent? What is my offense? Where is the evidence that doth accuse me? What lawful quest have given their verdict up unto the frowning judge? Or who pronounced the bitter sentence of poor Clarence' death before I be convict by course of law? To threaten me with death is most unlawful. I charge you, as you hope to have redemption, by Christ's dear blood shed for our grievous sins, that you depart, and lay no hands on me. The deed you undertake is damnable.

[FIRST MURDERER] What we will do, we do upon command.

[SECOND MURDERER] And he that hath commanded is our king.

[CLARENCE] Erroneous vassals, the great King of kings hath in the table of His law commanded that thou shalt do no murder. Will you then spurn at His edict and fulfill a man's? Take heed, for He holds vengeance in His hand to hurl upon their heads that break His law.8

Even so, people in the Eschaton will gladly forsake the gift of Christ in the heart for a swift, temporal recompense in the hand (cf. Matthew 24:9-10).

From chapter 4...

This will be the last chapter that we put under our procurement-of-provisions banner. There is a major turning point about to occur. The new farm leadership, finally ridding itself of any reasonable worry of human incursion, begins to face-off against each other. It's funny how revolutionary wars often lead to civil wars. It's almost as if man's sinfulness needs some sort of war; or, as Orwell famously wrote in 1984—War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.

Before going there, Orwell put forth an insightful foreshadow of what would happened with the Russian Revolution. Orwell died in 1950, just before the onset of the Korean War. As touching the West, after Korea would come Vietnam, and then the rise of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, etc. Orwell was in the grave before all this transpired; yet, the potent evangelism of the communist was well understood...

By the late summer the news of what had happened on Animal Farm had spread across half the county. Every day Snowball and Napoleon sent out flights of pigeons whose instructions were to mingle with the animals on neighbouring farms, tell them the story of the Rebellion, and teach them the tune of 'Beasts of England'.

There is probably an intentional effort on the part of Orwell to make his contemporary readers to think strongly of Trotsky. The only way to get the civil war motif really to click is to make it clear that Snowball and Napoleon turning against each other is historically echoed via the similar rift between Trotsky and Stalin. Therefore, there are several things in this hinge section that pushes Trotsky onto the reader—namely, the evangelism and the windmill...

One of Lenin's allies was Leon Trotsky (1879-1940), another Marxist thinker who participated in a number of revolutionary demonstrations and uprisings. His counterpart in Animal Farm is Snowball, who, like Trotsky, felt that a worldwide series of rebellions was necessary to achieve the revolution's ultimate aims. Snowball's plans for the windmill and programs [recall Snowball's attempt at re-education in the previous chapter] reflect Trotsky's intellectual character and ideas about the best ways to transform Marx's theories into practice.9

The trans-county rumblings of Animalism also give Orwell a chance to introduce two more major characters into the allegory: Mr. Pilkington and Mr. Frederick. Commentators assert that Mr. Pilkington represents far Western leaders (either Roosevelt, Churchill, or a combination of both, etc.) while Mr. Frederick represents Adolf Hitler. Towards the end—and immediately after—World War II, there would be the famous meetings between the U.S.S.R., the U.S.A., and the U.K., in order to discuss the topics of the war effort and reconstruction after the defeat of Hitler. Animal Farm was published a few months after the Yalta Conference, but not early enough to make its impression upon Orwell's novella. It was the earlier Tehran Conference that Orwell references (especially in the final scene).

Anyway, I've never come across a critic who thought Mr. Frederick represented anyone other than Hitler. That's important to establish, for it's kind of odd that Orwell doesn't really go to great lengths to insult Frederick. Here's how he described him...

...A tough, shrewd man, perpetually involved in lawsuits and with a name for driving hard bargains. These two [i.e., the U.S./U.K. and Germany] disliked each other so much that it was difficult for them to come to any agreement, even in defence of their own interests.

Remember, Orwell wrote this around 1943-1944, after the horrors of the Holocaust had come to light. This was a pretty weak response from the master penman. This can't merely be blamed on being anti-Communist (which is often the ruse given to excuse Pope Pius XII on a personal basis, despite Catholic locales such as Ireland and Latin America singing the same aloof song throughout the war effort). Read Down and Out in Paris and London. Orwell could appear fairly anti-Semitic. Throughout that novel he seems to lambast Jews as greedy weasels.

Yet, if Orwell was anti-Semitic, he certainly didn't seem to think so. He wrote thoughtfully against such (see the essay, "Antisemitism in Britain," published in 1945). After all, in Homage to Catalonia, he states very clearly that he signed up to fight in Spain "as the defence of civilization against a maniacal outbreak by an army...in the pay of Hitler." He also referred to Hitler as a "criminal lunatic" ("Wells, Hitler, and the World State," published in 1941).

Orwell appeared anti-Semitic at times because it was a very prevalent sentiment pre-1945, making it hard fully to understand the totality of the underlying, sinful prejudices. Also, he was a literary guy, adding to his temptation to follow in a doleful tradition. Anti-Semitism was very common in yesteryear's American and English literature. This was also the way of F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, William Shakespeare (see The Merchant of Venice for Pete's sake), Charles Dickens (in my opinion, anyway), John O'Hara, and many others. Let's face it: it was "cool" to be anti-Semitic among the artsy. (Many think it still is.)

Orwell readily admits this problem among English authors:

There has been a perceptible antisemitic strain in English literature from Chaucer onwards, and without even getting up from this table to consult a book I can think of passages which If WRITTEN NOW would be stigmatised as antisemitic, in the works of Shakespeare, Smollet, Thackeray, Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells, T.S. Eliot, Aldous Huxley and various others. -- "Antisemitism in Britain"

To sum things up quickly, Churchill lost the election immediately after the war. I think this is why Orwell was kinda silent about vital matters regarding the Nazi atrocities here and there. He did join the war effort, helping the BBC (even touching details about the mass death of Jews). Yet, he was probably too big of a maverick to associate himself in all seasons too closely with what reeked of a fading popular cause.

As far as Orwell's full views on Hitler and the Holocaust, I point you to a more extensive article on the matter. It's available for free via JSTOR. It's called "'Giants are Vermin': Orwell, Fascism and the Holocaust," by John Newsinger [see the citations for a link].

Moving on, at this point in the narrative, the animals must make an important stand for their homestead. Jones is coming back with reinforcements from the other farmers, and they are intent on putting an end to this odd experiment. The animals had known it would come to this at some point, and Snowball had a plan at the ready.

The group of homesteaders executed the martial strategy perfectly, with Snowball even suffering a heroic injury in the process—and a sheep also pays the ultimate price. The fact that Lenin suffered a similar injury [as did Orwell] goes to show that Orwell had no desire to be ultra-strict in his allegory. If he wanted to be ultra-strict then old Major should have been injured instead of Snowball.

This scuffle became known as the Battle of the Cowshed. Although it was a necessary skirmish from the standpoint of the animals, the part-memorial, part-commemorative ceremonialism that followed is both perturbing and instructive. They created military honours and instituted holidays, the scope of which extended beyond the battle itself...

Mr. Jones's gun had been found lying in the mud, and it was known that there was a supply of cartridges in the farmhouse. It was decided to set the gun up at the foot of the Flagstaff, like a piece of artillery, and to fire it twice a year—once on October the twelfth, the anniversary of the Battle of the Cowshed, and once on Midsummer Day, the anniversary of the Rebellion.

Not only was the battle set to be remembered, but so was the rebellion now. This glorification of violence is odd. I personally find celebrations such as Bastille Day to be very disturbing. Louis XVI was a decent bloke (with a questionable wife). I just don't understand the desire to glorify insurrections and political violence. Although Louis XVI and Marie wouldn't be put to death until later, still—imagine a holiday celebrating the attempted assassination of Reagan or the successful assassination of Kennedy? Why would anyone want that?

At best, this tendency among the nations is an attempt to guide and glorify one particular narrative. That suited Napoleon and Snowball. Soon, it would just suit but one of them.

III. Reflections upon Promises: Chapters 5-7

A. The Lord Jesus Christ

With the Battle of the Cowshed we've turned a corner. The animals have seemingly solved the problem of provisions up to this point. They've managed to bring in some good harvests and have kept themselves from being dislodged from their fertile ground.

Recall that in Luke there is the temptation about turning stones into bread, about bowing before the devil to receive power over every nation, and finally about falling off the Temple in order to test God's salvific power of glorification. The second one, the bowing/nations temptation, was about trusting God to give unto the Messiah his rightful kingdom...

And the Devil, having brought Him into a high mountain, showed to Him all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth in a moment of time. And the Devil said to Him, "I will give to You all this authority and their glory, because it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I shall be desiring. Therefore, if You prostrate Yourself in worship before me all will be Yours." And answering, Jesus said to him, "Get behind Me, Satan! It has been written, 'You will prostrate yourself in worship before [the] LORD your God, and Him only you will sacredly serve.'" [Deuteronomy 6:13] -- Luke 4:5-8

The Lord Jesus Christ will be the physical ruler of the world one day...

Then Pilate said to Him, "So then, You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. For this [reason] I have been born, and for this [reason] I have come into the world, so that I should testify to the truth. Every[one] being of the truth hears My voice." -- John 18:37

The Devil tempted him by offering a fast-track option. He could avoid the cross along with the years of waiting, labour, and persecution. His destiny could be realized in a moment of time. Pilate offered a way out as well. Thus, this temptation was ever-present. The Lord refused to take any shortcut. How many politicians follow this noble example? How many in general refuse to bow to sinfulness, trusting God with our ultimate futures?

B. Napoleon versus Snowball

From chapter 5...

The animals having solved the problem of provisions now must deal with the questions of ruling and maintaining their homegrown kingdom.

Ominously, this chapter begins with Mollie defecting. She was the first animal among the original revolutionaries to flee. She'd be the only one ever to make it out alive. She may have been petty and vain, yet what would the hardiness of Boxer get him in the end? This shows that justice must include an afterlife if it is ever to be truly realized. Of course, communism doesn't allow this view, thereby encouraging disillusionment.

Then shortly thereafter a bitter winter was upon them. Here we have the test of character that is always bound to come. How many days do we have where we receive all we hope or desire from sunrise to sunset? Why then do most political theories gloss over the incessant pressures that are bound transpire?

It was high time for the great piggy brains to formulate ways to forge ahead with their acquired domain ...

At the Meetings Snowball often won over the majority by his brilliant speeches, but Napoleon was better at canvassing support for himself in between times. He was especially successful with the sheep. Of late the sheep had taken to bleating "Four legs good, two legs bad" both in and out of season, and they often interrupted the Meeting with this. It was noticed that they were especially liable to break into "Four legs good, two legs bad" at crucial moments in Snowball's speeches. Snowball had made a close study of some back numbers of the 'Farmer and Stockbreeder' which he had found in the farmhouse, and was full of plans for innovations and improvements. He talked learnedly about field drains, silage, and basic slag, and had worked out a complicated scheme for all the animals to drop their dung directly in the fields, at a different spot every day, to save the labour of cartage. Napoleon produced no schemes of his own, but said quietly that Snowball's would come to nothing, and seemed to be biding his time. But of all their controversies, none was so bitter as the one that took place over the windmill.

As with Trotsky and Stalin, Snowball was seen as being mild with brains while Napoleon was seen as being malevolent and brawny. The windmill was the powder-keg between their contrasting styles of leadership. Snowball studied diligently and worked hard; Napoleon took every effort not aimed at his glory to be a personal slight, and subsequently balked. This is a problem with dictators. The desire-partition of citizenry control versus personal, petty self-aggrandizing is demarcated by a very thin line—if one exists at all. Thus saith the great enemy of the Jews—

...And Haman said to himself, "Whom would the king desire to honor more than me?" -- Esther 6:6

—and thereafter sought their extermination for the lack of a single bow.

Snowball worked hard and made elaborate drawings. His peers esteemed his efforts and came to look at all his diagrams. Napoleon clearly was jealous—unmistakable evidence of his crooked character. The corrupt character of Napoleon was more pernicious than the doleful dissipation of Jones...

Only Napoleon held aloof. He had declared himself against the windmill from the start. One day, however, he arrived unexpectedly to examine the plans. He walked heavily round the shed, looked closely at every detail of the plans and snuffed at them once or twice, then stood for a little while contemplating them out of the corner of his eye; then suddenly he lifted his leg, urinated over the plans, and walked out without uttering a word.

Just as in reality there are few Western "hookers-with-hearts-of-gold," even so there are few guttural politicians who are heroes-in-Cyrus-clothing. Nearly all men struggle with pride. If a man has a shallow and carnal character, you can guarantee that he will struggle with pride; therefore, how good of a leader could he possibly turn out to be?

Love waits patiently; it acts kindly. Love does not envy [or, is not jealous]; love does not boast; it does not become haughty. It does not behave disgracefully; it does not seek its own [concerns]; it is not provoked [or, irritated]; it does not keep a record of evil. -- 1 Corinthians 13:4-5

Here Paul is extolling the highest virtue. It pretty much doubles as an exact opposite description for many modern rulers.

Don't get me wrong; love doesn't mean negating the law of God. That's merely being "nice," which is sometimes a bad thing. Also, there are seasons for every emotion. Yet, we must try to make Paul's description our normal mode. It's not easy, and no one lasts long before falling. Here's the thing though: we can't get to the point where we think it's acceptable to circumvent the responsibility. There are no special privileges with God. If there were, then Christ wouldn't have been tested in the wilderness.

Moving on, the debate over the windmill divided the farm. Snowball thought that the whole enterprise could be completed in a year and that the electricity would be well worth the investment. Napoleon maintained that this was a tremendous waste of time and energy, both of which would be better spent at procuring more provisions. There ensued a great "democratic" contest, with Benjamin probably being the only one mentally fit to cast a vote...

The animals formed themselves into two factions under the slogan, "Vote for Snowball and the three-day week" and "Vote for Napoleon and the full manger." Benjamin was the only animal who did not side with either faction. He refused to believe either that food would become more plentiful or that the windmill would save work. Windmill or no windmill, he said, life would go on as it had always gone on—that is, badly.

The two boars fought over the windmill issue and also over the vital subject of defence. This shows the two dilemmas of maintaining their kingdom; namely, domestic and foreign burdens. However, the question of the windmill was in the forefront. An important Sunday meeting transpired where the two parties were set to make their final case. Snowball laid out his plans and seemed very thoughtful and persuasive. Napoleon seemed to be on the ropes. How could he outwit his opponent? In short, sledgehammers make short work of brain tissue...

By the time he [Snowball] had finished speaking, there was no doubt as to which way the vote would go. But just at this moment Napoleon stood up and, casting a peculiar sidelong look at Snowball, uttered a high-pitched whimper of a kind no one had ever heard him utter before.

At this there was a terrible baying sound outside, and nine enormous dogs wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn. They dashed straight for Snowball, who only sprang from his place just in time to escape their snapping jaws.

This proved to be game changing for the future of the farm, and for the future of real-life Russia. This allegorical scene is picturing the rising of Joseph Stalin over Trotsky. According to historians, Lenin had actually grown weary of Stalin and didn't want him to gain the ascendency. He laid all this out in his Testament that he wrote after being wounded, but it was largely suppressed upon his death10. Stalin would gain the ruling seat however, and Trotsky would eventually be exiled.

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...The animals would still assemble on Sunday mornings to salute the flag, sing 'Beasts of England', and receive their orders for the week; but there would be no more debates.

It's chilling to think just how few honest debates regarding vital issues there have been in Russia after the leadership of Stalin was cemented. That should be a lesson to modern advocates of socialism. You can fallow the ground by taking away the power from established billionaires and other long-term brokers; all you'll accomplish in doing so however is merely to clear the path for some greedy boar—some man of steel—to pluck the spoils with ease.

It's interesting that Napoleon decided to glorify the dead remains of old Major at this juncture...

Every Sunday morning at ten o'clock the animals assembled in the big barn to receive their orders for the week. The skull of old Major, now clean of flesh, had been disinterred from the orchard and set up on a stump at the foot of the flagstaff, beside the gun. After the hoisting of the flag, the animals were required to file past the skull in a reverent manner before entering the barn.

The corpse of Lenin was set up for public viewing in Stalin's day, and it's still on display.

To make matters worse for our fictitious animals, a few weeks after the great rift between the two boars, Napoleon rewrote history.

On the third Sunday after Snowball's expulsion, the animals were somewhat surprised to hear Napoleon announce that the windmill was to be built after all...

That evening Squealer explained privately to the other animals that Napoleon had never in reality been opposed to the windmill. On the contrary, it was he who had advocated it in the beginning, and the plan which Snowball had drawn on the floor of the incubator shed had actually been stolen from among Napoleon's papers. The windmill was, in fact, Napoleon's own creation.

Also, whereas Snowball said it would only take one year, Napoleon told the others that it would take double that. In addition, their rations would be reduced. There almost seems to be an intentional impoverishing and increase in labour happening, which was the exact opposite of the original goal. Yet, the game had changed. It wasn't about freedom for the animals through revolt, but it was about Napoleon being free from the anxiety of revolt. The concerns of the homestead were being transferred to a single person—a single sinful person.

He had turned into that old Pharaoh, another great enemy of the Jews. Pharaoh said in regards to the Hebrew slaves as he drastically increased their workload...

Let the labor be heavier on the men, and let them work at it so that they will pay no attention to false words. \-- Exodus 5:9

Yet, may the poor and afflicted know that the superior taskmaster has his eye upon their plight...

"What do you mean by crushing My people and grinding the face of the poor?" declares the Lord GOD of hosts. -- Isaiah 3:15

Therefore, it's vital for the poor to place their trust in this Saviour...

O LORD, You have heard the desire of the humble; You will strengthen their heart, You will incline Your ear to vindicate the orphan and the oppressed, so that man who is of the earth will no longer cause terror. \-- Psalm 10:17-18

From chapter 6...

Throughout the spring and summer they worked a sixty-hour week, and in August Napoleon announced that there would be work on Sunday afternoons as well. This work was strictly voluntary, but any animal who absented himself from it would have his rations reduced by half.

While labouring in Irish factories I've known older people from Eastern Europe; ergo, they were under Soviet rule before the Berlin Wall fell. The Soviets liked to bilk their people for labour. A particular point of irony was the "working Saturday." If there was a public holiday during the week, you could enjoy a nice day off; yet, the next Saturday would be a "working Saturday." Apparently this practice still goes on throughout some parts of Russia (see subbotnik).

Anyway, promises of Sugarcandy Mountain on the backs of government schemes should always be met with Benjamin-style cynicism.

The animals had the gruelling task of trying to build a windmill on top of all their other farm duties. The hardest task was breaking up the limestone on the farm. Great boulders needed to be hauled uphill and tipped over the edge of the quarry in order to break the boulders into smaller pieces.

This Calvary-like struggle was indicative of something ironic about Animal Farm—and about human nature. Having won the rebellion against Jones and partaken of the milk and honey, why couldn't they rest content?

As to the Soviet allegory, there were many attempts at modernization after the Revolution. The windmill promised electricity, and this was an important subject for Lenin and Stalin...

Lenin once famously remarked that communism was merely socialism plus the electrification of the countryside, a comment that reveals the importance of technological modernization to leaders in the young Soviet Union...Stalin initially balked at the idea of a national emphasis on modern technology, only to embrace such plans wholeheartedly once he had secured his position as dictator.11

With the growth of the farm's ambitions came their need for materials that the farm couldn't produce. Technology has indeed brought the world together—but often for the worse. World War III will have no comparison in human history. The pros and cons of technological development is an interesting insight from Orwell.

Consider this train of thought. Technology brings people and their various ideas closer together. Being closer together, bad influences abound, as do conflicts. The same technology that brought people within arm's reach is then used to fight with one another in frightening new ways. Orwell inadvertently depicted this track-jumping-train with his windmill.

The windmill forced Napoleon to seek materials from other farms. These farms began dealing with each other, but eventually there would be conflict. Ultimately, in chapter 8, the advanced use of explosives from one of these farms will completely obliterate the windmill. The desire for technology caused the most advanced weapon known in the story to destroy the fruits of the very pursuit.

The same thing of course happened in Biblical times. The impressive, advanced nations that Israel/Judah made alliances with would end up their executioners...

Therefore, I gave her into the hand of her lovers, into the hand of the Assyrians, after whom she lusted. -- Ezekiel 23:9

This isn't because international cooperation is wrong, but rather because international alliances often involve placing trust in sinful benefactors as opposed to God. This will lead to the bending of one's will. Many will bow in order to have this outlet of influence.

For example, as I wrote about earlier this year, the Pope has been much more interested in appeasing Xi of China for the sake of political influence, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of non-Catholic Christians and Muslims are languishing in concentration camps. Yet, just as Israel was soon swept away—God will always bring judgment upon those who seek the easy way out.

As Jesus Christ, we should rather listen to the commands of Moses...

Then the king of Assyria carried Israel away into exile to Assyria, and put them in Halah and on the Habor, the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes, because they did not obey the voice of the LORD their God, but transgressed His covenant, [even] all that Moses the servant of the LORD commanded; they would neither listen nor do [it.] -- 2 Kings 18:11-12

Moving on, being dutiful to conscience, the animals initially had qualms about all this use of finance and trade. This seemed to go against everything the revolution was supposed to be about. Squealer soon eased their concerns...

Afterwards Squealer made a round of the farm and set the animals' minds at rest. He assured them that the resolution against engaging in trade and using money had never been passed, or even suggested. It was pure imagination, probably traceable in the beginning to lies circulated by Snowball. A few animals still felt faintly doubtful, but Squealer asked them shrewdly, "Are you certain that this is not something that you have dreamed, comrades? Have you any record of such a resolution? Is it written down anywhere?" And since it was certainly true that nothing of the kind existed in writing, the animals were satisfied that they had been mistaken.

Although text-centred traditions are important, those texts inevitably carry with them an underlying ethos. This is why Paul stated that not only the words of the apostles should be emulated, but their lives as well...

What [things] you* both learned and received, and heard and saw in me, these [things] be practicing, and the God of peace will be with you*. -- Philippians 4:9

And again:

Join [others] in becoming imitators of me, brothers [and sisters], and be keeping a close eye on the ones walking about [fig., conducting themselves] in this manner, just as you* have us [for] a pattern. -- Philippians 3:17

And again:

Continue becoming imitators of me, just as I also [am] of Christ. -- 1 Corinthians 11:1

And again:

Therefore, I am calling on [or, pleading with] you*, continue becoming imitators of me. -- 1 Corinthians 4:16

Therefore, authentic Christianity should look a lot like Paul. Can any modern liberal minister really say with a straight face that Paul would accept the Western Moral/Gender Revolution? Would he join hands with the draconian A-list-inspired masses in pledging conformity to infamy? The truth of God goes beyond just a few passages here and there; an entire ethos exists, and the sum of that ethos has been preserved very precisely via the lives of the original apostles.

This is called "walking in the Spirit" (Romans 8:4; Galatians 5:16).

Perhaps the animals couldn't produce sufficient documentation about old Major's wishes regarding other farms. However, they knew it was wrong. In not standing up for the original principles of old Major, the entire farm was in the process of being dragged up the brow of the quarry, with the hint of a subtle proposition.

Of course, you can only tinker with ethos for so long; eventually you will run headfirst in direct contradiction to any claim to a consistent epistemology. In each Temptation of Christ, the Lord fought off the Devil with a statement from Moses in Deuteronomy. The Moses-like commandments of the animals were represented by their list of seven rules, written clearly on the side of the big barn. These commandments will now begin to fall...

It was about this time that the pigs suddenly moved into the farmhouse and took up their residence there. Again the animals seemed to remember that a resolution against this had been passed in the early days, and again Squealer was able to convince them that this was not the case. It was absolutely necessary, he said, that the pigs, who were the brains of the farm, should have a quiet place to work in.

This was a flagrant violation of one of the original commands. Clover [another horse] and Muriel [a goat] thought about the matter and sought to investigate. They went out to the barn to find out.

"Muriel," she said, "read me the Fourth Commandment. Does it not say something about never sleeping in a bed?"

With some difficulty Muriel spelt it out.

"It says, 'No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets,'" she announced finally.

Squealer appeared in order to fill his normal role of porky-spin-doctor...

"You have heard then, comrades," he said, "that we pigs now sleep in the beds of the farmhouse? And why not? You did not suppose, surely, that there was ever a ruling against beds? A bed merely means a place to sleep in. A pile of straw in a stall is a bed, properly regarded. The rule was against sheets, which are a human invention. We have removed the sheets from the farmhouse beds, and sleep between blankets. And very comfortable beds they are too! But not more comfortable than we need, I can tell you, comrades, with all the brainwork we have to do nowadays. You would not rob us of our repose, would you, comrades? You would not have us too tired to carry out our duties? Surely none of you wishes to see Jones back [this scare tactic was noticed by Orwell in the Spanish War; scare tactics are powerful tools of pressure]?"

In running headfirst into the commandments, first the phraseology was modified. The Bible warns against this in regards to itself...

Whatever I [Jehovah through Moses] command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it. -- Deuteronomy 12:32 [see also Deuteronomy 4:2]

And later in the Old Testament...

Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar. -- Proverbs 30:5-6

And in the New Testament...

I testify to everyone hearing the words of the prophecy of this scroll, if anyone shall add to them, God [is prepared] to add to him the plagues, the ones having been written in this scroll. -- Revelation 22:18

In the above passage, Squealer then goes on to argue concerning just what is really meant by "bed?" Paul pretty much directly warns against such surreptitious people via an interesting Greek term...

If anyone teaches a different [or, heretical] doctrine and does not consent to sound words (the [ones] of our Lord Jesus Christ), and to the teaching according to godliness, having been swollen up with pride, knowing nothing, but obsessing about disputes and quarrels about words [fig., petty controversies], from which comes envy [or, jealousy], strife [or, bitter conflict], blasphemies, evil suspicions, constant arguing of people having been corrupted in the mind and having been deprived of the truth, supposing godliness to be a means of gain. Be withdrawing from such people. -- 1 Timothy 6:3-5

"Quarrels about words" seems to be a pretty good translation. The term is a compound word, made up of the common Greek term for "word" and for "war." According to BDAG, it means "word-battle, dispute about words."12 There's a verb form that the lexicon translates as "to dispute about words, split hairs."12 It appears in 2 Timothy 2:14...

Remind [them] of these things, urgently warning [them] before the Lord, not to be quarreling about words [or, wrangling over the meanings of terms] [which is] useful for nothing [except] for the ruin of the ones hearing.

Squealer's redefinition of "bed" seems to be in keeping with this underhanded tactic.

A short while later a hard winter began to set in. There were violent winds, leaving the windmill in ruins. They had planned its construction poorly. The walls were too thin to hold up against nature's elements. Napoleon had a scapegoat...

"Comrades," he said quietly, "do you know who is responsible for this? Do you know the enemy who has come in the night and overthrown our windmill? SNOWBALL!"

In 1984, Big Brother would always be at war with an enemy who maybe didn't even exist. War is Peace. On a footnote, given that the false-flag enemy in 1984 has a Jewish name (Emmanuel Goldstein), this might be a refreshing bit of philo-Semitism from Orwell. Plus, Emmanuel is another way of writing Immanuel, a name for the divine Messiah. Classic communism hated Judeo-Christianity.

Here—as with Emmanuel Goldstein—we have the furtherance of the religious motif. Communism was supposed to replace religion. Now Snowball has been morphed into Satan. He is the dark force behind every ill. His power knows no bounds. I've written it before: there are only so many worldview options out there; in addition, we are all wired the same way. Thus, if you do away with the God of the gaps, you will end up with the aliens of the gaps. If you do away with fundamental Judeo-Christianity, you will end up with fundamental environmentalism. If you do away with Satan, you will give his attributes to a much more innocent enemy—namely, your political opposition. That's scary.

The "good war" theory can be applied to anything.

From chapter 7...

The animals shake off the setback at the hand of "Snowball," redoubling their efforts to build the salvific windmill in attempt to impress the other farms (i.e., the nations). The poorly animals had suffered under the drunken Jones. Napoleon had given them hope. Their hope had not been realized up to this point. Harvests were poor, and a lot of energy was being spent towards the windmill. They had to press on. They needed this structure in order to have the ascendency in the countryside—guaranteeing safety. If we can make it to the moon first—that'll show 'em!

Moreover, Napoleon needed it. He was surely better than Jones. He just hadn't proved that yet.

Napoleon's desperation to appear successful is obvious by what happens next. With the output of the farm waning, it was imperative that he swept this fact under the rug. There was a human that was his contact with the outside world named Mr. Whymper. Even with the farm failing, Napoleon made sure that a different impression was given to the human...

Napoleon was well aware of the bad results that might follow if the real facts of the food situation were known, and he decided to make use of Mr. Whymper to spread a contrary impression. Hitherto the animals had had little or no contact with Whymper on his weekly visits: now, however, a few selected animals, mostly sheep, were instructed to remark casually in his hearing that rations had been increased. In addition, Napoleon ordered the almost empty bins in the store-shed to be filled nearly to the brim with sand, which was then covered up with what remained of the grain and meal. On some suitable pretext Whymper was led through the store-shed and allowed to catch a glimpse of the bins. He was deceived, and continued to report to the outside world that there was no food shortage on Animal Farm.

Again, this is all a bit prophetic on the part of Orwell. This desperation to put on airs for other competing locales is reminiscent of all the back and forth reports between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. throughout the Cold War. The back and forth regarding who had the best atomic bombs, the best rockets, and the best overall space program is legendary.

Things are about to take a sharp turn on the farm. Napoleon decided that something drastic needed to be done in order to procure more food. He agreed to sell Mr. Whymper a large quantity of eggs. This would provide the means of surviving the winter. However, it was a clear negation of everything the revolution stood for. Were not the hens being forced to part with their young, selling them into human hands?

The hens and Napoleon would square off...

They were just getting their clutches ready for the spring sitting, and they protested that to take the eggs away now was murder. For the first time since the expulsion of Jones, there was something resembling a rebellion...Napoleon acted swiftly and ruthlessly. He ordered the hens' rations to be stopped, and decreed that any animal giving so much as a grain of corn to a hen should be punished by death. The dogs saw to it that these orders were carried out. For five days the hens held out, then they capitulated and went back to their nesting boxes. Nine hens had died in the meantime.

This is similar to Lenin and the kulaks (a.k.a., resourceful peasants)...

Lenin blamed the kulaks for crop failures; the droughts of 1920 and 1921; and for hoarding grain. On 18 August 1918, he decreed:

You need to hang...at least 100 notorious kulaks...13

It's odd that the Russian Revolution was supposed to liberate the peasants, but actually had no qualms about blaming and killing them.

Napoleon was debating about who to sell some timber to—Mr. Pilkington or Mr. Frederick. Snowball was invoked as an unseen force, tinkering with the other farms. Indeed, Snowball had morphed completely into Satan at this point...

The animals were thoroughly frightened. It seemed to them as though Snowball were some kind of invisible influence, pervading the air about them and menacing them with all kinds of dangers.

Not even the real Satan is so powerful. Don't get me wrong, the Bible certainly declares the existence of this sinister fallen angel along with his demonic comrades. Still, I think it's also clear that when it's all said and done, we'll discover in the end that almost every single fault in our lives had absolutely nothing to do with anything beyond our carnal selfishness.

The Devil had to petition God to harass Job (Job 1-2). He had to petition God to harass Peter (Luke 22:31). Satanic temptation is very, very rare. His activity has more to do with leading false teachings and the overall cultural zeitgeist.

Like in 1984, Orwell goes to great lengths to demonstrate how history is manipulated. Squealer declares...

Snowball was in league with Jones from the very start! He was Jones's secret agent all the time. It has all been proved by documents which he left behind him and which we have only just discovered. To my mind this explains a great deal, comrades. Did we not see for ourselves how he attempted—fortunately without success—to get us defeated and destroyed at the Battle of the Cowshed?

Apart from the Mosaic command against false witness, the Bible doesn't speak to this particular sort of chicanery directly; it does however instruct to be careful about being honest regarding ancient demarcation lines...

Do not move the ancient boundary which your fathers have set. -- Proverbs 22:28

According to modern reckonings, the actual French Napoleon was a wonderful bloke and—on a related, unrelated note—socialism is the premier philanthropic philosophy. I don't think that's what the more accurate history books actually show.

This next bit is where we come to one of the most horrendous parts of the novella. Before going there, let's consider again the nature of tyrants in general.

Great tyrants are great sinners. They are carnal men, obsessed with themselves alone. Everyone else is expendable. Given this penchant, it's amazing how many people seek to hitch their star to them anyway. This is reminiscent of the future, when most of the world will bow a knee to the Antichrist—despite his demonic credentials. It also reminds us of the infamous Richard III.

There's a great scene in this Shakespearean play where one of Richard's chief co-conspirators finally understands just how shallow and selfish the tyrant really is. Buckingham has been a loyal and bloodthirsty lackey throughout the play. Like the beforementioned thieves, he was promised a reward for his efforts. When it comes time to collect the payment, Richard can't pull himself away from his own self-obsessed reverie...

[BUCKINGHAM] My lord, I have considered in my mind the late request that you did sound me in.

[RICHARD] Well, let that rest. Dorset is fled to Richmond.

[BUCKINGHAM] I hear the news, my lord.

[RICHARD] Stanley, he is your wife's son. Well, look unto it.

[BUCKINGHAM] My lord, I claim the gift, my due by promise, for which your honor and your faith is pawned—th' earldom of Hereford and the movables which you have promisèd I shall possess.

[RICHARD] Stanley, look to your wife. If she convey letters to Richmond, you shall answer it.

[BUCKINGHAM] What says your Highness to my just request?

[RICHARD] I do remember me, Henry the Sixth did prophesy that Richmond should be king, when Richmond was a little peevish boy. A king perhaps—

[BUCKINGHAM] My lord—

[RICHARD] How chance the prophet could not at that time have told me, I being by, that I should kill him?

[BUCKINGHAM] My lord, your promise for the earldom—

[RICHARD] Richmond! When last I was at Exeter, the Mayor in courtesy showed me the castle and called it Rougemont, at which name I started, because a bard of Ireland told me once I should not live long after I saw Richmond.

[BUCKINGHAM] My lord—14

Richard eventually tells him to shut up basically, for he's not in the mood to deal with the matter. The penny finally drops that Buckingham has invested his time and energy on a very selfish, shallow man...

And is it thus? Repays he my deep service with such contempt? Made I him king for this?14

Things would go worse for the supporters of the Russian Revolution. They would see just how far the revolutionaries had turned on their own supporters when Stalin began his show trials...

During the murderous frenzy of the 1930s known as the Great Terror, hundreds of thousands of ordinary Soviet citizens were summarily convicted of 'counterrevolutionary' crimes and either executed or dispatched to labor camps....To justify their liquidation the General Secretary...staged the Great Moscow Show Trials of 1936, 1937 and 1938. Diplomats and journalists from around the world watched as top Party members and heroes of the Russian Revolution and Civil War took the stand and falsely confessed to participating in a series of completely fictitious plots to wreck Soviet industry and abandon the country to Germany and Japan.15

This is the ultimate negation of a revolution—the ultimate implosion of a kingdom.

The four pigs waited, trembling, with guilt written on every line of their countenances. Napoleon now called upon them to confess their crimes. They were the same four pigs as had protested when Napoleon abolished the Sunday Meetings. Without any further prompting they confessed that they had been secretly in touch with Snowball ever since his expulsion, that they had collaborated with him in destroying the windmill, and that they had entered into an agreement with him to hand over Animal Farm to Mr. Frederick. They added that Snowball had privately admitted to them that he had been Jones's secret agent for years past. When they had finished their confession, the dogs promptly tore their throats out, and in a terrible voice Napoleon demanded whether any other animal had anything to confess.

The three hens who had been the ringleaders in the attempted rebellion over the eggs now came forward and stated that Snowball had appeared to them in a dream and incited them to disobey Napoleon's orders. They, too, were slaughtered. Then a goose came forward and confessed to having secreted six ears of corn during the last year's harvest and eaten them in the night. Then a sheep confessed to having urinated in the drinking pool—urged to do this, so she said, by Snowball—and two other sheep confessed to having murdered an old ram, an especially devoted follower of Napoleon, by chasing him round and round a bonfire when he was suffering from a cough. They were all slain on the spot. And so the tale of confessions and executions went on, until there was a pile of corpses lying before Napoleon's feet and the air was heavy with the smell of blood, which had been unknown there since the expulsion of Jones.

As for the farm, the remaining animals were shocked and sorrowful, yet they tried to rally themselves to remain faithful to the cause. As for Russia, the show trials would open up Pandora's Box...

Propelled by the example of the Moscow trials, spy and wrecker hysteria swept through the USSR. Citizens and bureaucrats denounced one another with wild abandon...According to an authoritative account authorities arrested 1,575,259 persons during 1937-1938, including 1,372,832 for counterrevolutionary crimes. A staggering 681,692 were shot.16

No wonder Orwell was disillusioned. Modern war writers—such as Peter Hitchens—have pointed out how few tears have been shed for the atrocities that happened in far-away-Russia.

IV. Reflections upon Exaltation: Chapters 8-10

A. The Lord Jesus Christ

We come to the final leg of our tour. First, we saw the animals gain the farm. Then, we saw the animals seeking the establishment of their kingdom upon the countryside. The final step is ultimate exultation. This is where mankind gets stuck. People can spend their lives seeking to acquire more wealth, yet never feel that they have enough. People can spend decades climbing social ladders, never stopping even when their bodies begin to teeter with age. We are always craving that ultimate exultation, the culminating regeneration—the Nirvana experience.

Christian theology deals with these three aspects of universal human experience very well. First there is salvation, where a person initially becomes a Christian. Whoever calls out to God, having put their faith solely in the resurrected Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of all their sins, is indeed saved with an everlasting salvation. Such a person has become a member of the Kingdom of God; yet in essence, they are still the same person. This is where the second experience comes in. Whereas salvation deals with initially becoming a Christian, sanctification deals with the issue of slowly growing into a godlier person throughout the rest of your life. Sanctification will always be imperfect and incomplete, and so we long for more—we long for the ultimate redemption...

For we know that if our earthly house of this tent is [fig., our bodies are] torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with human hands, eternal in the heavens. For also in this [body] we groan, longing to clothe ourselves with our habitation, the one from heaven. -- 2 Corinthians 5:1-2

Recall that in Luke there is the temptation about Jesus Christ turning stones into bread [gaining sustenance/salvation], about bowing before the Devil to receive power over every nation [establishing the kingdom/sanctification], and finally about the Lord throwing himself off the Temple in order to test God's salvific power with ostentation [seeking exaltation/glorification].

It's that last temptation that we're about to consider in this final section...

And he brought Him to Jerusalem and set Him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to Him, "Since You are God's Son, throw Yourself down from here. For it has been written, 'To His angels He will give orders concerning you, to guard over you', and, 'They will lift you up on [their] hands, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'" And answering, Jesus said to him, "It has been said, 'You will not put [the] LORD your God to the test.'" [Deuteronomy 6:16] And having completed every temptation, the Devil departed from Him until an [opportune] time. -- Luke 4:9-13

A politician first tries to win the presidency, then a second term, and then a legacy. Napoleon had played his part in the revolution. He had established himself as ruler of the kingdom. Now he needed his legacy—his electricity-producing windmill. Failing an actual legacy based upon merit he could simply manufacture one. With all that in mind, let's trot through this final stretch.

B. Manor Farm Reclaimed/The Bowler Hat Brigade

From chapter 8...

A few days later, when the terror caused by the executions had died down, some of the animals remembered—or thought they remembered—that the Sixth Commandment decreed "No animal shall kill any other animal." And though no one cared to mention it in the hearing of the pigs or the dogs, it was felt that the killings which had taken place did not square with this. Clover asked Benjamin to read her the Sixth Commandment, and when Benjamin, as usual, said that he refused to meddle in such matters, she fetched Muriel. Muriel read the Commandment for her. It ran: "No animal shall kill any other animal WITHOUT CAUSE." Somehow or other, the last two words had slipped out of the animals' memory. But they saw now that the Commandment had not been violated; for clearly there was good reason for killing the traitors who had leagued themselves with Snowball.

The war against liberty is always very puerile. I mean, come on, there didn't need to be a law forbidding animals to be killed "without cause." Yet, the silly redaction worked. Even so, many brain-dead millennials want to cancel free speech because someone's feelings might be hurt if there isn't total acceptance of the Moral Revolution. Um, that's the whole point behind free speech and a free press. You don't need a law stating, "You can say/publish whatever you like, as long as it doesn't offend anyone or question a politician." You would never, ever need that law. Freedom of speech is a lot more important than hurt feelings, for without free speech, there will come something much more detrimental than mere philosophical disagreements.

Moving on, although the farm never did prosper, the pigs realized that their failure didn't matter very much. They could merely put out deceptive statistics claiming that all was well...

On Sunday mornings Squealer, holding down a long strip of paper with his trotter, would read out to them lists of figures proving that the production of every class of foodstuff had increased by two hundred per cent, three hundred per cent, or five hundred per cent, as the case might be. The animals saw no reason to disbelieve him, especially as they could no longer remember very clearly what conditions had been like before the Rebellion. All the same, there were days when they felt that they would sooner have had less figures and more food.

Empiricism can be used as a malicious weapon. Numbers can be fudged and facts made out of pure fiction...

Official sounding "evidence" thus convinces the animals that their own rumbling stomachs must be in the wrong.17

We come now to one of the most significant portions of this section. In writing this wee tour, I haven't been able to highlight properly recurrent themes. Perhaps the most popular recurring element is the revolutionary song, "Beasts of England." It was the hoary song that came to old Major in his dream. It ended up being the tie that bound the animals together throughout the narrative.

Now there was a new song.

Instead of singing of the great days of liberation, this new ditty featured another focal point altogether. I bet you can guess what it is—or rather—who it is...

Friend of fatherless! Fountain of happiness! Lord of the swill-bucket! Oh, how my soul is on fire when I gaze at thy calm and commanding eye, like the sun in the sky, comrade Napoleon!

It goes on like that for another few stanzas. The religious overtones are obvious. Again, whether it was intentional or not, a large part of Animal Farm ends up displaying the hypocrisy of atheistic communism. In reality, the same can be said for atheistic anything.

Anyway, not only do we currently have Napoleon appearing as a theopiggly-leader, but Snowball-Satan is at it again. This time he has planted weeds in the field. That's an allusion taken directly out of the Gospels (Matthew 13:39).

Eventually they managed to rebuild the windmill. The walls were thick enough this time. They had been triumphant. They would be basking in the glories of electric bliss in no time flat.

As that strumpet fortune would have it, around this same season there was finally an economic breakthrough with Frederick. He was going to buy the timber from Animal Farm. Napoleon (i.e., Stalin) had struck a handsome deal with Frederick (i.e., Hitler). You know where this is going.

In the end, the money that Animal Farm receives from Frederick is found to be fraudulent. When this betrayal occurred an incursion followed. Operation Barbarossa is happening; Frederick/Hitler invades Napoleon's/Stalin's domain. As with the real campaign, Animal Farm/Russia is ravaged by this blitzkrieg.

Notably, Frederick's party blew up the windmill. It no longer existed at all. Because of this shocking action the animals rallied and fought hard. They won, but not before suffering terrible losses...

A cow, three sheep, and two geese were killed, and nearly everyone was wounded. Even Napoleon, who was directing operations from the rear, had the tip of his tail chipped by a pellet.

In the last chapter, the animals were greatly demoralized after the purges from Napoleon. Here they are further brought low by the violence at the hands of Frederick. The Russian people have certainly gone through a lot over the past century—a whole lot. As for the fictitious animals, one sentence sums up their plight...

They had won, but they were weary and bleeding.

They quickly turn their gloom back into serenity however...

But when the animals saw the green flag flying, and heard the gun firing again—seven times it was fired in all—and heard the speech that Napoleon made, congratulating them on their conduct, it did seem to them after all that they had won a great victory.

This touch is what makes Orwell such a great writer. It's not his humour or his style—it's the fact that he is such a great critic of the weak human condition. Throughout the end of the novel we have the animals making these rebounds from sorrow to hope and joy. There's no reason for them to make these rebounds over and again. They shouldn't be making them. It's easier though. That's what makes paltry party politics thrive. "Oh well, so we have a bad leader. Well, actually, he's not that bad. He's actually jolly good." No—he's that bad. Serpents are more upright. You're just that slothful or faithless.

After the war, there were two noteworthy new trends. First of all, the military ceremonialism grew by leaps and bounds...

Two whole days were given over to celebrations. There were songs, speeches, and more firing of the gun...It was announced that the battle would be called the Battle of the Windmill, and that Napoleon had created a new decoration, the Order of the Green Banner, which he had conferred upon himself.

God created holidays for the Israelites to congregate, learn about the way of truth, and to worship Jehovah in gratitude. In an atheistic state, you have to celebrate other things. The Animal Farm preferred the military. Western culture prefers Halloween. May God help us.

The second new feature was the discovery of liquor. The pigs got sloshed, and after a knee-jerk compunction, decided they were going to start brewing themselves. Of course, this meant something else needed to be done with those pesky commandments...

...A few days later Muriel, reading over the Seven Commandments to herself, noticed that there was yet another of them which the animals had remembered wrong. They had thought the Fifth Commandment was "No animal shall drink alcohol," but there were two words that they had forgotten. Actually the Commandment read: "No animal shall drink alcohol TO EXCESS."

Not even Jones owned a brewery.

From chapter 9...

This is the penultimate chapter to Animal Farm and also the penultimate section of our tour. Since I want to focus on the temptations for the last one, I'd like to speak a final word about communism/socialism here. Socialism has been in the news a lot over the past few years, ever since Bernie Sanders became a serious presidential hopeful. Recently the theories of Marx have also been in the headlines because of the thirty-year anniversary to the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The Berlin Wall of course was erected to partition Berlin, and marked the line of the U.S.S.R's direct influence after the defeat of Nazi Germany. I was ten years old when the wall fell. It was celebrated as one of the greatest events of the twentieth century. There was non-stop cheering and positive news coverage. It's somewhat odd therefore that this thirty-year anniversary is bringing those memories back into the fore at the same time that socialism/communism is cresting in popularity once again.

We all know the counterargument. "There's a difference between socialism and communism. Orwell proves that. He was a socialist, but hated communism." Right, but what does all that mean in the modern era? Orwell's Britain (as pictured in Down and Out) is completely different from modern Britain. There are tons of social programs. I get money from the government of which I'm not even fully sure of the why-comes (my wife likely knows). Tramps aren't a big problem anymore. Pawning clothes isn't even possible anymore. I've never even seen a proper pawnshop in Northern Ireland (although I see far too many bookmakers). The living wage is very high. There's a wonderful healthcare system. I really find it hard to believe that George Orwell would hate modern Britain. Of course it's not perfect, yet I find it hard to believe that he would seek for the government to own the entirety of industry as a solution to lingering issues. I just don't believe it.

Anyway, while we remember the fall of the Berlin Wall, let's remember that this is celebrating the defeat of socialism. People always pretend there's some perfect brand of non-communistic socialism to be had. Actually, there is. It's called the United Kingdom. Anything beyond that is communism. This fairy-tale of a new socialism has always persisted...

Remarkably, the leaders of the Communist Parties in Eastern Europe appear to have believed the same thing. The ideologists in their Politburos described countries such as East Germany as examples of "actually existing" socialism—in contrast to the nirvana which would exist at some unspecified time in the future.

But we can only judge a system by its performance in practice, not by some Platonic ideal of what true believers imagine it might do. Everywhere it has been tried, socialism has been a failure. This simple fact cannot be repeated too often, particularly to younger generations to whom 1989 may seem as remote as the days of the Roman Empire.18

There is no "perfect socialism" because there are no perfect people. Whether you're talking the Bidens, Trump and company, the wife of Bernie Sanders—or whoever: you have to be a complete and utter braindead moron to trust any single overseer to have all the power. As the author of McMafia has demonstrated (via his Prisoner of Power series), not even the existence of billionaires guarantees that ultra-strongmen won't arise.

However, there's definitely been a benefit to the U.S. having many billionaires across a wide political spectrum in the U.S., from Adelson and the Mercers on the right to the trendy liberal Silicon Valley tycoons. This system largely keeps the boars in their stalls—or in the crosshairs of special prosecutors. A diversification of billionaires is the only way to have a diversification of power. Otherwise, there's only one mover and shaker in town—the easily corruptible government. Checks and balances, having three branches, whatever—none of that works. Look how quickly Hitler was able to cut through all such bureaucracy as a warm knife through butter. The existence of very wealthy people is the only way to diversify power in the real world—especially if the money is old.

Anyway, as we go forward with our failed Animal Farm, we have certainly entered into the season of falling action. The revolution was successful, the single-party kingdom was established, but it was unable to arrive at a state of sustainable Utopia via the energy-providing windmill. Instead, the ruling class ruled through brute force, and the revolutionaries fared worse.

In the final two chapters the separation between these two classes grows exponentially. Napoleon pretty much turns into a cult leader...

There were many more mouths to feed now. In the autumn the four sows had all littered about simultaneously, producing thirty-one young pigs between them. The young pigs were piebald, and as Napoleon was the only boar on the farm, it was possible to guess at their parentage. It was announced that later, when bricks and timber had been purchased, a schoolroom would be built in the farmhouse garden. For the time being, the young pigs were given their instruction by Napoleon himself in the farmhouse kitchen. They took their exercise in the garden, and were discouraged from playing with the other young animals. About this time, too, it was laid down as a rule that when a pig and any other animal met on the path, the other animal must stand aside: and also that all pigs, of whatever degree, were to have the privilege of wearing green ribbons on their tails on Sundays.

Orwell was a bit weak on Frederick, yet he did seem to mix in some anti-Nazi sentiments into Animal Farm. Napoleon often is reminiscent of Hitler in these latter chapters. Daniel Moran stated...

His decision to build a schoolhouse for the pigs is reminiscent of such fascist organizations as the Hitler Youth, and his numerous decrees favoring the pigs...recalls Hitler's thoughts about Aryan superiority.19

The pigs increasingly lived in luxury while most of the other animals faced regularly-reduced rations. There was also an increase in alcohol consumption. To counter this metamorphosis into Jones, more military splendour was accorded to Napoleon. This could have been another allusion to fascism. Orwell famously stated that this martial prowess is what gave Hitler popular appeal (see his review of Mein Kampf). Orwell rightly surmised that the appeal to the bleeding heart was only so successful. Many were actually attracted to the jackboot...

So that, what with the songs, the processions, Squealer's lists of figures, the thunder of the gun, the crowing of the cockerel, and the fluttering of the flag, they were able to forget that their bellies were empty, at least part of the time.

It's been a while since any Western leader has tried the jackboot charm. Most rulers are thankfully too soft in speech or too urbane in disposition. A warrior-politician will arise one day though, as the Apostle John prophesied. People will worship him...

And they prostrated themselves in worship [or, reverence, and in all references to the beast or dragon] before the dragon, the one having given the authority to [the] beast; and they prostrated themselves in worship before the beast, saying, "Who [is] like the beast, and who [is] able to wage war with it?" And a mouth was given to it speaking great [things] and blasphemy, and authority was given to it to make war forty-two months [i.e., 3½ years]. -- Revelation 13:4-5

Early in Shakespeare's Richard III there is a bit of banter involving a certain Queen Elizabeth, Margaret, and the ambitious Richard. Margaret is being slighted by the people in attendance, and Richard pokes jibes at her as well. Elizabeth seems to laugh along, yet Margaret breathes a sharp warning to her...

Poor painted queen, vain flourish of my fortune, why strew'st thou sugar on that bottled spider, whose deadly web ensnareth thee about? Fool, fool, thou whet'st a knife to kill thyself. The day will come that thou shalt wish for me to help thee curse this poisonous bunch-backed toad.20

Towards the end of the play we don't find a group surrounding Margaret in sharp banter. Instead, we find a group of grieving women, out-mourning one another over Richard's wicked deeds...

[QUEEN MAGARET] ...Richard yet lives, hell's black intelligencer, only reserved their factor to buy souls and send them thither. But at hand, at hand ensues his piteous and unpitied end. Earth gapes, hell burns, fiends roar, saints pray, to have him suddenly conveyed from hence. Cancel his bond of life, dear God I pray, that I may live and say "The dog is dead."

[QUEEN ELIZABETH, standing] O, thou didst prophesy the time would come that I should wish for thee to help me curse that bottled spider, that foul bunch-backed toad!21

Christians have been warning for a very long time about a coming Antichrist. He is known in the prophetic Scriptures as "the Beast." He will seemingly die, come back to life, and seek to conquer the globe. Although people aren't necessarily culpable for his rising, they are somewhat culpable in recklessly building the infrastructure that shall accommodate his reign of terror. The lack of digital privacy, the hyper-surveillance state, implantable digital technology, social credit scores, massive DNA databases, and many things besides—are all disgusting intrusions upon personal liberty. Couple this with the death of religious liberty, free speech, a free press—over-against a growing love of socialism—and the prophesied Orwellian nightmare seems to be just around the corner.

Moving on, the most tragic event in chapter 9 is the demise of Boxer. Throughout the entire novella he kept saying "I will work harder" and "Napoleon is always right." He laboured hard, looking forward to a quiet retirement after the windmill was completed. The slow, dubious progress towards the electric-Utopia hastened his demise. His body was worn out. He collapsed one day, and wasn't going to be fit for any more work.

Sadly, the pigs sold him to the knackers in order to be turned into glue. The animals grew wise to this scheme at the last minute, but it was too late. He was taken away to his death. Of course, Squealer was able to patch things up...

It had come to his knowledge, he said, that a foolish and wicked rumour had been circulated at the time of Boxer's removal. Some of the animals had noticed that the van which took Boxer away was marked "Horse Slaughterer," and had actually jumped to the conclusion that Boxer was being sent to the knacker's. It was almost unbelievable, said Squealer, that any animal could be so stupid. Surely, he cried indignantly, whisking his tail and skipping from side to side, surely they knew their beloved Leader, Comrade Napoleon, better than that? But the explanation was really very simple. The van had previously been the property of the knacker, and had been bought by the veterinary surgeon, who had not yet painted the old name out. That was how the mistake had arisen.

The animals were enormously relieved to hear this.

Here again we see an ignorance among the animals that can best be described as wilful. It's doubtful that Orwell intended us to believe that they were really that stupid by nature. They wanted to be that stupid. They wanted to believe the lies. They wanted to believe that boasting about sexual assaults was just a bit of locker-room banter. They wanted to believe anything that was simple, comforting, and required no difficult response. There are many repeat-battered wives.

As for Boxer's demise, let's take in one more description...

...Those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength; and the very instant that our usefulness has come to an end we are slaughtered with hideous cruelty.

Actually, that was from old Major's rousing speech in chapter 1.

From chapter 10...

This writing ended up being a lot longer than I originally intended, and so I'll make the conclusion very brief. One of the major reasons I decided to go with the oft-cited and oft-repeated Temptations of Christ was that it seemed clear to me why Luke uniquely ordered the events. Luke seemed to be arranging the temptations into a linear view of universal human experience, and this appears very evident in how he ended his Gospel.

The Lukan ordering of the Temptations of Christ find a very clear match to everything that happens to the Lord Jesus after his resurrection. That would make sense. The Temptations highlighted the very first days of his adult life. The scenes after the resurrection depict his very first days as the new man.

So let's quickly compare the temptations with the ending to Luke. In the first temptation, the Lord refused the Devil's suggestion that he turn stones into bread. In Luke 24, the Lord is pictured as having been raised from the dead. First, the women come to the tomb, which had its great "stone" removed to reveal the emptiness inside (Luke 24:2-3).

The second time his resurrection was manifested—to another group—it occurred over a loaf of bread...

And it happened, while He [was] reclining [to eat] with them, having taken the loaf of bread, He bestowed a blessing upon [it], and having broken [it], He began giving [it] to them. Then their eyes were opened, and they knew [or, recognized] Him [cp. Gen 21:19], and He became invisible from their [sight]. -- Luke 24:30-31

Jesus Christ had become the true Bread of Life (John 6:35).

The second temptation featured Satan demanding worship in exchange for power over all the kingdoms of the world. The very next scene depicts Jesus Christ appearing to the apostles, giving them a Gospel-charge over all the nations...

And He said to them, "Thus it has been written, and thus it was necessary [for] the Christ to suffer and to rise from [the] dead the third day, and [for] repentance and forgiveness of sins to be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem." -- Luke 24:46-47

Thus, the Lord has authority to offer all people of the world entrance into his authentic, unshakeable, Utopian Kingdom (and yes, I'm sure they'll be plenty of yummy sugar and candy).

Finally, the last temptation featured the Devil's suggestion that he toss himself down at the Temple complex. The Lord refused, and the Gospel closes with his marvellous ascension. This is the very next, and the very last, scene...

And it happened, while He [was] bestowing a blessing upon them, He parted from them and was being taken up into heaven. And they, having prostrated themselves in worship [or, reverence] before Him, returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and they were through all [fig. continually] in the temple, praising and blessing God. So be it! -- Luke 24:51-53

As for Animal Farm, you're probably familiar with the ending. It's fairly legendary. The pigs fully transform into humans. They begin walking on their hind legs, wearing clothes, and fraternizing with the other farmers. The sheep called out distractingly...

Four legs good, two legs BETTER! Four legs good, two legs BETTER! Four legs good, two legs BETTER!

The laws on the barn also had a final redaction...

For once Benjamin consented to break his rule, and he read out to her what was written on the wall [thus, he finally becomes somewhat noble, as Gordon Comstock in 'Keep the Aspidistra Flying;' Gordon and Benjamin are probably Orwell himself]. There was nothing there now except a single Commandment. It ran:

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS

At the very end, there's a raucous gathering of drinking and gambling, with the pigs and human farmers toasting each other. Orwell wrote this with the Tehran Conference in mind, but it also eerily evokes the more infamous Yalta Conference. Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin acted very much like these fictitious characters. The farmers apologized for misunderstandings, praised Animal Farm, and pretended that the future was exceedingly bright.

Napoleon took the floor and continued on with the well-wishing. However, he had a slight correction to make...

He had only one criticism, he said, to make of Mr. Pilkington's excellent and neighbourly speech. Mr. Pilkington had referred throughout to "Animal Farm." He could not of course know—for he, Napoleon, was only now for the first time announcing it—that the name "Animal Farm" had been abolished. Henceforward the farm was to be known as "The Manor Farm"—which, he believed, was its correct and original name.

"Gentlemen," concluded Napoleon, "I will give you the same toast as before, but in a different form. Fill your glasses to the brim. Gentlemen, here is my toast: To the prosperity of The Manor Farm!"

This charm offensive of Napoleon was matched by his real-life counterpart at Yalta...

The flawed agreement at Yalta was spun enthusiastically. In February, in the immediate aftermath of the conference, both the British and the Americans talked up what had been achieved in the Crimea.

Churchill informed the War Cabinet that he was quite sure Stalin 'meant well to the world and to Poland', and that 'Premier Stalin had been sincere.' And on 23 February he told ministers that 'Poor Neville Chamberlain believed he could trust Hitler. He was wrong. But I don't think I'm wrong about Stalin.' Hugh Dalton, present at the meeting, also recorded in his diary: 'The PM spoke very warmly of Stalin. He was sure—and Sir Charles Portal had said the same thing to me at the De La Rue dinner last Wednesday—that, as long as Stalin lasted, Anglo–Russian friendship could be maintained.'22

The good vibes didn't last long between Napoleon and the farmers however...

But they [the animals] had not gone twenty yards [from the party] when they stopped short. An uproar of voices was coming from the farmhouse. They rushed back and looked through the window again. Yes, a violent quarrel was in progress. There were shoutings, bangings on the table, sharp suspicious glances, furious denials. The source of the trouble appeared to be that Napoleon and Mr. Pilkington had each played an ace of spades simultaneously.

Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

It wouldn't take long for the agreements made in the joint conferences to completely fall apart. These sunny toasts would give way to the Cold War, which would dominate global politics for the next forty years. In every way that counts, it's never really ended.

When it does end, there will probably be no verdant pastures nor healthy animals left on the applicable countrysides. If humanity survives it, their chests will doubtless be bedecked with many medals and filled with many silly dreams.

Thankfully, fundamental Christianity has been guaranteed to live a very long time, in order "[for] repentance and forgiveness of sins to be proclaimed in His name to all the nations."

V. Citations

All website references are from November 2019.

1https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/animalfarm/themes/page/2/

2Moran, Daniel. CliffsNotes: Animal Farm. New York: Wiley Publishing, 2000. [Introduction to the Novel]

3https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/animalfarm/section2/

4https://www.preceden.com/timelines/35060-animal-farm-russian-revolution

5Colley, Rupert. History in an Hour: The Russian Revolution. London: HarperCollins, 2012. [The October Manifesto]

6https://www.preceden.com/timelines/35060-animal-farm-russian-revolution

7Colley, Rupert. History in an Hour: The Russian Revolution. London: HarperCollins, 2012. [The Provisional Government]

8Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Richard III. Folger Shakespeare Library, edited by Barbara Mowat and Paul Werstine. [Act 1; Scene 4]

9Moran, Daniel. CliffsNotes: Animal Farm. New York: Wiley Publishing, 2000. [Critical Essays]

10Colley, Rupert. History in an Hour: The Russian Revolution. London: HarperCollins, 2012. ['Lenin lived, Lenin lives, and Lenin will live']

11https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/animalfarm/section5/

12Danker, Frederick William (editor). A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature (Third Edition). Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press, 2000. [pg. 598]

13Colley, Rupert. History in an Hour: The Russian Revolution. London: HarperCollins, 2012. [Red Terror]

14Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Richard III. Folger Shakespeare Library, edited by Barbara Mowat and Paul Werstine. [Act 4; Scene 2]

15Wachtel, Julius. Stalin's Witnesses. London: Knox Robinson Publishing, 2013. [Forward]

16Ibid. [A Little Bit of History]

17Moran, Daniel. CliffsNotes: Animal Farm. New York: Wiley Publishing, 2000. [Chapter 8]

18Ormerod, Paul. "Today's apologists for socialism still won't acknowledge the lessons of the Berlin Wall." City A.M. https://www.cityam.com/todays-apologists-for-socialism-still-wont-acknowledge-the-lessons-of-the-berlin-wall/amp/

19Moran, Daniel. CliffsNotes: Animal Farm. New York: Wiley Publishing, 2000. [Chapter 9]

20Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Richard III. Folger Shakespeare Library, edited by Barbara Mowat and Paul Werstine. [Act 1; Scene 3]

21Ibid. [Act 4; Scene 4]

22Rees, Laurence. World War Two: Behind Closed Doors. BBC Books, 2008. [The Iron Curtain]

John Newsinger's article:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt21kk1wk.7

VI. Works by Me

[Anything not here that bears my name I've discarded due to poorness of quality.]

Is the Bible Divinely Inspired? (Special Edition)

Dinosaur (The Bible's Forgotten Prophecy)

A Fortnight from God (A Dialogue with Dom)

The Mark of the Beast (Prophecy's Crown Jewel)

The Gospel Salvation by Grace

Zechariah's Dreamscape

Christmas in Eden (A New Theory of Adam)

A Biblical View of UFOs

Dystopia (A Christian Essay on Huxley's, Brave New World)

A Brief Look at Hell

Daniel and the Dhammapada Eastern Beauty and Ancient Prophecy

The Coming False Revival and the 144,000

A Biblical Survey of the Rapture (Predicting the Vanishing of Millions)

House of Abaddon (The State of Modern Science)

The Inferno: A Biblical Survey of Plagues

The Day the Sun Stands Still (A Translation and Commentary of Revelation 16)

Werewolf (A Biblical View)

The Future Implosion of Nature (A Translation and Commentary of Revelation 6)

Philippians 2:5-11 (The Bible's Hidden Gem)

How to Become a Christian (or, "Born Again," "Saved," "Converted," etc.)

Bible Prophecy Digest #1

The Book of Jonah (A New Translation and Commentary)

My Civil Disobedience... (An Open Letter to a British Journalist from a Fundamental Christian)

UFOs, Alien Abductions, and the Apocalypse: (The Case of Betty Andreasson)

The False Prophet (A Translation and Commentary of Revelation 13:11-18)

Coronavirus is Not the End of the World The Certainty of Eschatology

The War of Gog and Magog (A New Translation and Commentary)

Messianic Purim (A Short Commentary on the Book of Esther)

Evidence of Divine Authorship: The Biblical Account of Elisha

Biblical Demonology: A Scriptural Survey of Demons and Spirits

Christianity and Idols (A Sermon)

More Evidence of Divine Authorship (Biblical Numerology)

An Asteroid, A Comet, And The Coming Apocalypse

More Aliens and Evolution Bible Prophecy Digest #2

150 Days Later Fear of Zombies: A Christian Essay

Regarding Donald Trump (Or, Bannon Marches On)

Dear Rodrigo Duterte (Evidence of Divine Authorship in Isaiah 40-66)

"The Son of Perdition" (A Scriptural Survey)

Bible Prophecy: 22 Reasons Why Time May Be Short

To Any Jehovah's Witness or Mormon Upon Troubled Waters

The Necessity of Christian Crudeness (A Short Refutation of Ecumenical Efforts)

Indifferent Honest Christian Reflections on Hamlet

Forensic Justification (A Commentary on Romans 3:24)

Prophecy and Pontius Pilate A Digest of Biblical Apologetics #1

The Fifth Dimension God and the Cosmos

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (A Bad Omen) A Digest of Biblical Apologetics #3

The Riddle of the Frogs (An End Times Essay)

The Nephilim/Fallen Angels (A Biblical Survey)

The Pope and Chinese Torture Camps A Digest of Biblical Apologetics #4

Mary, a Mother Challenging Modern Dogma

The Rising of Antichrist How Donald Trump Foreshadows The Coming Storm

The Confession of Judas The Plight of Muslims in Birmingham

Contortions of Truth Detective Amaral, and Madeleine McCann

Gleanings from Herodotus Christian Reflections: Book One

The JFK Conspiracy: Christian Reflections

Bigfoot and the Bible: A Brief Essay

Philip Dick's Accurate Forecast "The Hanging Stranger" and Demonology

The Strange Story of Sampson (Evidence of Divine Authorship)

Who's Afraid of Trip Lee (A Lesson from Biblical Archaeology)

Darwin's Great Gaffe Further Proof of a Global Flood

Dagon Shall Arise Biblical Archaeology and the Book of Revelation

The Trouble With John Knox (A Warning Against Christian Nationalism)

Climate Change and Bible Prophecy

The Angel of the Witnesses A New Translation and Commentary of Revelation 10

Signs of the Times: Dawkins, the Pope, and UFOs

The Georgia Guidestones A Contrast to Biblical Prophecy

Touring The Animal Farm Christian Reflections on a George Orwell Classic

The New Heresies of Pope Francis Shocking Denials from a Dubious Vicar

The Book of Joel A New Translation and Commentary

The Failing of Evolution And the Success of Prophecy

Daniel Chapter 3 A New Translation and Commentary

Paul's Mysterious Power in Corinth: A Translation and Commentary of 1 Corinthians 5:1-6

The Tower of Babel: A New Translation and Commentary of Genesis 11:1-9

1, 4, 9, 16...Stanley Kubrick, Arthur C. Clarke, and UFOs

Bible Prophecy in the Didache (And the Apostolic Fathers)

Gleanings from Herodotus Christian Reflections: Book Two

Shema Yisrael Jacob's Divine Messiah
