The Problem with People

In October 1917, one event stunned the world and shook politics to its very core, the Russian Revolution. Built upon the principles of Marxism and Leninism, the most recognizable goals was to create a socialist state without economic or social status. During the early days, there was no doubt that the idea worked well. Though some, realistically many, of the former bourgeoisie were upset having lost their power, Soviet citizens rejoiced at the newfound freedoms. As time went on, connections and influence made their way back into society with unacknowledged social classes reforming. Compare this to the novel Lord of the Flies by William Golding, a book chronologizing the adventures and tragedies of school boys on a deserted island without adult supervision. When a group of boys arrive on a deserted island, they form a group to survive. Just like the Revolution and numerous other uprisings, the boys too fell into the trap of organizing social classes from a classless society. Therefore it can be stated that when a group is created, even if it is for the goal of unifying the public equally, the group ends up benefiting a certain few.

The Lord of the Flies is a book chock full of analogies, references, and inferences to be made into today’s society. One of these is a distribution and confluence of power. Since the boys all arrive and meet up on an island without grown ups, they get to start anew as they try to survive. One of these ways was electing a chief to run the group and so the classes again re-form, starting with the words of a boy named Jack Merridew. “‘I ought to be chief,’ Jack said with a simple arrogance, ‘because I’m chapter chorister and head boy.’” (22) Even though the boys cannot entirely see it, Jack is trying to use his past social status, much like bourgeois did in the Russian Revolution, to gain influence and an advantage in the new, naive society. Although in the end, Ralph, another boy who stood quiet and held a conch for the whole time, is elected chief, a resentment would build in Jack and reveal itself at a later time. That resentment, stems from a loss of power which needs to be regained.

Similarly to the boys, the complete upheaval of social order during the Russian Revolution made many upper class citizens lose their power, and many of them were unhappy with that fact. One of the driving forces behind the Revolution was the Marxist/Leninist belief that a classless social system with common ownership of the means of production and with full social equality of all members of society, was one that was most effective and fair. This belief however, would be trampled almost instantly. As described by Polish defector, Józef Światło, in 1953 when he defected to the west, one of Poland’s top party members, Boleslaw Bierut had “No less than ten lavishly and luxuriously furnished palaces … all fitted out with legendary magnificence.” Now in today’s society, capitalism allows for such people to have that many residences. In the 1950s communist bloc, that was direct contradiction of the Revolutions’ beliefs of classless society. When the boys on the island in the Lord of the Flies originally create their work groups, they actually create social structure!

That social structure comes to a head towards the middle of the Lord of the Flies when Jack (now leader of the hunters) begins to argue with Ralph, the chief, about purposes of each group. “You and your fire!” Jack blames Ralph, of not having purpose and pushing his agenda too much. Ralph responds, “All you can talk about is pig, pig pig!” Which Jack counters with, “Because we want meat!” (54) The exchange of hostilities exemplifies how from creating the classless group, the boys have degenerated to insulting each other's worth. The insulting is due to the conflicting ideals and goals of each member and they do not seem to be working together. So even as the boys try to work together for survival, the refusal to put aside differences eventually would split the group for all the wrong reasons and create a new structural order.

Much like the boys, members of the Soviet Union also began to split themselves socially. The Party officials and members of higher status families (diplomats, state factory owners) were more likely to reap the benefits of the proletarians (workers and lower classes). “This [upper] class enjoyed privileges such as roomy apartments, country dachas... access to special stores, schools, medical facilities...Members of the urban working class (proletariat), in whose name the Party purported to rule, generally lived in cramped apartment complexes, spent hours each day standing in line to buy food and other necessities.” Looking back to the original goal of the Russian revolution however, this rigid and unfair structure clearly blasts the original Marxist-Leninist belief and proves how a revolution for all turned into a Country for few. Much like how Jack would splinter into a group to accomplish his goals.

Frustrated with the lack of attention he is being given with his goal of eating meat, Jack finally becomes fed up and announces, “ I’m going off by myself. He [Ralph] can catch his own pigs. Anyone who wants hunt when I do can come too.”(127) This split now signifies the full separation of social order on the island. You have Jack on the one hand who wants to find meat, compared to Ralph who wishes to create fire so the boys can be noticed. Jack who has slowly gained more power over time, now seizes the opportunity to split and reap the benefits, much like Stalin did. Ralph would then represent the proletariat, who would be weak and oppressed. Now not so like under Stalin but the lack of a hunting group and still using a relic of a bygone era (conch=Patriotic fervor) puts Ralph at a huge disadvantage and gives all the power and benefits of the group to Jack.

So after all this, one might wonder what is even the point of creating a group if only a few will be the true winners? The counter to that is that these are extreme cases. In a smaller group, ideas and power tends to be more equally shared, however when working under stressful situations, and or with a very large amount of people it is bound to happen that a certain few will manipulate the group to them. Whether it be Communist Party officials taking advantage of their Political status to gain wealth and luxury, or a boy using his influence over an important group so he can eat meat, there is no true instance that has ever proved people working together, benefitted everyone.










Works Cited


Golding, William. Lord of the Flies. New York: Penguin Group, 2003


Hignett, Kelly, Dr. "Power and Privilege: Elite Lifestyles in Communist Eastern

    Europe." The View East. Wordpress, n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2016.

    <https://thevieweast.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/

    power-and-privilege-in-communist-eastern-europe/>.


Library of Congress. "Social Structure." Country Studies. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Apr.

    2016. <http://countrystudies.us/russia/27.htm>.


Central Intellegence Agency, and Library of Congress. "Soviet Union (former) Social Structure." Photius.com. Ed. Photius Coutsoukis. Photius Coutsoukis,

    2004. Web. 6 Apr. 2016. <http://www.photius.com/countries/

    soviet_union_former/society/

    soviet_union_former_society_social_structure.html>.


Comments (1)

Anthony McDonnell (Student 2018)
Anthony McDonnell
  1. I agree with your main premise here. The idealism of Marxist and Leninist ideologies were just too pure and utopian for the vicissitudes of real life. I also like how you were able to point out the Orwellian tendency for revolutionary utopias to quickly resort back to old class systems.
  2. "Therefore it can be stated that when a group is created, even if it is for the goal of unifying the public equally, the group ends up benefiting a certain few."
  3. I like this statement because of how universal it is. This has happened in many societies across the globe and throughout history. I can also relate it back to other books I have read, specifically "Animal Farm" and "1984" by the aforementioned Orwell, where groups that are supposedly acting in the people's/animal's favor end up seizing all power for themselves.