“Four legs good, two legs bad.”
- June 25, 1903 – January 21, 1950
- Born in India during the British colonial period
- Author, journalist
- Through his representative works “1984” and “Animal Farm,” he presented sharp criticism of totalitarianism and the abuse of power, greatly influencing contemporary literature and thought.
Quote
“Four legs good, two legs bad.”
Explanation
This phrase comes from George Orwell’s Animal Farm and is part of the simplified slogan created by the animals in their revolution against the human farmer. The slogan is meant to encapsulate the animals’ belief that they, as four-legged creatures, are inherently superior to the humans, who walk on two legs. It’s a simple, binary statement that reflects the us-versus-them mentality that often characterizes revolutionary movements. In the context of the book, this slogan is used as a form of propaganda to unify the animals and encourage them to view all humans as enemies, reinforcing their commitment to the revolution.
However, Orwell uses this phrase to critique the danger of simplistic ideologies. Over time, the leaders of the farm, particularly the pigs, begin to adopt human traits—walking on two legs, living in human-like conditions—undermining the original values of the revolution. The phrase “four legs good, two legs bad” becomes a tool of manipulation, as it is used to divide the world into binary categories without room for complexity or nuance. Orwell is critiquing how revolutionary ideologies can be distorted, especially when those in power exploit simple slogans to justify their own rise to power, even if it means betraying the very principles they once fought for.
This idea is relevant today, particularly in political movements that employ simplified rhetoric or black-and-white thinking to manipulate people or create division. Orwell’s quote is a reminder of the perils of oversimplified ideologies, which may feel unifying or empowering in the short term but often lead to authoritarianism or corruption when leaders begin to exploit such ideologies for personal gain. It warns against accepting simple slogans at face value without critically examining their deeper implications and the real-world consequences of following them blindly.
