* "The Jungle" was a novel, not a factual report * Most of what Sinclair wrote was pure fiction, un-connected to reality
"The Jungle" was intended to dramatize working conditions, NOT food safety. In fact, Sinclair's fictional claims about food safety were limited to a mere 12 pages,
The above article says the author of The Jungle wanted to "convert Americans to socialism.". That's one thing I wrote in another thread on this board in the past. I don't remember when. I said it's one thing that disappointed me about the book. Otherwise, it was a pretty interesting story.
I wasn't aware that anyone thought the book was anything other than fiction. A story based on some facts. But still just a story. The end was very disappointing to me when I realized that the book has a hidden agenda, to convert Americans to socialism. You feel almost like you were tricked and it was a waste of time to read the book.
Speaking of books with hidden agenda's, and I may have written it in the other thread, Uncle Tom's Cabin is another example. It's purpose was to promote Christianity, not to promote Uncle Tom. A decent story, but with a really stupid ending.
I am reading it now. Only to chapter 3 so far, but I am finding it very insightful. Hopefully I won't be as disappointed with the ending since I know what the authors true agenda was.
so a 2010 article about needs to pull out a 1906 novel to say there is an agenda ie too much gov involvement. Is that someway to say they are meddling in our affairs and its all a big conspiracy.
as for the thinking its all convert people to socalism is laughable.
Its like taking novels by charles dickens and saying he was tying to turn people commie even though he died in 1870. Its merely people written in their era seeing silly stuff.
regulation in lots of cases has nothing to do with socalism it has to do with people cheat. capalistism will not always correct itself its a system and people cheat. So you need someone to regulate it. if there was a health scare like horsemeat or bse ppl would scream why was this allowed.
plus the guy who wrote the book probably had no notion of e coli and samonella and basic hygiene and i bet no one who worked then did. plus 1906 wasnt an era of fast production in chickens and pork where you can get all these cross contagions from animal to animal from farm to farm.
so why is a 1906 book even dragged up by people talking in 2010 must be smoke and mirrors
if i got sick i dont want doctors doing 1906 stuff or 2010 i want the 2015 stuff.
same goes for my food.
-- Edited by irishdude on Sunday 10th of May 2015 10:10:12 PM
so a 2010 article about needs to pull out a 1906 novel to say there is an agenda ie too much gov involvement. Is that someway to say they are meddling in our affairs and its all a big conspiracy.
as for the thinking its all convert people to socalism is laughable....................
I don't know who "they" are, or anything about a conspiracy regarding The Jungle. There is no "they". It's he the author, Upton Sinclair. One individual. A conspiracy requires two or more persons. One person wrote the book and I feel like that person decided to make it a pro socialism book.
Another person noticed what I noticed and that person wrote an article about it. How is that a conspiracy?
It doesn't matter that it's from 1906, it's about meat, a little. On topic for this board. As for it being "laughable" that it would convert people to socialism, it would be laughable to think it would work, but not laughable that someone would try.
-- Edited by Burgermeister on Monday 11th of May 2015 08:19:51 AM
no i was saying an online group with an agenga of getting government out of business was laughable having a need to drag up some obscure novel from 1906 thats as funny as leftists dragging up ayn rand to say capitalism is a conspricay novels dont believe people with agendas.
that book has zero no relavance how the world works now nor does charles dickens its scaremongering nothing else.
its not about making food safe making meatcutting a trade or making sure people get a wage its all about getting gov out of any industry no matter what it is .
anyway my opinion the biggest threat to meat people is the supermarkets which are all capitalism but thats ok you can have free trade but with free trade you must have free labour if trade goods can cross borders so can labour that is capitalism accept it or be a hypocite socalism only comes into when government stops immigration or cheap imports from area where labour is cheaper.These things mean more to the textile or electronic industties not food and fresh food even less.
but thats not all bad
because its all online now eventually the us will change to do online home delivery when that happens butchershops will fill a gap that wasnt there.
its true in uk you cant buy gas at pump with a cc cos they need ur foot fall in the store so you spend more.
its true online deliveries in uk have changed shopping habits of out of town supermarkets and this has lead to reasurgent of local butcher shops not because meat in supermarket was cheaper it was because people had more time to shop and met more customer service and it was as cheap.
so once the big supermarkets go online proper the same will happen they will do more packed goods for delivery but shoppers habits will change
I am on chapter nine now. Even though the book was written in 1906, I am seeing some similiarities to today's working environment as far as how employees are underappreciated and under paid. In my world, nobody really has a secure job anymore. The only real changes I can relate to are sanitary and safety. I know many of you are enjoying five weeks of vacation per year and I am happy for you, but in my meat cutting career I never got more than one week a year and sometimes that was hard to get. When I did get it I didn't have the money to go anywhere or really do anything with the time off. I have also heard threats along the lines of "If you don't want to do it there are a 1000 people out there who would love to have your job". I also had a string of abusive pit bull type bosses who thought the best way to motivate their employees was to treat them like **** and threaten termination. On my income I could afford no more than a run down one bedroom appartment and that wasn't even a high priced area. No I do not spend money on unneccessary luxuries. A lot in this story applies to today.
-- Edited by fdarn on Monday 11th of May 2015 06:40:36 AM
