Communism in 1984, an effective critique? (Sammy)

I remember Dr. Majerus said that Orwell wrote 1984 in response to BNW because he believed that a dystopian England would be different, but what aspects/movements does he seem to be criticizing/anticipating will get out of hand? His focus on the "Party", "Oligarchical Collectivism", and removal of private property, seem to point to a critique, or a warning, of communism. A lot of the negative aspects of his society are common attacks on communist states: they're oppressive, there are shortages of everything (food, razors, etc.), and innovation stops (in Goldstein's book, he said that the only tech-y people are working on weapons, and those probably won't ever be made). Individuality is strongly discouraged in Oceania, and one fear of communism is that everyone would be the same. The Party also openly attacks capitalism and its ideals in its propaganda (it claims to have freed the proles from the oppression of the oppressive capitalists). Orwell is pretty clearly attempting to attack communism. 

However, Orwell seems to miss the mark on the defining features of communism. Communism is defined as "political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society" (https://www.britannica.com/topic/communism) , most of which seems to be missing from the society in Oceania. The means of production are solely in the control of the government, as is everything else in Oceania, the natural resources of the society (and just about everything else) are owned by the inner party rather than the public, and the society seems to be profit based to some extent as the inner party profits from its control over Oceania and its wars. Basically, Oceania's essence doesn't appear to be communist, even though its problems are associated with Communism.

That being said, in Goldstein's book, he states that the pretenses of freedom and equality were abandoned by the followers of Ingsoc, so the novel could still function as some kind of warning. Orwell could be warning that socialists or communists don't actually want freedom and equality, but are simply manipulating people to gain power in order to install their own regime that keeps them on top. Of course that argument could be made against capitalist societies as well, and Oceania has its resemblances to capitalism too (a hierarchical class structure, disproportionate concentration of wealth in a small group of people, war over resources, high demand for cheap labor, etc.).

It seems pretty clear to me that Orwell was trying to be anti-communist here, but it also doesn't seem like he did it very effectively (at least in my opinion). What do you guys think?

1984 is a Brave New World Prequel

I don't actually think that 1984 is a prequel but there are some interesting commonalities between the two of them. These societies also have many differences. However, it's important to note that BNW takes place something like 500+ years AF (after ford) which is like 2450 ish whereas 1984 takes place in 1984. This means there is something like 450-500 years between the two books, so there is enough time for a drastic change to take place.

However, there isn't that much time. Brave New World's society is based very strongly on Ford. The party is destroying all of the past and so it's likely they destroyed Ford and took credit for his inventions. Julia tells Wilson that the part has taken credit for the creation of the airplane (1903). When Wilson was in school the party took credit only for the creation of the helicopter which was in 1939. So the party is moving backward through time and taking credit for inventions as they go. So it's fair to say that in 2000 all record of Ford would have been destroyed and all people who remembered the old way killed. This being said the window hasn't closed. It's certainly possible that some proles still remember ford.

I think that what happened is a Eurasian invasion. Maybe not of all of Oceania but at least what we call Brittan. Eurasia most likely includes what would have been the USSR. 1984 was written in 1948 so it's safe to assume that history doesn't derail until slightly after that date, which is consistent with what Wilson says about what he remembers with his mom. So it's quite possible Eurasia is still communist. If Eurasia is the basis for the world state it could explain why people are named Lenina. However, the story is still more complicated as it doesn't really make sense for a religion based around the biggest capitalist in the world to arise from a society based on communism. Perhaps this religion develops because of the proles who still remember ford. Maybe the deconditioning of the proles causes the Eurasians to build up some figure like ford as a replacement big brother? Either way, it's very unlikely and definitely not what was intended but still interesting to think about.