Désolé de poursuivre dans le hors sujet mais Chapoulier se trompe sur Orwell et Trotsky.

Goldstein est bien Trotsky mais c’est surtout un faux chef de la resistance crée par le parti lui même, sa fonction étant d’aider a mieux repérer les rebelles potentiels en leur faisant franchir le pas. C’est un des points centrale du livre, a savoir, que ce type de régime crée lui meme une fausse opposition pour mieux controler la population.Cela n’a donc rien de positif d’etre Emmanuel Goldstein dans 1984, au contraire.

De plus Orwell était loin d’être un trotskyste,par exemple :

Although in some places, for instance in the United States, Trotskyism is able to attract a fairly large number of adherents and develop into an organised movement with a petty fuerher of its own, its inspiration is essentially negative. The Trotskyist is against Stalin just as the Communist is for him, and, like the majority of Communists, he wants not so much to alter the external world as to feel that the battle for prestige is going in his own favour. In each case there is the same obsessive fixation on a single subject, the same inability to form a genuinely rational opinion based on probabilities. The fact that Trotskyists are everywhere a persecuted minority, and that the accusation usually made against them, i. e. of collaborating with the Fascists, is obviously false, creates an impression that Trotskyism is intellectually and morally superior to Communism ; but it is doubtful whether there is much difference. The most typical Trotskyists, in any case, are ex-Communists, and no one arrives at Trotskyism except via one of the left-wing movements. No Communist, unless tethered to his party by years of habit, is secure against a sudden lapse into Trotskyism. The opposite process does not seem to happen equally often, though there is no clear reason why it should not.

http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat