Two days ago, 115 years ago, the British writer Eric Arthur Blair, known worldwide as George Orwell, was born. His two novels critical of totalitarianism, Animal Farm and 1984, were published after World War II. These novels are undoubtedly his most representative works.

Animal Farm was first published in 1945, the work is a fable about the corrupted socialist regime of Yosif Stalin. In the novel, a group of animals expels tyrannical humans from the farm and creates a system that ends up corrupting itself into another tyranny even worse than that of humans. Orwell, a social democrat - something many are unaware of - and a member of the English Labour Party was a harsh critic of Stalin's communist authoritarianism.

Nonetheless, and something that very few people are aware of his works is that Orwell's intention was to use this allegory and 1984 as a denunciation of the Nazi and Soviet totalitarianism, but the book is known and used as propaganda against communism.

The work, more than a reflection of Soviet authoritarianism, is also an analysis of the corruption that can occur after power is acquired by any group. Given its readability, it is a book that has often been used as an educational tool at the beginning of primary education. This book is undoubtedly one of the most real fables about the human condition and its corruption with power.

Animal Farm is an example of what happens when we try to do something for inequality through state force. Inequality is a problem that is widely used by the left and Orwell's story (I am not saying that it was his initial intention) is a warning about the dangers of trying to remedy it through legislation, income redistribution and giving the state more control over our lives.

Without a doubt, one of the books that makes the most sense today is a novel about the results of granting special rights and privileges to some politically connected ruling class or elite.

Orwell shows us the fundamental problem with political authority, its recurring conflict, when one has a position that favors abuses of power, philosophical principles and ideals are very easily abandoned, as well as ethics and morals. One important thing that Orwell points out is that the pigs in the story never apply their discourse on equality and almost immediately begin to take advantage of their 'unequal' position or their position of power on the farm to exploit the rest of the animals and they have luxuries to their own advantage.

The connection between political power and economic power is a great thing about the novel. When inequality is to be eliminated with more control, as a matter of legal fact, economic inequality inevitably follows. Libertarians who support economic freedom often feel uncomfortable with the left's discourse of economic inequality, mostly because of the way they seek to eliminate it.

In principle, libertarianism cannot have any problem with inequality itself since everyone is different, there will always be inequality of outcomes because if we favor individual rights, free competition, and private property, we must accept the results that are obtained. But we must be careful with this; many times we do not point out the real inequality created artificially by politicians, by the measures they themselves impose initially for their supposed struggle against it. We see again and again that the more intervention on their part, the less social mobility there may be, and we are totally opposed to that inequality.

It seems to me that a well-done libertarian critique of society must include a critique of inequality as a symptom of the lack of economic freedom and the persistent interventions of political power to favor and enrich themselves and their little friends.