1984 and 2007

[eluminated]

My question/remark isn't necassarily about the book as a literary work but more about the countless, and evergrowing, obvious similarities between the "future" Orwell wrote about and our present day lives. I'll list a few basic parallels and hope for responses either to dispute my observations or to add some I have missed.
1. Much like the Telescreens, we have more and more CCTV cameras in public places to monitor our activities. In England the cameras have speakers on them so that the "authorities" can talk to (or yell at ) the people on the street to tell them to do things (i.e. "You there in the green shirt, Stop running!" -and soon-"You with the cigarette, you are smoking in an unauthorized zone! Please stand by as an officer will meet you shortly with your fine. Thank-you"
2. "We have always been at war with..." - *edit*
3. Thought Crimes are much like our hate speech and hate crime laws. *edit*
4. Our modern technology makes it possible for any would be "Big Brothers" to go well beyond what Orwell imagined. Implantable microchips that track your every move, paperless monetary systems where one's account can be erased and the individual made destitute in an instant, digital voting machines that can be extesively tampered with no oversite so as to only give the illusion of democracies to keep the masses docile, countless mood altering drugs overprescribed becoming the norm for both adults as well as children, etc. etc.

I'm very curious to see what any/all of you think about this subject

[Adudaewen]

I have always considered 1984 to be a brilliant book, mostly because it COULD happen! you're absolutly right! Scary, huh?

[manolia]

[QUOTE=eluminated;337433]
In England the cameras have speakers on them so that the "authorities" can talk to (or yell at ) the people on the street to tell them to do things (i.e. "You there in the green shirt, Stop running!" -and soon-"You with the cigarette, you are smoking in an unauthorized zone! Please stand by as an officer will meet you shortly with your fine. Thank-you"


Well i have never been in England (but i plan to visit this beautiful country soon) but what you relate is actually really scary!! I wonder how the majority of the people cope with that. Do they thing that this is for their safety?

[eluminated]

Yes manolia, unfortunately many of the people believe the idea that this is an essential tool for safety "in today's world". I even saw an interview where a local woman was asked whether she thought all these things were good and she replied " yes. I think it is a good idea to give up some freedoms in order to protect liberty" - absolute doublethink! the two words mean the exact same thing and she, like many others, are wilfully sacraficing their freedoms in order to protect themselves from a phantom enemy who they are told hates them and wants to destroy the very same freedoms that they are giving away! It's the same as burning down your own home so that it won't be robbed while your away on vacation!

[King of Frogs]

I live in Scotland and I haven't seen any signs of these microphones in CCTV cameras (though I have heared about them before), but I don't really think that most people are so passive as to allow it to happen, but when people start saying things like "it is a good idea to give up some freedoms in order to protect liberty" you've got to wonder.
Also, you've got to remember that these Holocaust Denial Laws have been in place in Austria and Germany since the end of the Second World War, they're nothing new and are there to make sure the fools don't become the majority. *edit*

What people need to do is keep books like 1984 (and The Handmaid's Tale) in mind and not take the Government's word for it.

[CatherineH/L/E]

I agree with all that everyone is saying but i think that we need to keep in might that we do need to give up some of our persnol freedoms for our own saftey. I think everyone needs to rember that having a government at all is giving up some of our persnol freedom. We don't all fend for ourselves when our enemies threaten us, we have an organized army. By having a president or prime minister of any kind we surrender some degree our autonomy for protection.

One thing that has been overlooked that is truly preventing government today from splipping into the ways of Oceania is that there are multi-party politics. In 1984 the Party dominated all politics and all atempts to think otherwise were immiatly quashed by the government. Clearly three branches of government cannot prevent it from what is demonstrated in 1984 but letting people vioce there opinions is the key to success for a true democracy.

[Big D]

:( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :(
I believe that big brother has more than a million message in it for us to disither as time goes on. (not deliberately placed messages) one of these messages being do not take your civil liberties for grantid and that we should fight back aginst any allthalitarean stae that oposis the poorer or less better off eg the poles. :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare:

[The Atheist]

:( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :(
I believe that big brother has more than a million message in it for us to disither as time goes on. (not deliberately placed messages) one of these messages being do not take your civil liberties for grantid and that we should fight back aginst any allthalitarean stae that oposis the poorer or less better off eg the poles. :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare: :flare:


Well said, mate!

I know this is a non-political place, but Poland has had a raw deal for a very long time. Fortunately, I think the internet will ensure that people everywhere know how to retain their liberties so that there are never any more Room 101s in the world.

Give us time.

[Dante Wodehouse]

I think you have a point, eluminated. *edit*You might also want to take note that those screens (unless I misunderstood you) are only on property that wants them to be there, much different from a channel forcibly inflicted on people in their own rooms.
Also, a state that opposes the poorer is only evil if it opposes the poorer because of their poverty.

[King of Frogs]

Also, a state that opposes the poorer is only evil if it opposes the poorer because of their poverty.

I'm not entirely sure of what you mean by this, but I would have thought that any state which opposes the poorer people is at least not very nice - if not evil.

[dorina]

:thumbs_up ,you are sharring the same ideeas as i do, for more informations i suggest you to read the Bible,especially Danile and Revelations.
it is all hapenning!!!:flare:

[Dante Wodehouse]

I'm not entirely sure of what you mean by this, but I would have thought that any state which opposes the poorer people is at least not very nice - if not evil.

I meant that any state that opposes the poor due to their poverty is evil and not nice. A state that opposes a poorer state because that poorer state has the nasty tendency of raising coups in border territories owned by the richer state has a legitimate complaint and right to oppose the poorer state.

[Lioness_Heart]

I think that it's really scary how everything in 1984 is coming true. And other books, like Animal Farm, too. I just hope that it doesn't all end like it does in those books.

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

is there really a class anymore?

[Lioness_Heart]

do you mean as in social clasees? or classes in school?

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

social class.both novels refer to class as the main theme of distinguishing between people/animals. that a group of people/animals an be in control of another group of people/animals and benefit from them them and the working class always seem to rally and start a resistance but it never comes.

[Lioness_Heart]

I see what you mean. I think that there are still social classes, at least here (England). People keep saying that there's no class system anymore, and whilst the working and middle classes are becoming blurred, the upper class is still there, and getting more powerful, while the rest of us have very little say in anything.

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

in todays day and age we never seem to get that problem, marxists will tell you that its because the owning classes disguise it, feminists blame men but at the end of the day everyone is so content now at being able to afford the same things as the upper classes (ie. computers, access to knowledge, holidays- things that only rich people could afford) that there isnt really a class problem ergo no need for a totalitarian state

[Lioness_Heart]

But there is still a class system in people's minds. At least, as far as I have seen.

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

could i have an example?please?

[Lioness_Heart]

There are lots of people who claim to 'feel working class'. Don't get me started on that actually... But then there are lots of wealthy people (not upper class, but somewhere towards the upper of the middle) - I'm talking people I know here... - who look down so much on those they believe inferior to them...

Like, my friend's parents are really rich, and they don't mind me, but they totally look down on my parents becasue they're not rich...

Not the greatest example. but what I basically mean is, it's hard to claim that there is no class system when people themselves identify with certain classes.

And also when what happened in Animal Farm is happening now.

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

i agree that class identity is still present in some people. there are still certain people that look down on my parents for the same reason.and i do suppose that all you need is a group of people with the same class identity to get together to form a class. I just cant see another country going communist, havent we learnt enough.then again there was two world wars.
i guess what im trying to say is i obviously have no idea but im trying hard to have faith in this country.please forgive my ramblings.

[Lioness_Heart]

lol. Nothing to forgive... Perhaps I am to cynical. But the country is starting to scare me. I doub't we'll go communist, but it seems to be getting increasingly capitalist

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

but the masses dearest, surely will prevail. we used to control the world and now we cant even control this little island. theres not enough guts in government to ever take total control. I like capitalism. let them have the control as long as i get my beer tokens and can speak freely at the end of the week im all for that. its that kind of attitude that let the nazis in. i dont think your cynical either, its nice to have an opinion while you still can.as you can probably tell i dont have mine yet!

[Lioness_Heart]

But what if 'the masses' have faith in a corrupted system? Not that I think that it's totally corrupted... I don't know really. I'm just quite scared: I want to feel proud of my country for being a good place where people can feel safe, and where people can THINK. Don't quite know where that came from... but I feel that there is a little too much blind faith in a system that does not deserve that faith. I know it's silly, but I just want everyone to be nice, so that we can have trust without it being betrayed, and so that good intentions will not be corrupted.

Not quite sure of my point. But anyway...

[johnA.B.C.Smith]

i don't think its silly to want everyone to be nice. if anything its sensible (the exact opposite to silly) and if everyone wanted that, nay worked at that, it would happen. but as i can tell you know, being nice can sometimes not garner the intended result and then how stupid and let down do we feel. trust and love i feel are one in the same thing as an emotion and i feel this world needs a little more of it, from bush to blair to us little people or we will end up not being able to tell the people from the pigs and living in a paranoid controlled world where the powerful isolate themselves and scrutinize our every movements for fear of revolt.kudos?

[Lioness_Heart]

Are we getting there already?

Anyway, I must depart. :wave: It's been interesting talking to you.

I feel so unsure about our world :( . It confuses me. Although much does.

[RULAI]

Oh hii. I feel u made a really good point down there. Yes our society looks pretty much alike 1984. But still, I say that 1984 is a rather bleak look into the future. U see, we are all so "I am always right" kinda attitude out there, so its gonna be tough trying to force all of us to change our mindset even through torture. At least.. for me I m pretty firm in my beliefs...

[The Atheist]

but the masses dearest, surely will prevail. we used to control the world and now we cant even control this little island. theres not enough guts in government to ever take total control. I like capitalism. let them have the control as long as i get my beer tokens and can speak freely at the end of the week im all for that. its that kind of attitude that let the nazis in. i dont think your cynical either, its nice to have an opinion while you still can.as you can probably tell i dont have mine yet!

Just like to add my take on it, from the other side of the world.

Imagine a system where the ruling "class" made up all of the major parties. Capitalism has created a new type of elite, where the money has risen to the top in many ways. Consider media. The enormous majority of electronic, print and voice media is carried by a tiny bunch of companies and is therefore open to abuse. If mainstream coverage of international events doesn't convince you that we are seeing somewhat slanted details already, then you must be either very young or naive.

I have watched the differences in political bias swing from an almost-Communist Labour in England, to the current situation where the ruling Labour party is as right-wing as any Tory government has been or could be. It's Labour who have instigated the biggest and most sophisticated electronic spy network in history - all to monitor its own citizens. This kind of behaviour would have seen storms of protest across Britain which would have dwarfed any seen to date had this been tried even as recently as the 1990s.

Using OECD countries, representing pretty much all of the major democracies in the world, it's very hard to distinguish serious differences in policy between any of the ruling parties or major opposition. The Green factor aside - and they have been shown able to sway to political influence with the best of them - policies, as they relate to the vast majority of citizens are largely the same.

Capitalism itself is becoming a de facto totalitarian system. That may be fine and work well, but who's to say that the best interests of humanity aren't served better by complete anarchy, or matriarchal rule?

When 5% of humans control 95% of wealth in the world - and I don't think the truth is too far from those numbers - have we created a fair system, or The Party?

Compare with 1984. The Party in place. Network for national, constant surveillance of its citizens being implemented. Anti-demonstration policies instituted. Prisoners held without rights.

There's no chance of an Orwellian/Stalinesque totalitarian sweeping into power for a thousand years; but is what we're creating all that different underneath?

[wudidiz]

Hi, I just registered here. Could someone please remind me what the handbook or manual in 1984 that Winston had was referred to? I'm sorry, I haven't read the book for 20 years. It was and still is one of my favorite novels.

[nethrelm]

I'm going to have to agree with dorina on this one. I'm seeing far too many correlations between 1984 and Revelation in the Bible. I never had a lot of belief in religion (and I still don't) but there are things happening that fit just a little too well. I'm not saying the Bible is the undisputed Word of God as some will claim. I am saying that there is a lot of value in the book. If you have a distinguishing mind, you can pick out which parts have been corrupted by the churches over the centuries and which parts were divinely inspired. Revelation seems to be very prophetic. In the chapters leading up to Revelation 13, I swore I was reading a cryptic account of World War II. If that's correct, then Revelation 13 could easily be happening right now. See if you can follow me on this...

Technology. Technology allows the Big Brother scenario to really happen. *edit*
Maybe it's all a coincidence, or maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I can't help but feel very uneasy about everything that is happening. Whatever the case may be, it certainly makes for one helluva story!

:lol: :bawling: :lol: :bawling: :lol: :sick:

Peace.

[Dante Wodehouse]

Just like to add my take on it, from the other side of the world.

Imagine a system where the ruling "class" made up all of the major parties. Capitalism has created a new type of elite, where the money has risen to the top in many ways. Consider media. The enormous majority of electronic, print and voice media is carried by a tiny bunch of companies and is therefore open to abuse. If mainstream coverage of international events doesn't convince you that we are seeing somewhat slanted details already, then you must be either very young or naive.

I have watched the differences in political bias swing from an almost-Communist Labour in England, to the current situation where the ruling Labour party is as right-wing as any Tory government has been or could be. It's Labour who have instigated the biggest and most sophisticated electronic spy network in history - all to monitor its own citizens. This kind of behaviour would have seen storms of protest across Britain which would have dwarfed any seen to date had this been tried even as recently as the 1990s.

Using OECD countries, representing pretty much all of the major democracies in the world, it's very hard to distinguish serious differences in policy between any of the ruling parties or major opposition. The Green factor aside - and they have been shown able to sway to political influence with the best of them - policies, as they relate to the vast majority of citizens are largely the same.

Capitalism itself is becoming a de facto totalitarian system. That may be fine and work well, but who's to say that the best interests of humanity aren't served better by complete anarchy, or matriarchal rule?

When 5% of humans control 95% of wealth in the world - and I don't think the truth is too far from those numbers - have we created a fair system, or The Party?

Compare with 1984. The Party in place. Network for national, constant surveillance of its citizens being implemented. Anti-demonstration policies instituted. Prisoners held without rights.

There's no chance of an Orwellian/Stalinesque totalitarian sweeping into power for a thousand years; but is what we're creating all that different underneath?

I am speaking from America, and I don't know about a lot of the corruption of the rich classes of the rest of the world, but the American rich have done the most for the people of America, and, far from becoming "The Party", have reasonably good intentions. They primarily look out for themselves, but they assist the people who enabled them to become weathy without any greater compensation than having their names implanted on the institutions they establish. The problem is that the great masses of people (in the democratic republic) are influenced by a minority of the minority of the rich that is the media. The media have influenced people in a highly negative way and, for the most part, have a political agenda and don't allow diversion from that agenda by their employees. As they hold more sway than the run-of-the-mill rich, they are in a position (and seem to be using that position) to form a "Party". However, they are not exceptionally successful, so I can't see that capitalism is becoming a totalitarian state, and, conversely, the leaders of our country have very little power.

[The Atheist]

Hi, I just registered here. Could someone please remind me what the handbook or manual in 1984 that Winston had was referred to? I'm sorry, I haven't read the book for 20 years. It was and still is one of my favorite novels.

"Goldstein's Book"

Actual entitled:

The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism

[The Atheist]

I'm going to have to agree with dorina on this one. I'm seeing far too many correlations between 1984 and Revelation in the Bible. I never had a lot of belief in religion (and I still don't) but there are things happening that fit just a little too well. I'm not saying the Bible is the undisputed Word of God as some will claim. I am saying that there is a lot of value in the book. If you have a distinguishing mind, you can pick out which parts have been corrupted by the churches over the centuries and which parts were divinely inspired. Revelation seems to be very prophetic. In the chapters leading up to Revelation 13, I swore I was reading a cryptic account of World War II. If that's correct, then Revelation 13 could easily be happening right now. See if you can follow me on this...

Your problem seems to be, like many, that Revelation is so obscure that it can mean anything you want it to. Nostradamus' quatrains are much the same.

If you look for coincidences, you will find them, but they could equally apply to any other time in our history.

Trust me, Revelation is rubbish. Most serious biblical scholars (christians to a man) don't want it in the bible at all, but the churches demand it stays.

[The Atheist]

I am speaking from America, and I don't know about a lot of the corruption of the rich classes of the rest of the world, but the American rich have done the most for the people of America, and, far from becoming "The Party", have reasonably good intentions. They primarily look out for themselves, but they assist the people who enabled them to become weathy without any greater compensation than having their names implanted on the institutions they establish. The problem is that the great masses of people (in the democratic republic) are influenced by a minority of the minority of the rich that is the media. The media have influenced people in a highly negative way and, for the most part, have a political agenda and don't allow diversion from that agenda by their employees. As they hold more sway than the run-of-the-mill rich, they are in a position (and seem to be using that position) to form a "Party". However, they are not exceptionally successful, so I can't see that capitalism is becoming a totalitarian state, and, conversely, the leaders of our country have very little power.

*edit*

I understand what you're saying and I have no doubt that the majority of people feel the same way, plus I don't think this is something which is being plotted or arranged right now - I'm suggesting that the way current Western power politics are played, the opportunity is open for a totalitarian system to arise within it.

*edit*

(Sorry if we're getting into too much politics here, admin)

Laws are being enacted in every democracy which limit freedoms. Any erosion of civil liberty gives the opportunity for more to take place. The thin end of the wedge, it's called, as we lose freedoms, it becomes easier to justify removing others. Please note, I am not a doomsayer, just positing a possibility based upon losses of those freedoms.

[nethrelm]

Your problem seems to be, like many, that Revelation is so obscure that it can mean anything you want it to. Nostradamus' quatrains are much the same.

And your problem seems to be, like many, that you view another person's opinion as a problem. We're all speculating here; it's called a "thought experiment". Some people believe in Nostradamus' quatrains, some don't. Some people believe in Revelation, some don't. Neither side has a problem. It's a matter of personal opinion.

[The Atheist]

And your problem seems to be, like many, that you view another person's opinion as a problem. We're all speculating here; it's called a "thought experiment". Some people believe in Nostradamus' quatrains, some don't. Some people believe in Revelation, some don't. Neither side has a problem. It's a matter of personal opinion.


Whether people believe them or not isn't the issue - the problem is that both are incomprehensible and accordingly can be fitted to any agenda. Revelation has been predicting the downfall of human society since the second or third century but we're still waiting. I could make Revelation fit many different apocalyptic novels.

[billyjack]

And your problem seems to be, like many, that you view another person's opinion as a problem. We're all speculating here; it's called a "thought experiment". Some people believe in Nostradamus' quatrains, some don't. Some people believe in Revelation, some don't. Neither side has a problem. It's a matter of personal opinion.

that "everyone's opinion is a-ok" makes every opinion equally valid and equally weak.

nostradamus was an archaic john edwards. didn't south park take our nose plugs off and let the stink of psychics hit the air?

i've seen sam harris take a cookbook recipe and turn it into a means to enlightenment. his only special power was a masters in philosophy.

revelation is typical in terms of "end of days" fables. you see the same patterns in native american lore as well. the "end of days" is simply a re-telling of the fall of a civilization applied to future peoples in order to avoid the same mistakes their forefathers made. in revelations, the civilization was rome, and the story of romes fall was applied to some time in the distant future with the figure of christ thrown in there as primary cause. christ's appearance was followed by the fall of rome and his reappearance will be followed by the end of the world. its not divine, it a folklore. folklore is used to teach and learn. nothing wrong with that. divine predictions are used to control and brainwash. that is a problem

[bazarov]

Capitalism itself is becoming a de facto totalitarian system. That may be fine and work well, but who's to say that the best interests of humanity aren't served better by complete anarchy, or matriarchal rule?

When 5% of humans control 95% of wealth in the world - and I don't think the truth is too far from those numbers - have we created a fair system, or The Party?



Actually, socialism would be the best system if only people would be fair enough to themselves and others but they aren't...
Capitalism at least gives you a chance to come from zero to those 5%, and totalitarian system doesn't; you know you'll always be a zero!
Those 5% knows that they will have better if you will also have better, so they are, let's say fair to those 95%.

[The Atheist]

Actually, socialism would be the best system if only people would be fair enough to themselves and others but they aren't...

Yep, that's always the saddest part of it.

Whichever way it's viewed, socialism is the perfect answer for humankind - apart from when human nature comes in: people won't put others equal with themselves.

Orwell knew it.

[Dante Wodehouse]

Actually, socialism would be the best system if only people would be fair enough to themselves and others but they aren't
I disagree. However noble the ideals may be, human nature will ruin in from lack of incentive, and the removal of human nature will turn the human into a drone. Great acheivements have never been made by drones unless a non-drone directed them, and this would be more of a totalitarian system anyway (I refer to the making of the Pyramids by slaves under the direction of pharoahs). Socialism is pretty enough, but I would prefer to have freedom. There is no self-expression in it, as well, and I would think that anyone on a literature website would dislike the idea of limiting of expression as much as I do.

[The Atheist]

I disagree. However noble the ideals may be, human nature will ruin in from lack of incentive, and the removal of human nature will turn the human into a drone. Great acheivements have never been made by drones unless a non-drone directed them, and this would be more of a totalitarian system anyway (I refer to the making of the Pyramids by slaves under the direction of pharoahs). Socialism is pretty enough, but I would prefer to have freedom. There is no self-expression in it, as well, and I would think that anyone on a literature website would dislike the idea of limiting of expression as much as I do.

Sorry, but it sounds as though you don't actually know what socialism is.

[bazarov]

I disagree. However noble the ideals may be, human nature will ruin in from lack of incentive, and the removal of human nature will turn the human into a drone. Great acheivements have never been made by drones unless a non-drone directed them, and this would be more of a totalitarian system anyway (I refer to the making of the Pyramids by slaves under the direction of pharoahs). Socialism is pretty enough, but I would prefer to have freedom. There is no self-expression in it, as well, and I would think that anyone on a literature website would dislike the idea of limiting of expression as much as I do.

I said it would be the best, I am aware it's impossible.
Socialism is social regime; not a political, so lack of freedom actually (in theory) doesn't have a direct connection with socialism.

[bazarov]

Orwell knew it.

All proles are the same...

[aarrgg]

Wow, this is possibly the first time I’ve encountered other people with the same opinion as me. Maybe I stay on this forum for a while.

As for the original question, to me it seems as if there’s two “forces” in a society or civilization (I’m not sure what the correct word would be), one that pushes towards control and the other which pushes for anarchy. This is a natural effect of a society as the one governing wants more power and the people want more freedom. Throughout history this has always been the case. When the one governing has too much power, a revolution will occur (e.g. The French revolution) or just collapse (e.g. ancient Rome).

The problem previous authorities had, was that it was virtually impossible to control and monitor everybody but today’s development of technology has suddenly made it possible for just a few people to monitor everybody everywhere. At about the same time this became possible, the one governing got a perfect reason to increase surveillance, namely the “War on Terrorism”. After 9/11 the world became a much more dangerous place and the authorities did their job great in convincing most people they needed more surveillance. If anyone questions the surveillance the just say we need to offer our integrity for security. What I find most disturbing is the fact I’ve never said I rather want security instead of freedom.

I think I should point out though that I do not believe the problem is control, which is always needed for a society to exist. The problem is when the one governing has enough control to know if someone disagrees and the power to disappear him. If anyone is interested, I could try to translate an article I’ve written about this subject in which I "unfortunately" concluded that it seems Orwell was right after all.

[billyjack]

. The problem is when the one governing has enough control to know if someone disagrees and the power to disappear him. If anyone is interested, I could try to translate an article I’ve written about this subject in which I "unfortunately" concluded that it seems Orwell was right after all.

true power is allowing people to disagree with you, and not losing your power.

[King of Frogs]

I disagree. However noble the ideals may be, human nature will ruin in from lack of incentive, and the removal of human nature will turn the human into a drone. Great acheivements have never been made by drones unless a non-drone directed them, and this would be more of a totalitarian system anyway (I refer to the making of the Pyramids by slaves under the direction of pharoahs). Socialism is pretty enough, but I would prefer to have freedom. There is no self-expression in it, as well, and I would think that anyone on a literature website would dislike the idea of limiting of expression as much as I do.


I'm afraid that I'm going to have to agree with the atheist here (not that that's a bad thing). Socialism is at grass roots level a series of economic policies directed towards the redistribution of wealth - whether those policies are implemented authoritarianly or not is a different matter all together. Most socialists belive that true freedom comes form releasing people from the restrictions of the class system produced by capitalism. What Orwell does very cleverly is paints a picture of a supposedly socialist system that has swept away a class system, only to replace it with an infinately more rigid one.

If you want to know more about the difference between economics and authoritarianism I would recomend visiting www.politicalcompass.org, I found it very useful.

[King of Frogs]

true power is allowing people to disagree with you, and not losing your power.


I think Orwell would disagree with you Billyjack. The point of 1984 was to show a world where the government had complete control not only over people's lives, but their minds as well making it impossible to disagree with it - thus creating an indestructable system. Allowing people to disagree with you and still retaining power is not true power, it is the mark of an adept political mind that manipulates opinion.

[ShakeYourSpear]

I believe that it it only a matter of time before 1984 becomes a reality. Only when it becomes a reality, it will be far more advanced than what Orwell described.
Also, it will make sense to nearly everyone, we will believe that it is better for us.
To simply sit and think about the very real possibility and the great probability that we are drawing nearer and nearer to a power-driven society is simply amazing. The complexities of what may happen are overwhelming and interesting beyond belief.

[corticalaxon]

Firstly that thought crimes are reflective of the patriot act, not hate crimes. hate crimes are hate crimes.

It is no question that orwellian world is imminent if not already permeating; I am reading Tim O'Brien's If I Die In a Combat Zone, from which I drew so many comparisons to the disintegration of thought, use of propaganda, preemptive war, etc., and many of those aspects can be applicable to America today because of the similarity in the nature by which Vietnam and Iraq have been carried out. It is really quite scary what can happen and how easily it can become a reality.