The part of style of government in the strongness of the system in 1984

[Taliesin]

Well, I think that one of the reasons why the power of the government was so great and so impossible to destroy was because it was basically an oligarchy.

Aristotle describes 3 types of good governments: monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. He also names the three antipodes, the bad cases of government.
Monarchy could turn into tyranny, aristocracy into oligarchy and democracy into the power of canaille.

Well, I think that the government of 1984 was oligarchy (the power of the few, which were the inner party)

Both tyranny and canaille have got their weaknesses.

The main weakness of canaille is that it is dumb. A canaille cannot create such big a system. The main weapon of canaille is its numbers. The canaille needs an idea and propaganda (like nazis) and to be terrible, it has to be somewhat coordinated. This leads to tyranny or oligarchy.

The weakness of tyrantry (the power of one) is that the power is in the hands of just one human. And a human can change the politics if he intends to and after some time, he will die. He is not immortal like canaille or oligarchy can be. There can be great power struggles at the top. And even if the power is secure, kings breed kings, and one of them shall decide that he won't continue like this.

But what were the weaknesses of the inner party in "1984"? It is renewening. It does not die. Of course, if it stupid enough and everyone are of the same age, there will be point when they all start dying, which causes chaos and power vacuum, but if they take new young members periodically this won't happen.
When a few of them decide to make a different politics will cause the destruction of them (we remember those three) It is like a great circle where everyone watches everyone.

There is a thread here where people considered how the situation of 1984 could end and many considered that it would never end although some suggested that a power struggle could cause the ending. That is true, but also, if the inner party is smart, it would not do such a thing. Also, they have got an non-existant leader (BB) who cannot be replaced by another person.


So, what do you think?

[Rumble]

I think the ultimate undoing of The Party would be economic collapse. Not unlike the Soviet Union, come to think of it.

[crisaor]

Actually, given all the exploitation of the people by the party, economics wouldn't be an issue IMO. There are many ways to overthrow 1984's regime, but that doesn't imply that any of them would be easy (quite the contrary, actually). Anyway, if history has taught me anything, is that all regimes fall down eventually.

[subterranean]

But what were the weaknesses of the inner party in "1984"? It is renewening. It does not die. Of course, if it stupid enough and everyone are of the same age, there will be point when they all start dying, which causes chaos and power vacuum, but if they take new young members periodically this won't happen.
When a few of them decide to make a different politics will cause the destruction of them (we remember those three) It is like a great circle where everyone watches everyone.

There is a thread here where people considered how the situation of 1984 could end and many considered that it would never end although some suggested that a power struggle could cause the ending. That is true, but also, if the inner party is smart, it would not do such a thing. Also, they have got an non-existant leader (BB) who cannot be replaced by another person.


So, what do you think?

Perhaps, if the status quo keeps giving them the benefits they want, the system would last. But political condition is a very dynamic thing, if changes don't come from within, there's always the outside world. So I kind of agree with Crisaor's that all regimes would eventually fall, and if they don't, there must be some "modifications" that they did that make them still stand.