-
Atheist
By necessity, when speaking of society in the aggregate it will inevitably be generalized. Generalities have this ability to annoy and irritate us, especially if a generality is used to buttress an opinion contrary to our own. Every generality will have exceptions that the annoyed hearer will very quickly produce. But to focus on exceptions in order to invalidate a generality does not help our understanding. What it does, is imprison one in the details never to see the big picture, never to see the full panoramic landscape of human affairs. That picture is painted in the watercolors of generalities, not in the fine black ink of details.
The notion that ours is not a culture of youth can only be seen should one focus on the exception, in this case the created public imagery of presidential candidates (2 out of a land of 300,000,000), and the confusion of experience with age. I’m incredibly inexperienced at studying literature, yet I have not a few years behind me. Am I to be disrespected for my age or my lack of experience?
Abortion has always been as it was in BNW; a safety net in case of failure of the “Malthusian Drill.” A safety net creates the consequence-less-ness that empowers both the high-wire performer and the recreational fornicator.
>>> lots of kids take ritalin, the percentage is tiny.<<<
“This year some six million children in the U.S.--one in eight-- will take Ritalin. With 5 percent of the world's population, the U.S. consumes 85 percent of this drug. Have we considered the consequences?” http://www.worldandi.com/public/2000/November/sax.html
Daycare, the state, public education, society in general are nurturing our children while mother’s work. Because after-all: “In these economic times a family NEEDS two incomes.” And we also NEED two SUV’s and a 4000 sq ft home and a room full of electronics and a myriad of other perceived NEEDS which science and technology are continually adding to. The State has the children while the parents pursue hedonism.
That you advocate the removal of sexual taboos and increased sexual indoctrination of the young and that you in someway represent a portion of people in the West; highlights our approach towards BNW.
The etymology of “hospice movement” was first attested to in 1979. A linguistic indicator of movement towards euthanasia and the normalizing of death which we have now institutionalized in specialized branches of the medical industry. BTW I’m not judging euthanasia or any of the other issues, just observing the trends.
This exchange has been rewarding. I now believe that my original premise was daft. BNW is not, nor ever was a dystopia. It is a view of an unrestrained Leftist utopia. 1984 is not a dystopia nor a Rightist utopia. 1984 is a parody of Orwell’s day, created of extant elements of that day. It is a parody of the Soviet totalitarianism and the complicit nature of the seemingly endless cold war. It was political commentary. And neither view was a view from the Right.
I’m going to go bark up another tree now. Thanks.
-
Sorry, but this whole discussion is utterly ridiculous. Really, there can't be a discussion about whether BNW is dystopian or utopian. Just read the genre description for an utiopian text. (Did you read Thomas More's Utopia?)
A dystopian novel/text/whatever is characterised by the supression of individualism, by pure state control, the fight of one individual against the system...all those matters are clearly prominent in BNW.
If you really are interested in Huxley's political attitude, then you can always read his essays (which are all available on the internet)...