Lessons from George Orwell’s ‘1984’
By Ethan Indigo Smith
“Political language is designed to make lies
sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to
pure wind.” — George Orwell
Some fictional literature is so profound as to be relevant
for decades. George Orwell’s timeless 1984 is one such literary work. One of
the most influential books of our time, its message resonates today as much as
it did when it was first published over 65 years ago — as shown by its recent
surge to the #1 spot on Amazon’s bestseller list.
So what can 1984 teach us about the modern day?
At its core, 1984 is a post-WWII interpretation of the
relationship between individuals and institutions. It changed the course of
social history by spawning new language relating to the structure and
mechanisms of our society, expanding the scope of human language and thought,
and therefore, humanity’s understanding of itself. And that legacy seems
perfectly fitting, for in the story of 1984, the world is controlled by so many
restrictions that even the expressiveness of the official language, “Newspeak”,
is deliberately narrowed by the ruling institutions in a way that limits the
ability of individuals to express “thoughtcrime” — that which is deemed illegal
by the “Inner Party”, the State. As a work of fiction, 1984 provides a stark
view of a burgeoning culture of totalitarianism. As a work of symbolism,
however, it stands as a reflection of modern fact in The U.S.A. and the world
today. Within its narrative, the five freedoms of the First Amendment of the
United States Constitution were infringed and removed; in particular, the
freedom of speech was so restricted that there was only one source of news
operated by the official governing body and an entire branch of government was
dedicated to steadily eliminating language deemed detrimental to the State.
Orwell created new phrases like “Newspeak” (the official,
limited language) and its antonym “Oldspeak”, “Goodthink” (thoughts that are
approved by the Party) and its antonym “Crimethink”, and “Doublethink” (the
normalized act of simultaneously accepting two contradictory beliefs). The new
language allowed his narrative to portray and expose age-old structures of
thought and language manipulation – structures that have exponentially
escalated in the modern day. In 1984 all opposition is controlled and absorbed
into the background. ‘Big Brother’ is the human image that represents The Inner
Party (and the Party line) via the Telescreen providing an ‘official’ narrative
while appropriating and misrepresenting the notion of brotherhood and unity
into a ‘brand name’ — one that actually instills a psychology of collectivism,
not brotherhood, just as the controllers in our own world instill nationalism
and war-mindedness in the name of “freedom” and “liberty”. Indeed, the
Telescreen is the primary means through which norms were forced on the society
and false imagery and narratives embedded in its collective consciousness.
Totally transfixed on the Party line, as told by the Telescreen, the fictional
society of 1984 has lost the ability to think such that it will believe two
plus two is five, as the saying goes, as long as it is presented as such on the
Telescreen. They have been captive to this set up their entire lives, and, with
language and thought restricted and outlawed, they are blind to their own
captivity, unable to discern for themselves. Thus, lies are made to be “truths”
using logic so distorted that it not only convinces the masses that two plus
two equal five, but that war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is
strength.
In reality, individual ignorance is strength to
institutions. Such distortions of language and thought (and, incidentally,
history) are the perfect means by which to disempower and co-opt an entire
society — means that are not limited to the works of fiction. Orwell knew that
ideas do not exist separately from language. Language, in both spoken and
written forms, is essential to our ability to form and communicate thoughts and
ideas. That is why today the United States government, the shadow powerbrokers
that control it, and the mainstream media that support it (the entirety of
which is owned by only 6 corporations) continue their war on “fake news” — i.e.
ideas that are skeptical of government pronouncements, and information that
proves them to be false — taking aim not just at independent journalism but
independent thought itself. While government surveillance of its own people
continues to increase, government secrecy is at an all-time high, the sharing
of ideas that challenge the status quo is becoming more heavily censored,
releasing information on institutional and State activity is now punishable by
law, and whistleblowers from inside the State are systematically destroyed. If
that wasn’t Orwellian enough, Donald Trump’s advisors have begun coining
phrases like “alternative facts”, and we have even seen the creation of an
Orwellian “Ministry of Truth”, an “international fact-checking network” charged
with deciding what is “truth” and what is “fake news”. If the events of 1984
continue to hold true, and the ruling Party of today gets its way, words and
ideas will soon become not only censored, but illegal and eliminated
altogether, controlled by increasingly totalitarian governments steering our
society down a dystopian path of censorship, blind belief, and misinformation —
all in the name of the State. However, as our minds are freed, one at a time,
we are ultimately finding that our society is heavily embedded with such norms
and structures that perpetuate false imagery, preserving the status quo of the
State from the ‘threat’ of individual thinking — hence the modern war on “fake
news”. We are beginning, as a society, to question such falsehood, and exercise
our inherent freedom to expose it.
“Freedom is the freedom to say that two
plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows”. ~ George Orwell
The Last Man in Europe
The original working title to 1984 was ‘The Last Man in
Europe.’ This descriptive and evocative title idea provides a clear glimpse
into George Orwell’s intent, and encapsulates a main point of 1984, a title
perhaps too revealing to be anything but a working title. Certainly, that is
the way many of us feel when we first become aware of lies and partial-truths
that are presented as reality by those in control of our society today, and
accepted in totality by seemingly everyone else – it is as if we are the last
lone person. Indeed, the road of the freethinker can be a lonely one, and the
story’s protagonist, patriot Winston Smith, is made to believe he is the last
person who questions, who looks, listens and speaks. In a totalitarian society
— be it Orwell’s fictional world or the increasingly authoritarian political
regimes of today — the official narratives portrayed by the “official” media
portray that a society is in consensus with the State, and that those engaged
in Thoughtcrime (whether or not it is legally a crime) are isolated social
outcasts and lunatics, and demeaned as “rebels” and “conspiracy theorists” (despite
the existence of actual conspiracy, against which the truly conscious mind must
inevitably rebel.) Yet in reality, Crimethink is what differentiates we
freethinkers from those who are lost in the spell of societal illusion and,
therefore, pose a threat to the status quo of the State. But this is part of
the trap of Goodthink — it creates the illusion of consensus, and therefore,
engenders isolation in those who do not concede. As a master of his craft,
nothing Orwell wrote was off the cuff. Now it is not overtly spoken in the
book, but there are four types of people in the fictional realm of 1984. There
are three described classes and a suggested fourth, only later is it implied
that the Brotherhood, anti-establishment rebels — has been eliminated from the
narrative jut as those in power sought to eliminate them from the society.
1984 is in part an expose on the four basic types of people
in a society, the four types of institutions and the four types of
institutional lies that enable them. Characterized by how they respond to
information, modern societies are made up of four archetypes of people —
idiots, zealots, elitists and patriots. Idiots refuse information, zealots
blindly refute information, elitists misuse information, and patriots seek and
distribute information. Despite dramatic alterations in the world’s
geopolitical landscape, and some fluctuation of individuals from one group/role
to another over time, the dynamic between these groups has historically
remained the same, and are inevitably intertwined: Idiots avoid all new
pertinent information in order to maintain their perspective, never questioning
the status quo. Zealots ask certain questions of certain information, ignoring
unaligned information in order to maintain their perspective, supporting the
status quo at all costs. Elitists question information in order to manipulate
and reap gains off those who don’t know, benefiting from the status quo.
Patriots question information to educate themselves and share it with others,
in order that we might enhance our lives and progress beyond the status quo.
It is no wonder, then, that the patriot has been all but
deleted from today’s socio-political landscape, with those acting as true
patriots being demonized by the State, and the meaning of the word “patriot”
distorted and confused (by the likes of George W. Bush Jr.) to mean an
unquestioning, flag-waving, with-us-or-against-us brand of nationalistic
idiocy. (Check out my article, The First Amendment – The REAL Patriot Act for a
deeper discussion of this.) Using a practice so well-defined by Orwell that it
is known today as Orwellian speak, institutions transfer and confuse words and
ideas by mixing up themselves, their policies and their products with patriotic
ideas and words. They take the meaning of words and archetypes, and flip them
on their heads: War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, and
true patriotism (such as that shown by government whistleblowers) is
traitorous. In reality, the true patriots, the rebels who see through the lies
of institutions and act accordingly, are removed from public consciousness in
exactly the same way. In “Orwellian” fashion, the fourth deleted class of
people in 1984, the Brotherhood, who are working to bring down the fascist
Inner Party, are deleted through the admission of language. The other three
types, which are specifically mentioned in the-book-within-the-book, the
fictional The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, are the High,
the Middle and the Low castes. Similarly, the other three types of people
depicted in the society of Oceania are the Inner Party, the Outer Party and the
Proles. The social classes interact very little.
The Inner Party and Outer Party make up 2% of the
population, and are the institutionalized controllers of Oceania. They are akin
to modern politicians and the financial elite, working with and against one
another, and clamoring to gain and maintain power. They have privileges the
other castes do not, including being able to (temporarily) turn off the propaganda-spewing
Telescreens.
However, there is a pecking order within the Party. The
Outer Party are given state administrative jobs and are composed of the more
educated members of society. They are responsible for the direct implementation
of the Party’s policies but have no say in decision making. They are the
“artificial middle class” and as such, have strict rules applied to them. They
are allowed “no vices other than cigarettes and Victory Gin”, are spied on via
their Telescreens, and are encouraged to spy on each other, and to report
suspicious activities to Big Brother.
The lower class of workers that perform the majority of
menial tasks and labors are known as the Proles. They live in the poorest of
conditions, are not educated, and instead are kept entertained with alcohol,
gambling, sports, fiction and pornography (called “prolefeed”) — the 1984
equivalent of “bread and circus”.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment.