That’s the point, the agenda of the Stalinist govts are Identical to the ones more “liberal” govts have

I disagree with that.

I think the point that’s being made (and IMO the right one) is that even if the book was written from a view of progression from Stalinist Russia, that’s largely irrelevant. What it’s about is the use of technology, etc to subjugate and manipulate a population. That could develop from Stalinist Russia or from a Western Democracy.

Despite some doom mongers claiming otherwise, we’re not even close to that right now. Could it develop from this point even in a Western Democracy? Yes, I reckon feasibly it could. Will it? Well that’s the question, isn’t it?

I’ll say the same thing to you that I said to Raceface then;

Now you’ve read Orwell, go read Chomsky

Could it develop from this point even in a Western Democracy?

Well.. Yes, but the technology is just the tool – the motive has to be there.

When you have a functioning ballot box, governments are bound to appease the population, and as long as the government isn’t able to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes at the same time and bully the rest, they won’t be able to do what Hitler did in the 30s.

Technology could actually help prevent that as it allows more people’s voices to be heard. As long as it’s not strictly controlled…

Despite some doom mongers claiming otherwise, we’re not even close to that right now. Could it develop from this point even in a Western Democracy? Yes, I reckon feasibly it could. Will it? Well that’s the question, isn’t it?

No idea, and I do basically agree we’re still a fair way off. But the tools are there, and I genuinely do believe that the UK is a lot closer than it was 20 years ago.

Well.. Yes, but the technology is just the tool – the motive has to be there.

The motive is there: security. Fear of terrorists, immigrants, crime, paedophiles…

Yes, the tools are there. The issue is that they cannot be used in the 1984 way unless you redirect a huge amount of resources to doing that. Or maybe AI…

Of course as molgrips says, technology may be the counter to that – it’s becoming hard for news to be buried these days with twitter, etc though as molgrips alludes to, if that were to be controlled…

Well.. Yes, but the technology is just the tool – the motive has to be there.

And we’re back as Mogrim points out to “fear of the other”

Still sure that there’s no link at all between the Red Dread and the muslamic ray guns?

Of course as molgrips says, technology may be the counter to that – it’s becoming hard for news to be buried these days with twitter, etc though as molgrips alludes to, if that were to be controlled…

Yeah, just imagine if the government mandated all the ISPs to stick in a great big filter to stop nasty things being shown on the internet. That could never happen, could it? Or if they started monitoring twitter just in case you said something that might be terroristy. That couldn’t happen either, could it?

The tools are there, all over the place. Fortunately for the moment we still have democracy, more or less, and the two main parties limit themselves to nibbling around the edges of it when the Mail asks them to. I’m not sure a UKIP-style party with a majority would be so scrupulous, however.

The motive is there: security. Fear of terrorists, immigrants, crime, paedophiles…

Hmm. Do you think fear of those things could be extrapolated to Stalinist policies? I think that’s a bit of a stretch tbh.

The overriding aim of the state in 1984 seems to be to fight the other states, at enormous cost – now does that require such totalitarian control of the population? Or is it just a pretext?

Why did Stalinist Russia end up like it did? I suspect a combination of Stalin’s fundamental insanity, and the fact that state-wide communism requires everyone to toe the line whether they like it or not.

Could that situation be replicated in the West? Hitler did a fair old job of it, but that was 80 years ago now and the world was pretty different. I believe the novel is saying that in order to respond to Soviet Russia the West had to do something similar to even respond. Fortunately, as it turned out, they/we chose a different path and eventually won the ideological battle. That in itself is rather interesting.

Fortunately for the moment we still have democracy

Democracy, but also capitalism. Money talks more than governments in many circumstances. These two things both make it hard to force people to do what they don’t want. Soviet Russia had neither of these things.

Yeah, just imagine if the government mandated all the ISPs to stick in a great big filter to stop nasty things being shown on the internet.

Because that’s worked really well at blocking the P!rate bay and similar hasn’t it – my point being that the internet is so big now, without making it largely useless (which would kill business), it’s almost impossible to actually regulate it effectively.

Hmm. Do you think fear of those things could be extrapolated to Stalinist policies? I think that’s a bit of a stretch tbh.

I never said we would get to Stalinist policies, I don’t see that happening at all. What I can imagine is a society that is increasingly intolerant of dissent and non-conformance, and uses the tools available to stop it.

Because that’s worked really well at blocking the P!rate bay and similar hasn’t it – my point being that the internet is so big now, without making it largely useless (which would kill business), it’s almost impossible to actually regulate it effectively.

I think you’re overly optimistic. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am.

Molgrips you have to look past the way governments behave, and look at what those behaviour patterns are trying to achieve IMO

I don’t think anyone here is trying to compare 21st Britain to Stalinist Russia in the 40’s and 50s, but there are scarily similar parallels to what they both try to achieve

Read a bit of Chomsky, really do

Read a bit of Chomsky, really do

I’ve always meant to.

Where would you start? Manufacturing Consent?

Yes or Necessary Illusions

There’s an awful lot of stuff on you tube of speeches and so on, sometimes his wit and humour is lost

Molgrips you have to look past the way governments behave, and look at what those behaviour patterns are trying to achieve IMO

That’s what I’m aiming to do.

Read Chomsky, then we’ll have another crack at this

Of course as molgrips says, technology may be the counter to that – it’s becoming hard for news to be buried these days with twitter, etc though as molgrips alludes to, if that were to be controlled…

Funnily enough, I was having this discussion with a few friends last week. There was a piece on R4 (I think) about it being 25 years since Tiananmen Square yet the anniversary was more or less being ignored internationally and not even mentioned in China. A survey of students over there had been undertaken and it was something like 90% of them had no idea the anything had happened and those that were aware of something believed there was a protest – not a single mention of the massacre or “Tank Man”. Apparently, if it is ‘googled’ within China you get nothing other than its location and a map.

If that report was genuine then it is really quite scary, IMO of course.

it is prophetic in the sense that it is the principle of control of the population by secret methods.

What’s really disappointing is the naivety, the amount of data held by various organisations about so much of your behaviour is huge.

The reason 1984 is relevant is not that it specifically referred to the Eastern Block, but that it showed a principle that the state has no conscience in achieving its aims, even at the expense of the people it purports to serve.

Just because they’re out to get you doesn’t mean you’re not paranoid.

Read a bit of Chomsky

Great book, and neat little Kurt Cobain quote there

it is prophetic in the sense that it is the principle of control of the population by secret methods

Not really, he was simply following on from what had already been happening, and on a much larger scale than now.

Molgrips, there’s no shame in admitting you were having bad day the other day. A number of posters have proved generic accuracy about the topic, there’s no need with the continued insistence of it being a Stalinist template to be.

Now, have a nice weekend 🙂

Noooo, the scale of data collected and stored today is unimaginably greater than it was in 1948, It is also captured in greater depth and far more easily analysed to provide a profile of you.

The reason 1984 is relevant is not that it specifically referred to the Eastern Block

Isn’t Britain called Airstrip One, the potential launchpad for a a US strike againmst the evil eastern communist block? Ipso facto, it’s not a far left but far right society, the warning not being about far right or far left ideaologies but about a totalitarian state. In a far right state, the power lies with the Capitlists, the point made IIRC when Winston went for a drink with the proles and got the history mixed in with the good old days of a pint as opposed to a litre/half litre of beer. Just like Daily Mail readers pining for some “good old days” that never really existed.

Kryton: firstly, I was just fine the other day, not cross or anything. Secondly, no-one can be accurate about this topic because the topic isn’t “are we being watched?” but “what was Orwell trying to say?” and no-one can prove that.

Back to the interesting debate then – Roger, the scale of data collected now is of course greater but the scope of investigation is far narrower. In the book, everyone is under threat and even one word out of place could see you disappeared. Far closer to Soviet era than the present day.

I see the similarities of course between modern monitoring and Big Brother but that is simply a coincidence. The context of the book is different to the present day and hence this is not what Orwell was talking about.

Ipso facto, it’s not a far left but far right society

Stalin showed us how a society can be both. And yes the book is about totalitarianism of course. But the further question is, can you have communism without it?

Comparisons to communist era surveilance?

Please, we’re not even close. Yes we have better means but definitely no will to do so. Read about Romania under Ceausescu or read this for perspective: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26838177

That all said and done, 1984 does have a resonance with todays society, if it makes people examine their civil liberties and how they choose to give them up (or not) then it’s no bad thing.

Then watch Brazil.

The totalitarian influence and control depicted in 1984 is not exclusive to either the right or the left.

It’s shared by any religious or politial movement which reminds us how difficult, awkward and inconvenient free will can be and urges us to subjigate our ability to think in favour of ignorant, populist propoganda.
Given the promise of higher definition television, cheap alcohol and the ability to sneer at our neighbours we will vote for anyone that fails to remind us what a rancid, vile, venal species we actually are.

Bit busy right now so I can’t read all the previous postings, apologies I’m sure that they are spiffing.

In answer to your question, yes. Yes you should read it. On a base level it is a pretty good read. However the second half about state control and double speak is VERY[/u] relevant. Surprisingly so.

Read it, you won’t be disappointed.

I see the similarities of course between modern monitoring and Big Brother but that is simply a coincidence

What is your point here? They are monitoring us for the benign reason / to “protect” us rather to “spy” on us. Is that not doublethink?

Stalin showed us how a society can be both.

No he showed you can have a left wing despot and a right wing despot
He was a left wing one.
he was not personally both left wing and right wing.
What Rusty said

yes, read the **** thing. it’s not long. As far as I can tell, Chomp-sky is right on lots of stuff, in theory.

no-one can be accurate about this topic because the topic isn’t “are we being watched?” but “what was Orwell trying to say?” and no-one can prove that.

Many, many reders, critics and commentators have pretty much reached a consensus regarding this, which differs quite a lot to your interpretation. Which I think is far too linear and binary; ‘if things aren’t exactly like they are in the book, then they aren’t similar in any way’. That’s far too simplistic and naive, and I think you should employ a little lateral thinking to your approach. You might tehn enjoy the book more.

Out of interest Molly, how much other Orwell material have you read? ( newspaper articles essays speeches on so on) not just his novels or orher published non fiction?

In some ways you’re correct 1984 IS a book about A particular future the Could have arisen in a society decimated from the terrors if WW2. However Orwell himself ( as did many others) saw a much greater picture, and warned as much in many articles about the rise and centralisation of govt power and propaganda

You don’t need to be quite so disparaging. I don’t think books are to be interpreted by consensus, and I’m very capable of understanding the complexity of the ideas in the book.

‘if things aren’t exactly like they are in the book, then they aren’t similar in any way’

See, you’ve interpreted my point in an unsubtle way. My point isn’t that they aren’t similar, my point is that they are similar for different reasons. And that the book is not sci-fi i.e. it’s not about intrusive technology it’s about totalitarianism in general. And we don’t live in a totalitarian state.

Out of interest Molly, how much other Orwell material have you read?

None, but they are on my list. I remember reading some quotes and extracts and I was just as impressed with those words as I was with the two most famous books.

And that the book is not sci-fi i.e. it’s not about intrusive technology it’s about totalitarianism in general. And we don’t live in a totalitarian state.

1984 is very definitely sci-fi!

And that the book is not sci-fi i.e. it’s not about intrusive technology it’s about totalitarianism in general. And we don’t live in a totalitarian state.

Its a love story set in a futuristic Britain. It’s not about a Totalitarian state, its about Winston and Julia

Not read the whole thread, but for the OP… it sure as hell isn’t going to make you dumber by reading it