---------------The Journal of the Erosion
of Freedom---------------
Edition 1, Volume 2
Editor, David Ross
Chief Adviser, Dr. David Goodman
Our pledge: We will NEVER share your email information
with any other
party
Please forward this email newsletter to a friend (before
you are
denounced to the party!)
Editor, David D. Ross
Chief Adviser, Dr. David Goodman
EDITORIAL: "THE EMERGING TOTALITARIAN MAJORITY
EDITOR,S PICKS
THREE ORWELL PREDICTIONS THAT CAME TRUE
By DR. DAVID GOODMAN
VICTORY GIN (A listing of the latest outrages at home)
THE PRISONER
By JEFFERSON P. SWYCAFFER
Part I of IV
WHEN THE PUNISHMENT DOESN,T FIT THE CRIME
By ROBERT A. ROSS
GEORGE ORWELL THE VOICE OF THE 20TH CENTURY
By NORMAN ERSHLER
NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR IS NOW
By NORMAN ERSHLER
#########################################################################
EDITORIAL
"THE EMERGING TOTALITARIAN MAJORITY?
By DAVID ROSS
A few months ago a National Guard helicopter was searching
out an illegalm marijuana farm in the Backcountry of San Diego County. The
helicopter's rotors clipped a power line and the resulting sparks from the
downed line caused a fire that spread until it consumed about 50 homes and
destroyed millions of dollars of property.
The "War on Drugs" has been with us now since
the days of Richard Nixon, more than 30 years. We are no nearer to winning
it than we were in the 1970s and some might argue that we are further from
that goal than ever. The use of the term "war" by the government
is no linguistic accident. It has all of the attributes of a war, and, like
a war, it is considered just a little bit unpatriotic to point out that
not only is it not being won, but that it has very little chance of winning.
Point this out to the current Drug Czar or U.S. Attorney
General and you will get a reaction similar to any suggestions of surrender
to Jefferson Davis in the last days of the Civil War, or to Adolph Hitler
when the Russians were pounding the Fuhrer Bunker with artillery.
Also, like a war, almost any means are considered legitimate
to achieving the war,s aims. Confiscating the private property of citizens
who are "suspected of being involved with drugs is not only allowable,
it's sanctioned by the Supreme Court. And later, if the person is found
not to have been involved in this criminal activity, it's often impossible
for them to get their property returned. In answer to a question about this
in which a reporter said that the accused had been found guilty, the Drug
Enforcement Agency's response was: "No, he was not found innocent,
he was not proven guilty."
You walk onto a campus of a modern high school today and
find that, it,s considerably different from when you were a teenager (and
not only because "they didn,t look that good when I was a kid!). What,s
missing? Lockers? What has replaced them? Backpacks hauled by students looking
like a latter-day version of Sisyphus. Why are the lockers gone? Because
of the War on Drugs! No invasion of is too extreme in this holy cause.
If we were at peace, or the drug war was won, we could,
one supposes, return to the days when children,s backpacks weren,t routine
searched, and the courts waited until the accused was actually found guilty
before authorizing a seizure of his property.
In Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four Oceania is constantly
at war with one of the other two superstates, East Asia and Eurasia. Victory
is about as far away (or as near) as it has always been. People die in bombing
raids. Cities are captured. Survivors of torpedoed ships are machine-gunned
in the water. The war goes on and on and on. The war is necessary in order
to justify all of the repressive measures that are taken in its name.
Long live Big Brother!
Long live the War on Drugs!
Appropros of invasions of privacy here's an interesting
quote: The "most systematic invasion of privacy of every American citizen
that has ever been taken in this country" has been taken with the expanded
use of wiretapping and secret court proceedings as part of the United States'
War on Terror.
Is this Ralph Nader decrying the invasion of our homes
by government in the name of fighting terror? The American Civil Liberties
Union? How about William Safire?
Nope, it's former Vice President Al Gore, who, in an interview
recently added, "We have always held out the shibboleth of Big Brother
as a nightmarish vision of the future that we're going to avoid at all costs.
. They have now taken the most fateful step in the direction of that Big
Brother nightmare that any president has ever allowed to occur."
It's interesting that Gore is now criticizing "W"
for implementing plans that could conceivably put the police under every
bed in America. Particularly interesting since Gore himself was championing
something similar when he was Vice President.
As recently as the 2000 election Gore said he was toying
with a 24-Hour Internet cam in the Oval Office, according to an interview
published two years ago by Internet Life.
But that's nothing compared to what he was pushing in 1993
when there was no war on terror.
According to a report in the Aug. 29, 2002 Washington
Times "In 1993, Vice President Al Gore spearheaded a project called
'Clipper' which was designed to monitor America. Gore's leadership in this
scheme to allow the Feds to have easy access to bug American telephones
is all too well documented for him to deny. "
"We also want to assure users of key escrow encryption
products that they will not be subject to unauthorized electronic surveillance,"
wrote Al Gore in a 1994 memo to Congress.
"As we have done with the Clipper Chip, future key
escrow schemes must contain safeguards to provide for key disclosures only
under legal authorization and should have audit procedures to ensure the
integrity of the system," wrote Gore.
It was intended to be a secret project, but memos kept
by Webster Hubbell, the number two man in the Clinton Justice Department
(Janet Reno was the number one man). Hubbell, later a convicted felon, noted
that Gore had chaired on the "AT&T Telephone Security Device."
This was meant to combat AT&T's achievement of developing a tap-proof
telephone. This was considered an unacceptable threat by the U.S. government,
which wanted to pressure Congress to ban this software.
The Gore plan was to persuade AT&T to put 'Clipper'
chips i(or were they Tipper Clips?) nside all of its phones and computers.
The chip would allow the federal government to monitor "secure phone
and computer conversations.
Well, Al, it's nice to see that these days, you're on "Our
Side."
This year two Democratic political analyists, John B. Judis,
Ruy Teixeira wrote "The Emerging Democratic Majority, in which the
predicted that time and demographics is on the side the self-styled "Party
of Jefferson." Although the big Republican win might make this prediction
seem a little ridiculous, it's clearly too early to say. After all, John
Adams's Federalists took the presidency and both houses of Congress in 1796
and eight years later disappeared as a force in American politics.
But what is becoming increasingly obvious is what I will
refer to as the "emerging totalitarian majority, in American. And no,
that's not intended as a cheap shot at Republicans. That's intended to be
a warning shot for those of us who still cherish our liberties.
There has always been a torpid, lazy, non-working majority
of people who would be just as comfortable living under a dictatorship as
they are living in a Republic, as long as they are safe and comfortable
in their homes.
But that majority is growing, and under the whipped up
hysteria that has accompanied 9/11 it became obvious that those who are
contemptuous of our freedoms almost have the votes to put together a working
majority of voters willing to sell their freedoms in exchange for security.
The way it works is that people will fiercely defend their
own personal freedoms, but will stand by idly while other freedoms that
they don't care anything about are snuffed out.
At the same time people will put up with a great deal of
civil liberties violations masquerading as security measures in order to
feel safer in the air, at public events, in public buildings.
If you want a nice, convenient symbol for all this: The
White House, once known as "The People's House," no longer allows
public tours. Does anyone truly imagine that such tours will resume once
the current unpleasantness passes?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * *
THREE ORWELL PREDICTIONS THAT CAME TRUE
By DR. DAVID GOODMAN
Some folks have asked about the Orwellian predictions.
Three that come to mind are: (1) Forced metrification. (2) Think tanks to
plan the logistics of future wars. And (3)Speakwrite machine.
For those interested in page numbers from the Bantam paperback
edition that reference these innovations, please let me know. In any case:
(1) Forced metrification. The chap at the local pub chatting
with Winston Smith complains that he is unable to get his pint. As his lament
continues, it appears that the government declared for the metric system
without consideration for the people and their wishes. Certainly Orwell
writing in 1947 about the future foresaw the continental system imposed
on the Brits before calendar 1984.
(2) Think tanks to plan the logistics of future wars. This
refers to the teams of experts such as the Air Force RAND being established
in the USA during 1947. Orwell himself related to the Brits mobilizing scientists
during peacetime to fight the Cold War. Orwell apparently had diverse scenarios
(a think tank weapon) in mind then. He called one, "Boom go the rockets,
wallop go the bombs," about atomic war between the major powers. "1984"
is his think tank contribution built around the concept of Continuous War
against the saboteurs (terrorists).
(3) Speakwrite machine. Perhaps Orwell's most original
prediction for the future. Winston Smith in his cubicle at the Ministry
of Truth pulls the microphone towards him and dictates his memoranda. The
machibe translates his spoken words into a typed message. Every time I enter
my local computer store and see software converting words into type, I think
of Orwell and his invention of speakwrite to eliminate secretaries who became
aware through memos of black and white propaganda. Speakwrite to Orwell
maintains the secrecy of intelligence documents.
Hope this gives you a flavor for the entire list of 137
predictions and their translating into contemporary English by this humble
servant.
The Prisoner
By Jefferson P. Swycaffer
Part I of IV
The Prisoner of Ipcress
"The Prisoner" was a British television series
from ITV, produced by the great Lew Grade, and created, directed, and written
by Patrick McGoohan. In this dramatic -- some say melodramatic -- spy-era
series, McGoohan plays the part of a secret agent who has resigned his job.
Why? Why did he resign?
This is the key mystery of the series, and was not answered
until the final of seventeen episodes.
In the series, McGoohan's character, who is never named,
but who is referred to only as "Number Six," or "The Prisoner,"
is spirited away to a place called only "The Village." There,
he is subjected to psychological leverage designed to break his spirit and
reverse his loyalties.
The show is a masterpiece of the theater of antagonism:
Number Six forcefully declares his defiance at every turn. He refuses to
accomodate; he refuses to participate. "He doesn't even bend a little,"
says one of his tormenters, a series of men and women bearing the nameless
badge of "Number Two."
The series was produced in 1965, and it makes use of several
of the more painful cliches of television. There is the episode with a "double,"
produced by split-screen filming. There is the "mind swap" episode,
in which a guest actor plays the part of Number Six, with painful semi-success.
(This turns out to have been necessary, as McGoohan was
in America, filming for his part in the classic Cold War movie, "Ice
Station Zebra.")
The series utilized surrealism and symbology to good effect.
It was witty, and, in general, an intellectual exercise. The show proffers
riddles for the viewer, and does not always provide an answer. The show
is, today, a "cult classic," and has a large and dedicated fan
base. In England, after the final episode was broadcast, there were, quite
literally, riots in the street: not everyone, it seems, enjoyed the answers
that were -- or were not -- given at the end.
#
"The Ipcress Files" was a British movie, starring
Michael Caine, based on Len Deighton's first and ground-breaking spy novel
of the same name. Michael Caine plays Harry Palmer, a working-class military
man who has been assigned to counter-espionage work in lieu of prison time.
Cain's performance is sardonic, saucy, irreverent, and a lot of fun.
When Caine, as Palmer, is assigned to cover a route, with
work sheets, recording forms, and other bureaucratic minutiae, he, instead,
breaks the rules, looks up an old pal, short-cuts the process, and gets
to the heart of the matter.
The heart of the matter is that someone is using "Induced
Psychoneuroses by Conditioned Response to Stress" -- the IPCRESS of
the title -- to break the spirits of prominent scientists and researchers.
In due course, Palmer himself is taken up and subjected to the IPCRESS process.
#
The parallels are numerous, but I will limit myself to
a handful:
1) In both The Prisoner and The Ipcress Files, the intent
of the villains is to break the spirit and mind of a subject without permanent
damage to their body. The ideal is to return the kidnapped victim to his
society, where he will function as an enemy agent. In The Prisoner, there
is a chilling euphemism regarding the prohibition against physical torture:
"We mustn't damage the tissue." In The Prisoner, the technique
is an elaborate cat-and-mouse game of psychological gamesmanship. In The
Ipcress Files, the technique involves sensory overload.
(Today, we know that sensory deprivation is actually more
effective.)
2) The first "Number Two" who confronts Number
Six is played by Guy Doleman, the same actor who played "Ross,"
Palmer's superior, The Ipcress Files. A number of other actors, throughout
the tv series, had also had parts in Ipcress. This is, however, largely
an artifact of the great paucity of English actors of the time: any afficionado
of English tv will recognize the same faces popping up, again and again,
in every sort of dramatic series.
3) Rather trivial, but amusing: one of the key points in
The Ipcress Files is the discovery of a short bit of recording tape, upon
which is stored "The Ipcress Sound," an audio effect of overwhelming
complexity and annoyance, part of the overall sensory-overload process.
In the episode "The General" of The Prisoner, the same sound effect
is used in the "sublimator" sequence.
4) There is a surprising parallel in the endings of the
two shows... But, as I have promised my editor that I would not spoil the
effect by giving away secrets, it must be incumbent upon the reader to explore
the two on his or her own, in order to enjoy the full effect.
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
ADVERTISE IN THOUGHTCRIME
ThoughtCrme accepts advertisements from individuals and
businesses. Contact us at curmudgeondr@ixpres.com for rates.
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
VICTORY GIN, the latest outrages at home:
I CAN READ YOUR MIND
The Washington Times reported that Airport screeners might
soon have the technology to try to "read read the minds of travelers
to identify terrorists.
NASA said it was developing monitoring devices used in
space that would "be adapted to receive and analyze brain-wave and
heartbeat patterns, then feed that data into computerized programs to detect
passengers who potentially might pose a threat.
These "neuro-electric sensors attached to airport
gates, would monitor the electric signals emitted by the brain and heart.
Computers could analyse the patterns of individuals and cross-reference
it will their known travel patterns, criminal backgrounds, credit information,
etc.
Of course, that assumes that peoples, blood pressure, anger
and hostility aren,t already at an all-time high when they are standing
in airport screening lines! The documents, by the way, weren,t released
voluntarily, but were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit
against the Transportation Security Administration/
WOULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE LOUDER, PLEASE?
The Fatherland Security Bill just signed by the president
will give the government leave to track email, Internet, travel, phone and
bank records and credit card purchased.
Part of the bill is the Defense Department,s Total Information
Awareness , putting all the aforementioned information into what the Pentagon
calls a "centralized grand database."
The usual small band of people concerned about civil liberties,
such as William Safire, have blasted this scheme, but it,s now law. Safire
wrote: "To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial
sources, add every piece of information that government has about you -
passport application, driver's license and bridge toll records, judicial
and divorce records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the FBI, your lifetime
paper trail plus the latest hidden camera surveillance - and you have the
supersnoop's dream: a 'Total Information Awareness' about every U.S. citizen.
Georgia Republican congressman Bob Barr, who,s retiring
from Congress this year, said, "You would think the Pentagon planning
a system to peek at personal data would get a little more attention. "It's
outrageous, it really is outrageous,"
The Pentagon bigwig supervising this Orwellian nightmare
is Admiral John Poindexter, who news junkies might recall almost helped
get President Ronald Reagan impeached by lying to Congress and destroying
evidence in the Iran-Contra scandall.
The story doesn,t say whether the Pentagon will share its
snooper scoops with the IRS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ADVERTISEMENT
*************************************************************************
********************
Do you know that George Orwell's "1984" is malicious
satire against world socialism and an accurate forecast of the war against
terrorism in America today?
Sound incredible? Have the experts told you something
else? Did they say that the novel describes Soviet communism and that Big
Bother is the dictator Josef Stalin? This is what I thought too. Then ten
years ago new facts changed my mind.
What I discovered is that the novel is a masterpiece of
satire comparable to "Gulliver's Travels" by Jonathon Swift."1984"
is also, I am convinced, a forecast in the grand design for the continuous
war against terrorism. Orwell's scenario of the future years after September
11, 2001 must be evaluated today before it occurs.
My name is David Goodman. I am a research scientist. The
concept that there are predictions in Orwell's "1984" came to
me in 1974 while teaching an Extension School course at UC Irvine. Only
in 1994 after reading W. L. West about satire in "1984" did Irealize
the enormity of the satire or parody that Orwell hid in the text.
When satirical references are identified, "1984"
is a very funny book. You don't believe me? Then read on. These pages are
slipped in between a pocket folder comprising two sides. The left side
pocket is chock full of potent satire against the British progressive socialists.
I enclose the most recent revision of "Orwell's 1984:
The Future is Here" originally published in the December 31, 2001
edition of the weekly Insight magazine published by the Washington
Times group. The Revised Version throws even more barbs at the founders
of British progressive socialism, Beatrice and Sidney Webb.
The satire when read carefully discloses the real reason
why Orwell wrote "1984." It was to warn against socialist intellectuals
working for a wartime government who would create a world socialist state
in which two percent of the population employing another 13 percent of
the population rules absolutely the rest of us.
Read the left-side pocket to see Orwell's bulldog teeth.
The right-hand pocket is crammed with the 137 predictions found buried
in the "1984" text. They represent life in America and Great
Britain ten years after declaration of a continuous war against saboteurs
and terrorists.
The list of predictions was first disclosed in a talk
I gave at USC in 1974. The gathering, covered in depth by the local media,
appeared in a national publication a year later. The 137 predictions appeared
again in a 1999 article for the Washington Times. But only the first
40 predictions, related to science and technology, appeared in "Some
Futurists Say Beware, Orwell's Future is at Hand," written in the
50th anniversary of first publication of Orwell's prophetic book.
The 137 predictions appear in print for the first time
in the right-hand folder. They have been rewritten in contemporary English
for public to decide for themselves how many of the Orwellian predictions
have already come true.
Discovery of the 137 predictions for America in 2011 as
a totalitarian nation, I suspect, will appear to you as much as reading
the bulldog-teeth-sharp satire that George Orwell buried in "1984"
for this generation to uncover.
Share the satire and forecast with family, friends and
coworkers on the job. I have placed no copyright symbol on the document,
so make copies and mail them around the world and to the media especially
the talk-show hosts. (Orwell himself hosted two radio talk shows on BBC
during the War).
Orwell, in his most brilliant forecast alerted us to the
menace of socialism on the political right as well as the left. He warned
us about a cowardly New World to come that deceived the public regardless
of their political stripe. Doublethink he called it. It was rule by intellectuals
playing both sides of the road against the middle class.
If you act quickly, the worst of the intellectual excesses
can still be averted. The Orwellian world advances to the degree that the
vast general public remains ignorant about the satire and forecast scenario
that is the real "1984."
To the degree you are ignorant of the satire and predictions,
that attests to the success of the intellectuals to pull the wool over
your eyes. Take that you skeptics who believe that America is immune to
a takeover of the nation by well-compensated professionals not always paid
to tell the truth and to defend freedom.
Remember: Copy everything. The author hereby waives his
copyright. Want to know more? Go to go to the website: www.ThoughtCrime@davidross.info.
My long-term friend and colleague, David Ross would love to hear from you.
Contact me at DGOO2000@aol.com. Good luck with reading and spreading news
about the Orwellian predictions, and persuading friends that "1984"
is the most pungent and embarrassing satire ever written.
***********************************************************************
When the Punishment Doesn't Fit the Crime.
By Robert A. Ross
When I saw the name of this publication, it bought immediately
to mind the accepted form of thought crime that currently exists in the
United States. I am of course referring to the notion of "hate crime."
Never before has there been a system that punishes people for how they feel
rather that for how they act.
Those who support the specious notion of hate crime point
to the particularly callous nature of the act. They point out that the act
was committed solely on account of the color of their skin, their religious
belief, their sexual orientation, or whatever.
What they fail to acknowledge is that the motivation for
the crime has never been an issue. Only the physical act was deemed to be
a crime that carried a punishment of incarceration or death.
Until now.
Now we delve into the mind of the perpetrator. We want
to know why he committed the crime. We want to know the motivation that
led him to commit a seemingly random act of brutality on someone that he
otherwise would never have encountered. In short, we want to know what he
was thinking, and if what he was thinking was hatred, his hatred caused
the crime. Ergo, hate = hate crime; thought = thought crime.
Not only do we punish the thought crime, the punishment
is more severe than it otherwise would be. If I punch someone, that is assault
and battery.
However, if I punch someone and say "take that you
[choose your favorite racial epithet]!" and I have committed a hate
crime, which carries a stiffer penalty. This is a frightening turn of events:
the motivation for the crime is itself illegal, and carries its own penalty.
How long until we merely punish someone for the motivation, and not the
actual act?
Unlikely? I wish I were certain. The recent film Minority
Report, based on a story by Philip K. Dick, shows us a time in the future
when crime is stopped before it happens. Those who would commit a crime
are stopped shortly before they commit the crime, and are punished for what
they were about to do. Those who were punished were thinking about committing
the crime. Again: thought = thought crime. Dick wrote a story about punishing
those who were thinking about committing a crime before they committed it
long before the notion of hate crime existed, and at a time when the notion
of punishing people for what they had not yet done was beyond consideration.
Our legal system has a well-established system for meting
out punishment to those who commit violent acts. The severity of the punishment
is in line with the level of the severity of the committed act. The notion
that an act requires a stiffer punishment based upon the motivation for
it is a truly frightening turn of events in our legal system. Is the victim
any more injured? No. Is the victim any more dead? No.
There are some who would claim that the victim suffers
additional injury based upon their knowledge that the act was committed
on the grounds of prejudice. The motivation causes additional injury. The
thought which led to the motivation causes additional injury, ergo hate
= hate crime, thought = thought crime.
We are now punishing people for how they feel. This is
the logical conclusion for the politically correct movement, where it is
unacceptable to call a spade a spade, or anything else for that matter.
We must now use cumbersome and indirect wording to say the same thing to
ensure that someone is not offended. Not offending someone is the foundation
for a hate crime. If someone is offended, then the offender must be held
accountable for his offensive act. Ergo hate = hate crime; thought = thought
crime.
The notion of hate crime has become an entrenched part
of our legal system, and is becoming more pervasive with each passing day.
What was once an isolated incident is now becoming more commonplace as the
obsession with punishing those who do not think the correct way while committing
a crime. This can take absurd proportions.
A few years ago a man used the word "niggardly"
and was vilified for being a racist. To steal a line from Dave Barry: I
am not making this up. I wish I were.
One shudders at the possibility that the day may come when
the mere thought of committing a crime will carry its own punishment. We
already have laws against "terrorist threats," where the mere
suggestion of violence carries a prison sentence. How long before this notion
becomes twisted into a law prohibiting "criminal thoughts," where
merely thinking about a violent act carries a prison sentence? As Philip
K. Dick has shown, it is not as far from the realm of possibility as we
would like to think. Which is a crime in itself.
***********************************************************************************************
George Orwell - The Voice Of The 20th Century
You Are Here
Nineteen Eighty-Four is NOW
c) Copyright Norman Ershler 1996 - 2002
The tone of the 20th century was set long before the first
day of its first year. The 19th century had begun with a new and profoundly
different presence on the world stage. Born at the close of the 18th century,
the United States, with its huge expanse, vast resources and independent
spirit, would lead the western world into the intense industrialization
of the 19th century. Thus, the 20th century dawned on a world which had
become both master and slave of the great mechanized society. And no part
of 20th century society would seize the power created by this massive industrialization
more than its politicians and, in their service, its warriors.
Terror, in both war and peace, had been with mankind since
the first man realized that a stick or a stone could get you your way not
only with a woolly bison, but with your fellow cave dwellers as well. But,
prior to the 20th century, wars were fought by armies which met on a field
of battle far separated from civilian life. During the 20th century, however,
from the Somme to Guernica to Coventry to Dresden to Hiroshima, mass terror
against civilians during wartime had become an instrumentality of national
will. (Even during the relatively peaceful last half of the 20th century,
the threat of mass terror, that is, psychological terror - the mad policy
of Mutually Assured Destruction - was employed by the American and Soviet
superpowers.) And politicians and government leaders, who had so willingly
employed these new and profoundly inhuman tools of war soon realized the
effectiveness of terror as an instrument of domestic social policy, also.
Within the 20th century, the campaigns of terror and murder
by the Russian Czar and the Soviet and Nazis governments against their own
citizens and, to the same end, the apartheid and terror practiced against
African-Americans through the late 1970s, the capitalist led and government
condoned, if not controlled, violence brought to bear against labor organizers
and the McCarthite campaign of the United States government against the
American people are examples of the use of such terror.
Such domestic terror has the effect of fragmenting the
society and alienating individuals from each other and from the group as
well, the end result being an atmosphere of fear and conformity; i.e., 1984.
Orwell's writings and, in fact, his life itself, were concerned
with the process and mechanism, and, more importantly, with the consequences
of this alienation. This itself is not wholly different from other writers.
What separates Orwell and his writings from the others, however, is his
view of the connection between the form of social interaction and the individual's
psychological/emotional, and ultimately his spiritual well being.
The Man
George Orwell was the pen name of an Englishman named Eric
Arthur Blair. At the time of his birth in India in 1903, Orwell's father
served as a civil servant in that part of the then vast English empire.
Shortly after he was born, Orwell's mother brought he and his sister to
England, where he grew up and went to school. He died of a neglected lung
ailment in 1950, having lived only forty-seven years, during which he wrote
nine books and a large number of essays.
The Philosophy
Although he saw himself as merely a writer, at best, a
political writer, George Orwell was, in the end, far more. Culminating in
his last two novels, Animal Farm and finally Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell's
entire body of work portrays a complete philosophy, encompassing the political,
social and, on an even deeper level, the psychological interplay between
the individual and the group. (The idea of the group, as opposed to the
larger and more generic "society", is compelling in Orwell's work,
because of its more pervasive and immediate importance to the individual's
well being.) While on a less fundamental level, Orwell's writing may be
seen as merely concerned with the struggle between the individual and the
group, Orwell's deeper view is a more integrated one.
It is, at base, that the individual's relationship to the
particular group in which he lives and functions, and, in turn, the group's
attitude toward the individual will ultimately determine the individual's
autonomy, that is, his freedom to be himself; to be. As his view of the
writings of Charles Dickens was simply that "If men would behave decently,
the world would be decent", Orwell implores that our most basic individual
responsibility is not merely to stand against the group, but, as individuals
within the group, to act in such a way as to make the group a viable place
in which the individual can thrive. As Winston Smith so indelibly and painfully
illustrates, given our psychological constraints, to ask anything more of
the individual is to imagine something that cannot be.
Thus, Orwell believes and Nineteen Eighty-Four demonstrates
that only when we create groups in which the individual is valued will each
individual be safe and able to survive. And, only then, will the individual
be capable of supporting the enlightened values of the group itself.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Nineteen Eighty-Four - "The Past Is Prologue"
Nineteen Eighty-Four is NOW
c) Copyright Norman Ershler 1996 - 2002
Nineteen Eighty-Four is not and never has been just a year.
Nor is the world portrayed by George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four a place
or even merely a set of political or social circumstances. Rather, Nineteen
Eighty-Four is a state of mind, a way of being, an atmosphere in which the
dark side of our nature lives and turns all around it darker still. It is
a time or place which we create when we turn away from the light that is
within us, within each individual self, to the empty darkness of group will
and psychology; of "mass-mindedness". Thus do we create for ourselves
to live in the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Orwell's "fiction" of a world in which, but for
a lingering echo, individuality had all but passed into extinction, could
have been set in any time or place where "mass-mindedness" is
paramount and where the individual exists merely to serve the group. Throughout
history, most religions have preached, most governments have practiced and
most societies have been organized around such "mass-mindedness".
It is only the calendar which might confuse and comfort us, which might
convince us that Nineteen Eighty-Four was merely a gruesome story about
a time and place that never was nor could ever be. But nothing is further
from the truth. And the simple truth is that Nineteen Eighty-Four is NOW.
The Story
In Nineteen Eighty-Four, there are no heroes, except as
an idea, an ideal may be said to be a hero. All of its characters are exceedingly
human, and this is what makes Nineteen Eighty-Four both timely and timeless,
both powerful and profoundly pathetic. Nineteen Eighty-Four is often upsetting,
sometimes disheartening, but, when its main lesson is learned, never depressing.
It is fundamentally a story of hope, of a truth which can be discovered
(although too late for all concerned); a truth which can be seen by us and
taken as not only our ideal, but as the practical guide by which, to a greater
or lesser extent, we can avoid the very pitfalls which consumed Winston
and Julia and O'Brien and Big Brother, and liberate ourselves from the tyranny
and ultimate destructiveness of the group and its mass-minded stranglehold
on our hearts and our souls.
Nineteen Eighty-Four is a simple story of faith wrongly
placed. Winston Smith, its main character, searches to escape the suffocating
and oppressive world manipulated by and for a ruling group, The Party. He
believes that he is seeking a political, a social solution with which he
can combat, can destroy the evil of group-think and the "mass-mindedness"
in which he lives. Instead, he finds the most exquisitely human, individual
"weapon" with which to pursue his salvation: love. But, as we
humans are too often prone to do, Winston overlooks what is simple and obvious,
what is at hand, and, even as do those he disdains, he puts his faith in
another group, The Brotherhood. (It is not for Winston to realize that his
answer lies in the idea and practice of "brotherhood", rather
than in the imaginary purity of "The Brotherhood".) In the end,
Winston is betrayed not by his enemies, but, in a real sense, by himself,
by his failure to see the worth in the object of his own worship; the individual
and the emotional life with which he or she can find their own peace and
presence, even in a world gone apparently mad.
"That which we seek must be our teacher."
"If you hate violence and don't believe in politics,
the only major remedy remaining is education. Perhaps society is past praying
for, but there is always hope for the individual human being." - George
Orwell
************************************************************************
ADVERTISMENT
Want to find out more secrets about Orwell's "1984"?
During the past 25 years I have lived in libraries and chatted with insiders
who know a great deal about George Orwell and the origins that remarkable
scenario about the future.
Now you can purchase: IF THERE IS HOPE FOR THE FUTURE IT
LIES IN THE READERS OF THIS REPORT. It is also known as "Goldstein's
Book" because it reveals secrets never discussed before in print.
Do you suspect that George Orwell's "1984" is
humorous satire against interenational socialism and an accurate forecast
of the war against terrorism in America within ten years?
Sound incredible? Have the experts told you something else?
Did they say that the book desribes Soviet communism and that the book is
filled with doom and gloom?
This is what I thought too. Then ten years ago new facts
changed my mind. What I discovered is a masterpiece of satire comparable
to "Gulliver's Travels" by Jonathon Swift.
George Orwell, besides the satire, also wrote a forecast
for America as it could be ten years after launching its perpetual war against
terrorism. The perpetual war seems guaranteed because since September 11,
2001 government is investing tens of billions in the same individuals that
failed to avert four almost simultaneous hijackings.
As David Goodman I have written extensively about the predictions
of Orwell's "1984." The concept there are predictions in Orwell's
work came to me in 1974 while teaching an Extension School course on the
future at UC Irvine.
The humorous saire eluded me until 1994 when a book by
W. L. West published in Scotland arrived at my desk. He raised the vital
issue because Orwell himself the day after the publication of "1984"
told friends that the book was satire.
In this special REPORT on the satire and predictions in
Orwwell's "1984," there are two pockets in the folder. On the
left side is proof that the book is humorous satire on the foibles of the
founders of British progressive socialism.
The article enclosed is the most recent revision of "Orwell's
1984: The Future is Here," appearing in the December 31, 2001 issue
of Insight magazine published by the Washington Times. The
evidence suggests that Orwell on page after page parodies Beatrice and Sidney
Webb's heavy-handed attempts to remake socialism in the shape of Josef Stalin's
world communism.
The right-hand pocket contains two articles I wqrote about
the predictions of Orwell's "1984" that lay buried in the text.
The first article, "Time Bomb," appeared in Human Behavior
magazine. It opened the eyes of the public to the 137 predictions.
The second article, published in 1999 by the Washington
Times, celebrates the 50th anniversary of first publication of "1984"
in London. Thirty-one predictions, in science and technology, were revealed
for the first time. There were obviously 106 more to come.
This REPORT makes public for the first time all of the
137 predictions. They reveal the depth and breadth of Orwell's thoughts
about the de facto arrival of the totalitarian state. Judge for yourself
which social, political and economicm predsictions of Orwell's "1984"
have come true and which are currently on the verge.
I unreservedly guarantee that you will get as abundant
insights in reviewing the ingenious Orwellian predicitons as you felt inr
eading about his humorous satire.
Should you believe thqat this report is accurate and true,
then you are invcited to share it with family and friends and coworkers
as well as radio and television talk show hosts. I have placed my copyright
symbol on this document and invite you to make copies to alert everyone
to the genius of George Orwell -- until now kept from you.
Remember that the predictions and satire work so well because
during World War II Orwell knew that socialist intellectuals in government
ministries would never relinquish their unprecedented powers over the public
purse. Orwell believed that socialists through declaring war on an assortment
of enemies in the future whould create a world in which their services would
remain very much in demand.
If you act quickly, you can acquire the REPORT -- disguised
to look like "Goldstein's Book" within the book "1984."
The cost including shipping and handling and taxes is $24.00. Send check
or money order to payable to my public service firm, NNC, at Postal Box
803, San Marcos, California 92079-0803.
Your time to act is now while you still have a few years
remaining before Big Brother and the thoughtcrime police gain total victory
over individual freedoms and your personal legacy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
******************************************************************************
READ A CHAPTER . . .
. . . Of David Ross's novel "Cranium," which
posits a future where there is no privacy, where the tyranny of the mob
rules a fragmented United States via instant and constant referendums on
the Internet, and where journalists are the true power----or are they? Available
soon on the ThoughtCrime website.
| 