OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Nineteen Eighty-Four

Entry 2131, on 2021-06-02 at 20:43:30 (Rating 4, Politics)

I like satire, and I particularly like the satirical web site, The Babylon Bee, at the moment. The Bee is great because it is humorous, but also very relevant to the current state of the world.

I have a collection of some of their best work, and one which has become relevant recently features the phrase: 1984 has been moved to current affairs section.

I hope that most people know a bit about the classic novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four (which I will refer to as 1984 to save unnecessary typing). It was written in 1949 by George Orwell and was intended to criticise the Soviet regime in power at the time. It describe a dystopian world where the government controls its citizens: what they do, who they associate with, and even what they think.

According to Wikipedia: it centres on the consequences of totalitarianism, mass surveillance, and repressive regimentation; and examines the role of truth and facts within politics and the ways in which they are manipulated.

Why would this work be moved to the current affairs section? Well, the satirical piece was created during the reign of Donald Trump, to criticise his loose relationship with reality. But I think it might be even more appropriate now, with the insidious lies and propaganda being promulgated by some of the more leftist governments in power.

Here's a quote from the book which is being used a lot in the context of today's political propaganda: "Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right."

And a meme, featuring Orwell, I saw recently on Facebook said: "Boy, did I call it or what?"

Here's another recent reference by comedian, John Cleese: "All humour is critical. If we start saying, oh, we mustn't criticise or offend them, then humour is gone, and with humour goes a sense of proportion, and then, as far as I'm concerned, you're living in 1984."

Politicians have always tried to control what people are and aren't allowed to say, but it seems to have become far worse recently, and this repression appears to originate mainly from the left. I call them the "fascist left" and when I am called out on that - because fascism is a right-wing political movement - I point out the second definiton of the word: "(in general use) extreme authoritarian, oppressive, or intolerant views or practices" (Oxford English Dictionary) which I think describes many on the left perfectly.

The type of propaganda the left uses to control the narrative varies over time, but the current favourite subject is racism. Today, everything is racist, and if you disagree you are just demonstrating your own racism, which proves their point. It is quite a brilliant strategy, although most people can see that it is wrong, it can be difficult to formulate a rational argument showing its lack of logic.

So, if someone says "all white people are racist, and if you disagree that just shows how racist you are" (a claim I have seen many times) then how do you escape from that? If you aren't racist and say so, you are then branded as racist.

I prefer to move the debate, and ask for specific examples of what the accused person has actually done, beyond just the very non-specific claim of them being racist. Generally this results in nothing more than the hysterical repetition of the accusation, showing that catchphrases are more important to these people than statements of fact.

Another example of the clever use of language is in statements which cannot be denied, but are imbued with a deeper, dishonest meaning. The current best example is "black lives matter". If I am asked if I support the BLM movement I say emphatically no. But then I am asked: so you don't think black lives matter? Is say, yes they do, but that has very little to do with what BLM are doing. Even worse, if I answer "yes, but all lives matter" then that almost always ends up with accusations of racism (see above).

This propaganda technique has been well known for years, and was a favourite with Nazi propagandists, as well as others. I'm guessing that the vast majority of people who go along with it either don't realise what they are doing, or don't see the deeper insidious consequences, but I think it is a very deliberate move by the leaders of these movements. Anyone familiar with the history of activism, propaganda, or political action should be very aware of it.

The fact that 1984 specifically criticises a Marxist regime (the Soviets) is significant too. Many of the most problematic beliefs of modern left extremists do seem to originate with Marxism. This makes the comparison with 1984 particularly pertinent.

Notice also, the references in the book to statues being renamed. Today we go one step further and destroy them. Also, there is the renaming "street buildings" which is another "woke" activity which has become popular. And the date altering sounds like the rewriting of history for politically correct reasons. Finally, the Party being always right seems to equate with cancel culture; there is only one right way to think, inflicted on the people from on high.

If I remember correctly (it has been a while since I read it), the hero's attempt at escaping the stifling conformity is ultimately subdued by the state. It's not a happy book. I hope real life is better.

Comment 1 (6720) by Anonymous on 2021-06-03 at 12:23:27:

Hmmm... "which I think describes many on the left perfectly"
Perhaps you mean to say the "extreme-left" as left and right sit on a continuum after all.

Seems silly and inaccurate to paint around 50% of the population as"extreme authoritarian, oppressive, or intolerant views or practices".

Comment 2 (6721) by OJB on 2021-06-03 at 12:42:23:

So we are just debating over the meaning of the word "many"? Sure, I concede that we have the classic problem of definition of words here.

By "people on the left" I didn't mean just people who usually vote for more left-oriented parties (Democrats in US, Labour in New Zealand, etc), I meant people who have a real commitment to leftist "ideals".

Those ideals seem increasingly oriented around repression of alternative views and advancement of hysterical over-reactions to whatever happens to be the latest trendy fad: metoo, climate change, racism, white supremacy. Not saying these things don't deserve some attention, just that the left are out of touch with the reality of them.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.