You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Culture Wars
Nineteen Eighty-Four at 70: What Orwell Got Right
2019-07-14
[American Thinker] This summer, George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four turns 70 years old, and that anniversary has prompted a surfeit of articles analyzing the book and its continuing relevance to our age.

There is no doubt that the book is one of the most consequential political novels ever written and ought to be on the reading list of every conservative -- not because Orwell was himself a conservative (he remained a man of the Left until his death), nor because the dystopian world that Orwell described turned out to be prophetic.

"The image of a boot stamping across the human face," in Orwell's memorable phrase, is an accurate depiction of present-day North Korea or China, but is not really an apt description of the U.S. or Western Europe, societies that have fallen into the kind of soft despotism described by Alexis de Tocqueville, but well short of the dystopian nightmare foreseen in Nineteen Eighty-Four.

However, the novel remains prescient in its depiction of two key elements of modern-day political correctness conceived of and promoted by the Progressive Left: the war on language and the war on memory.

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell focuses on an individual living in "Oceania," a socialist society comprising the present-day nations of England and the Americas. In the novel, Oceania is abandoning standard English, which is referred to as "Oldspeak," and is adopting "Newspeak," a limited vocabulary designed to restrict thought.

Orwell understood that words enable thought and thought enables action. If there is no word for something, it makes it hard to think about it. This is an ancient insight -- the Bible speaks reverently of "The Word."
Posted by:Besoeker

#11  Of course he didn't. That was kind of the point--he missed some things. So far: A real life Brave New World isn't exactly a stable society.
Posted by: james   2019-07-14 22:33  

#10  Orwell didn't write Brave New World. He wrote 1984.
Posted by: Herb McCoy    2019-07-14 15:13  

#9  We've got a lot of Brave New World features: distraction by entertainment and soma and sex. So far.
Posted by: james   2019-07-14 14:24  

#8  This article is exactly right.

Newspeak is everywhere, and the goal is exactly as Orwell predicted: to restrict thought by declaring certain ways of thinking to be culturally and even legally unacceptable.

We see this in Ontario's ridiculous tranny legislation that compels the use of Newspeak.

We see it in the ubiquitous use of the bullshit, nonsense-on-stilts neologism undocumented that has displaced the clear and universally-understood, standard legal term used in the statutes, illegal alien.

We see it in the complete degradation of the word diversity, to the point where it denotes the absence of diversity.

"Tolerance" means intolerance.

"Progressive" denotes reactionary politics.

"Conservative" describes radicalism and extreme market mania.

"Shareholder value" describes the practice of corporate insiders lining their own pockets.

Etc etc

Posted by: Lex   2019-07-14 12:14  

#7  Everything - you (in USA) have seen nothing yet.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2019-07-14 11:11  

#6  Can someone say AMEN???

Wonderful post.

As long as we who believe continue to witness to the word, we have a chance.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2019-07-14 10:40  

#5  Of course Orwell was liberal. Many think of him as an atheist and rebel, like Hitchens, seeking to find common ground with his genius. I believe he was more christian than christians try to be, and never knew it. He did hate the roman catholic creeds anyway, and saw the same bureaucratic bullshit in organized religion as in any other political committee.

Any liberal of Orwell's kind would probably see the 'liberals' of today as bloody fools, anarchy cultists with zero understanding, free time and money on their hands. If Marx met AOC for example, he'd rip his manifesto to shreds and stomp on it. Liberal thinkers have appropriated his legacy to spell out 'Big Brother' and its connotations with national security agencies Poor, desperate bastards and surveillance. But that's the problem with so many supposed 'thinkers', lauded by committees and rulers as visionaries because their enterprise borrows from unreal doctrine to gain acceptance. These thinkers can opine on utopias and possible outcomes of theoretical prescriptions to be inserted in legislation, because it's easy to think in terms of 'the written word.' Scholars and academics, have so very little connect with real life and almost always die adamant, narcissistic old farts.

What the Bible teaches is that it's the spirit behind every word that is more important. Because word is thought expressed and thoughts originate in spirit(or mind, if you're so inclined). An evil spirit expressing seemingly kind, generous words and humanist theories still aims to wreak havoc by supplanting mankind. And you know the spirit by it's fruits. So if it has once produced mayhem and destruction, the result the second time round, with revised theories and new words won't be any different. For example, the first evil spirit that controlled mankind and taught us about 'Big Government' and globalism was in Babylon.

It was Nimrod who united every known tribe into constructing the first self licking ice-cream cone. His administration taught them government - the so called social compact, and the enslavement of man by other men. And every organization, bureaucracy and committee today swears by its efficacy.

America is not yet a dystopia, only because there still have to be people there who believe in the first word, from God. The Bible.
Posted by: Dron66046   2019-07-14 10:36  

#4  So might as well call London "Airstrip One" from now on...no "Steamers" yet but plenty of knife and acid attacks.
Posted by: Unosh Hupinelet8756   2019-07-14 09:30  

#3  Aesop, Orwell, once you get a drift of human behavior, it really doesn't change. Orwell figured out rather early what power and the concentration of power leads to in the modern world. BTW, the founders thought the same thing which is the reason for the separation of powers among the branches of the national government and between the states and national government. That's an arrangement that the Judiciary has been attacking in its assumption of authority and power that was never intended.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2019-07-14 08:14  

#2  What Orwell Got Right - everything.
Posted by: Raj   2019-07-14 06:59  

#1  Nostradamus would be jealous of Orwell.
Posted by: One Eyed Tsar   2019-07-14 06:54  

00:00