Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, July 08, 2019

o novel of the past century has had more influence than George Orwell's 1984. The title, the adjectival form of the author's last name, the vocabulary of the all-powerful Party that rules the superstate Oceania with the ideology of Ingsoc -- doublethink, memory hole, unperson, thoughtcrime, Newspeak, Thought Police, Room 101, Big Brother -- they've all entered the English language as instantly recognizable signs of a nightmare future. It's almost impossible to talk about propaganda, surveillance, authoritarian politics, or perversions of truth without dropping a reference to 1984. Throughout the Cold War, the novel found avid underground readers behind the Iron Curtain who wondered, How did he know?

Advertisement

More

This is really good. Worth your time.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Link?

#1 | Posted by Vaquero at 2019-07-08 02:55 PM | Reply

--memory hole, unperson, thoughtcrime, Newspeak, Thought Police, Room 101, Big Brother

It's a checklist for the Left, who think "1984" in a how-to guide.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-08 02:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Link

www.theatlantic.com

#3 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-08 03:01 PM | Reply

I love this line from the article:

" And in the Trump era, it's a best seller."

You have to be profoundly ignorant not to know that it's one of the most devastating takedowns of communism ever.

#4 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-08 03:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

You have to be profoundly ignorant not to know that it's one of the most devastating takedowns of communism ever.

Are you new here? Of course the DR Left will have no clue that this and Animal Farm are strong anti-communist novels.

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-08 03:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

--Are you new here?

Either that or I've landed somewhere in the Twilight Zone.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-08 03:25 PM | Reply

You have to be profoundly ignorant not to know that it's one of the most devastating takedowns of communism ever.
#4 | Posted by nullifidian a

Once again, you prove your ignorance; this time with profundity.

1984 is a takedown of nationalism.

#7 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-07-08 03:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Nineteen Eighty-Four, often published as 1984, is a dystopian novel by English writer George Orwell published in June 1949, whose themes centre on the risks of government overreach, totalitarianism and repressive regimentation of all persons and behaviours within society. The novel is set in an imagined future, the year 1984, when much of the world has fallen victim to perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance, historical negationism and propaganda.

Fascism is a form of radical right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.


#8 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-07-08 03:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Laughing at Headhurts and CommieShack.

#9 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-08 03:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#8

Learn a little more than what you have been told to believe Clown, Orwell was a fervent Anti-Communist and 1984 was a denunciation of a Soviet style Stalinist State set after a nuclear war:

Nineteen Eighty-Four was published in 1949, but Orwell was first set on the road to it at least 12 years earlier when he was fighting Franco's insurgents in Spain as a member of a left-wing, but non-Stalinist militia, the Workers' Party of Marxist Unification (POUM).

Orwell had gone to Spain to fight Francoist fascism, but found himself face-to-face with another form of totalitarianism. The pro-Stalin communist forces in Spain turned on the POUM, branding them Trotskyist traitors. Orwell was shot by a Communist Zampolit and barely escaped Spain with his life.

Back home no one wanted to know about his experiences. Even non-communist left-wingers, including the publisher Victor Gollancz and the New Statesman editor Kingsley Martin, were reluctant to publish his accounts of what had happened with the Communists, for fear of harming the overall cause of anti-fascism.

It's often missed that Nineteen Eighty-Four is set a few decades after an atomic war. The managers administering the book's three super states, Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, have tacitly agreed not to try to destroy each other but to continue forever in a kind of cold war.

Indeed, it was Orwell who coined the phrase "cold war" in a 1945 essay called You and the Atomic Bomb.

In his view of things, communist totalitarianism was not merely a theoretical threat from a fictional future. The urgency of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and of much of Orwell's wartime and post-war writing, springs clearly from his sense that communist totalitarianism was already proving dangerously attractive to many on the left, not least intellectuals..

But what I think we can see is that, with fascist totalitarianism utterly defeated in WWII, Orwell found himself one of the relatively few people prepared to agitate against the left-totalitarianism of our erstwhile ally, the Soviet Union.

When Animal Farm was published, and when Nineteen Eighty-Four was being conceptualised and then written, Orwell's overwhelming preoccupation was to warn against Stalinism and its onward march.

BBC- 1984: George Orwell's road to dystopia

#10 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-08 04:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orwell himself said it was about communism, idiots.

"[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office."

--George Orwell

#11 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-08 04:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Fascism is a form of radical right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.

This is exactly what authoritarian socialism is.....

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-07-08 04:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Ha, Orwell had no idea what he was talking about!

- The DR Left

#13 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-08 04:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I never read the novel so I'll have to trust what the readers learned from it.

Did Clown or truthurts read it?

#14 | Posted by eberly at 2019-07-08 04:22 PM | Reply

"Orwell himself said it was about communism, idiots.
'[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office.'
--George Orwell
#11 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2019-07-08 04:10 PM"

Really? Please supply a link showing this is an actual quote of George Orwell and not a hear-say description, lacking context, written up in Wikipedia.

"Most of the twentieth century's notable men of letters -- i.e., writers of books, of essays, of reportage -- seem also to have, literally, written a great deal of letters. Sometimes their correspondence reflects and shapes their "real" written work; sometimes it appears collected in book form itself. Both hold true in the case of George Orwell, a volume of whose letters, edited by Peter Davison, came out last year. In it we find this missive, also published in full at The Daily Beast, sent in 1944 to one Noel Willmett, who had asked "whether totalitarianism, leader-worship etc. are really on the up-grade" given "that they are not apparently growing in [England] and the USA":

(Meanwhile, here's what George Orwell actually wrote in response):

"I must say I believe, or fear, that taking the world as a whole these things are on the increase. Hitler, no doubt, will soon disappear, but only at the expense of strengthening (a) Stalin, (b) the Anglo-American millionaires and (c) all sorts of petty fuhrers of the type of de Gaulle. All the national movements everywhere, even those that originate in resistance to German domination, seem to take non-democratic forms, to group themselves round some superhuman fuhrer (Hitler, Stalin, Salazar, Franco, Gandhi, De Valera are all varying examples) and to adopt the theory that the end justifies the means. Everywhere the world movement seems to be in the direction of centralised economies which can be made to ‘work' in an economic sense but which are not democratically organised and which tend to establish a caste system. With this go the horrors of emotional nationalism and a tendency to disbelieve in the existence of objective truth because all the facts have to fit in with the words and prophecies of some infallible fuhrer. Already history has in a sense ceased to exist, ie. there is no such thing as a history of our own times which could be universally accepted, and the exact sciences are endangered as soon as military necessity ceases to keep people up to the mark. Hitler can say that the Jews started the war, and if he survives that will become official history. He can't say that two and two are five, because for the purposes of, say, ballistics they have to make four. But if the sort of world that I am afraid of arrives, a world of two or three great superstates which are unable to conquer one another, two and two could become five if the fuhrer wished it. That, so far as I can see, is the direction in which we are actually moving, though, of course, the process is reversible."

www.openculture.com

#15 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2019-07-09 07:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Hey stupid, all you need to do is read "1984" while possessing some knowledge of the Soviet Union to see the obvious allusions.

It's clear that leftist communist-coddlers are desperate to deny "1984" is about communism. They hate to see communism criticized because they have a fondness for the ideology. Leftists never use "communist" as a pejorative like they do with "nazi." They are Lenin's useful idiots.

#16 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-09 09:25 AM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

All the [..] movements everywhere, even those that originate in resistance to [fascism], seem to take non-democratic forms [..] and to adopt the theory that the end justifies the means.

Interesting. I wonder...what would Orwell think of Antifa?

#17 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-07-09 09:29 AM | Reply

"I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office."

So like our Smart TVs and Alexa listening devices, correct?

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 01:04 PM | Reply

#18 If you referring to the surveillance state, then Yes, especially when those corporate entities enter into data sharing agreements with the government.

However, if you are addressing the quote as a whole, then No, because neither Alexa or my Samsung are working at the behest of communists.

#19 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-07-09 01:22 PM | Reply

#19 Totalitarianism is totalitarianism, be it Commumist, Capitalist, or anything in between.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 01:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#15

Try looking at Orwell's writings after Hitler was defeated, his focus shifted to Soviet Communism, all these quotes are about Stalinism:

"There is something wrong with a regime that requires a pyramid of corpses every few years."

"A society becomes totalitarian when its structure becomes flagrantly artificial: that is, when its ruling class has lots its function but succeeds in clinging to power by force or fraud."

"The really frightening thing about communist totalitarianism is not that it commits 'atrocities' but that it attacks the concept of objective truth; it claims to control the past as well as the future."

#21 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-09 01:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Like believing the Betsy Ross myth.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 01:49 PM | Reply

Just because Orwell's story was about Communism as he saw it at the time he wrote it doesn't mean that parallels are impossible outside a communist system.

#23 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-07-09 01:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"#15
Try looking at Orwell's writings after Hitler was defeated, his focus shifted to Soviet Communism, all these quotes are about Stalinism:
"There is something wrong with a regime that requires a pyramid of corpses every few years."
"A society becomes totalitarian when its structure becomes flagrantly artificial: that is, when its ruling class has lots its function but succeeds in clinging to power by force or fraud."
"The really frightening thing about communist totalitarianism is not that it commits 'atrocities' but that it attacks the concept of objective truth; it claims to control the past as well as the future."
#21 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER AT 2019-07-09 01:41 PM"

You'll note I didn't dispute the concept that George Orwell's 1984 was directed at Communism (and, more specifically, Stalinism).
I simply asked NULLIFIDIAN to provide a source to prove that what he posted as a quote from George Orwell, actually was a quote from George Orwell.
Given NULLIFIDIAN's ad hominem reply when questioned, it was obvious that he could not prove that this was a quote from George Orwell.

To further the discussion, I then followed up with a portion of a letter (there's more of the letter given in the link) actually written by George Orwell. In that letter, Orwell speaks of the dangers of totalitarianism. Since in 1948-1949 (when 1984 was released), Communism was the upcoming/dominant form of totalitarianism, it only makes sense that Orwell would highlight Communism as a dangerous totalitarian government. However, Orwell did not 'call out' Communism exclusively. Re-read this portion from his letter:

"All the national movements everywhere, even those that originate in resistance to German domination, seem to take non-democratic forms, to group themselves round some superhuman fuhrer (Hitler, Stalin, Salazar, Franco, Gandhi, De Valera are all varying examples) and to adopt the theory that the end justifies the means. Everywhere the world movement seems to be in the direction of centralised economies which can be made to ‘work' in an economic sense but which are not democratically organised and which tend to establish a caste system. With this go the horrors of emotional nationalism and a tendency to disbelieve in the existence of objective truth because all the facts have to fit in with the words and prophecies of some infallible fuhrer."

George Orwell initially believed that socialism was the "cure" for totalitarianism. Later, he recognized the difficulties in implementing socialism due to the greediness of those in power.

#24 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2019-07-10 05:04 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#24

Very well written and informative.

Thank you.

#25 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-07-10 10:39 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort