PDA

View Full Version : Big Brother Is Watching



Gold9472
12-27-2005, 01:34 PM
Big Brother Is Watching

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/oped/ci_3337465

12/26/2005

It took 21 years longer than expected, but the future has finally arrived.

And we don't like it. Not one bit.

We are fighting a war with no end to create a peace with no defined victory.

We occupy a foreign land that doesn't want us, while at home our civil liberties are discounted.

We are told that it's better not to know what our government is doing in our name, for security purposes. Meanwhile, our government is becoming omnipresent, spying on us whenever it deems it necessary.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

George Orwell was right after all.

In 1949, Orwell penned "1984," a dark, futuristic satire in which the totalitarian government used indoctrination, propaganda and fear to enforce order and conformity. His "Big Brother" — the face of this all-knowing regime — was never wrong, and to make sure of it, history was constantly being rewritten.

Orwell wrote his book as a cautionary tale to underscore the insidious danger of slowly eroded individual liberties. His Thought Police may not yet be on the march, but it's not hyperbole to point out the eerie parallels with today's America.

In America today, Big Brother is watching.

He's watching because President Bush told him to. Shortly after 9/11, Bush secretly authorized warrantless wiretaps on U.S. citizens making or receiving international calls and e-mails.

When it comes to fighting terror, Bush is totalitarian — remember, you're either with us or against us. Trust me to get it right, he says. Debate on the law is not only not needed, it's evil.

"An open debate about the law would say to the enemy, 'Here's what we're going to do.'" Bush said recently. "The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy."

Then there's the Patriot Act, also created in the days immediately after Sept. 11, 2001. The Senate and House of Representatives voted Thursday to extend the law by a month. President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales insist it's an indispensable tool in the war on terror and want it extended permanently.

"I'm as concerned about the privacy of American citizens as anyone, but we cannot allow libraries and use of libraries to become safe havens for terrorists," Gonzales said in July, defending one of the act's most controversial provisions.

Remember, too, that we invaded Iraq primarily because we were told Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat

with his weapons of mass destruction. Now the Bush administration acknowledges that wasn't so, but insists there were (are?) other reasons to invade. History is malleable.

Orwell wrote of war without end; we're told the war on terror will last decades at least. Orwell wrote of a dumbed-down "Newspeak," and who could argue that our national discourse hasn't slumped? Orwell's "Ministry of Love" tortured dissidents real or imagined; our government decries Iraq's secret torture prisons while arguing over whether to ban torture. Meanwhile, we maintain our own secret CIA prisons.

Bush is unapologetic. The president believes he has the legal authority to spy on American citizens without a warrant, and he plans to continue to reauthorize the program "for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill American citizens." But when the enemy is poorly defined, who determines when the threat is over? In this case, the same government that secretly taps our phones.

Turns out the truth is no stranger than fiction.

We think it's time for Congress to heed the warning of George Orwell.

To that end, we're asking for your help: Mail us or drop off your tattered copies of "1984." When we get 537 of them, we'll send them to every member of the House of Representatives and Senate and to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Feel free to inscribe the book with a note, reminding these fine people that we Americans take the threat to our liberties seriously. Remind Congress that it makes no sense to fight a war for democracy in a foreign land while allowing our democratic principles to erode at home.

Remind President Bush that ours is a country of checks and balances, not unbridled power.

Perhaps our nation's leaders can find some truth in this fiction and more carefully ponder the road we're traveling.

Bring or mail your books to the Oakland Tribune, 401 13th St., Oakland CA 94612. Doors are open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

911=inside job
12-27-2005, 06:07 PM
i tell everyone they need to read 1984 again if they havent read it since high school...

i think that "they" have read 1984 plenty and look at it as their final goal...

ThotPolice
12-28-2005, 04:33 AM
It's been a while since I read it I am still confused by the ending, is he saying to be complacent means to die inside or that, dissent is pointless?

Anyhoo there is a group pf people trying to change 1984 from fiction to current events...

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7022

I found it funny.

Simply_sexy
12-28-2005, 11:41 AM
Hey, I'm 21yrs...What a coincidence!!

911=inside job
12-28-2005, 01:36 PM
It's been a while since I read it I am still confused by the ending, is he saying to be complacent means to die inside or that, dissent is pointless?

Anyhoo there is a group pf people trying to change 1984 from fiction to current events...

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7022

I found it funny.
im not really sure.. i think you sound about right... ya know, orwell is my favorite but im starting to think he was up to no good in the end....

my teacher the other day told me he thinks orwell was a fascist before he died... ive read somewhere before people talking about if he wrote the book 1984 mold the people slowly.. something like that...

one thing that bothers me is that here in the states they make just about every high school kid read 1984... i didnt read it until i was 31 so i got a lot out of it but i dont think i would have got the same as a kid....

ive read most of his books and theyre all great but very very dark.... no matter what there is a lot to learn from everyone of his books...

Partridge
12-28-2005, 03:18 PM
my teacher the other day told me he thinks orwell was a fascist before he died... ive read somewhere before people talking about if he wrote the book 1984 mold the people slowly.. something like that...

I sincerely doubt Orwell was a fascist when he died. He spent the best part of his time since 1936 in one way or another fighting fascism, physically in the Spanish Revolution, and ideologically as an Allied-propagandist for the BBC in Asia during the WWII years. After that he wrote regularly for both Tribune and The Observer. It's true he did shamefully provide a list of names of people he suspected to be Communists (ie Stalinists) to the Foreign Office - and that I can never forgive him for - but this was probably more out of a hatred Stalinism (who's effects he had directly experienced in the Spanish Revolution, being basically run out of the country on pain of death by the sell-out Stalinist forces) than any love of capitalist 'democracy', never mind fascism.

There is revisionism in regard to Orwell, both the Cold War revisionism of the right which use books like 1984 and Animal Farm to show that a) Orwell hated socialism (not true - in fact his critiques of the USSR were based largely upon the Trotskyist and Anarchist views of that state) and that b) Socialism necessarily leads to 1984 style Totalitarianism - presumably because 'Orwell said so' (which, of course, he never did).

And then is the new-revisionism which would have it that Orwell secretly wanted a 1984 style society, and as you put it to "mold the people slowly". I find this laughable - anyone who reads 1984 can surely see this was railing against the society in which Winston Smith found himself - which was basically what he believed the future would be like under Stalinism. Doublethink is the prime example of this - remember this book was written when Stalin was still in power, and the various Communist Parties all over the world followed the Russian line without criticism. And example would be the fantastic anti-fascist propagandism doen by the CPs, then as soon as the Molotov-Von Ribbentrop non-agression pact was signed, the CPs began agitating for non-interventionism in Euorpe (and ironically, selling out their CP comrades on the mainland). Of course, such 'doublethink' is not the sole property of the Stalinist left, one can easily see it among pro-war right in the US for example (Saddam Hussien had WMDs/We never said he had WMDs - Saddam was helping Al Qaeda/We never said that! etc).

So basically, no, I think your teacher is talking out of his arse. To the best of my knowledge, Orwell remained what he termed a 'democratic socialist' until his death in 1950 - he was probably closer to anarchism than any other ideology in his last years.

jetsetlemming
12-28-2005, 03:31 PM
"Stranger in a strange land" left more of an impression on me than "1984". I'll check 1984 out again, I don't remember much about it...

911=inside job
12-28-2005, 03:48 PM
I sincerely doubt Orwell was a fascist when he died. He spent the best part of his time since 1936 in one way or another fighting fascism, physically in the Spanish Revolution, and ideologically as an Allied-propagandist for the BBC in Asia during the WWII years. After that he wrote regularly for both Tribune and The Observer. It's true he did shamefully provide a list of names of people he suspected to be Communists (ie Stalinists) to the Foreign Office - and that I can never forgive him for - but this was probably more out of a hatred Stalinism (who's effects he had directly experienced in the Spanish Revolution, being basically run out of the country on pain of death by the sell-out Stalinist forces) than any love of capitalist 'democracy', never mind fascism.

There is revisionism in regard to Orwell, both the Cold War revisionism of the right which use books like 1984 and Animal Farm to show that a) Orwell hated socialism (not true - in fact his critiques of the USSR were based largely upon the Trotskyist and Anarchist views of that state) and that b) Socialism necessarily leads to 1984 style Totalitarianism - presumably because 'Orwell said so' (which, of course, he never did).

And then is the new-revisionism which would have it that Orwell secretly wanted a 1984 style society, and as you put it to "mold the people slowly". I find this laughable - anyone who reads 1984 can surely see this was railing against the society in which Winston Smith found himself - which was basically what he believed the future would be like under Stalinism. Doublethink is the prime example of this - remember this book was written when Stalin was still in power, and the various Communist Parties all over the world followed the Russian line without criticism. And example would be the fantastic anti-fascist propagandism doen by the CPs, then as soon as the Molotov-Von Ribbentrop non-agression pact was signed, the CPs began agitating for non-interventionism in Euorpe (and ironically, selling out their CP comrades on the mainland). Of course, such 'doublethink' is not the sole property of the Stalinist left, one can easily see it among pro-war right in the US for example (Saddam Hussien had WMDs/We never said he had WMDs - Saddam was helping Al Qaeda/We never said that! etc).

So basically, no, I think your teacher is talking out of his arse. To the best of my knowledge, Orwell remained what he termed a 'democratic socialist' until his death in 1950 - he was probably closer to anarchism than any other ideology in his last years.dont get me wrong, this is not what i think... i think youre right... what my teacher/friend said was that something gave him that feeling... he also likes orwell so ill have to ask him about it again...

part, have you read Burmese Days??? great book... i read somewhere that a lot of people in burma believe the orwell wrote 3 books about burma meaning animal farm and 1984... a lady wrote a book about orwell in burma that i want to read...

sorry if i came off like I thought he was a nazi...

Partridge
12-28-2005, 04:16 PM
I wasn't having a go at you! Sorry if it sounded like that. And no, I've yet to read Burmese Days - I know these a copy online, but I prefer old fashioned dead-wood for books. I just got Down and Out in Paris & London which I'm gonna start on soon.

911=inside job
12-28-2005, 04:39 PM
i was just trying to be clear....

down and out is another great one... i have 3 more of his books sitting right here waiting for me to read.. ive sort of been saving them because ill be bummed when i have no more orwell books to read...

A Handmaids tale is a great book that is a lot like 1984...

ya, i cant read a book online either... i did start 1984 online though, then got the book...

ThotPolice
12-28-2005, 06:12 PM
The ending may have just been a way to save his ass from persecution, like in the origin of man darwin put in a bit at the end about it being so complex a higher power must have been involved. That way the messege still gets out without the author having to spend the rest of his days in jail or what have you.

Kinda confusing though.

Partridge
12-30-2005, 01:59 PM
I don't think Orwell would have been facing a prison sentence if he'd written a 'happy' ending - especially as from 1945 to '51 Britain was under a somewhat radical Social Democratic government (that instituted the Welfare State, National Health Service and free thrid level education, among other things).

I do think he'd have faced a lot of literary criticism from realists though, having built up this horrible world of Total Information Awareness (oooh, sound familiar?), and then having one man bring the whole thing down - because that's not how things work in real life - outside of Fantasy and Sci Fi novels, and crappy political thrillers.

If you're looking for the hope in 1984, Smith gives it in his diary "If there is hope, it lies with the Proles."

A happy ending in 1984 would be like a happy ending in the film Brazil - crap. I mean, I've seen the 'Love Conquers All' US-edit of Brazil, and its complete shite compared to the Director's Cut.

ThotPolice
12-30-2005, 05:42 PM
I don't think Orwell would have been facing a prison sentence if he'd written a 'happy' ending - especially as from 1945 to '51 Britain was under a somewhat radical Social Democratic government (that instituted the Welfare State, National Health Service and free thrid level education, among other things).

I do think he'd have faced a lot of literary criticism from realists though, having built up this horrible world of Total Information Awareness (oooh, sound familiar?), and then having one man bring the whole thing down - because that's not how things work in real life - outside of Fantasy and Sci Fi novels, and crappy political thrillers.

If you're looking for the hope in 1984, Smith gives it in his diary "If there is hope, it lies with the Proles."

A happy ending in 1984 would be like a happy ending in the film Brazil - crap. I mean, I've seen the 'Love Conquers All' US-edit of Brazil, and its complete shite compared to the Director's Cut. What if he had faked being brainwashed and lived long enuff to inspire the proles to revolution before being shot? Or maybe he was leaving that up to the reader. ;)

Either way great book..must pick it up again.

911=inside job
12-31-2005, 04:20 AM
"If there is hope, it lies with the Proles."

that is my favorite line in the book... it is so true.. how does 1% control the other 99%?? to me it is fucking unreal.. HAHAH!!!

911=inside job
01-12-2006, 11:21 PM
i think this fits here... this is kind of what i think about 1984 and having kids read it...

Samuel Clemens
(Mark Twain)

I am greatly troubled by what you say. I wrote Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn for adults exclusively, and it always distresses me when I find that boys and girls have been allowed access to them. The mind that becomes soiled in youth can never again be washed clean; I know this by my own experience, and to this day I cherish an unappeasable bitterness against the unfaithful guardians of my young life, who not only permitted but compelled me to read an unexpurgated Bible through before I was 15 years old. None can do that and ever draw a clean sweet breath again this side of the grave. Ask that young lady -- she will tell you so.

AuGmENTor
09-23-2007, 10:21 AM
BUMP