A lot of my liberal friends are suddenly rediscovering this book.

>>9304933
>If so, what happened?
Dolan
>Is it more relevant
probably not

Literally Hitler was elected as american president

>>9304933
>what happened?
Snowden.

File: image.jpg (138KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 711x533px

Obvious bait. Go fuck yourself /pol/.

I hope libkeks who think this fits as Trumpian dystopia don't miss on the irony that the novel takes place in a globalized world

>>9304968
Globalized in what sense? Isnt the narrative of globalization just fed to the citizens without any observable interaction occuring?

>>9305022
the opposite. The population is fed with the narrative of a war against another superpower, when for all we know there's only 1 country.

>>9304933
No, it was way more relevant when SJW media and universities were reigning unopposed. Now we have healthy debates again and the media isn't sucking off the president anymore.

File: IMG_7403.jpg (107KB, 1180x842px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1180x842px

>>9305054
Where are these healthy debates that you speak of taking place?

>>9305433
4chan

>>9305433
At universities, the bastions of free thought and open communication.

>>9304933
If they didn't realise shit was already fucked; then they're being melodramatic desu. Dolan is just going to get Democrats voted in again. Nothing will change until people realise shit's fucked outside of voting for favourite sock puppet.

I'm only 2/3 through it but the most striking comparison for me was that they were essentially indoctrinated like terrorist regardless of the fact they were almost fully unaware of what they wanted to fight or improve.

>>9305701
I'm confused. I thought the fedora clad masses generally represented /pol/? This sounds like a millennial. #imwithher

>>9304968
>3 Superpowers with zero immigration or civilian communication between them, two of which are always at war with the other.

>Except for Africa which is a fractalized churning mess, likely very culturally diverse due to the absence of proper nations, cut off from the rest of the world.

>Every world power train people to be hyper xenophobic

>Globalised.

The idea of globalism(as an ideology, rather than a process) versus nationalism as the central dichotomy of politics is retarded and there's a reason it came out of /pol/ and info-wars rather than Oxford.

>>9304933

Ninteen eighty-four is like the liberal training manual.

>>9304933
>The aim of the High is to remain where they are. The aim of the middle is to change places with the High. The aim of the Low, when they have an aim - for it is an abiding characteristic of the Low that they are too much crushed by drudgery to be more than intermittently conscious of anything outside their daily lives - is to abolosh all distinctions and create a society in which all men shall be equal.
>the old kind of Socialist, who had been training to fight something called 'class-privilege', assumed that what is not hereditary can not be permanent.

I have a feeling that Orwell is at war with socialism when reading 1984. The book provides you with marvelous insights about today's radical-left, SJW, 'newspeak'-pronouns-advocates.
>They [the High] are then overthrown by the Middle, who enlist the Low on their side by pretending to them that they are fighting for liberty and Justice.
>The earthly paradise had been discredited at exactly the moment when it became realisable. Every new political theory, by whatever name it called itself, led back to hierarchy and reglementation.
>It [the ideology] systematically undermines the solidarity of the family, and it calls its leader by a name which is a direct appeal to the sentiment of family loayalty.

>>9305749
newspeak only real comparison with new pronouns and advocates is that they're supported by the state (like in that meme right wing philosopher related event that I can't remember, I think it was in Canada?). Other than that the comparison doesn't hold up; newspeak is is about using less words in order to make people think in more mechanic ways. This is based in the fact that language operates on reality and is the very first ideological product and producer.
And you're half right, Orwell is against Stalinism but he was a radical leftist.

The right loves it whenever the left is calling the shots and the left loves it whenever the right is calling the shots. The people who actually get what the book is about love it regardless of who's in charge.

>>9305701
Orwell liked the POUM because they were murdering Catholic priests. He was a socialist because it gave him cover for his love of British imperialism.

>>9305039
except that this reality is "all inclusive" and other narratives are available other than mainstream media. Orwell's world is extremely isolationist and authoritarian like that of Russia not three decades ago. Cold wars, surveillance, deportation, incarceration etc.

File: aka Demons aka Devils.jpg (55KB, 366x540px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 366x540px

>>9304933
1984 is overrated. Hit your libfag friends with the only legit novel about the dangers of a totalitarian state.

>aka Demons or aka Devils

>>9305877
The bridges from policing language to policing behavior to policing thoughts to policing history are very short.

>>9305929
That's about anarchists you retard.

File: it can't be true.jpg (32KB, 308x308px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 308x308px

>>9305948
>That's about anarchists you retard.

>The first thing that must strike any outside observer is that Socialism, in its developed form is a theory confined entirely to the middle classes. The typical Socialist is not, as tremulous old ladies imagine, a ferocious-looking working man with greasy overalls and a raucous voice. He is either a youthful snob-Bolshevik who in five years’ time will quite probably have made a wealthy marriage and been converted to Roman Catholicism; or, still more typically, a prim little man with a white-collar job, usually a secret teetotaller and often with vegetarian leanings, with a history of Nonconformity behind him, and, above all, with a social position which he has no intention of forfeiting. This last type is surprisingly common in Socialist parties of every shade; it has perhaps been taken over en bloc from. the old Liberal Party. In addition to this there is the horrible — the really disquieting — prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together. One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist, and feminist in England.

>>9305789
>that meme right wing philosopher
J.B. Peterson, he sounds like Kermit The Frog btw
>>9305789
>newspeak is is about using less words in order to make people think in more mechanic ways

I'am trying to figure out what the implcations of making people think in 'mechanical' are. When I understood the crucial point of what came out of the linguistic turn properly, than it is that language, which is ultimately social, constructs our reality or to put it with Zizek's understanding of ideology it predetermines our default acces to reality. So when you enter the world you enter a prefabricated symbolic order, which is language. The latter preexists you and you just enter its realm of organised signs. What newspeak is trying to do in my opinion is that it exploits language's social nature by precise engineering of meaning, predominantly by abolishing binary oppositions such like in the cases of 'ungood' instead of good and ba, blackwhite and so on and so on *sniff*... Consequently each new individual which enters the engineered symbolic order is obliged a linguistic system with a logic on its own which does not allow the individual to attain some grasp of an existing state of affairs and to conceive another state of affairs preferable to it. Taken this as the ethical (in means of 'action' or 'transpassing') structure of linguistic oppositions, the effect is that agency, realisation of one's own circumstances and their overcoming is made impossible. I think postmodernism's renunciation from binary oppositions is the philosophical groundwork for such a deceicive attempt. For me it goes even further: When agency and constant self-transgression is made impossible, the historical structured Being is deprived from Time, for Being is never fixed, it projects itself forward and therefore is never identical with it self. In the end the Being is bound in a servile order. Just think of the Time aspect when reminiscing the phrase 'the clocks where striking thirteen.'

Demolishing oppositional thinking by reorganising the sign system needs the mental concept which is described by g.O. as doublethink:

>Doublethink means the power of holding to contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneaously, and accepting both of them.

That implicates that the truth is in hands of the dominators and alterable whenever the situation demands it.

I like 1984. It's just that i can't find someone talking about it not being a complete idiot.

I always prefered 1985

>>9304933

It was more relevant when Obama was president and the entire media apparatus was on his side. Now the entire media and intelligentsia is against Trump and somehow we live in a MORE Orwellian time?

>>9306015
please cut that 'Orwellian' bs. You will never come to a satisfying result by inquirying the question whether this or that is orwellian or not. It's all a game about who can draw a narrative on his side and therefore obtaining a sponsor for motivations and interests. Ideological abuse of text is way to common with 1984, BNW, TBK etc.

>>9306052
That's a very Kafkaesque analysis.

>>9306073
xDDD

>>9305995
I too prefer the sequels, but they started to go a bit off the rails at 2001 and especially 2666

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-28 at 4.03.15 PM.png (437KB, 899x522px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 899x522px

Omg #sotrue this really makes u think.

>>9305995
>>9306015
When does the new one come out?

>>9304933
i really truly deep down feel like this book is very overrated and could've easily been replaced with a much more succinct essay

i guess you could argue that by putting it in story format you feel more for the people in that position but i dunno. it's very bland and uninteresting imo

>>9306181
>by putting it in story format you feel more for the people in that position

not quite right. The whole narrative instance is situated within Winston as focalizer. On top of that he suffers paranoid hallucinations. You get absoluetly no clue about the feelings of any other person except for Julia, who is a bitch

File: 3AD51DA200000578-3979738-image-a-69_1480362895145.jpg (66KB, 634x423px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 634x423px

>what happened?
>"alternative facts"

>>9305726
Could you elaborate?

>>9306181
Novels are far more accessible than essays. How many people read essays? Depending on the complexity of a message, informing through a narrative is the best way to reach people. It's compelling and relatable. This has been recognised for thousands of years.

>>9306208
So much hysteria about a uncharitable interpretation of a comment. He obviously meant 'the facts that the mainstream press won't tell you', not 'we make up our own facts'.

there was almost exactly the same thread 3 days ago. write something profound or shut up.

>>9305624
Hahahahahaha! Yeah, that's what happens there...

I hate this book but i bought it for that good good pynchon intro

It's a bit of an old stand-in for the whole apparatus of Freedom & Politics & All That.

Not terrible apposite right now, though, wrong kind of a despotism.