Which part was the dystopia? It seemed pretty comfy.

The lack of free choice is the dystopian bit.

Everyone fitting in by force is seen as dystopian by the "enlightened" masses who would tell you that ultimate freedom is just being and doing whatever you like, whenever you like without external forces coercing your decisions

They would never understand the desire for fitting in present in those who otherwise never will

It's a world full of chads and staceys, enforced by self-hating robot philosophers. It's a fucking nightmare unless you want to be chad.

>>36252446
its preetty comfy
>work job that you've been genetically engineered to do
>content with life because you've been socialized to enjoy life
>get high and go to orgies
doesn't seem that bad

Bernard is literally r9k prove me wrong

>>36252781
>prove me wrong
he was actually mildly popular after bringing in the savage
otherwise sure

>>36252781
>prove me wrong
not a virgin

The dystopia was the lack of individualism or identity. The part that was meant to be frightening was how appealing it was. Huxley's contention was that control by force as depicted in, for example, 1984 might be shocking in a visceral way, but isn't a very likely threat.

People have an innate hatred of authoritarianism and coercion. There is a gut reaction against police states. Brave New World shows that the real threat isn't that the individual is beaten down by the state, it's that the individual is indulged, placated, and pampered by the state until it stops caring and gladly gives itself up.

Brave New World is warning first and foremost against comfiness. Because at the end of the day its a distraction and a narcotic. The state in the novel does seem to be benign and well intentioned. The concern is that if they weren't it wouldn't make any difference to the population.