Orwell vs. Huxley

[Arising_uk]

...

If that fails the Great Beast would be forced to require women to wear fashionable chastity belts good for both vanity and population control.

Weren't they a Christian invention?

[Greta]

You still don't comprehend that the Earth has natural limits, do you?

How can you not appreciate this blindingly simple fact?

[Dubious]

The irony is that we still live in one of the best times to be alive in human history; there are still many good things we take for granted, even if they are being taken away from us at a fair clip.

I agree. Looking back can be an absolute horror story; we had no defense against nature, add to that the massive mortality rate we inflicted on each other during times when the entire population of the planet was less than half a billion - which included a large portion of those showing the trauma of having barely survived.

With all the misery it's no wonder that their lives were so focused on an afterlife finding virtually no hope in this one. Of all the things in the past which appear senseless to us now, that hope which almost amounted to certainty for them seems completely rational.

One can carry the irony forward in knowing that people THEN were at least as intelligent as anyone alive today. The main difference being that OUR errors, just as senseless in their own way, become vastly more lethal to the future.

Also, I think that rights being taken away can only occur and succeed, knowingly or unknowingly, with the collusion of those it is taken away from.

I'd still rather this lifestyle to that of the 19th century or before. Neither of us would have lasted too long during The Inquisition, I suspect

Me too! But then again both of us, had we existed during Inquisition times, would have been more theistically inclined like everyone else though that in itself was no guarantee of avoiding a possible Inquisition interview.

[Greta]

The irony is that we still live in one of the best times to be alive in human history; there are still many good things we take for granted, even if they are being taken away from us at a fair clip.

With all the misery it's no wonder that their lives were so focused on an afterlife finding virtually no hope in this one. Of all the things in the past which appear senseless to us now, that hope which almost amounted to certainty for them seems completely rational.

The circle turns and now ever more people are turning back to superstition as a relief from the troubles of reality, the troubles of being too many.

Also, I think that rights being taken away can only occur and succeed, knowingly or unknowingly, with the collusion of those it is taken away from.

Disagree. Those at the bottom have never had a chance. Consider the idea that animals unknowingly colluded with humans to remove their rights. The power differential today is the same.

I'd still rather this lifestyle to that of the 19th century or before. Neither of us would have lasted too long during The Inquisition, I suspect

Me too! But then again both of us, had we existed during Inquisition times, would have been more theistically inclined like everyone else though that in itself was no guarantee of avoiding a possible Inquisition interview.

Even if we were theists, we'd on the progressive side and thus would be doomed. The inquisition, along with the Third Reich, shows what happens when conservatives are completely dominant, and stresses the importance of political balance. When progressives are highly dominant, conservatives are pushed to the side. When conservatives are dominant, progressives are pushed out of existence.

[Dubious]

The irony is that we still live in one of the best times to be alive in human history; there are still many good things we take for granted, even if they are being taken away from us at a fair clip.

With all the misery it's no wonder that their lives were so focused on an afterlife finding virtually no hope in this one. Of all the things in the past which appear senseless to us now, that hope which almost amounted to certainty for them seems completely rational.

The circle turns and now ever more people are turning back to superstition as a relief from the troubles of reality, the troubles of being too many.

This statement requires more research. There is, for example this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wor ... 4a3bd39cd7

Also, I think that rights being taken away can only occur and succeed, knowingly or unknowingly, with the collusion of those it is taken away from.

Disagree. Those at the bottom have never had a chance. Consider the idea that animals unknowingly colluded with humans to remove their rights. The power differential today is the same.

Not certain whether I understood this statement but animals don’t foment revolutions or make Treaties. Animals may exist in society but were never, or rarely so, a part of society. It's only very recently that Animal Rights has become an issue.

Those at the bottom have usually always been at the bottom without the means to react to any authority. But for the Middle Class to be so divested is a process in itself in which they themselves may be unsuspectingly complicit.

I'd still rather this lifestyle to that of the 19th century or before. Neither of us would have lasted too long during The Inquisition, I suspect

Me too! But then again both of us, had we existed during Inquisition times, would have been more theistically inclined like everyone else though that in itself was no guarantee of avoiding a possible Inquisition interview.

Even if we were theists, we'd on the progressive side and thus would be doomed. The inquisition, along with the Third Reich, shows what happens when conservatives are completely dominant, and stresses the importance of political balance. When progressives are highly dominant, conservatives are pushed to the side. When conservatives are dominant, progressives are pushed out of existence.

That may be true but only under extreme conditions which may last a long time but still remains temporary...meaning no party ever completely vanquishes the other; it only retreats for the time-being incubating revolutions the more extreme conditions get.

[gaffo]

Orwell and Huxley were both right. I happen to think that Huxley's path to the downfall of civilization has greater weight than Orwell's (by about 60-40), but each route accelerates the other, doesn't it.

This gave me the thought that Huxley's route is the decadence of society, the wallowing in pleasure and forgetting how to behave in hard times. If the pleasure continued, there would be no downfall. The Roman Empire, Athens, Atlantis, all fell when the going was so good that everyone let the invading hordes in just because the indigenous had become too lazy, too soft, too liberal.

Orwell's path has had also many real-life examples. This is when the going gets so tough, that event the tough stop going. Pot Pol is the best example. Communist rule in the early years of communism (Stalinist era). Nazi rule of jingoism until bleeding resources cause death. Aztec culture. etc.

I think Huxleyism is sustainable. All you need is absolute lack of external enemies, and complete automation (no exploitation). Orwell's route eventually breaks down, due to dissent within the system.

USA prides itself with being both tough and not soft, yet affluent and pleasant. If it only were so. But carrying on those two opposing tendencies successfully will sustain America longer as a superpower than any other in past history.

Today's Orwellism is represented by fanatic islamic communities. The oppression is absolute. No deviance is tolerated. It is punished harshly, so nobody even tries. The religion's restrictive nature punishes those who follow it, yet the apstates are punished way harsher. This system has seemed to have reached an equilibrium, too. The Moslim culture is expanding, and is stable in its social structure. The grip on people is stronger than communist countries ever could or hoped to achieve. At least jokes were allowed in Communist countries, and sex was not a taboo. Try to make a joke on the system's idols in Islam, and then look at yourself.

So today we have two parallel systems running: Huxley-y USA, which does not get soft, and Islamic Orwellism, with enough controls in place to prevent the chance for change.

WOW wise post from you Sir! if good to find a "place" with folks that "think about stuff, thoughtfully" (only wish the forum was a little more active ;-/.)

anyway, concur 99-pecrent (dissagree 1 - will get to that - but first)

As a non-self hating liberal white male who was never a colonialism nor champoined colonialism - THANK YOU THANK YOU AND THANK YOU for your refererence to the Aztec above. utterly cruel empire that I have no tears for its fall from the Spanish (who were not choir boys) - only reason the Spanish defeated that "Evil empire" was due to help from all the enslaved indian tribes that sided with the Spanish when they showed up in 1521?

per the Incas, though i do have tears - they were better than the Spanish - unlike the Aztecs - who were on par with the Assyrians (Old Testament book "Nahum" (great work IMO) had wrote about their fall and how all rejoiced over it) .

don't know if you viewed my "inteligence squared" link i proved last week - but they concur with your view of what America is (Huxley's work). my mind goes to all the "phonebots" i see everyday. Trump-ism-ists are clearly Orwellian, and so if he/they prevail America will move that direction.

also concur with your view of Wabbist Islam as being Orwellian.

--------------

now to the 1-percent i dissagree with.

Islam - the religion (not islamic culture we have today) is not more Orwellian than Judaism or Christianity. Historically speaking "We have traded places", when Christians were on the rampage 700-500 yrs ago burning heretics on the stake, Muslims were charting the stars and learning about the Greek Philosophers/science/ and math.

now it the is the opposite.

It remains important that though Islam is in its "dark age" - thanks to "soft power" (globalism/coka cola) that even in the heart of Wahabbism 20 pecent of Saudis do not even believe in Allah! (sadly they have to remain silent over their Atheism - but they are still Athiests!!!!!!!!!!! - so "cultural Islamic Marxism has failed! - i call 1/5th in Heart of Fundi Islam are not only not Sufis (a liberal form of Islam) - but not even Muslim!!!!!!!!!)

Have heart/faith in the humanity of humans for liberalism - even from Saudis in Saudi Arabia.

peace, thanks for wise reply Sir!

[gaffo]

... to the downfall of civilization ...

People keep saying this, so which civilization is being talked about?

I had in mind modern Western civilization.

not sure if you know this, but all civilization since last century is "Western"

verses "the west" (which of course would be Europe/America/Australia/Japan i suppose).

in otherswords, since mechanization and "soft power" influence first by Britian and later America - all the nations of the world are essentually now "Western culturally"............yes not totally - there is still "the last gasp" of Hindu Nationalism and Saudi Wahabbists - but they are now a relic, soft power, colonialist rule has made its mark since the 19th century.

[gaffo]

I had in mind modern Western civilization.

Which one? But still,

there is only one. modern civilization across the world.

[gaffo]

A common American problem in thinking that civilization is themselves. But I tend to agree, it looks like you're gonna be one of the shorted-lived nations.

America is not all - and i sadly concur that America is dying.

the rest of the Nations have inherited "western culture" and god willing will champion and defend it from the many thugs out there.

[Arising_uk]

… now "Western culturally"............yes not totally - there is still "the last gasp" of Hindu Nationalism and Saudi Wahabbists - but they are now a relic, soft power, colonialist rule has made its mark since the 19th century.

I think you wrong here as you ignore China and I think India is going to stay its route. I also think there's a fair chance that the idea of Liberal Democracy is on the way out in many nations and if the trumpette is a guide and the US keeps upon his route then its influence is going to decline internationally and the poorer countries are going to be looking to China as a model. I also think you underestimate Wahabbism and the pull of the Caliphate.

[gaffo]

It's a double-edged sword. Huxley's side may be sharper and more insidious; Orwell's blunter but more forceful and direct. Both collude toward the decline. As mentioned on the first page of this OP, "it's not an either/or situation". The only way that could happen is if a government attacks the citizenry as if it were a foreign invader forcing a sudden transition.

"the fall" can happen many ways. not just the obvious one you state.

the other one - and more apt IMO - is the sheople willingly without knowing (or caring!) - give thier rights to the Global Corps (which of course control most goverments today - esp America's).

as long as they live well and have their baubles to fixate them, who cares about Liberty/Rule of Law.

[gaffo]

… now "Western culturally"............yes not totally - there is still "the last gasp" of Hindu Nationalism and Saudi Wahabbists - but they are now a relic, soft power, colonialist rule has made its mark since the 19th century.

I think you wrong here as you ignore China

I'm not ignoring China - just hopeful overal globally.

her people (in general - hate to stereotype - there are always "outliars(s) - free thinkers even in China (how they must feel utterly alone) the Chinese are "unpolitical" (for obvious reasons (or the free thinkers to keep their heads - for the rest of the sheople due to them not thinking outside what they were told via their conformist culture) so they will not "make waves".

I view China as a lost cause myself - but china is not the World - so eventually they may make progress --due to longtern "the mojority of the rest of the world) - 50 100 yrs from now.

who knows.

and I think India is going to stay its route.

yes Modi is an ass, and like turkey (Tunisia is moving the right direction Sir!!!!!!!! - so important to see good progress, and not just reversals) is moving in the wrong direction.

however - India has 150 yrs of Colonial rule via Britian - where they adopted British ideals of Rule of Law/Westernism (no I'm not defending Colonialism, i just understand history, and the Brits (AFTER LEAVING A LAND THEY HAD NO RIGHT TO HAVE) inffluenced the natives in concepts that they (I think rightly - Locke/etc) then adopted is their own (Western concepts of Universal Humanism).

ya Modi was like trump elected by rubes (rubes live all over the world and come in all religions), but India has 150 yrs of History behind her that affirms Western Culture - Modi is a rock in the road, nothing more.

i hope ;-/.

China lacks India's exposure of centuries of Westernism (only the last 40 yrs or so) - and so not nearly as hopeful about them sadly.

"we" will need India as a longterm geopolicital western ally in the 21st century to "contain chinese nationalism"

I also think there's a fair chance that the idea of Liberal Democracy is on the way

sadly cuncur - due to end of Cold War for Eastern Europe and here in America.

not sure "Why" WRT to india though.or Tailand(sp) either.

there must be reasons for this outside of death of USSR.

Globalism (without regulation from govs) seems to create income inequallity - maybe that is enough to "fill the pciture of why".

not sure.

I fully support globalism - it removes these dying from lack of food, to being able to live a less sucky life, while the rich just get richer.

Globalsim with governments that have the balls to regulate and not be bought out is prob the solution.

but $$ talks sadly.

out in many nations and if the trumpette is a guide and the US keeps upon his route then its influence is going to decline internationally and the poorer countries are going to be looking to China as a model.

sadly agree 100-percent - and why i literally think "saving Western civilisation" will fall upon the Indians (why i view them as both America and Europes best strategic ally longterm (assuming Modi is hickup here)).

I also think you underestimate Wahabbism and the pull of the Caliphate.

dissagree there, "islamophodia" is mindess hysteria. prior to 911 the biggest terrorists with the highest death count for DECADES were the Tamil Tigers (Hinus) - but no Americas were killed so will they did their killing from the 1970 to th 1990's "We" never heard of them.

the Sri Lankans sure as shit did though!

IMO - there is not "global clash of civilizations" bet Islam and "The West" - instead there are rubes living in the middle east that dream of a caliphate who kill "Cafeteria Mulsims" (the latter make of the majority of their population - they are reasonable Muslims (and many are not even Mulsim) - they are silent out of fear - but they remain here - this to me means something (it means there is no real "clash of civilizations). just a c;ash of the cosmopolitan with the hayseeds, the latter seem to have the power in much of the middle east currently.

per Wahhabism (BTW it is possible to be a Fundi Wahabbist and not wish to murder all non-such (in fact i'd go so far as to assume most are not murder hungry) its not a real geopolitcal threat to the Western world.

per my Nation the greatest threat right now is Trump (who is a symtom not a cause - and so even more of a threat!)

then Russia.

to Europe and your nation England - the greatest threat is Russia.

Wahabbism can be ignored - yes i said that.

they kill many each week in thier own lands (did'nt the Taliban kill 24 yesterday in Afganistan?).

[gaffo]

BTW i think Clinton was a fool to ignore India after the fall of USSR - 20 yrs of sloth - instead of fostering relations. At least Obama did so and dropped the lozer/dead weight of Pakistan - a lost cause and failed state. let them stew in thier poverty until they wise up on their own.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh21pKaK5KM


good movie about the minset of fundementalism - how a loser finds appeal in fundiesm, and how a smarter women with sense denies the same and carries on with her life in the fucked up culture Pakistan.

[Dubious]

It's a double-edged sword. Huxley's side may be sharper and more insidious; Orwell's blunter but more forceful and direct. Both collude toward the decline. As mentioned on the first page of this OP, "it's not an either/or situation". The only way that could happen is if a government attacks the citizenry as if it were a foreign invader forcing a sudden transition.

"the fall" can happen many ways. not just the obvious one you state.

I haven't stated any "obvious" one you stupid jerk head! I merely mentioned it's usually a fusion of the two and not merely one or the other which causes decline. Read the OP! It reads Orwell vs. Huxley and THAT'S what I was referring to. Now Fuck Off!

[gaffo]

It's a double-edged sword. Huxley's side may be sharper and more insidious; Orwell's blunter but more forceful and direct. Both collude toward the decline. As mentioned on the first page of this OP, "it's not an either/or situation". The only way that could happen is if a government attacks the citizenry as if it were a foreign invader forcing a sudden transition.

"the fall" can happen many ways. not just the obvious one you state.

I haven't stated any "obvious" one you stupid jerk head! I merely mentioned it's usually a fusion of the two and not merely one or the other which causes decline. Read the OP! It reads Orwell vs. Huxley and THAT'S what I was referring to. Now Fuck Off!

ok, whatever asshat.