From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Fri Jan 14 2005 - 17:49:39 GMT
Hi all,
I thought Keith's comment on the triumph of free societies over
totalitarianism was a good one, though I disagree that the triumph is
as unquestionable as some (perhaps not Keith) seem to suggest. In
this post I'd like to examine this idea, with much thanks to George
Orwell. As always, all comments are appreciated, and please feel
free to bring the Moq's moral hierarchy into the discussion. As
mentioned earlier, IMO, any societal suppression of thought or other
forms of mind control are absolutely immoral.
msh said:
The first enemy of any State is its own people; the people must be
controlled for the State to perform its function, which is to
maintain and enhance the power of the elites who finance it. In a
dictatorship, control is by means of the bludgeon and boot;
keith said:
I think Orwell describes some of this very well. However the
prophetic 1984 didn't actually come to pass. The Human spirit did
(in lots of cases) manage to overcome totalitarianism.
msh says:
I'm not sure how well you remember 1984, but here are numerous ways
in which the totalitarianism exemplified in that novel have come to
pass in the US and, I bet if you look carefully, you'll see
similarities in the UK, or any other powerful "democratic" state.
DOUBLETHINK
"Doublethink" is defined in the book as "the power of holding two
contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting
both of them." In Oceania in 1984, citizenship meant "not thinking --
not needing to think."
In USUK in 2004, there's a little known but essential power concept
known as "perception management," which operates under the principle
that truth is unessential. Truth simply becomes what the Party is
able to convince the electorate is true. In USUK, during the run-up
to the latest invasion of Iraq, government officials practiced
perception management every time they announced their certainty that
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, as well as connections to Al
Q'aeda and the September 11 attacks.
The Big Brother government in 1984 alternated between war and
alliance with two competing states. The official enemy can change
from one speech to another, sometimes even within the same speech,
and the audience immediately accepts the new reality. They have no
choice. In Oceania, In 1984, "The heresy of heresies was common
sense."
This doublethink of perception management is sometimes inadvertently
affirmed by those in power. In a recent NYT article a senior Bush
advisor scoffed at people who exist in "the reality based community,"
who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of
discernable reality. That's not the way the world works anymore.
We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality."
A state government that creates its own realities is bad enough. But
even more spooky is when citizens of that state accept the
manufactured reality despite overwhelming evidence of what could
politely be called contradictory truths. When asked whether USUK
should have gone to war without evidence of a WMD program or support
to Al-Qaeda, a clear majority of Bush/Blair supporters said no. Yet
these same people continue to support the war, suggesting a cognitive
dissonance of doublespeak proportions, or at least an inability or
refusal to accept "discernable reality."
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Right after September 11, Bush swore that he would stop at nothing to
kill or capture the attackers. This was right after he allowed a
plane full of Saudi Arabians, including bin Laden's relatives, to
leave the country, without being questioned. Six months later,
while laying the ground work to divert most of USUK military
resources to a war against Iraq, Bush said of bin Laden, "He's a
person who's now been marginalized...I just don't spend that much
time on him...I truly am not that concerned about him." By April,
2002, less than a year before the invasion, Joint Chief of Staff
Chairman Myers followed that with: "The goal has never been to get
bin Laden."
PERMANENT WAR
In Oceania in 1984, the state remained perpetually at war against one
vague and interchangeable enemy or another. This largely abstract and
perpetual war served to fuel hatred and nurture fear, thus
engendering popular support for Big Brother's totalitarian goals,
both domestic and international.
The USUK war against terrorism has become ever more vague. Although
we are told our leader's resolve is steady and the mission clear, we
seem to know less and less about the enemy. What began as a war
against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda quickly morphed into a war
against Afghanistan, followed by comical warnings about an "Axis of
Evil," the targeting of terrorists in some 50 to 60 countries, and
the ongoing atrocities against Iraq. Exactly what will constitute
success in this amorphous war remains deliberately unclear, but the
one thing the Bush/Blair alliance has made certain is that the war
will continue "indefinitely."
THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH
In Oceania in 1984, the Ministry of Truth served as Big Brother's
propaganda arm. The Ministry not only spread lies to suit its
strategic goals, but constantly re-wrote and falsified history. This
is a practice that has become increasingly commonplace in USUK houses
of power, where transcripts are routinely sanitized to remove
official gaffes, where accounts of intelligence warnings prior to
Sept. 11 get spottier with each retelling, as do the accounts of
evidence supporting the notions of Iraqi imminent threat. At the
same time, the facts surrounding our leaders' past financial
dealings and cozy connections to power, both domestic and
international, are subject to continual revision, with all negative
reflections consigned to the black hole of inconvenient truths.
Surprisingly, the Bush admin has been up front about its
deceptive intentions, perhaps inadvertently. For example, the
Pentagon announced a plan to create an Office of Strategic Influence
to provide false news and information abroad, to help manipulate
public opinion and further its military objectives. There was a
public outcry, and the Pentagon said it would close the office, an
announcement to be taken with a ton of salt, considering it emanated
from a place that just announced it was planning to spread
misinformation. But you gotta admire the irony: The US War
Department was renamed the Department of Defense, and yet it remains
the most powerful and aggressive force on the planet.
THE INFALLIBLE LEADER
In Oceania, in 1984, an omnipresent and all-powerful leader, Big
Brother, commanded the total, unquestioning support of the people. He
was both adored and feared, (mostly feared, remember the God Father)
and no one dared speak out against him, lest they be met by the wrath
and power of the state.
Bush and Blair and all their pretty ones are less menacing of course,
but Bush in particular makes little effort to conceal his desire for
greater power. On no fewer than three occasions, he's said how much
easier things would be if he were dictator. By abandoning many of
the checks and balances established in the Constitution to keep any
one branch of government from becoming too powerful, Bush has already
achieved the greatest expansion of executive powers since Richard
Nixon. His approval ratings remain remarkably high, and his minions
have worked hard to cultivate an image of infallability, including
obscuring the fact that, during his 2001 inauguration ceremonies,
thousands of people protested what they knew to be a stolen election
by throwing eggs and vegetables at the presedential "parade."
Incredibly, these images of protest were nowhere to be seen on
national television. This manufactured illusion of presidential
infallability was nowhere more apparent than during a recent
commencement address Bush gave at Ohio State University, where
students were threatened with arrest and expulsion if they protested
the speech. They were ordered to give him a "thunderous ovation," and
they did.
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING
The ever-vigilant eye of Big Brother kept constant tabs on the
citizens of Oceania in 1984., using two-way telescreens to monitor
people's every move while simultaneously broadcasting party
propaganda.
Our television sets force-feed plenty of propaganda both commercial
and political, but don't yet look into our living rooms (as far as we
know). However, public video surveillance has gonads pumping in law
enforcement, with cameras being deployed everywhere from street
corners, to sporting events to public parks.
Just as the the citizens of Oceania were rewarded for spying on their
neighbors, the Bush administration plans to recruit millions of
Americans to form a corps of citizen spies, a snitch-squad to serve
as "extra eyes and ears for law enforcement," reporting any
suspicious activity as part of a program dubbed Operation TIPS.
And thanks to the hastily passed USA Patriot Act, the Justice
Department has sweeping new powers to monitor phone conversations,
Internet usage, business transactions and library reading records.
Best of all, law enforcement need not be burdened any longer with
such inconveniences as search warrants or probable cause.
THOUGHT POLICE
In Oceania in 1984, the omnipresent Thought Police were charged with
eradicating dissent and ferreting out resistance. The TP carefully
monitored all unorthodox or potentially subversive thoughts. Our
leaders, as the far as we know, are not prosecuting thought crime
yet, but many have been quick to question the patriotism of anyone
who dares criticize their handling of the war on terrorism or
homeland defense. Take, for example, the way Attorney General John
Ashcroft answered critics of his anti-terrorism measures, saying that
opponents of the administration "only aid terrorists" and "give
ammunition to America's enemies. "
Even more ominous was the stern warning White House Press Secretary
Ari Fleischer sent to Americans after Bill Maher, host of the now
defunct "Politically Incorrect," called past U.S. military actions
"cowardly." Said Fleischer, "There are reminders to all Americans
that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do, and this
is not a time for remarks like that; there never is."
So, in summary, what would it take to turn so-called democracies into
the kind of societies that Orwell warned about, societies that
envision war as peace, freedom as slavery and ignorance as strength?
Would it happen in an instant, or would it result from the gradual
decay of freedoms unopposed by a perpetually frightened population?
I don't know, but don't forget that the state's control over people's
minds in Oceania in 1984 was so powerful that, eventually, everyone
came to love Big Brother. This is something to think about; and we
need to consider it BEFORE we are programmed to believe, because
afterward there will be no thinking, only fear. And the love of Big
Brother.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"The shadows that a swinging lamp will throw,
We come from nowhere and to nothing go."
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 15 2005 - 00:57:24 GMT