I read Brave New World when I was in my teens in the 70s. I had faith in mankind but I was wrong. Brave New World DID materialize but it is NOT compatible with the divine human nature. Many of us are resisting that crap and that is why we have an Orwellian world in a Brave New World.
According to WEF propaganda piece written in 2016, by 2030 plebeians will “own nothing and be happy.” Democrats in USA seem to tend towards the WEF/Huxley model, while the rhetoric of Republicans seems to reflect Orwell. Both parties rule with a top-down approach, which crushes true grassroots representation and individual liberty which should be the hallmarks of our republic.
Huxley and Orwell painted two aspects of the same picture. Ask any J6er and they will probably describe a fate closer to that of Orwell's imagination, while those sickened by the COVID bioweapon attack will put a star on Huxley's chart.
I love Orwell and have read much of him several times. Burmese Days, Homage to Catalonia, Road to Wigan Pier. So much respect. He is excruciating in his ability to convey and do so honestly. But I think Huxley wins. And I will tell you why and this is said by Huxley. Keeping a police state in line requires too much energy. Too much force. Epstein understood this. A brutal system requires a cadre of coordinated persons/groups/states that have some degree of central planning. They have to have a goal and confer on the means. The miracle of a system that controls through "internal, psychological, and biological means" is that it can be fully distributed and can function dynamically without agency coordination. Of course, that sort of coordination doesn't hurt. Like during covid having Fauci and Collins running shot gun. But this really can be done by very distributed forces, as long as everyone is cut in on the deal. Our academic institutions, our NGOs, our gov't agencies all have specific self interest right in their sights. And this type of confluence is marvelously aided and abetted by a player like Jeffery Epstein. That's all he did. Connect the widely distributed points of the network. He helped light them up. He helped grease them. Of course there is one terrible consequence.... The system has to strip humans, citizens, players with lives to live, of their humanity, their agency, their sense. As Bob Dylan says in his great great song, License to Kill,
"Now, they take him and they teach him and they groom him for life
And they set him on a path where he’s bound to get ill
Then they bury him with stars
Sell his body like they do used cars
Now, there’s a woman on my block
She just sit there facin’ the hill
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?
Now, he’s hell-bent for destruction, he’s afraid and confused
And his brain has been mismanaged with great skill
FYI, the Huxley’s were part of the Deep State, secret society crowd. The brothers, Julian and Aldous, both promoted the LIE of “overpopulation.”
Julian, as the first Director General of UNESCO (the education arm of the UN), served as president of the Eugenics Society and promoted sterilization legislation. His 1946 book on UNESCO promotes “world government” and “unifying the world mind.”
Aldous’s Brave New World has been seen by some as more “prophetic” than cautionary. In other words, his book served as preemptive programming for the coming totalitarian New World Order. I cringe when I see any Huxley praised as a hero.
Information manipulation and psychological conditioning periodically breaks down. Then the glove comes off the Orwellian fist. An example is the freedom convoy in Ottawa. These models are not exclusive.
"...psychological conditioning is a more effective way of controlling people than intimidation and violence."
Totally agree John!
And what are the primary weapons of psychological conditioning used to control us?
Information (or lack of), Language, Education, Religion, Currency, and Media. Far more powerful than violence!
The ancient cultures have histories that tell of their beautiful abundant world BEFORE the Evil came and destroyed their culture and enslaved the people.
The Zulu, who have one of the longest surviving oral histories said “The Evil came as friends, bearing gifts and amazing magic, and they destroyed our culture and enslaved the people with their words and stories.”
It wasn’t weapons that destroyed the ancient cultures and enslaved the people, it was Language and Religion.
Language is critically important. It's not "Gender-affirming surgery" It's Treatment of delusion with Surgical Mutilation." etcetc. Language leads thought. Thought also leads to language. Words often lead to action. Language is being purposefully twisted these days.
Perhaps because of his own personality, I think Huxley failed to understand the key passage of "1984".
"Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power".
That clearly implies that the rulers of IngSoc do it the hard way because they want to. Huxley suggests that 'the ruling oligarchy would find “less arduous and wasteful ways of governing” than the “boot-on-the-face” approach'. But what if they prefer the boot-in-the-face approach, as O'Brien clearly does with Winston Smith?
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power".
Huxley, bless his kindly enlightened heart, vastly overestimated the moral character of people who run dictatorships. Torturing people is never too much trouble for them; they ENJOY it!
Most of the previous comments speak directly to the two authors in question and their individual publications. I see things a little differently. We have the freedom to be lead by our own logic, rational analysis, and critical thinking, not submit to either method of control. We have plenty of methods to communicate and inform, we have ways to spend our time productively, and even in relaxation.
In my Texas county, we opposed a planned Islamic-centered development and won. It wasn’t power from above, but unity of the mass community, asking for support from elected officials, to gain the results we needed. I acknowledge there is power from official offices, but when we strip away that top-down power, we find the raw power of united individual citizens when we see a threat, overreach, or invasion, it can be resisted, opposed, and defeated.
I thank you for approval of our success, but my point was more about the two author’s books, which worked on the primary assumption that a population was being ruled over, not governed. Today, we (Americans) are not being ruled over, we have our own methods and techniques to communicate, do research, analyze, and share information. We do not depend on mass media or government statements for understanding situations. Many of us have no mind-altering habits (not withstanding our early lives), and we certainly do not submit to overreaching government rhetoric. So, neither of the authors were ever speaking about real Americans.
Tony Robbins popularized the phrase but that's just Freud's pleasure principle. Or Jeremy Bentham's utilitarianism - pleasure/pain as basis of decision-making.
I often wonder why “they “ then took the ability away to acquire the opiates that were so easy to get,at one point. Yes,lots of people enjoy the “pleasure “ and relief opiates provide. My only guess is that the plan to addict people was coupled with the plan to create a desperate population,( by taking it away)to support the “black markets”, and create chaos because the problem with addiction is….running out. There would not even be a fentanyl problem if people could get clean pharmaceuticals without fear of stigma and law. imho. At least,not any worse than alcohol,tobacco,etc..imho..
I read Brave New World when I was in my teens in the 70s. I had faith in mankind but I was wrong. Brave New World DID materialize but it is NOT compatible with the divine human nature. Many of us are resisting that crap and that is why we have an Orwellian world in a Brave New World.
I agree with you the Huxley and the psychological conditioning is what is happening. We're not thinking and using our heads. Some are, but not enough.
Strip mall boner-pill doc-in-the-box plays thinker.
According to WEF propaganda piece written in 2016, by 2030 plebeians will “own nothing and be happy.” Democrats in USA seem to tend towards the WEF/Huxley model, while the rhetoric of Republicans seems to reflect Orwell. Both parties rule with a top-down approach, which crushes true grassroots representation and individual liberty which should be the hallmarks of our republic.
Thanks John. Who says it has to be one or the other? Perhaps a quibble over an either/or fallacy?
Yes. More likely governmental control functions alternating between the two, as needed, when compliance begins to falter.
I agree with D. Sayers - the Prescribed Therapy will be: Use Any or All - PRN
Keep the Citizenry FDH - Fat, Dumb, & Happy
"You will own nothing, & you will be happy."
Bread & Circuses include but are not limited to:
Corporate Fast Food Joints
Dispensaries/Pharmacies/Liquor Stores
The Cable Channels - Hundreds of Channels, & Nuthin's on.....
Netflix/Prime Video/Fandango/Paramount+ (pick your stream, etc)
Internet Porn/Ai Girl/Boyfriends
Facecrack, Instacrap, TikTok what a Crock, Telegram to Nothing, all full of In-fluenzers
Professional Sports & now College Sports
There's more, but y'all get the idea, no?
Chapsnatch
😂
That's a good one, Mr. Earl!!
Huxley and Orwell painted two aspects of the same picture. Ask any J6er and they will probably describe a fate closer to that of Orwell's imagination, while those sickened by the COVID bioweapon attack will put a star on Huxley's chart.
I love Orwell and have read much of him several times. Burmese Days, Homage to Catalonia, Road to Wigan Pier. So much respect. He is excruciating in his ability to convey and do so honestly. But I think Huxley wins. And I will tell you why and this is said by Huxley. Keeping a police state in line requires too much energy. Too much force. Epstein understood this. A brutal system requires a cadre of coordinated persons/groups/states that have some degree of central planning. They have to have a goal and confer on the means. The miracle of a system that controls through "internal, psychological, and biological means" is that it can be fully distributed and can function dynamically without agency coordination. Of course, that sort of coordination doesn't hurt. Like during covid having Fauci and Collins running shot gun. But this really can be done by very distributed forces, as long as everyone is cut in on the deal. Our academic institutions, our NGOs, our gov't agencies all have specific self interest right in their sights. And this type of confluence is marvelously aided and abetted by a player like Jeffery Epstein. That's all he did. Connect the widely distributed points of the network. He helped light them up. He helped grease them. Of course there is one terrible consequence.... The system has to strip humans, citizens, players with lives to live, of their humanity, their agency, their sense. As Bob Dylan says in his great great song, License to Kill,
"Now, they take him and they teach him and they groom him for life
And they set him on a path where he’s bound to get ill
Then they bury him with stars
Sell his body like they do used cars
Now, there’s a woman on my block
She just sit there facin’ the hill
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?
Now, he’s hell-bent for destruction, he’s afraid and confused
And his brain has been mismanaged with great skill
All he believes are his eyes
And his eyes, they just tell him lies
Both, a combination of the two.
FYI, the Huxley’s were part of the Deep State, secret society crowd. The brothers, Julian and Aldous, both promoted the LIE of “overpopulation.”
Julian, as the first Director General of UNESCO (the education arm of the UN), served as president of the Eugenics Society and promoted sterilization legislation. His 1946 book on UNESCO promotes “world government” and “unifying the world mind.”
Aldous’s Brave New World has been seen by some as more “prophetic” than cautionary. In other words, his book served as preemptive programming for the coming totalitarian New World Order. I cringe when I see any Huxley praised as a hero.
Information manipulation and psychological conditioning periodically breaks down. Then the glove comes off the Orwellian fist. An example is the freedom convoy in Ottawa. These models are not exclusive.
Yes.
"...psychological conditioning is a more effective way of controlling people than intimidation and violence."
Totally agree John!
And what are the primary weapons of psychological conditioning used to control us?
Information (or lack of), Language, Education, Religion, Currency, and Media. Far more powerful than violence!
The ancient cultures have histories that tell of their beautiful abundant world BEFORE the Evil came and destroyed their culture and enslaved the people.
The Zulu, who have one of the longest surviving oral histories said “The Evil came as friends, bearing gifts and amazing magic, and they destroyed our culture and enslaved the people with their words and stories.”
It wasn’t weapons that destroyed the ancient cultures and enslaved the people, it was Language and Religion.
Language is critically important. It's not "Gender-affirming surgery" It's Treatment of delusion with Surgical Mutilation." etcetc. Language leads thought. Thought also leads to language. Words often lead to action. Language is being purposefully twisted these days.
Tastes great? Or less filling?
Perhaps because of his own personality, I think Huxley failed to understand the key passage of "1984".
"Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power".
That clearly implies that the rulers of IngSoc do it the hard way because they want to. Huxley suggests that 'the ruling oligarchy would find “less arduous and wasteful ways of governing” than the “boot-on-the-face” approach'. But what if they prefer the boot-in-the-face approach, as O'Brien clearly does with Winston Smith?
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power".
Huxley, bless his kindly enlightened heart, vastly overestimated the moral character of people who run dictatorships. Torturing people is never too much trouble for them; they ENJOY it!
Brave New World tactics will ensnare the majority; the 1984 boot will squash those who escape.
Most of the previous comments speak directly to the two authors in question and their individual publications. I see things a little differently. We have the freedom to be lead by our own logic, rational analysis, and critical thinking, not submit to either method of control. We have plenty of methods to communicate and inform, we have ways to spend our time productively, and even in relaxation.
In my Texas county, we opposed a planned Islamic-centered development and won. It wasn’t power from above, but unity of the mass community, asking for support from elected officials, to gain the results we needed. I acknowledge there is power from official offices, but when we strip away that top-down power, we find the raw power of united individual citizens when we see a threat, overreach, or invasion, it can be resisted, opposed, and defeated.
Well done opposing and eliminating the prospect of (and threat posed by) a planned Islamic-centered development in Texas!
I thank you for approval of our success, but my point was more about the two author’s books, which worked on the primary assumption that a population was being ruled over, not governed. Today, we (Americans) are not being ruled over, we have our own methods and techniques to communicate, do research, analyze, and share information. We do not depend on mass media or government statements for understanding situations. Many of us have no mind-altering habits (not withstanding our early lives), and we certainly do not submit to overreaching government rhetoric. So, neither of the authors were ever speaking about real Americans.
It’s the stick and the carrot over and over and over.
In the words of the immortal Sackler family, masterminds of the lovely Oxycodone craze: “People run from pain and run towards pleasure.”
Tony Robbins popularized the phrase but that's just Freud's pleasure principle. Or Jeremy Bentham's utilitarianism - pleasure/pain as basis of decision-making.
But sure... Sacklers 😂 🤣
I often wonder why “they “ then took the ability away to acquire the opiates that were so easy to get,at one point. Yes,lots of people enjoy the “pleasure “ and relief opiates provide. My only guess is that the plan to addict people was coupled with the plan to create a desperate population,( by taking it away)to support the “black markets”, and create chaos because the problem with addiction is….running out. There would not even be a fentanyl problem if people could get clean pharmaceuticals without fear of stigma and law. imho. At least,not any worse than alcohol,tobacco,etc..imho..
The panopticon is real. Has been for decades but now is far more comprehensive.
Technologies advance. Power is seized without consent.
The less “boot on your face” hope may be too altruistic. After all, we’re dealing with man.
Right?