Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Alonso
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:48 pm

Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Alonso » 4 weeks 2 days ago (Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:58 am)

This post contains spoilers about George Orwell's novel 1984.

As I read about Holocaust revisionism I've stumbled several times upon comparisons between the censorship of revisionism and the censorship depicted in George Orwell's novel 1984. It's a very good comparison because the goals of both censorship systems are very similar, and there are also striking similarities between some of the methods they use. However, some revisionists take this similarity too far, asserting that both systems are essentially the same. I believe that is a mistake. Orwell's 1984 is a brilliant dystopian novel that can be used as a starting point for insightful discussions about thought control in the real world. However, that's all it is, a novel, no more and no less. The dystopian world it describes is very different from the real world. Acknowledging that difference is essential to understand how thought control works in the real world.

In the world of 1984 expressing dissent in public is impossible, and expressing it in private leads to horrible consequences. That doesn't happen in the real world, as the existence of this website and many others attest. A few days ago I was discussing Holocaust revisionism with my friend in the terrace of a pub (we live in Spain). Both of us have loud voices and many people could hear perfectly our conversation, including waiters and other patrons. Nobody showed the slightest interest in what we were saying. The waiters were as nice as always. And no thought police agents have broken into my house in the middle of the night to arrest any of us on charges of thought crimes.

The modern system of thought control is not based on a strict surveillance and censorship that eliminates any expression of dissent. Quite the opposite, it's based on deceiving most people into believing that dissent is allowed and even encouraged. People like to believe that they are free and control their lives. That's why the most efficient form of thought control is the one that controls what people think and do, while at the same time making them believe they have total freedom. Actually, this system is so efficient that it has the majority of the population very happily supporting and working for the very system that robs them of their freedom and their lives. That's a level of thought control significantly more advanced than the one depicted in Orwell's novel.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Hannover » 4 weeks 2 days ago (Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:11 am)

Alonso, you said:
1, 1984. It's a very good comparison because the goals of both censorship systems are very similar, and there are also striking similarities between some of the methods they use. However, some revisionists take this similarity too far, asserting that both systems are essentially the same. I believe that is a mistake. Orwell's 1984 is a brilliant dystopian novel that can be used as a starting point for insightful discussions about thought control in the real world. However, that's all it is, a novel, no more and no less. The dystopian world it describes is very different from the real world. Acknowledging that difference is essential to understand how thought control works in the real world.

2. In the world of 1984 expressing dissent in public is impossible, and expressing it in private leads to horrible consequences. That doesn't happen in the real world, as the existence of this website and many others attest. A few days ago I was discussing Holocaust revisionism with my friend in the terrace of a pub (we live in Spain). Both of us have loud voices and many people could hear perfectly our conversation, including waiters and other patrons. Nobody showed the slightest interest in what we were saying. The waiters were as nice as always. And no thought police agents have broken into my house in the middle of the night to arrest any of us on charges of thought crimes.

3. The modern system of thought control is not based on a strict surveillance and censorship that eliminates any expression of dissent. Quite the opposite, it's based on deceiving most people into believing that dissent is allowed and even encouraged. People like to believe that they are free and control their lives. That's why the most efficient form of thought control is the one that controls what people think and do, while at the same time making them believe they have total freedom. Actually, this system is so efficient that it has the majority of the population very happily supporting and working for the very system that robs them of their freedom and their lives. That's a level of thought control significantly more advanced than the one depicted in Orwell's novel.

1. Which Revisionists do you say take it "too far" & what do they say that you disagree with in that regard? Be specific.
I submit that you are essentially wrong about 1984 and today's increasing totalitarianism.
Today it's largely done under the guise of "hate crimes", about as Orwellian as it gets. I mentioned that to you before in another thread, you ignored it.

2. You say you live in Spain, which does not technically* have laws against free speech concerning the 'holocaust' narrative.
I suggest that perhaps you willfully ignore the 24/7/365 relentless pounding of the fake 'holocaust' via movies, media & government (largely the same ).
- see: Hitler and/or Chomsky on Capitalist Democracy: http://www.unz.com/gdurocher/hitler-and ... democracy/

* I also suggest you are not informed of events in your country:
Revisionist Publisher Varela arrested in Spain: https://codoh.com/library/document/326/?lang=en
Spanish Court Sentences Thought Criminal Five Years Imprisonment / Pedro Varela : https://codoh.com/library/document/2788/?lang=en

Come on, a bar is hardly a place where people will be listening to your conversations anyway, they have other things on their minds.
Even, or especially, in the US where free speech is enshrined in our Constitution, such conversations in general public are apt to cause problems due the public conditioning via govt. - media control, a la 1984.

Try taking your public conversation to France or Germany for instance, your chance of arrest is high. Free speech on that subject is not allowed.
I showed this map to you before, you ignored it, again:
Below is where free speech on the truly impossible "holocaust" storyline is illegal, violators go to prison for Thought Crimes. In all western countries, persecution, harassment, violent attacks & threats are the order of the day against those who engage in free speech about the impossible claims within it.
Those are obvious admissions that the storyline doesn't stand up to scientific, logical, & rational scrutiny.
Image


3. You're contradicting yourself.

- Hannover

No alleged human remains of millions upon millions to be seen in allegedly known locations, no 'holocaust'.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1047
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Lamprecht » 4 weeks 19 hours ago (Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:55 am)

Orwell had some accurate predictions, but others not so much. Same with Aldous Huxley. We can look to both and compare/contrast
This image may help:

Image

Edit:

Image

Another image, this time in comic format, that compares / contrasts Orwell & Huxley. I'd say what we are seeing is a mixture of the two.
The above comic seems to be based on the following quote:

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism.

Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumble puppy.

As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists, who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny, “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.”

In 1984, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.”
― Jewish-American Author Neil Postman, 'Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business'
Last edited by Webmaster on Wed Aug 21, 2019 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1047
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Lamprecht » 4 weeks 9 hours ago (Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:36 pm)

Alonso wrote:In the world of 1984 expressing dissent in public is impossible, and expressing it in private leads to horrible consequences. That doesn't happen in the real world, as the existence of this website and many others attest. A few days ago I was discussing Holocaust revisionism with my friend in the terrace of a pub (we live in Spain). Both of us have loud voices and many people could hear perfectly our conversation, including waiters and other patrons. Nobody showed the slightest interest in what we were saying. The waiters were as nice as always. And no thought police agents have broken into my house in the middle of the night to arrest any of us on charges of thought crimes.

Well apparently there are no "Holocaust denial" laws in Spain. However, you can not publicly express certain beliefs in various countries. You can not publish an article online and say "The Holocaust is a hoax because..."

Certainly, in any country you can write "The Holocaust is a hoax" on a piece of paper, wipe your bottom with it, and flush it down the toilet. But so what?

You're taking the concept too literally, check out the First Amendment of the US constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So "Freedom of Speech" is not simply the ability to say words in solitude, but also encompasses the ability to exercise it publicly without government interference. The fact that other people do not care is irrelevant (please see the comparison/contrast with Orwell & Huxley above for more on this) as is the fact that paid workers were still nice. This is where freedom of the press comes in.

At least one "Holocaust denier" I know of has fled to Spain to avoid persecution: Gerd Honsik.

Anyway, people have been arrested for exercising what would be considered unalienable human rights by the US Constitution. Please note also, when reading the Constitution, you will notice that the document does not itself grant these rights to people. It recognizes that these rights already exist for humans (based on the concept of free will, or an omnipotent creator) and proclaims that the government can not take them away.

Recommended:

Official list of Revisionist scholars persecuted / imprisoned for questioning the "Holocaust"
viewtopic.php?t=12642
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

flimflam
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby flimflam » 4 weeks 6 hours ago (Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:50 pm)

Lamprecht wrote:Certainly, in any country you can write "The Holocaust is a hoax" on a piece of paper, wipe your bottom with it, and flush it down the toilet. But so what?

You're taking the concept too literally, check out the First Amendment of the US constitution:

The original point was that 'thought control' is different from 'speech control' and that in 1984 the govt. used invasive measures to detect any hint of forbidden thought, whereas in the west that's not the case and the govt. goes after forbidden speech.

But, it's all moot .... I'm convinced Orwell was a great genius based on 1984 because of quotes like ....

a stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought . . . and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction
and
.. and then the chosen lie would pass into the permanent records and become truth... Sometimes he talked to her of the Records Department and the impudent forgeries that he committed there. Such things did not appear to horrify her. She did not feel the abyss opening beneath her feet at the thought of lies becoming truths.

But, let's face it, he was entirely oblivious to the greatest hoax in the history of the world.

And, I recently read this comment on Unz .....

JP Morgan famously bought up controlling interest in major newspapers in 1917 to prevent significant media opposition to the US entering WWI. The Counsel on Foreign Relations was created in the early 1920s to maintain control over the national dialog and they have ever since. The CIA Project Mockingbird tightened control. Every presidential cabinet since is saturated with CFR members. As a result most Americans are disastrously misinformed about just about everything. 1984 happened decades before 1984.

So, 1984 happened a long time before 1984 and Orwell didn't notice. This quote is from From 'La Démocratie Victorieuse', E. Malynski, 1929

The nation which above all others claims to be free and in sovereign command of its own destiny was brainwashed to the hilt. In 1914 any American would have laughed to scorn the idea that in three years time he would be struggling and suffering in France for the sake of affairs which had no connection with those of his own country.

And yet, when 1917 came, the same man enlisted enthusiastically. Every soldier whom we happened to interview and questioned as to his personal motives for fighting, invariably replied: 'we are fighting for democracy'. They were one step ahead of their fellow soldiers from other nations, who went for their own country's sake.

It is only when we realize that France was invaded by hundreds of thousands of inhabitants from Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Florida, Illinois, Wyoming, California, Louisiana, and subsequently from Ontario, Manitoba, Rhodesia and New South Wales, whose only possible motive was to hasten the triumph of democracy, that we begin to understand something of the power of Israel. The power to stir up a whole nation of solid, egotistical and utilitarian individuals, and to persuade them that their greatest privilege is to set out and get themselves killed at the uttermost ends of the earth, with no hope of gain for themselves or their children and almost without their understanding against or for whom they are fighting, or why, is a simply incredible phenomenon which makes one afraid when one comes to think about it.

And for a book on the subject, read English man of letters Wyndham Lewis's 'Left Wings Over Europe, or How to Make a War About Nothing', written in 1936 !

We've been living in an Orwellian world for 100 years, and Orwell didn't notice.

Spect3r
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:34 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Spect3r » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:46 am)

I am a huge fan of Orwell, read 1984 a few times already, as well as Animal Farm and some of his loose texts and i can see your line of though and at the moment i cant say you are wrong, but with the way things seem to be evolving, you will soon be on the wrong.

Lamprecht wrote:
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism.

Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumble puppy.

As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists, who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny, “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.”

In 1984, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.”
― Jewish-American Author Neil Postman, 'Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business'


I had never read this quote before, but sounds pretty accurate to me.
Thanks for posting :)
I just love the smell of Zyklon B in the morning, afternoon, late afternoon, evening and night, for it means that I’m nicely deloused 8)

User avatar
Dresden
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Dresden » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:15 am)

flimflam said:

"But, let's face it, he(Orwell) was entirely oblivious to the greatest hoax in the history of the world"


From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AGe ... s_Chambers

Orwell Doubted the Gas Chambers

Orwell was an antisemite who even doubted the holocaust gas chambers. At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Orwell expressed doubt about the Allied account of events and posed the following question in his book Notes on Nationalism, "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear... Is it true about the gas ovens in Poland?".
Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

User avatar
Dresden
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Dresden » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:49 am)

A comparison between Orwell and Hitler

Orwell's "Doublethink" seems to be right out of Mein Kampf:

Hitler on Jewish Lies

"Considering the Satanic skill which these evil counselors displayed, how could their unfortunate victims be blamed? Indeed, I found it extremely difficult myself to be a match for the dialectical perfidy of that race. How futile it was to try to win over such people with argument, seeing that their very mouths distorted the truth, DISOWNING THE VERY WORDS THEY HAD JUST USED AND ADOPTING THEM AGAIN A FEW MOMENTS AFTERWARDS TO SERVE THEIR OWN ENDS IN THE ARGUMENT!
No. The more I came to know the Jew, the easier it was to excuse the workers."

"If you faced them with this point they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles one’s hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a solid mass a moment afterwards"


George Orwell on"Doublethink"

"To forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed"
Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

flimflam
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby flimflam » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:52 pm)

Dresden wrote:Orwell Doubted the Gas Chambers

Orwell was an antisemite who even doubted the holocaust gas chambers. At the conclusion of the war in Europe, Orwell expressed doubt about the Allied account of events and posed the following question in his book Notes on Nationalism, "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear... Is it true about the gas ovens in Poland?".


Here is the extended quote ... http://seas3.elte.hu/coursematerial/Loj ... lism_(1945).pdf

There can often be a genuine doubt about the most enormous events. For example, it is impossible to calculate within millions, perhaps even tens of millions, the number of deaths caused by the present war. The calamities that are constantly being reported – battles, massacres, famines, revolutions – tend to inspire in the average person a feeling of unreality. One has no way of verifying the facts, one is not even fully certain that they have happened, and one is always presented with totally different interpretations from different sources. What were the rights and wrongs of the Warsaw rising of August 1944? Is it true about the German gas ovens in Poland? Who was really to blame for the Bengal famine? Probably the truth is discoverable, but the facts will be so dishonestly set forth in almost any newspaper that the ordinary reader can be forgiven either for swallowing lies or failing to form an opinion.


As far as I know that's the only thing he wrote on the subject, and he lived through the Nuremberg trials where hoax was etched in stone. Orwell was silent, for all practical purposes oblivious.

What is even more surprising is that he fought on the communist side in the Spanish civil war. http://georgeorwell.org/SpanishCivilWar.htm
In December 1936, Orwell went to Spain as a fighter for the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War that was provoked by Francisco Franco's Fascist uprising. He did not join the International Brigade as most leftist did , but the little known Marxist POUM

User avatar
Dresden
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1418
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Dresden » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:14 pm)

flimflam said:

"As far as I know that's the only thing he wrote on the subject, and he lived through the Nuremberg trials where hoax was etched in stone. Orwell was silent, for all practical purposes oblivious"

But, Orwell doubted the existence of the gas chambers ..... that's my point.

I don't see how the "extended quote" makes any difference.

Orwell's doubt about the "gas ovens" is even strengthened when juxtaposed to his admission that there were "rights and wrongs" about the Warsaw uprising.
Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1047
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Lamprecht » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 6:47 pm)

Orwell died in 1950. So there wasn't any time for him to become an actual revisionist. It is clear that he was skeptical of "gas oven" claims, probably because he lived through all of the anti-German atrocity propaganda of World War 1.
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Hannover » 3 weeks 6 days ago (Thu Aug 22, 2019 7:32 pm)

Dresden wrote:I don't see how the "extended quote" makes any difference.
Orwell's doubt about the "gas ovens" is even strengthened when juxtaposed to his admission that there were "rights and wrongs" about the Warsaw uprising.

Agreed. The extended quote certainly makes no difference.
And obviously Orwell was beginning to see through the entire fraud.
Nor does Orwell's involvement with the Spanish communists make any difference. It's another 'Well, so what'?

Lamprecht's point about Orwell's death in 1950 is important as the skepticism about what would later be marketed as 'The Holocau$t' was largely undeveloped at that time. No doubt Orwell, as indicated by his already stated positions, would have been at the forefront of Revisionist efforts had he lived longer.

- Hannover

No alleged human remains of millions upon millions to be seen in allegedly known locations, no 'holocaust'.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

flimflam
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby flimflam » 3 weeks 5 days ago (Fri Aug 23, 2019 9:03 am)

Looking at the extended comment, it is clear that Orwell does not say that he doesn't believe the story about the 'gas ovens in Poland' but that the information on them is sketchy and inconclusive, quoting
Probably the truth is discoverable, but the facts will be so dishonestly set forth in almost any newspaper that the ordinary reader can be forgiven either for swallowing lies or failing to form an opinion.

So I googled looking for a more definitive statement and found one - the May 1949 issue of the Partisan Review contains the comments of Orwell on the awarding of a poetry prize to Ezra Pound ... http://www.bu.edu/partisanreview/books/ ... x.html#518
Quoting Orwell ...
None of this is a reason against giving Pound the Bollinger Prize. There are times when such a thing might be undesirable - it would have been undesirable when the Jews were actually being killed in the gas vans for instance - but I do not think that this is one of them.

So, in 1949 Orwell did believe the gas vans hoax.

Breker
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: Europa

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Breker » 3 weeks 5 days ago (Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:13 am)

Mr. flimflam tells us:
So, in 1949 Orwell did believe the gas vans hoax.

But "so what"?
The point remains that Orwell rejected the preposterous "gas chambers" which allegedly killed about 4,000,000 Jews and X,000,000 others.
Not to mention the even higher numbers that were being claimed.
While, at that time, he accepted the equally preposterous "gas vans" which are said to have killed perhaps 500,000 total.
We rather think his rejection of so many millions of falsely claimed murders is quite a revisionist position for the post war 1940s.
B.
Revisionists are just the messengers, the impossibility of the "Holocaust" narrative is the message.

Daniel
Member
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:31 pm

Re: Orwell's 1984 and modern censorship

Postby Daniel » 3 weeks 5 days ago (Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:56 am)

Orwell had anti-Jewish leanings, but he didn't trust those leanings. He was in the camp of those who say, "some Jews are good, some are bad."

I agree with flimflam's point that Orwell is not some brilliant original thinker in his predictive powers. When he's right, he's derivative.

There's a reason Jews are comfortable with Orwell. All writers in the West promoted to the youth have to first get the kosher stamp of approval.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests