Just two or three generations ago, most Americans understood that George Orwell’s classics Animal Farm and 1984 were written to explain how freedom is lost to totalitarianism and the intolerance that accompanies it. “Big Brother,” a term still casually used to describe an all-knowing governing authority, comes right out of 1984. In the society that Orwell describes, everyone was reminded that “Big Brother is watching you,” by way of a constant surveillance through the pervasive use of “telescreens” by the ruling class.
Orwell’s warnings about totalitarianism written in novel form in Animal Farm and 1984 came shortly after Friedrich Hayek’s Road to Serfdom was published at the end of World War II. But it took the shocking revelations about Nazism and Soviet Communism, by scholars like William Shirer and Robert Conquest in the 1960s, to really make Orwell relevant for teaching to the masses educated in American public schools.
Reading Orwell, it was thought, would help American students appreciate their freedoms and gain perspective and critical faculties to understand socialist totalitarianism and its defining features: 1) the institutionalization of propaganda designed to warp and destroy people’s grasp on reality, and 2) the fostering of groupthink, conformity, and collectivism designed to eliminate critical and independent thinking.
Orwell described the scope of the totalitarian enterprise, noting in one section of 1984 that “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, and every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
The concepts of “newspeak” and “doublethink” in Orwell’s 1984 are manifest in what we know now as political correctness. Newspeak is the distorted reality accomplished by manipulating the meaning of language and words, while doublethink is the conditioned mental attitude to ignore reality and common sense and substitute and embrace a distorted or false narrative.
As Orwell notes, “the whole aim of Newspeak and Doublethink is to narrow the range of thought.” Political correctness has the same goal and that’s why its adherents are so intolerant — seeking to shut down and silence people with whom they disagree on college campuses across the country, clamoring for removal of historic statues and monuments, and demanding that people with opposing views on such subjects as climate change and gay marriage be silenced, fined or arrested.
Many assume that because the press is not state-controlled in the U.S., there is a long way to go before the American government has the power of Orwell’s Big Brother.
But what if the universities and the educational system and the major television and print media institutions embrace the groupthink that ingratiates them with the ruling elite? What if the culture shapers in Hollywood and the advertising industry on Madison Avenue follow a similar path in participating in and reinforcing the same groupthink norms?
And what if the rise of social media promotes a kind of groupthink conformity that effectively marginalizes and silences opposing views? Could it then be that propaganda in a free democratic nation like America might be more effective in shaping thought and attitudes than state-controlled propaganda in totalitarian societies?
Orwell’s Big Brother has become a reality in the NSA’s tracking and recording of all email, text, and telephone communication in the United States. But Big Brother has a new dimension with social media and consumer giants, Google, Facebook, and Amazon knowing almost everything about people’s preferences through their artificial intelligence peering into people’s “telescreen” computers and smartphones.
Social media has great power to narrow the range of acceptable thought. On Facebook, those who openly support a politically correct view — what appears to be the popular majority view — are frequently lauded with thumbs up, while dissenters often remain silent to avoid being criticized or denounced. All of which leads to what is called “the spiral of silence,” which reinforces the groupthink of what appears to be the social and cultural majority.
Shortly after 9/11, Pam Geller began documenting and educating the public about radical Islam and Sharia law. Recently Facebook blocked Geller’s newsfeed from her one million-plus followers, and Google followed suit, scrubbing the Geller Report from its search engines (since reversed due to public outcry).
What comfortable and disengaged Americans have forgotten is that there are determined enemies within and there is an internal war being waged against the values and institutions that made America a great nation.
The left is the vanguard leading this war, following a course laid out by cultural Marxists such as Antonio Gramsci and members of the Frankfurt School. Becoming influential in the 1930s and beyond, they believed the “long march through the institutions” was the best route to taking power in developed, industrialized societies such as the United States and Europe. This “march” would be a gradual process of radicalization of the cultural institutions — “the superstructure” — of bourgeois society, which would transform the values and morals of society.
In retrospect, there is a high correlation between the softening of morals over the last two or three generations and the corruption of our family, political, legal and economic foundation.
There are three measures of the establishment’s venality. First, there is a high incidence of denial, manifest for instance in little to no discussion of the doubling of national debt in just nine years to over $20 trillion, and unfunded entitlement liabilities now five times greater than that — conditions inviting financial collapse of the U.S.
A second measure of corruption is the establishment’s reluctance to prosecute fellow establishment lawbreakers in government, which has effectively created a two-tiered justice system. A third measure of establishment corruption is its accommodation of extremist anti-American groups as though they have a legitimate role to play in reform and influence on policy-making — whether in taking down historic monuments, controlling the nation’s borders, establishing police protocols in law enforcement, fighting wars overseas, or restructuring the economy at home.
The hostility to the Trump Presidency by the establishment elite in both political parties, the media, the teachers’ unions and the university faculties, and Hollywood is probably a contrary indicator. It likely tells us more about the real state of corruption in government, the establishment media and popular culture than it does about Trump and his peccadillos.
A society committed to maintaining liberty, prosperity, and opportunity for all, needs to focus on real threats, a key one of which is now the loss of freedom of speech.
One of the nation’s founders, Patrick Henry, was a gifted and passionate orator best known for his declaration, “Give me liberty or give me death.” But his most important, substantive and lasting contribution to the legacy of freedom was his tenacious and ultimately successful fight to have the Bill of Rights amended to the Constitution because of his conviction that the First Amendment and nine others were absolutely necessary to protect individual liberty against the power and abuse of centralized government.
Orwell reminds us today of the critical importance of the First Amendment, noting “if liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” Exactly the opposite of the current trajectory and what the politically correct crowd wants.