Posted by Mike on May 08, 2002 at 00:05:26:
In Reply to: Re: 1984 and NOW posted by Zorak on May 06, 2002 at 16:40:14:
I'm hesitant to compare Orwell's fictional geopolitics with globalisation. Like any text - be it 1984, the Bible or the Koran - the nuances and meanings of the authors need to be taken in context in the time and place that they where written. The political entities of 1984 are more akin to Stalin's Russia and the fascist regimes of Germany and Italy in the 1930's & 40's rather than multinational companies.
There equivalents would be the numerous military dictatorships of today - Burma's military junta or the terrible regime of Hussein in Iraq are closer to the spirit of Eurasia/Eastasia/Oceania than Time Warner & Disney. Whatever their faults, we can be thankful that they don't control storm troopers or secret police.
Orwell brilliantly captures the post-war period, and the coming Cold War. Since 1914 the world had experienced two world wars, an uneasy peace, the Great Depression and the loss of millions of lives. Following that another 50 years of conflict between the United States, the Soviet Union and their proxies.
Born in 1903 right on the eve of this climatic period, Orwell's adult life covered the most traumatic episodes in European history. They must have affected him deeply - thus to him Eurasia had always been at war with Oceania. War, poverty, death: no wonder he created such a bleak world view.
I do think Orwell presaged the link between language, mass communication and reality. Doublethink, the Ministry of Truth & the Thought Police etc. are brilliant creations and bear relevance to today's world. We live in the so called information age: the messages circulated within a society dependent on mass communication ARE vulnerable to abuse. Call it spin doctoring, but often the truth is buried or customised to suit the purposes of vested interests.
However, I don't think we should junk the entire system. Simple "anti-globalisation" won't help and to compare the world of 1984 with today would be factious . Any system that involves mass participation - be it political, economic or social - is open to abuse. Orwell saw this in Spain when he glimpsed the true nature of Communism. In fact, it's a danger first diagnosed by the Greeks. After all it was a democracy that put Socrates to death. A jury of his peers when put to the vote condemned him, and their decision has been debated for over 2000 years.
The dangers Orwell intimates at are universal truths about the nature and abuse of power. It think that it's a message relevant to the world of 1948, 1984 or 2002.