[HN Gopher] Who Got It Right: Orwell or Huxley?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Who Got It Right: Orwell or Huxley?
        
       Author : steelstraw
       Score  : 41 points
       Date   : 2022-01-27 21:34 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.pairagraph.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.pairagraph.com)
        
       | umvi wrote:
       | Depends on the country.
       | 
       | China - Orwell
       | 
       | USA/EU - Huxley
        
       | wrnr wrote:
        
         | kodah wrote:
         | If you read Orwell's essays I don't think he paints the picture
         | as clearly as 1984 does.
         | 
         | Some papers with these themes off the top of my head:
         | 
         | - Reflections on Gandhi
         | 
         | - Politics and the English Language
         | 
         | - My Country Right or Left
        
           | cjbgkagh wrote:
           | Replying here because GP is flagged.... I do not agree with
           | the GP opinion but I think people should be allowed to
           | express 'bad' opinions.
        
             | wrnr wrote:
             | No there should be no place for bad opinions, otherwise
             | people can LARP their favourite dystopian fiction.
        
             | kodah wrote:
             | I wasn't saying I agree with them either, just pointing out
             | Orwell wasn't telling stories about "good and bad" in the
             | way 1984 was written. A lot of his essays actually show
             | there's a lot of grey, much less shades of it.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | spaetzleesser wrote:
       | I hate these either/or questions. A lot of societies have aspects
       | of both. North Korea probably leans toward Orwell but the rest of
       | the world more Huxley at the moment. But we shouldn't create
       | these dichotomies. Left vs right, socialism vs capitalism and so
       | on. They stifle any reasonable discussion right before it can
       | even begin. I guess that's the purpose of offering only extreme
       | alternatives.
        
       | unixhero wrote:
       | Aldous wrote a utopia.
       | 
       | Orwell wrote a dystopia.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | madrox wrote:
       | A recent thread went around twitter discussing the need for
       | artificial wombs to address the inequality between men and women.
       | Huxley is the first place my mind went.
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/molly0xfff/status/1483831201823703041?s=...
        
       | AnimalMuppet wrote:
       | Orwell is more oppression that is done to us. Huxley is more
       | oppression that we go along with doing to ourselves. So far, it's
       | more Huxley.
        
       | nottorp wrote:
       | Both, depending on country/time period.
       | 
       | I've lived in Orwell's country (communist dictatorship) when I
       | was young, now I live in Brave New World.
        
         | HarryHirsch wrote:
         | Brave New World had the Falklands. Where are the Falklands?
        
       | lordnacho wrote:
       | Elements of both exist in the modern world, but Huxley's is
       | easier to overlook. Authorities need people to mostly not react
       | to intolerable things that are happening, and it's best if you do
       | it from placating people with drugs/toys/pacifiers rather than
       | the whip, because people who are pacified will pressure other
       | people into not rocking the boat, whereas people who are being
       | whipped will complain about it to their friends and try to build
       | up a resistance movement.
       | 
       | Of course when you do go for the whip, you want to newspeak it
       | into something else, so that also works, in small doses. Your
       | problem occurs if it escalates, then you can't hold it down with
       | PR anymore.
       | 
       | So 1984 is metastable and such societies did in fact boil over.
       | BNW is stable and invisible to a lot of people, though I suspect
       | there is some failure mode we have yet to see. Maybe there's a
       | line of thought where people just get sick of every damn thing
       | being massaged to death by PR people, and they do something about
       | it.
        
         | Jansen312 wrote:
         | 1984 got it more correct. Take sometime to read or watch
         | current China related stuff. It makes whatever we think
         | oppressions done by western countries look pedantic. Huxley
         | birth control might also play out in China if birth rate there
         | still dropping way below what the state wants of 3 at the
         | moment. Personally I feel, if the world was dominated by
         | mainland Chinese and their influences or direct supremacy in
         | some kind of marvel multiverse, then Huxley-Orwell fictions
         | might be "unfictionized" there.
        
         | pram wrote:
         | I've always thought the achilles heel of Oceania's government
         | was the economy. Pretty much the one thing they couldn't really
         | place into their 'subjective reality' philosophical framework.
         | 
         | The way information passed through the Outer Party technicians
         | was extremely compartmentalized. It was a command economy, did
         | anyone actually know how things were going? The statistics were
         | basically all lies. Eventually the gin and cigarettes would
         | stop flowing.
        
           | ashtonkem wrote:
           | Related, there are stories of the USSR turning its own spy
           | satellites on itself to estimate correct crop yields because
           | of the culture of lying and exaggeration internally.
           | Basically nobody at the top really knew what was going on,
           | because everyone below them constantly lied to avoid getting
           | in trouble.
        
       | TheCoelacanth wrote:
       | Both. They are fictional explorations of human nature. Not
       | prophecies about what the future will actually look like.
        
       | mjfl wrote:
       | Huxley seems to be more right in the long term, since Orwellian
       | oppression is very visible, people work to fix it and eventually
       | do. Not so for Huxly-an dystopia.
        
         | NikolaeVarius wrote:
         | > Orwellian oppression is very visible
         | 
         | 1984 makes a fairly strong point that this is not true.
         | 
         | The proles do not conceive of the fact that they are oppressed.
         | Only the outer party can even think this, and at best its a
         | muted response. Newspeak is about making it impossible to see
         | or conceptualize oppression or injustice.
        
         | WillPostForFood wrote:
         | _Orwellian oppression is very visible, people work to fix it
         | and eventually do._
         | 
         | At least in 1984, oppression wins. It is a very bleak ending.
        
         | colecut wrote:
         | Nearly everyone carries an internet connected camera microphone
         | tracking device everywhere.
        
           | Hnaomyiph wrote:
           | Does a camera, microphone and tracking device detect a slowly
           | boiled frog?
        
         | time_to_smile wrote:
         | The trouble is I'm perfectly fine with the Huxlian distopia.
         | Ship me off to an island of intellectual dissidents and give me
         | some good drugs, I'm down for that world.
         | 
         | Kafka is the one who really got it right. I've never felt a
         | more realistic depiction of my life than _The Trial_.
        
           | cjbgkagh wrote:
           | I'd be down for 60 years of good health, I think of the
           | amount of work that I could do. I think the problem is that
           | they have to keep throwing the work away and the
           | pointlessness of it all would kill me.
        
       | jameskilton wrote:
       | Yes.
        
       | scandox wrote:
       | My experience is that 1984 is much more re-readable. That doesn't
       | necessarily mean anything, except that perhaps Orwell created a
       | world that is more mentally inhabitable despite its grim nature.
       | The little room above the shop is a respite we can all dream of.
       | 
       | There's nothing like that in Brave New World, though I think it's
       | the wiser book.
        
       | 5cott0 wrote:
       | Neither because they both plagiarized Yevgeny Zamyatin.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_(novel)
        
         | pharmakom wrote:
         | Plagiarised is totally the wrong word here. Besides, We is
         | satirical so quite different in tone. I greatly enjoyed all
         | three novels though, and encourage people to read them all :)
        
         | cookie_monsta wrote:
         | Meaning that Zamyatin got it wrong, too?
        
       | uvdn7 wrote:
       | They are not mutually exclusive? If you look at China, both are
       | sort of happening at the same place in the same place.
        
       | scoofy wrote:
       | The books are using "the future" to describe their present times.
        
       | nix23 wrote:
       | Both, it's the mix that makes the perfect society, but 1984 is
       | the better book ;)
        
       | after_care wrote:
       | I don't really see the either/or situation here. It seems like
       | two ways in which states can control citizens, and with actors in
       | the modern world taking lessons from both mixed with other
       | sources.
        
       | js2 wrote:
       | Neither. The dystopia I fear is Terry Gilliam's _Brazil_ , though
       | on some days, I think we're headed toward _Idiocracy_.
        
       | cjbgkagh wrote:
       | Orwell vs Huxley seems to be the lens of how people react to what
       | is done to them. I'm more interested in why those in power do
       | those things in the first place. The article points to the
       | students as if they have power, I don't think they do, they're
       | trapped in a system and reacting to it as pretty much any young
       | human would do in the same position.
       | 
       | Possibly my favorite example of the powerful impressing a way of
       | life on a huge number of people is the diplomatic sealed train
       | the Germans used to send Lenin from Switzerland to Russia. i.e.
       | the Russian Revolution was an intentional act done to it by
       | cynical Germans who correctly expected the outcome would help
       | them in the war. And the rest is history.
        
         | NikolaeVarius wrote:
         | > i.e. the Russian Revolution was an intentional act done to it
         | by cynical Germans who correctly expected the outcome would
         | help them in the war.
         | 
         | Claiming that Germany caused the Russian Revolution via the
         | sole act of sending him back to Russia is not true.
         | 
         | While it is true that Lenin ultimately led the Bolsheviks to
         | power, the reason Germany even thought about sending Lenin back
         | was that Russia was already on the brink of collapse due to
         | reasons a mile long and Germany was throwing shit against the
         | wall to hasten Russian collapse.
         | 
         | Claiming a revolution of an entire country was caused by a
         | single person is a bit much.
        
         | pydry wrote:
         | Power is a hell of a drug.
        
         | ashtonkem wrote:
         | Sending Lenin to Russia wasn't about causing a revolution, that
         | had actually already happened, but it was about trying to
         | affect who would win the following fight for power.
        
         | madrox wrote:
         | After reading Dune and also being an engineering leader, I've
         | come to view power as multivariate. In some ways you have less
         | power when you're in charge. To go with your example, many
         | other countries didn't see a choice in getting involved in WW1.
        
           | cjbgkagh wrote:
           | One of my takeaways from 1984 is that those who are
           | supposedly in charge are slaves to a self perpetuating
           | emergent behavior. It often feels like it is never a choice.
           | How much of politics is decided by Henry Kissinger and his
           | disciples (e.g. Klaus Schwab - Davos) carrying on the
           | tradition of realpolitik.
        
             | spaetzleesser wrote:
             | "those who are supposedly in charge are slaves to a self
             | perpetuating emergent behavior"
             | 
             | That describes most of society and for sure a lot of
             | companies. A lot of people realize that something is not
             | right but they still stay confined within that framework.
        
       | pphysch wrote:
       | Neither because they're both fiction books marketed towards a
       | popular audience for their entertainment. They are not
       | substitutes for concrete analysis of historical facts.
       | 
       | "Who got it right, J.R.R. Tolkien or J.K. Rowling?"
        
         | rapnie wrote:
         | Well, fiction with such clear warnings in them are more like
         | parables.
        
           | pphysch wrote:
           | Neither of these fictional novels are succinct nor simple,
           | like a parable.
        
       | maurits wrote:
       | Although I understand its been critiqued, I always liked the
       | visual depiction of "amusing ourselves to death" from Postman
       | [1], by McMillen [2]
       | 
       | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_Ourselves_to_Death
       | 
       | [2]: https://biblioklept.org/2013/06/08/huxley-vs-orwell-the-
       | webc...
        
       | voidfunc wrote:
       | Am I the only one who read Brave New World and thought "That
       | doesn't seem all that bad?"
        
       | TheDudeMan wrote:
       | I'm here to collect my free sex and drugs.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-01-27 23:00 UTC)