[merryandrew]

1984, followed directly by Brave New World. Our world resembles a lot from each of these books. Much like in 1984, we have devices and companies constantly monitoring us (iOS, Android, Facebook, etc.), we have “news programs” and websites seemingly modeled after the “two minutes hate”, and we clearly have some Ministry of Truth-like misinformation getting spread around while accurate information gets lost or ignored. Much like in Brave New World, we have soma-like drugs, distractions and trivialities occupying people while they accept the world as it is and even shy away from wanting to change things. Really, we live in a world that blends together much of what was described in 1984 and Brave New World. Neither book predicted the future accurately, but together the picture these books painted is pretty damn accurate, and disturbing.

[eli_gottlieb]

>Much like in Brave New World, we have soma-like drugs, distractions and trivialities occupying people while they accept the world as it is and even shy away from wanting to change things.

Now hold on. There are millions of people in the streets demonstrating on a regular basis these days. How many have to be trying to change things before we stop labeling them all distracted, sleeping, over-amused sheeple?

[unicornporn]

"We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn't, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.

But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell's dark vision, there was another - slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley's vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.

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 egoism. 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 bumblepuppy. 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, Orwell added, 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 what we desire will ruin us."

— Neil Postman (Author of Amusing Ourselves to Death)

[danblick]

I first learned about Neil Postman in the last year from Alan Kay's reading list. I've found myself wishing he were still alive to champion his ideas today - they seem just as relevant in the era of Facebook as they did in the era of television.

http://www.squeakland.org/resources/books/readingList.jsp

[merryandrew]

Both you and pdog have made interesting observations, I suppose, but as I said, neither book described our reality accurately. Our reality is far more complicated. As you point out, millions have protested, but tens of millions haven’t. As pdog remarked, the world in 1984 might be described as a totalitarian hellscape, in part, but parts of our world can also be described as such; pdog needs to look outside his locale, I’m afraid. Our world really is like a combination of those two books, even if your neighborhoods aren’t. We haven’t matched the world portrayed in either book, obviously, but it feels to me like were transitioning to a world a lot like a combination of those books. Let’s review things in a decade or two and see what comes to be.

[eli_gottlieb]

>As you point out, millions have protested, but tens of millions haven’t.

On both an absolute and per-capita level, those millions are actually record highs. These are historically large demonstrations. I'd have to check where I read this, but IIRC about 3% of a country's total population is typically the amount you need demonstrating in order to overthrow a government.

We're possibly looking at a revolution in progress, and all you guys can say is, "Why aren't there more of them?"?

[goldmouth]

I think it's important to note that the majority of these protests are happening in large urban cities on the coasts that overwhelming did not vote for Trump. There are no large protests in the Middle of the country.

I'd also like to see the source for he 3% number that leads to overthrow.

[merryandrew]

> "you guys"

I don't know what group you're imagining me to be a part of, but you have no idea who I am, clearly. That's fine.

[eli_gottlieb]

Fair enough. I retract any implied criticism. You keep organizing!

[enraged_camel]

>>How many have to be trying to change things before we stop labeling them all distracted, sleeping, over-amused sheeple?

3.5 percent, according to research.

https://rationalinsurgent.com/2013/11/04/my-talk-at-tedxboul...

[eli_gottlieb]

Well, that's roughly how much of the population you need to mount an ultimately successful revolutionary movement. And we're 1/3 of the way there already.

Also, if I had to venture a guess for why things have been improving, it's that modern economies rely on very fine, highly-skilled divisions of labor. If you're a marketing manager, you probably don't really understand how software goes together. This makes it very difficult to point a gun at a programmer and force them to work.

This means that in order to climb the ladder of value-added production, you need to keep your social organization nonviolent, and possibly even increasingly peaceful. You need everyone to cooperate, and when they cease to do so, even nonviolently, you start losing all that value you can't extract at gunpoint.

[pdog]

> Our world resembles a lot from each of these books. Much like in 1984, we have devices and companies constantly monitoring us (iOS, Android, Facebook, etc.), we have “news programs” and websites seemingly modeled after the “two minutes hate”, and we clearly have some Ministry of Truth-like misinformation getting spread around while accurate information gets lost or ignored.

Is this a joke? Having recently reread Orwell's 1984, you can't seriously believe our society resembles Oceania in the slightest. The world may have some problems today, but the world in 1984 is war-torn, totaliarian hellscape from which no one can escape.

[dijit]

It certainly feels like we've always been at war with R̶u̶s̶s̶i̶a̶ the Middle East.

[rvdm]

I've been doing the exact same in the last few weeks in the opposite order.

I remember reading these as a young teen and liking the stories, but thinking the concepts were so far from ever being possible.

This was the age where the brutality stories of my grandparents surviving WWII started sinking in.

I was convinced mankind would never ever allow anything to happen again that could lead to what happened in the late 30s.

[infinite8s]

Mankind has a historically short memory (unless stories are elevated to religious levels). Witness the recent Holocaust Remembrance statement from the White House.

[tio00]

Short mention of a new book related to 1984: 2084 the end of the world http://www.europaeditions.com/book/9781609453664/2084-the-en...

Haven't read it yet, but it looks interesting

[dominotw]

>we have soma-like drugs

Having not read the book. Anyone know if that soma is based on vedic soma[1], seems like it.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soma_(drink)#Vedic_soma

[khedoros1]

From what I can see, Vedic Soma makes someone immortal and invulnerable.

Huxley's soma is some kind of narcotic haalucinogen. This is a list of quotes from the book that include the word "soma" in them, and it should give you an idea of the drug's effects and the characters' attitudes toward it: https://www.huxley.net/soma/somaquote.html

[dominotw]

>From what I can see, Vedic Soma makes someone immortal and invulnerable.

Rig veda describes Soma is a hallucinogenic used for intoxication.

1. Intoxication, though not addiction, is a central theme of the Veda, since the sacrificial offering of the hallucinogenic juice of the soma plant was an element of several important Vedic rituals. The poets who “saw” the poems were inspired both by their meditations and by drinking the soma juice. The poems draw upon a corpus of myths about a fiery plant that a bird brings down from heaven; soma is born in the mountains or in heaven, where it is closely guarded; an eagle brings soma to earth (4.26-7) or to Indra (4.18.13), or the eagle carries Indra to heaven to bring the somabo

2. we have seen a Vedic poem (10.119) in which someone exhilarated (or stoned) on soma says that the drinks have carried him up and away, “Like horses bolting with a chariot.”

Source:

Doniger, Wendy (2009-02-24). The Hindus: An Alternative History (p. 122).

[khedoros1]

That's interesting. Thank you for the clarification.