George Orwell presented a dark picture of society in his classic novel 1984. He conjured a world in which the government placed exacting control on every aspect of an individual’s life. Privacy and individual thought were not tolerated. Orwell built the world of 1984 on these rigid fundamentals that defined what it meant to be a party member of Oceania. We take pride in our concept of freedom, power as citizens and our constitutional rights. Do we take so much pride in our freedom that we dismiss the possibility of Orwellian constructs emerging in our experience? Is our government the new “Big Brother” or is it the dominating corporate power? Recognizing controlling trends, reclaiming our forfeited rights and keeping corporate political power in check are our best hope for avoiding the realization of an “Orwellian Society” and protecting our freedom. Personal political activism should be a priority in today’s contentious political climate. Terms like “Doublethink” and “Big Brother” may remind us of dreamy days from an English literature class but these ideas are quietly becoming part of our American landscape.
Surveillence
In Oceania, urban decay and human suffering are rampant but hi-tech surveillance is part of each person’s life. Every citizen’s home quarter is equipped with a telescreen that monitors activity and broadcasts propaganda to the citizens. It projects a constant and changing stream of information based on what the controlling Party wants its citizens to believe at that moment. The telescreens are used to promote Party support, incite hatred for outsiders and instill a fear of dissent. The people are bombarded with overstimulation designed to interfere with the mind’s ability to think independently. Big Brother is the face of the Party. Posters and billboards stating “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” wallpaper the city of Oceania. Though the name implies safety and protection from enemies, the constant presence keeps the population in a state of paranoia.
We have monitored elevators, shopping malls, highways, stoplights, schools et cetera. We also have a constant barrage of information presented to us in the form of billboard, advertising and 24-hour radio, television and the boundless Internet. Surveys show that “ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.” (heritage.org) We are a society addicted to a constant intake of media information. We have not been coerced into this lifestyle like the Party members of Oceania but we have been constantly courted, studied, researched, surveyed and then courted again by advertisers and program directors for corporations. The loop constantly repeats until there is something for everyone on TV. At that point everyone has the potential to be an impressionable consumer reachable by advertisers. If the viewing public can relate to a character, show or performer, it is possible they may accept a product that is attached directly or indirectly, regardless of weather it is good, bad or in keeping with their moral code. A political viewpoint may also become popular because a celebrity that connects with a particular group supports that view. Glen Beck is a popular shock jock buffoon that stokes the fire of the “Tea Party” movement. This group is self-described as having no previous interest in political activism but their support of the celebrity Glen Beck has united them to take a stand.
In addition to the corporate research and ratings style of surveillance and manipulation, the USA Patriot Act introduces a level of access and control to the American psyche that is hard to imagine as American. The ACLU describes the creation of the USA Patriot Act in Elements of Argument as follows:
Just six weeks after the September 11 attacks, a panicked Congress passed the “USA Patriot Act,” an overnight revision of the nation’s surveillance laws that vastly expanded the government’s authority to spy on its own citizens while simultaneously reducing the checks and balances on those powers like judicial oversight, public accountability and the ability to challenge government searches in court. (772)
The USA Patriot Act was devised as a tool to promote the safety of the American people. It can be interpreted to define any politically contrary deed or act of protest, as an act of terrorism. (778) How can an American citizen be sure what kind of websites are safe to visit? What are the safe books? Is it okay to sign an anti-war petition on-line? Could an environmentalist be considered a terrorist because they don’t support the largest corporations that give political party donations? Who is going to sort out these details for the American public? Where do the people stand? What is safe? If the people have to sort this out, isn’t free speech and right to privacy already a joke?
Doublethink
Orwell uses the concept of Doublethink throughout 1984. Doublethink is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas in one’s mind at the same time. In Oceania, party members are forced to Doublethink and accept contradictions. They can do this because their minds have been exhausted with opposing information. They have lost the capacity to think analytically and follow a thought through to conclusion. The few whose minds do not buckle under the stress are physically tortured into compliance. Here are some examples of Doublethink at work:
This country was founded on religious freedom
This country was founded on Christian values.
This country was founded on the separation of Church and State
This country respects basic human rights
This country tortures minors in secret prisons
The right to life is the most basic right
A woman has a right to make decisions about her own body
This country is the great melting pot
This country was built by immigrants
This country is being ruined by immigrants
Doublethink is served fresh every minute of everyday from the likes of advertisers, politicians, religious organizations, and the Fox network versus MSNBC news. So much constant, conflicting information poses a great challenge for anyone that wants to develop a personal code of ethics, belief system or set of opinions that have been chosen by them and not sold to them.
Corporate Domination
Orwell’ s book was written as a cautionary tale against a Totalitarian regime. Today I think it speaks to the dangers of a corporate run society. On January 21, 2010, in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations should have the same free speech benefits as “The People” of the United States and their spending for political campaign support should be free from limitation.
By a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court rolled back restrictions on corporate spending in federal campaigns. The decision could unleash a torrent of corporate-funded attack ads in upcoming elections. President Obama called it “a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”
Democracy 21's Fred Wertheimer…”The Supreme Court majority has acted recklessly to free up corporations to use their immense, aggregate corporate wealth to flood federal elections and buy government influence. The Fortune 100 companies alone had combined revenues of $13 trillion and profits of $605 billion during the last election cycle," Wertheimer wrote. "Under today's decision, insurance companies, banks, drug companies, energy companies and the like will be free to each spend $5 million, $10 million or more of corporate funds to elect or defeat a federal candidate -- and thereby to buy influence over the candidate's positions on issues of economic importance to the companies." (Huffington Post)
Corporations have a singular objective, which is to make more money for shareholders and investors. Individuals have more diversified goals in their support of candidates. The promotion of better school, air and water quality may not be of interest to the corporate bottom line but that shouldn’t be a reflection of importance.
Throw the hammer!
The 1984 television commercial for Apple’s Macintosh Computer features a party member that runs ahead of the group and throws her work hammer into the televised face of Big Brother. That is an extreme and fictional representation of activism but an incredible visual. Political activism is a necessity in political climate of our time. Organized community leadership is our best hope of differentiating ourselves from what is becoming more like an Orwellian society each day. The recent Supreme Court ruling to de-regulate political campaign contributions from corporations has greatly diminished our voting power. We need to galvanize grass-roots organizations and collectively reclaim our political significance. The Internet has given us more tools for organizing than ever before.
There are many websites and groups now forming to address these issues. Freespeechforthepeople.org is organizing to demonstrate opposition to the Citizens United decision. Moveon.org provides a petition to urge Congress to pass public financing and give elections back to the voters. Democrats.com/impeach is collecting signatures to pressure Congress to impeach Supreme Court justices. Doing some research and finding a group that is well suited to one’s beliefs can be exciting. Political activism offers community and opportunities to experience news and politics in a way that is not presented by advertisers. In the age of “Social Networking” cyber activism is a great way to rally and educate friends about issues. It is possible to register voters, circulate petitions and forward letters to your congressmen through myspace, facebook, twitter and personal websites. There are groups that are strictly virtual; if the threat that “Big Brother is watching you” has already taken hold many groups in the real world meet monthly, weekly and organize for events. Both provide our best chance for avoiding the Orwellian storm that seems to be headed our way.
When considering the value of activism it is inspiring to recall its role in our country’s independence from England, the abolition of slavery, a woman’s right to vote and the civil rights movement. Major changes taking place before the November 2010 midterm election are doubtful. The corporate powers that be are armed, informed and prepared to sell a candidate and a message that looks and sounds like the people but acts and speaks like the corporation. Friendly faces like Sarah Palin and Glen Beck will be doing the dancing for corporate dollars. Hopefully congress will act in time to establish a law that will require transparency in advertising so that it’s clear who is selling what.
Works Cited
Rector, Robert. “Understanding Poverty in America: What the Census Bureau doesn't count” (September 11, 2009) The Heritage Foundation http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed091109b.cfm
Rottenberg, Anette T. Winchell, Donna Haisty., Elements of Argument, How Has Terrorism Affected The Idea Of Justice? 772. American Civil Liberties Union., Surveillance under the USA PATRIOT Act.,
“The Supreme Court Rolls Back Campaign Finance Restrictions
The Huffington Post (1/21/2010)
www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/ 01/21/supreme-court-rolls-back_n_431227.html
Freespeechfothepeople.org “What Did The Supreme Court Just Do To Our Democracy? Solution” http://freespeechforpeople.org/the-solution
Moveon.org “Supreme Court Opens The Floodgates” http://moveon.org/
Wanson, David. “Obama's Argument Leads to Impeachment of Supreme Court Justices” http://www.democrats.com/node/21598
No comments:
Post a Comment