Was George Orwell a Prophet ?

Just put another Democrat in the White House.

 

Well you look at what autonomous weapons can do and tel me a big brother oppressive scenario is impossible.

 

We'll get to that, but I think this'll be difficult without sharing a baseline of knowledge about the actual story of 1984.

Have you read it?

 

yes.... eons ago in school, we're not exactly talking about a new publication here. My post referred to the big brother, oppression, lack of individuality in the book and the role autonomous weapons can play in enforcing such a scenario. Of course not exactly like in the book we're now technically highly advanced by comparison.

There is a movement to ban autonomous weapons due to the individual targeting capability.

 

Big Brother has gone corporate. Alexa is watching you...

One thing Orwell got right is the way pseuedocons can turn on a dime when ordered to do so by Trump or Fox News. "We have always been at war with eastasia."

 

Trump couldn't even if he wanted to. Congress is full of Establishment wonks who would block him should he try anything significant.

What is needed is a "Movement" - akin to a new party. Folks could run under the red or blue banner - so long as the voters have vetted them as part of the movement.

We have to get rid of all sitting members of SCOTUS ... that has to be part of the platform.

 

The main way they get around the founding principle (Individual liberty ABOVE the legitimate authority of Gov't) is through Utilitarian justification for law.

This justification looks only at "what will increase happiness for the collective" and completely disregards individual liberty. On this basis alone it should be thrown out in all but the most grey situations.

Then there is "fallacious utilitarianism" .. when the justification is not even a good utilitarian argument.

An example of this plague is as follows: "If it saves one life" / "Harm Reduction" as justification for law.

It sounds very good on the surface - "who does not want to save one life" ? This is what makes this argument so insidious.

Dig deeper and this argument is truly evil. It is totalitarianism dressed in sheep clothing.

If "If it saves one life" is truly good and valid justification for law... should we not then ban skiing tomorrow ? Would this not save one life - reduce harm ?

How about boating - that is really dangerous as one could drown. Driving a Car? Forget it . In fact one should probably not rise from bed in the morning as one might fall and break neck.

In a free society individuals have the right to risk a reasonable amount of harm to themselves.

How often do we hear " If we make this legal - Pot for example - "The children the children" Classic harm reduction argument.

The fact of the matter is that it is illegal for Children to use pot. That is how we protect "the children". It is not my fault if some kid breaks the law. Why should I be punished for the actions of some kid. This is a violation of the Rule of Law - "One person is not to be punished for the actions of another"

At the end of the Day the Gov't (Feds, State, Muni) is not supposed to have any authority to make law outside its legitimate purview (which is protection from direct harm .. one person on another - murder, rape, theft and so on ) of its own volition.

The mechanism that it is supposed to be using is "overwhelming majority". NOT - 50+1 or simple majority mandate. This was termed "Tyranny of the Majority" in both Classical Liberalism and Republicanism.

If the Gov't can convince 66% that some activity (pot for example) is so harmful that it should be given power to use physical violence to dissuade people from smoking the stuff .. then law is then legitimate. If it can not .. its not .. Full STOP.

This is how our Law is supposed to be made in this nation.

 

No .. you are not getting it. The Establishment consists of both Red and Blue.

It was not a Democrat who used fear of a foreign threat to make it our "Patriotic Duty" to get on our knees and beg to trade individual liberty for security.

It was however a Democrat that changed the name to the equally Orwellian doublespeak "Freedom Act" .

Voting Red will not change the status quo (nor will voting Blue) it will maintain it. A vote for either Red or Blue is a vote for continued sodomization.

 

There are way too many parallels. ... Its freaky. Its like the Establishment is using 1984 as a textbook.

 

U.K. has fulfilled prophecy.

 

~~~~
Exactly!! That is why our forefathers in their wisdom created three branches of government. The Executive, Legislative and the Judiciary. Although Congress was to be represented by the People and the Senate comprised of two representatives of the States selected by the Governors of each state. This was changed in the early 20th Century so that Senators were elected by vote not appointed by Governors.

 

To put it crudely, when the population has been engineered to the point of there being only 1 intellectual per 1000 'red carpet' morons, the respective governments can afford to totally ignore the intellectual? I get ignored by my constituency MP every time I write to her - which sort of proves my point.

 

Like the US hasn't??

 

Indeed. When ever you get a lone voice speaking up ( drug pricing - price fixing for example). Everyone points and says "look look we have freedom of speech in this nation - what a good system we have".

That lone voice is then quickly drowned out by the cacophony on the take.

So long as the raging masses are ignorant - there is little that can be done to get in the way of the Establishment agenda.

 

That about sums it all up - Get 'em young, make them bovine, then we can do what we like with them.

 

Its amusing to see some far right wingers praising Orwell, I wonder how many of them know that Orwell was a life long socialist who fought with the Maxist's in Spain against the fascist dictator Franco and sustained a bad wound to his mouth?
Obviously they never had read 'Homage to Catalonia'.

 

What I mean is it's likely that the next Democrat in the White House will be a millennial. Every US generation since the 1960s has become unwittingly more radicalized and coincidentally dumber. This is a product of public education, the curriculum has been severely watered down and politicized. The left feels it's more important to indoctrinate than to educate, that social issues and popular culture trump history, science and mathematics. The average high school graduate these days possesses less academic knowledge than those in junior high in the 1950s. As evidenced by the exceedingly dim Bernie Sanders supporters we are only a generation or two away from becoming another failed socialist experiment. We've seen it all before, every one of these magical thinkers is blowing rainbows out of their ass over an extremely flawed and unworkable system of government. They are convinced that some how this time the'll get it right. Fortunately for some of us like myself won't be here for that **** show.

 

No one is claiming that the U.S. is not on it's way to the prophecies of Orwell, the claim is that the UK has already arrived there with gun confiscation, CCTV wherever you go, and now the Alfie situation, where the gov't has the right to take a child away from it's parents and starve it to death. Seems a little like what Hitler's Germany began in the 1930's that blossomed into the Holocaust.

 

It is the politicians and bureaucrats and media that are corrupt. In other words, creating a new party will only attract the corruption from one dying party to another party.

However, I will agree that a "movement" is required to give Trump the IMPLICIT power that will overcome the corruption when they run to hide like the cockroaches they are. Ironically, the cockroaches have already begun that movement by showing the corruption exists, in failing to produce hard evidence against Trump. Instead, it has backfired on them.

But the most important thing will be that justice prevails and the people are FINALLY given confidence that government corruption ends NOW.

Steve

 

~~~~
Sorry Steve, here I disagree with you. I don't want to give any president elected by the People too much power. That said, No party should have control of the government either. Democrats seem to control the gov't bureaucracy, that must stop. It's all up to the People not the Parties.

 

~~~~
Too bad they forced the end to Speakers Corner in Hyde Park. Heard the Blue Bottles broke up all the soap boxes.

 

Then, what was the message behind "Animal Farm"?

 

I see your point and made the effort to differentiate "power" with "IMPLICIT power." That would be power of the people to allow Trump to complete the task of going after corrupt bureaucrats (cockroaches). It would last only as long as Trump has the nod from the people. And it is a precarious nod as well with the lying liberal media able to sway voters somewhat easily. The media now has the lowest rating of TRUST by the people in history though.

I concluded, "But the most important thing will be that justice prevails and the people are FINALLY given confidence that government corruption ends NOW."

In regard to "Giftedone's" previous response, this is much better and more realistic than his proposals showing the corruption will just move from one party to another UNLESS the cockroaches are running in fear of their life, with the nod of the people.

Steve

 

I call it "The Beast" - its the natural outcropping of self interest and greed. You do not need some star chamber or cabal directing every more once the system is in place.

For example: Insider trading is quazi legal when you make it to congress - You (or better yet your buddy) can sit on committee giving contract to ABC company and you can invest in the company before the news hits the street. Its a license to print money. I want in on that game !

Sure from time to time you get some "do gooder" speaking out ... everyone then points and says "LOOK LOOK what a good system we have - freedom of speech" That lone voice is then quickly drowned out by the cacophony on the take.

Can you blame them ? Would you be the one to shoot the goose that lays the golden eggs ? - run against a heard of stampeding bulls ? I probably wouldn't.

Its the natural outcropping of self interest and greed Once the system is in place it runs itself.

Every time a tax law or regulation is made the Oligopoly is sitting at the table - and perhaps has a right to be there. The problem is that the person who is supposed to be representing the people is either in the pocket of, or influence by the oligopoly.

It is not like the Oligopoly wins ever table but, over time, table after table, the rules of the game get skewed towards the Oligopoly.

Look how Trumps first choice for Drug Czar didn't make it because he was involved in the process wherby the Drug companies would write the legislation and hand it to the Congressman for submission to Congress.

The relationship is hand in glove.

Its a pay to play system - when you play you get paid - and everyone knows it. Play ball and your future is secure.

It is not for her good looks and charming personality that Hillary gets paid 250 K a pop for a 15 min speech at some wall street banker luncheon - Its for a job well done !.

Bureaucrats that play ball get cushy lobbyist positions or perhaps a seat on some board of directors. Somehow you are going to be taken care of. Its a pay to play system.

Sure there are a few that will maintain their integrity - but we know the raging masses - most will succumb (its not like they were taking a bribe or doing something illegal) its the natural outcropping of self interest and greed.

Once the system is in place it runs itself.

 

I would claim that we are already a failed experiment social and economic and political. There was a test that was posted a while back - grade 8 level test in order to proceed further. No kid would pass such a test today ... it was before 1920.

I call it the Oligopoly-Bureaucracy Fusion Monster. Extreme capitalism and extreme socialism (totalitarian communism for example) both end up at the same place. In both cases you have a few elite owning most resources and means of production.

We have managed to combine the worst of both into an ugly monster.

Both Red and Blue support tax law and regulation that favors the oligopolies towards a system of indentured slavery (see post 99). The Establishment (both Red and Blue) love big Gov't and Big Govt spending. They love increasing Gov't and police power and hate individual liberty towards a quazi totalitarian police state.

Both hate fair and free markets.

Back in the 50-60's the corporation/ worker tax split was roughly 50-50. Now it is 20/80. MacDonalds can not do business without roads, police, infrastructure and so on. Not sure about you but I am not happy paying their share of the tax bill.

People say (Oh .. but they create jobs) 1) so what 2) if MacD was not there someone else would be selling burgers. I would not mind so much if it was a private company. At least the profits would be spent in the local economy.

With MacDonalds the profits go to some nameless faceless shareholder that may not even live in the country - never mind spend in the local economy. In this way a little cream is skimmed off the top of the milk. Multiply by 1000 and you are left with skim milk.

Nike moves manufacturing overseas to some slave labor nation. This is justified by "prices will be lower". BS - that Nike shoe that cost 5 bucks to make sells for 120 dollars.

But we tax the profit right ? Wrong. That shoe is first sold to a shell company in a tax haven such as the Cayman Islands (for $5). The shoe is then sold to the US affiliate for 90 Dollars. After the $20 dollar cost of sales there is $10 left in profits which get taxed.

The bulk of the profits go to some nameless faceless shareholder. - This is all perfectly legal. Obviously a $120 dollar shoe can be manufactured in the US profitably.

The problem is that if I do it here (say the mfg cost is 30 dollars and same $20 in cost of sales) I get taxed on 70 dollars rather than $10.

Buy gas at Exxon and the fellow selling you the gas gets nothing on the gas sales - he gets the chips and the gum. If he were to get those profits he would spend in the local economy - instead - nameless faceless shareholder.

Laws against price fixing, collusion and anti competitive practice by the Oligopolies - Defense Contractors, Energy, Healthcare, Insurance, Food - is rarely enforced and when it happens it is a slap on the wrist.

In one case way back Merck was found guilty. The estimated extra profit was 5 Billion. The fine was a few million.

And to add insult to injury - the worker gets to foot the Oligopoly's portion of the tax bill.

I have intentionally left out the "Bureaucracy" side of this multi headed beast - Oligopoly Bureaucracy Fusion Monster (this is partly covered in post 99). The reason for this is because you left this out of your analysis.