Film, Media & TV9 mins ago
1984 …
109 Answers
… by George Orwell. Anyone read it - and if so what were your impressions and is it relevant to what is happening today? The condemnation and destruction of history, the suppression of ideas that oppose the ideals of the ‘woke’, and the insistence in some quarters that two plus two really does equal five - all of that I think we are now witnessing.
Your thoughts?
Your thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I get the distinct impression that some here haven’t read the book. The suggestion isn’t that we’re living in such a world - yet - rather that we (and I include the powers that be in that) are becoming more willing to acquiesce - just as the characters in 1984 did - in reality the ‘silent majority’ hounded out by the aggressive beating of the ‘woke’ drum. Taking the knee (what a stupid expression!) because we are expected to show support for an organisation bent on bringing anarchy but shielding under false pretences; demolishing our heritage and expected to feel shame for our history (I don’t); denying the legitimate result of a democratic vote with every duplicitous excuse both in and out of any book - the most gobsmacking example being ‘democracy doesn’t mean what you think it means’ - and there are the stars of Harry Potty biting the hand that has fed them so very well and all because the source of their enormous wealth told the truth. Only women menstruate. J K Rowling knows that’s true - I know that’s true - we all know that’s true - and yet we are required to pretend - and so many do. Even on here we’ve been requested by AB Towers to go along with the lie - call a he 'she' if that's what he wants - a request I hasten to add that I will not concede to. Newspeak abounds and two plus two does indeed equal five in such a world.
Zacs, //This very forum where we can say exactly what we want without recourse//
Haha! You are soooo obvious - but I'll go along with it. Try saying something in the Science section that breaks no normal Site Rules but that opposes current scientific thinking - even though science is prone to changing its mind - and all rests on the adjudication of just one member who in addition to being a mod is also ‘Quality Controller’ (his words - not mine) of said section. Censoring ideas and crushing curiosity isn’t, in my opinion, conducive to education - but there we - shades of 1984 - hence my self-imposed exile from the Science section. Call it my own little rebellion.
Zacs, //This very forum where we can say exactly what we want without recourse//
Haha! You are soooo obvious - but I'll go along with it. Try saying something in the Science section that breaks no normal Site Rules but that opposes current scientific thinking - even though science is prone to changing its mind - and all rests on the adjudication of just one member who in addition to being a mod is also ‘Quality Controller’ (his words - not mine) of said section. Censoring ideas and crushing curiosity isn’t, in my opinion, conducive to education - but there we - shades of 1984 - hence my self-imposed exile from the Science section. Call it my own little rebellion.
// the most gobsmacking example being ‘democracy doesn’t mean what you think it means’ //
It would have been less gob-smacking if you'd given the context, but as it is you've delighted in quoting it without explanation. Even I've forgotten what I meant by it now, as I can't seem to find its first appearance.
It would have been less gob-smacking if you'd given the context, but as it is you've delighted in quoting it without explanation. Even I've forgotten what I meant by it now, as I can't seem to find its first appearance.
Nobody has. There was some discussion about "quality control", but not "a quality controller". A small difference, but still a significant one, although I don't think Naomi meant to mislead there. On the other hand, the rest is a clear and obvious misunderstanding of what the policy -- and, for that matter, what Science -- is.
//I get the distinct impression that some here haven’t read the book. The suggestion isn’t that we’re living in such a world - yet - rather that we (and I include the powers that be in that) are becoming more willing to acquiesce - just as the characters in 1984 did - in reality the ‘silent majority’ hounded out by the aggressive beating of the ‘woke’ drum.//
You are right to. The latest boastful proclamation from the "Ministry Of Truth" gloats that they will double down on the propaganda if you fail to acquiesce first time around.
""The publicly-funded British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is ploughing £100 million into increasing “diverse and inclusive content” in response to the Black Lives Matter unrest in Britain and the wider West.
The BBC, funded by a compulsory licence fee levied on all live television viewers whether they watch BBC content or not, with non-payment punishable by fines backed by imprisonment, will also set a test for its TV output, with productions having to meet two out of three requirements for “diverse stories and portrayal on-screen, diverse production teams and talent, and diverse-led production companies.”
Eat ya heart out Pravda.
You are right to. The latest boastful proclamation from the "Ministry Of Truth" gloats that they will double down on the propaganda if you fail to acquiesce first time around.
""The publicly-funded British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is ploughing £100 million into increasing “diverse and inclusive content” in response to the Black Lives Matter unrest in Britain and the wider West.
The BBC, funded by a compulsory licence fee levied on all live television viewers whether they watch BBC content or not, with non-payment punishable by fines backed by imprisonment, will also set a test for its TV output, with productions having to meet two out of three requirements for “diverse stories and portrayal on-screen, diverse production teams and talent, and diverse-led production companies.”
Eat ya heart out Pravda.
Togo //The BBC, funded by a compulsory licence fee levied on all live television viewers whether they watch BBC content or not//
That isn't true. I spoke to them and they told me I don't need a licence, as I don't watch it. It's your own choice.
Naomi, I mostly agree with you at 18:07, except I don't see that anyone is meant to apologise for history. Sometimes, people are just too determined to take it personally. You can agree something is due for a change, without it being an insult or apology. We just move on.
That isn't true. I spoke to them and they told me I don't need a licence, as I don't watch it. It's your own choice.
Naomi, I mostly agree with you at 18:07, except I don't see that anyone is meant to apologise for history. Sometimes, people are just too determined to take it personally. You can agree something is due for a change, without it being an insult or apology. We just move on.
