A Dystopian Future?

I do not know how to begin writing this blog.

Honestly, while ideating the structure and content of my work over the years, my main focus has always been to have a strong opening line that lets me make my intent clear while being convoluted enough to pass the first reworking of the piece. My emotions are made clear with this statement. However, the reason for my writing today has left me speechless and my emotions all over the place. I write today on the work of George Orwell.

I am sure everyone has heard of this author, either through their school reading list or their interest in the field of political ideology. I was first exposed to him by my 8^th grade English teacher when we started reading Animal Farm as a ‘drama’ for school. A seemingly harmless book by its cover, this book truly taught me the meaning of allegory. It sparked a curiosity in me that will probably last a lifetime.

This word, allegory, really stumped me when I first understood its meaning. How does one derive an entire alternate meaning from a story left to the open interpretation of a reader? How does one draw this parallel without ever mentioning its real source of information? How can one book about barnyard animals have nothing to do with the lives of the barnyard animals? This, as I learned, can be achieved when your intent of writing is to pour out your emotions and prepare a scathing remark on an opinion you firmly stand by. Animal Farm is a story that parallels the Russian Revolution, arguably, and in my opinion, the most important event of the 20^th century.

Although the details are hazy, I do remember the story that the book follows; how an old ideologist inspires a generation of revolutionaries to take charge of their lives by literally overthrowing the establishment and laying the foundation of a system they believe will maximize the utility of the more significant portion of the population. Sound familiar? The book entirely captures a Socialist Revolution and gives us one of the first fundamental understandings of utilitarianism. And how is this achieved? Through an old boar, pigs, horses, goats, and raven. I had no idea what each of these animals, or rather who these animals symbolized. What each battle meant, and the significance of the windmill. However, after learning so much about the Russian Revolution in my history lessons and through extensive reading on the subject, I have made these connections and had that a-ha moment.

<Takes a break to listen to ‘Take on me’>

Names like Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky, which have now become a part of daily life, meant nothing to me four years ago. Reading this book like a novella was enough for our course, but it wasn’t enough for our teacher or us for sure. This book truly did spark my interest in revolutions and made me more and more inclined to the concepts of these movements. However, it was one of Orwell’s other books, which I recently completed after putting off for quite some time, that made my understanding of the world and its revolutions much clearer. This was 1984, written in the summer of 1949.

Another book in story format, with third-person narration, is precisely what should be done while covering heavy topics like totalitarianism, a dystopian future, and control over the masses – by retaining the suspense this structure allows you, a reader (who may find these concepts uninteresting) is compelled to read on. Personally, this suspense factor kept me on towards the end of the book. I thought there would be little time between the climax and the resolution period; however, it stretched on for almost 1/5^th of the book – I felt myself getting lost towards the end, but the suspense did keep me around.

Now, why were my emotions all over the place? A book CANNOT be so futuristic and spot-on so long after it has been written. Don’t get me wrong – this isn’t calling out the book in any way. More so, it’s a slap in the face to human civilization, and its, what I refer to as its ‘masters.’

The book is set in a post World War world, which has been divided into three super-states – Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia, all three of which are always at war with each other and keep changing their allegiance. Oceania is the super-state where we find Big Brother, leader of the political party known as Ingsoc based in London, which has complete control over this State. It is more authoritative than the most authoritative regime you can think of. The first ones that came to your mind were Stalin’s USSR, Gaddafi’s Libya, Hussein’s Iraq, Un’s DPRK, and now, more than ever, Putin’s Russia. What is/was the most common reason for persecution there? Anti-governmental activities – physical acts that you could have committed that were tangible and could be distinguished. However, in this dystopian wasteland of a place, there exists a higher level of treason – Thoughtcrime. Persecution of the highest level for your unspoken beliefs, your politically unorthodox thoughts, and your doubts that contradict the policies of Ingsoc. To me, the one thing that is truly your own is your thoughts – until they are penned down in a journal. What you think is personal. Therefore, when I first read of the Thought Police and their ability to catch Thoughtcrime, I was intensely petrified, for we could have invented the technology that gives people the power to do this. Imagine such a thing being instituted in a Democratic society? It isn’t tough to imagine, which amplifies my terror. Will there even be an Opposition? Will our fundamental rights, which I am always passionate to defend, be compromised? Would I even be able to write this blog? Would we be able to have protests?

The slogans that Orwell created for this Party help us understand Ingsoc even better. Their main slogan ‘Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past’ tells us about the re-writing of history committed on a day to day basis to make sure whatever Big Brother had said was true. Our protagonist works to edit newspapers and books already published to alter facts to correspond to the actual output at the moment. Further, there is a systematic effort to wipe out traces of the world before the Revolution. Therefore, by being in control, they can alter the past and make it seem like they are nothing short of visionaries who are always correct. The other slogans ‘War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength’ speak a thousand words. An aspect that I found shockingly accurate was the justification we have for war. We learn that ‘the primary aim of modern warfare is to use products of the machine without raising the standards of living.’ I urge you to read that again, and think back to all the wars you have studied about, and look at the effect it has on the general population as well. We truly are fighting wars to consume resources produced, so we do not have to contribute to building society. Thus the author concludes that as long as they are in a state of war, the Party remains in power, and there is no ‘anarchy,’ just pure oppression.

While reading it, I always had Animal Farm on my mind. With the current semester being the exploration of Stalin and his paranoia based purges, I best understood this book by relating it to events in the Soviet Union’s dark history. I think this summary would help explain the context of my arguments. Here are some: Both States were ruled by a single Party that promoted national duty over a familial lifestyle and believed that a single leader should lay down policy. Similarly, both regimes had show trials for prominent party members ousted by ‘Big Brother’ and Stalin as they scrambled to consolidate power on top for themselves. Furthermore, both regimes showed purges of their population, as Oceania tried to eliminate the older population who had lived before the Revolution (therefore could be anti-Ingsoc) and the USSR killing off disloyal ethnicities under the pretense of safety. Lastly, both relied heavily on the use of force and fear, through the ThoughtPolice and Spies in Oceania, as well as the Cheka-OGPU-NKVD-MGB-KGB history of the Soviets.

It is the mandate of a government to build schools and national education programs – but why is government-controlled education, what is considered a fundamental right for children, even being called into question? The book shows how people in power want to cultivate a new generation of indoctrinated children and thus include programs in the ‘Youth League’ to promote spying and reporting acts of Thought Crime. We see many children turning in their parents as suspected defaulters from thoughts they extract from their parents while they sleep. So this begs the question – is national education, an established part of the government, slowly indoctrinating children to have a specific mindset? Throughout the book, we hear the protagonist say that the proletariat is the only hope for revolution – but if we have an uneducated, indoctrinated population, will people ever realize what is going on?

Increasingly, I am also beginning to feel trapped in an authoritarian country, which petrifies me. As a member of the world’s biggest democracy, one would expect many liberties associated with the constitution. But through un-clever brute force, these liberties will be stripped one by one until we are nothing more than voters without rights working for the Party Machine. This is precisely what Orwell talks about in his book – the population of Oceania comprises 15% Party members and almost 85% ‘proles’ or the proletariat, which serve almost no function but being receptive to party fervor and nationalism. In India, I see some of my rights being destroyed in front of me. I will say that I am a part of a privileged sector of society – however, fundamental rights are fundamental for a reason. They apply to everyone equally, and I see them being crushed through loopholes in the system. Recently I saw the right to peaceful demonstrations (upon which our country has been built) stripped from me in the Dec-Jan protests of 2019-20. Sure, it was legally allowed, but the sheer fear people were subjected to is a violation. I spoke to a relative about my opinions about this book and my plan to write something on the topic, and the first thing they said, unconsciously, was ‘Do not write about the ruling party.’ This fear that they have about a democratically elected government seems to be perfectly rational. This is precisely the curtailing of freedom of speech that I feel now. If something like this has been predicted and left for the world to see over 70 years ago, how have we allowed such things to happen?

The main character is seen writing in a diary as a form of therapy – there are intense emotions in his heart as he pours his soul into his diary, something else illegal as well. I find this comforting. To go through the trouble to pen down your opinions can be a monumental task and the only source of pleasure. The protagonist wrote of the disturbing truths he had seen in his life, his issues with the people in charge, and so on. This gives me an important lesson – when you are justifiably unhappy with something that you cannot take on alone, instead of protesting out loud, do the things you love by breaking the rules yourself, however small they may be, in a protest against the cause.

I hope you do pick up this book as it can bring about a considerable change in the way you think. You don’t need to be an enthusiast in this field – read it like a storybook, with a chunk of ideology in the middle. But I leave you with this – it doesn’t have to be this book. I urge you to read more and rediscover your passion for it as I have. It truly is a release from the world pressures you are facing right now. Find a spot and posture, set the right temperature, fill your bottle, and un-zip your chips.