Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sam_paine
sam_paine said: I dunno. Maybe Orwellian. But Huxleylike totalitarianism seemed to endorse lascivious behavior. I think this is technicaly more "Puritanical" than "Orwellian."

Another aspect of "Orwellian" control is that the control is arbitrary. One day the nation is aligned with "Oceania" and the next day opposed. The people were expected to adapt to the changed allegiances and controls without question. The state which can prohibit kissing in public can also mandate it. That which is not prohibited becomes required.

I believe it is in Missouri that the state constitution enumerates the right to keep and bear arms but which contains a clause that such right "shall not justify the carrying of concealed weapons". A judge has ruled that this clause prohibits carrying of concealed weapons. The "thinking" (if it can be called that) is that whatever is not a protected right must therefor be prohibited even with legislative approval.

14 posted on 11/08/2003 12:23:20 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


From 1984 by George Orwell:
The aim of the Party was not merely to prevent men and women from forming loyalties which it might not be able to control. Its real, undeclared purpose was to remove all pleasure from the sexual act. Not love so much as eroticism was the enemy, inside marriage as well as outside it. All marriages between Party members had to be approved by a committee appointed for the purpose, and -- though the principle was never clearly stated -- permission was always refused if the couple concerned gave the impression of being physically attracted to one another. The only recognized purpose of marriage was to beget children for the service of the Party.

Sexual intercourse was to be looked on as a slightly disgusting minor operation, like having an enema. This again was never put into plain words, but in an indirect way it was rubbed into every Party member from childhood onwards. There were even organizations such as the Junior Anti-Sex League, which advocated complete celibacy for both sexes. All children were to be begotten by artificial insemination (artsem, it was called in Newspeak) and brought up in public institutions. This, Winston was aware, was not meant altogether seriously, but somehow it fitted in with the general ideology of the Party. The Party was trying to kill the sex instinct, or, if it could not be killed, then to distort it and dirty it. He did not know why this was so, but it seemed natural that it should be so. And as far as the women were concerned, the Party's efforts were largely successful.


15 posted on 11/08/2003 12:32:02 PM PST by george wythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson