Orwell Just Didn't Take It Far Enough I Guess.

[ThomWV]

A central theme in Orwell's masterpiece, "1984" is that words fashion thought so that if you can control language you can control the mind, hence the speaker. Reduce the number of words, blur distinctions, let laziness of thought supplant articulate response and you'd have them in your hands. 1984 has come and gone.

And so now we have George Bush. We call him a moran but he is not. He is certainly something else, something somehow new and strange but somehow familiar. He is a man who does not use words to inform, in fact he doesn't use words in any coherent way at all. The words the man uses often have little to do with his subject, in most cases if you read transcripts of his encounters with the press you can discern no intelligible thought what so ever. Really, you can watch and listen to one of his pressers and know exactly what he means, but you try to read what was said and you will come away baffled.

So how does this square with sage Orwell? George Bush has mastered the dumbing down of language. He has got language to the point where no one expects him to say anything intelligible at all, and indeed that is what we get. Yet somehow this baboon of a man, this imbecile who shouldn't be able to communicate at all manages to communicate with maniacal force? How in hell does he do it? Somehow this man plants the evil substance of his mind in yours and using words of no meaning conveys his message of hatred, the expectation of entitlement to privilege and immunity from responsibility that is the God given right of him and his. How in hell does he do it. Has he gone so far past Orwell that from him words aren't even necessary? Is this the ultimate end of future speak? And did it happen because we've been dumbed down so far we can understand him?

[Nitrogenica]

1. Bush is part of a propaganda machine that mastered it's craft.

"Propaganda is a means and must be evaluated as such, from the standpoint of the goal."

"It has always to speak only to the masses."

"The task of propaganda lies not in the scientific training of the individual, but rather in drawing the attention of the masses to certain facts, events, necessities, etc...."

"It is wrong to want to give propaganda the multi-sidedness of scientific instruction."

"...Effective propaganda must limit its points of a few and these points must be repeated until even the last member of the audience understands what is meant by them."

"It must limit itself to a few themes and repeat them incessantly."

"Each change must never affect the content of propaganda, but rather must always draw the same conclusions."

~Propaganda Abteilung, Propaganda (Munich: Reichs-Parteileitung der N.S.D.A.P., 1927