The world in Nineteen Eighty-Four

In Nineteen Eighty-Four there are only three countries’ left in the world and all three of them are superpowers. All of them are communistic countries. This is the world in 1984.

George Orwell takes you back to 1949, when the book was written. Back then WW II had just ended and everyone feared WW III might start soon. A solution for that fear was the communism. However, Nineteen Eighty-Four fits in the time spirit of those days as, it is according to me, an attack on communism. It shows what will happen to the world and to the life of individuals if communism comes to power. This book is written from a rebel’s point of view, which obviously represents Orwell’s point of view on communism.

The most interesting part of the book is that Orwell was clearly right about a lot of things. He predicted how communism would develop. In Nineteen Eighty-Four there is, for instance, a crime called thoughtcrime. This crime is thinking something wrong. The same thing happened in the Soviet Union, if someone had political thoughts that were contradictory to the political thoughts of the party, you were executed or banned to Siberia. However, Orwell takes communism to an even more cruel level, and, in my opinion, he exaggerates a bit. The so-called proles, are underestimated. In his opinion the less educated people of society (the proles) will never stand up against the regime, because they aren’t allowed to think scientifically. Since they will not think scientifically, consequently all progress in society has come to an end. In my opinion, they will. If you look at the history of mankind, you see there is a certain period called the Age of Enlightenment. In that period mankind became extremely anxious to learn all there is about nature and its laws. Mankind began to think scientifically, a way of thinking that would destroy communism as described in Nineteen Eighty-Four. It happened in history, so it will, most likely, happen again in the future. Now that I’ve mentioned the future, Orwell exaggerates here too. According to Orwell, if you control the past you control the future. And if you control the present, you control the past. Therefore, “The Party” falsified all records to fit their point of view. This is a bit naïve. Even the dumbest individual will notice when overnight, there was a war not with terrorism, but with United States instead. Furthermore, if they continue by showing records that we have always been at war with America, even the so called “proles” will understand that it’s all just a bunch of malarkey.

All of this is, of course, a bit harsh to claim as errors or as flaws. Back in 1949 there was little knowledge about communism. No one knew how communism would develop. However, Orwell’s point of view on nuclear weapons is somewhat absurd. First, he claims that everything is about power. The next thing he claims is that all three superpowers want to win the war. They all have weapons to win the war but they don’t use them. On behalf of the story, this is necessary, but it lowers its credibility. If who is in control, and who’s in charge is all that matters, a nuclear weapon wouldn’t be a bridge to far. A nuclear war wouldn’t even be a bridge to far. Considering that in the story there is no nuclear war, nor are the nuclear weapons used, power cannot be the most important matter.

A final issue: the idea behind the Newspeak language really shocked me. I do not think ANYTHING about the development of Newspeak, or the prosecution of thoughtcrimes, is exaggerated. Those things are merely a development that totalitarian regimes and institutions did not make yet. All of them failed before they could achieve such control on the human mind.

Enough criticism on Nineteen Eighty-Four! In spite of all issues raised, I really enjoyed reading Nineteen Eighty-Four. Before Nineteen Eighty-Four I wasn’t really interested in political issues. Now I start thinking about communism and other political issues. At first, I thought it was just another way of leading a country. Now I understand that communism is an ideology, which regrettably is bound to fail. If you take another look at history, you’ll see it yourself. The Soviet Union had a big economic problem and was way behind on scientific area’s compared to the United States.

One of the things that really got me thinking was the line: “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four”. You could say: “Freedom is the freedom to give your opinion at work or at school”. But when they said “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four”, (and it really was appropriate at that situation!) it got me wondering where the influence of a regime stops and where the freedom of the human mind starts. When the regime actually convinces Winston (the main character) that two plus two doesn’t make four but makes five, the whole meaning of the line suddenly became clear to me. It’s not about the freedom to express yourself, it’s about the freedom to think for yourself!

This is the original line:

“Do you remember, ’He went on, ‘writing in your diary

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four”?’

Yes, said Winston.

O’Brien held up its left hand, its back forward to Winston, with the thumb hidden and four fingers extended. ‘How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?’

‘Four’

‘And if the Party says it is not four but five- then how many?’

‘Four’

The word ended in a gasp of pain. The needle of the dial had shot up to fifty-five.

Page 261-262