Framed in the way Postman does in the quote you provided, Huxley’s fears certainly appear to have achieved a more obvious realization. But, many of Orwell’s predictions are coming to pass. And there is even a synergy between the two types of phenomena: As Huxley’s vision comes to pass and thus more of us are distracted into obliviousness concerning deeper trends and, as T.S. Eliot said, “we can connect nothing with nothing”, Orwell’s fears are more easily implemented and are in fact being implemented.. I’ll give some examples below:
1. “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books.”
This most certainly is happening: A number of publishers and authors have been completely banned from Amazon and major booksellers. There is a pervasive if unofficial network of Goodthinkers who absolutely prevent “unapproved” books and ideas from being allowed into schools, libraries, curricula, etc. Now, much of this is achieved informally and not through official government action, but it is real nonetheless and is certainly aligned with the mainstream views of the Western governing classes. Just days ago, Hillary Clinton advocated for prosecuting American citizens for “misinformation”. People in Europe have been prosecuted for quoting Bible verses.
In his Substack column yesterday, Orthodox writer Rod Dreher described how a hit-job piece in the Kirkus Review on his about-to-be released book “Living In Wonder” will all but guarantee that his book will not be picked up by libraries, schools, universities, etc. Again, this is a small and informal but meaningful step, and it is certainly part of the way that power operates in today’s world. Key quote from Dreher’s reaction to the review: “You see what’s going on here: the Kirkus reviewer is signaling to libraries and bookstores that Living In Wonder is bigoted hatecraft. I will not be surprised if many libraries and bookstores decline to stock it after that review.” https://roddreher.substack.com/p/the-wildness-of-the-invisible-sky
2. “Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information.”
This is also happening, pervasively. The lack of transparency with respect to government actions in any number of areas (foreign policy and military matters, allocation of funding, conflicts of interest, etc) is ubiquitous. Now, for sure it is in part the inundation of trivial information itself that is also contributing to the success of the deprivation of information: People are too distracted to care that key information is being kept from them. Another example that is not easy to prove but I think many of us of a certain age can confirm it experientially is that the nature of information availability on the Internet has significantly changed: Google results lead to a narrowing range of sources, and the burying of information by neglect. Whether this is intentional or simply the nature of the algorithms etc, who knows, but it is happening and it affects people's ability to ascertain sufficient information to make informed judgments.
3. “Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us.”
Similar to and largely covered above. The arrest and prosecution/persecution of people like Snowden, Assange, Aaron Swartz, etc. shows that the authorities will go to great lengths to conceal truth and to destroy those who are trying to provide access to information.
4. “Orwell feared we would become a captive culture.”
Again, in many ways, this has, and continues to, come to pass. Criticisms of Liberal shibboleths ranging from immigration, to the various revolutionary sexual agendas to foreign policy to the imposition of energy quotas (“15 minute cities”) now have the real possibility of resulting in de facto if not de jure persecution, deplatforming and physical threats, etc. or simply the sheer inability to resist or escape from the effects of such policies: A formerly middle class person who has been economically decimated by intentional policy decisions, whose neighborhood is flooded with immigrants, who is prohibited from purchasing certain vehicles, etc etc and certainly cannot publicly criticize any of these such things is very much a captive, and it would be a kind of cruel gaslighting to deny it, even though that is exactly what the mainstream powers do. Many people do indeed feel they are captives through oppressive government policies, neglect and cancel culture, and the completely anti-democratic transformation of their societies, etc.
So, while the Orwellian predictions may be less obvious or perhaps because they do not always directly arise from (overtly) official channels of power, are denied as being real, I would argue that these things are happening and that the trend will be for them to increase as technologies (e.g. CBDC) enable it and increasingly authoritarian Western governments use these tools to impose their vision of the just society.
Anyway, this comment is not mean to be contrarian or argumentative, but just to make the point that both Orwell’s and Huxley’s visions have their descriptive truth in today’s world, and that they can be mutually reinforcing: the more we are distracted by trivialities and oceans of information, the more that centralized powers can enforce their preferred agenda in anti-democratic and authoritarian ways.
I very appreciate your work, both at Protecting Veil and You Are Not A Machine.
Much appreciated, Daniel! I think you are correct...there is certainly no reason that both visions cannot be true, and are simply appearing at a different pace. It makes sense that Huxley's vision would come first to weaken the will of people, making Orwell's vision much easier to implement. 🙏🏻
The most dangerous kind of censorship is that done "to be safe;" for every successful ban, there's numerous others who pull back or revise their work to be more palatable.
I think Huxley's vision is coming, too. If you hear an interesting piece of news that challenges the "official story", search for it a week or two later and it will have been memory holed. Examples: an article by the Atlantic about water treatment options and the pollution of hormonal birth control. Super well researched, impossible now to fine. Ilona Maher played for a few years as a boy, for the boys rugby team, under the name Mason Maher. Did she use male hormones? If she did, did it impact her performance at the Olympics on the women's team? You can't find information on it.
Turns out information doesn't want to be free; it wants to be cheap. But still monetizable.
And now you don't even need any announcement or authorization to censor. Does some book written in the 20th century not reflect proper 21st century morals? Well, have your "sensitivity readers" come up with a goodwordful fix, then update everyone's E-readers with the Correct Version. Tyranny of the Safetycrats.
Framed in the way Postman does in the quote you provided, Huxley’s fears certainly appear to have achieved a more obvious realization. But, many of Orwell’s predictions are coming to pass. And there is even a synergy between the two types of phenomena: As Huxley’s vision comes to pass and thus more of us are distracted into obliviousness concerning deeper trends and, as T.S. Eliot said, “we can connect nothing with nothing”, Orwell’s fears are more easily implemented and are in fact being implemented.. I’ll give some examples below:
1. “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books.”
This most certainly is happening: A number of publishers and authors have been completely banned from Amazon and major booksellers. There is a pervasive if unofficial network of Goodthinkers who absolutely prevent “unapproved” books and ideas from being allowed into schools, libraries, curricula, etc. Now, much of this is achieved informally and not through official government action, but it is real nonetheless and is certainly aligned with the mainstream views of the Western governing classes. Just days ago, Hillary Clinton advocated for prosecuting American citizens for “misinformation”. People in Europe have been prosecuted for quoting Bible verses.
In his Substack column yesterday, Orthodox writer Rod Dreher described how a hit-job piece in the Kirkus Review on his about-to-be released book “Living In Wonder” will all but guarantee that his book will not be picked up by libraries, schools, universities, etc. Again, this is a small and informal but meaningful step, and it is certainly part of the way that power operates in today’s world. Key quote from Dreher’s reaction to the review: “You see what’s going on here: the Kirkus reviewer is signaling to libraries and bookstores that Living In Wonder is bigoted hatecraft. I will not be surprised if many libraries and bookstores decline to stock it after that review.” https://roddreher.substack.com/p/the-wildness-of-the-invisible-sky
2. “Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information.”
This is also happening, pervasively. The lack of transparency with respect to government actions in any number of areas (foreign policy and military matters, allocation of funding, conflicts of interest, etc) is ubiquitous. Now, for sure it is in part the inundation of trivial information itself that is also contributing to the success of the deprivation of information: People are too distracted to care that key information is being kept from them. Another example that is not easy to prove but I think many of us of a certain age can confirm it experientially is that the nature of information availability on the Internet has significantly changed: Google results lead to a narrowing range of sources, and the burying of information by neglect. Whether this is intentional or simply the nature of the algorithms etc, who knows, but it is happening and it affects people's ability to ascertain sufficient information to make informed judgments.
3. “Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us.”
Similar to and largely covered above. The arrest and prosecution/persecution of people like Snowden, Assange, Aaron Swartz, etc. shows that the authorities will go to great lengths to conceal truth and to destroy those who are trying to provide access to information.
4. “Orwell feared we would become a captive culture.”
Again, in many ways, this has, and continues to, come to pass. Criticisms of Liberal shibboleths ranging from immigration, to the various revolutionary sexual agendas to foreign policy to the imposition of energy quotas (“15 minute cities”) now have the real possibility of resulting in de facto if not de jure persecution, deplatforming and physical threats, etc. or simply the sheer inability to resist or escape from the effects of such policies: A formerly middle class person who has been economically decimated by intentional policy decisions, whose neighborhood is flooded with immigrants, who is prohibited from purchasing certain vehicles, etc etc and certainly cannot publicly criticize any of these such things is very much a captive, and it would be a kind of cruel gaslighting to deny it, even though that is exactly what the mainstream powers do. Many people do indeed feel they are captives through oppressive government policies, neglect and cancel culture, and the completely anti-democratic transformation of their societies, etc.
So, while the Orwellian predictions may be less obvious or perhaps because they do not always directly arise from (overtly) official channels of power, are denied as being real, I would argue that these things are happening and that the trend will be for them to increase as technologies (e.g. CBDC) enable it and increasingly authoritarian Western governments use these tools to impose their vision of the just society.
Anyway, this comment is not mean to be contrarian or argumentative, but just to make the point that both Orwell’s and Huxley’s visions have their descriptive truth in today’s world, and that they can be mutually reinforcing: the more we are distracted by trivialities and oceans of information, the more that centralized powers can enforce their preferred agenda in anti-democratic and authoritarian ways.
I very appreciate your work, both at Protecting Veil and You Are Not A Machine.
Much appreciated, Daniel! I think you are correct...there is certainly no reason that both visions cannot be true, and are simply appearing at a different pace. It makes sense that Huxley's vision would come first to weaken the will of people, making Orwell's vision much easier to implement. 🙏🏻
The most dangerous kind of censorship is that done "to be safe;" for every successful ban, there's numerous others who pull back or revise their work to be more palatable.
Mutually reinforcing, indeed!
I think Huxley's vision is coming, too. If you hear an interesting piece of news that challenges the "official story", search for it a week or two later and it will have been memory holed. Examples: an article by the Atlantic about water treatment options and the pollution of hormonal birth control. Super well researched, impossible now to fine. Ilona Maher played for a few years as a boy, for the boys rugby team, under the name Mason Maher. Did she use male hormones? If she did, did it impact her performance at the Olympics on the women's team? You can't find information on it.
Alas, it would seem that is likely, Stephanie(!)
Turns out information doesn't want to be free; it wants to be cheap. But still monetizable.
And now you don't even need any announcement or authorization to censor. Does some book written in the 20th century not reflect proper 21st century morals? Well, have your "sensitivity readers" come up with a goodwordful fix, then update everyone's E-readers with the Correct Version. Tyranny of the Safetycrats.