George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four was one of those books that I read at just at the right point in my life to have a real long-term impact on my philosophy. When I read it 35 years ago. I reasonably drew parallels to events going on at that time in the communist world. Never in my wildest dream (or nightmare) did I think that I would experience and watch play out in the United States the Orwellian concepts of “double-speak” and rampant media manipulation of facts of the magnitude described in that book.
In Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, people have to sift through the “facts” presented in the media to determine the “real” truth which was never as presented, though often just twisted a few degrees from true rather than told as a complete lie. The government generated a narrative and fed it to a media that was the willing communications arm of that government instead of being any check on the actions of the government. The government kept the majority of the population completely economically dependent upon the government at a level just high enough to avoid revolt and to create and maintain loyalty. Any of this sound like it might apply to the present?
We stand at a tipping point in history right now with slightly under (maybe over) half of the population totally dependent on the government for subsistence. The Food Stamp program has grown more in the past four years than at any other time in history. President Obama has directly said that he wants to expand a redistribution of income program by dramatically increasing taxes on high earners (5% already pay 60% of the taxes) and using that money to further increase the size of the government dependent population – a population completely and blindly loyal to a government providing them with full economic support. It is not a great level of economic support, just enough to prevent a revolt of those carried on the public dole.
I watched in disbelief during the second debate as President Obama used the Orwellian concept of “double-speak” when the President declared himself “offended” by the suggestion that anyone in his administration, including the U.N. ambassador, would “mislead” the country on Libya. (Obama quote) As has been discussed at length elsewhere on this blog the Obama Administration has intentionally mislead the American people from the moment the crisis began. (“Libyan Lies,” “Libyan Timeline” and “Obama Debate Lies.”) As the Columbus dispatch reported,
No one misled? His U.N. ambassador went on not one but five morning shows to spin a confection that the sacking of the consulate and the murder of four Americans came from a video-motivated demonstration turned ugly: “People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent, and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons.”
But there was no gathering. There were no people. There was no fray. It was totally quiet outside the facility until terrorists stormed the compound and killed our ambassador and three others.
The video? A complete irrelevance. It was a coordinated, sophisticated terror attack, encouraged, if anything, by Osama bin Laden’s successor, giving orders from Pakistan to avenge the death of a Libyan jihadist.
Not wishing to admit that we had just been attacked by al-Qaida affiliates, perhaps answering to the successor of a man on whose grave Obama and the Democrats have been dancing for months, the administration relentlessly advanced the mob/video tale to distract from the truth.
And it wasn’t just his minions who misled the nation. A week after the attack, the president himself, asked by David Letterman about the ambassador’s murder, said it started with a video. False again. (Columbus Dispatch)