u missed some of the more obvious clues & i believe the inner party was the jesuit order itself with indirect references to st. ignatius' spiritual exorcises,the inner party in black, obrian couldve been a "priest", enemies of the party were "heretics" etc.
@Hamandchees3 & ty very much for this vid; i was very delighted 2 see this video because i had thought the same thing and would never had discovered what u have. I like to suggest that maybe the book is actually an undercover pro-tyranny/catholic book & that Orwell, regardless of his open positions was infact an agent of the vatican. he also alludes secret handshakes and gestures in the book, did make the protagonist an immoral rapist, willing to spread std's, murder & throw acid in kids' face.
@supplanter111 Orwell depicts the innerparty writing goldstein's book which the ''black robes' have almost exclusively been cited as doing including the ghost writing of adolph hitler's books. also, golstein's book may have been a metaphor for the protocols of zion, a popular writing distributed globaly. these protocols, universally in every publication, have that suspicious part in chapter 5(or maybe 4) where these 'masterminds' say the jesuits are the ONLY group that threatens their tyranny.
@supplanter111 "The Jesuits...are simply the Romish army for the earthly sovereignty of the world in the future, with the Pontiff of Rome for emperor...that's their ideal. ...It is simple lust of power, of filthy earthly gain, of domination -- something like a universal serfdom with them [i.e., the Jesuits] as masters -- that's all they stand for. They don't even believe in God perhaps."
Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881; famous Russian novelist)
@supplanter111 "Eight years before the attempted [Spanish] Armada invasion [of 1588], Jesuits were seditiously active plotting the overthrow of the English government. By using different disguises, aliases, and secret codes, to illegally slip in and out of England, Jesuit Robert Parson, in 1580, had led and then later organized a mission to bring other Jesuits into England to engage in a work of subversion.
@supplanter111 "In the agreement to rescue Rome [i.e., the Roman Catholic Church's hierarchy] from the predicament of losing its world control to Protestantism, and to preserve the spiritual and temporal supremacy which the popes [had] 'usurped' during the Middle Ages, Rome now 'sold' the [Roman Catholic] Church to the Society of Jesus [i.e., the Jesuits]; in essence the popes surrendered themselves into their hands." John Daniel
@supplanter111 "Today they [i.e., the Jesuits] are stronger in the United States than they ever were in any of the countries of Europe which expelled them as a menace to the government." (1912) Jeremiah J. Crowley
Winston could be Catholic inasmuch as he is not persuaded by the chaos of relativism, i.e., 2 + 2 = 5, however Orwell reckoned on certain certainties in life of which Margaret Atwood seems to be a critic in Oryx and Crake & The Year of the Flood. Together, they both fear the mob and are both righteous.
For unbendable truth, science clutches to arithmetic, 2 + 2 = 4; religion runs to five. Nothing is ever whole with religion. In this sense it is that the Grand Inquisitor is nihilistic, a friend to violence, a boot to the face of humanity.
I came independently to the same conclusion as the video but detailed analysis was lacking. Most interesting and thought-provoking, perhaps I am not as insane as I thought I was. For God's sake, write a book on this theme. If there are already books, please inform me of them. For it is deeply pleasing to see an idea that I thought only I had come to life. Well done, professionalism is always appreciated in hell.
One of the most interesting and thought-provoking videos I have watched in a long time. It embarrasses me to admit that the anti-clerical theme of '1984' never occurred to me, let alone the connection with Chesterton. Chesterton himself was a romantic reactionary but with a streak of fanaticism in him, especially where the Jews were concerned. To really understand Chesterton then it is necessary to read about Hilaire Belloc, historian and Catholic apologist, who was a huge influence upon him
The issue of Catholic/fascist collusion had passed?
It STILL hasn't passed. If people are still bitching about it sixty-odd years later, surely one can reasonably think a piece from the same decade might be intentionally highlighting it.
@blackacidlizzard Not just any collusion, but /the/ open collusion of the Church and Fascist parties had passed. If you think the Catholic church still has fascist elements I wouldn't disagree but it wasn't the explicit historical circumstance to which I was referring. Fascism as a word has completely lost its connection to the official ideologies it use to signify. I did put in a pic of Pope Pius XII but even his fascism is under-substantiated and nothing like the pre-WW2 epoch.
@Hamandchees3 Agreed. Fascism is such an overused term I hasten to say it means socialism, communism, nationalism, racism, atheism, fundamentalism, pan-slavism, Americanism, egalitarianism, etc.
Quite far removed from Mussolini's original ideas.
Being of the totalitarian school myself, at least in historical legacy, I suppose I should give credit where it is due. Theocracy managed impressive methods of control for thousands of years till this very day, yet without the massive technological propaganda apparatus that we have access to (Newspaper, radio, television, internet)
Awesome. So I guess you'd support a perfected totalitarian state with Mugabe at the head?
There aren't very many of you anymore, but I find that totalitarians see themselves at the head of the state. It seems to be an underlying assumption. It's just another form of idealism that people have when they think about the state. The market is argued for or against based on reality, whereas with the state we're supposed to argue based on ideal models. It's a double-standard most don't notice.
@fringeelements I'm not sure if I can still be considered of the totalitarian school, but I certainly used to be.
Note also that because I support a strong state (one which is involved both economically & socially) it does not mean that I support any kind of involvement. After all, there exists an x such that y doesn't mean for all x y is true.
Aside, within the system I envision, I don't see myself as head of state. Not even close. I would probably be some low level adviser or bureaucrat.
Wait wait... so you think the government should step in on social and economic issues? I thought you were just some progressive liberal type, but atleast you have consistency.
@SecularNumanist Indeed. Although exactly where it involves itself is of course a matter of much though & consideration. But essentially I do not reject government being involved anywhere out of hand.
I suppose my views would be a sort of pan-ultimate a/anti-libertarianism; Particularly is the latter is based on the nap.
@SecularNumanist Oh no, you were right the first time. I am indifferent to the nap; I am either indifferent or anti- libertarian policy (Although to be clear, not always, just often). Sorry about the confusion. I am eating at the moment and so I am being a bit lazy with typing my ideas out in stringent and excessive detail as I usually do.
u missed some of the more obvious clues & i believe the inner party was the jesuit order itself with indirect references to st. ignatius' spiritual exorcises,the inner party in black, obrian couldve been a "priest", enemies of the party were "heretics" etc.
supplanter111 1 month ago
@supplanter111 The more time I put into the book the more these themes come out. Thanks for your ideas.
Hamandchees3 1 month ago
@Hamandchees3 & ty very much for this vid; i was very delighted 2 see this video because i had thought the same thing and would never had discovered what u have. I like to suggest that maybe the book is actually an undercover pro-tyranny/catholic book & that Orwell, regardless of his open positions was infact an agent of the vatican. he also alludes secret handshakes and gestures in the book, did make the protagonist an immoral rapist, willing to spread std's, murder & throw acid in kids' face.
supplanter111 1 month ago
@supplanter111 Orwell depicts the innerparty writing goldstein's book which the ''black robes' have almost exclusively been cited as doing including the ghost writing of adolph hitler's books. also, golstein's book may have been a metaphor for the protocols of zion, a popular writing distributed globaly. these protocols, universally in every publication, have that suspicious part in chapter 5(or maybe 4) where these 'masterminds' say the jesuits are the ONLY group that threatens their tyranny.
supplanter111 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@supplanter111 "The Jesuits...are simply the Romish army for the earthly sovereignty of the world in the future, with the Pontiff of Rome for emperor...that's their ideal. ...It is simple lust of power, of filthy earthly gain, of domination -- something like a universal serfdom with them [i.e., the Jesuits] as masters -- that's all they stand for. They don't even believe in God perhaps."
Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881; famous Russian novelist)
augustmaquet 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@supplanter111 "Eight years before the attempted [Spanish] Armada invasion [of 1588], Jesuits were seditiously active plotting the overthrow of the English government. By using different disguises, aliases, and secret codes, to illegally slip in and out of England, Jesuit Robert Parson, in 1580, had led and then later organized a mission to bring other Jesuits into England to engage in a work of subversion.
augustmaquet 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@supplanter111 "In the agreement to rescue Rome [i.e., the Roman Catholic Church's hierarchy] from the predicament of losing its world control to Protestantism, and to preserve the spiritual and temporal supremacy which the popes [had] 'usurped' during the Middle Ages, Rome now 'sold' the [Roman Catholic] Church to the Society of Jesus [i.e., the Jesuits]; in essence the popes surrendered themselves into their hands." John Daniel
augustmaquet 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@supplanter111 "Today they [i.e., the Jesuits] are stronger in the United States than they ever were in any of the countries of Europe which expelled them as a menace to the government." (1912) Jeremiah J. Crowley
augustmaquet 1 month ago
Winston could be Catholic inasmuch as he is not persuaded by the chaos of relativism, i.e., 2 + 2 = 5, however Orwell reckoned on certain certainties in life of which Margaret Atwood seems to be a critic in Oryx and Crake & The Year of the Flood. Together, they both fear the mob and are both righteous.
carusmm 4 months ago
Mindfulness is a total con as in no way can it be total at any one moment.
carusmm 5 months ago
Always revolution dies of general ignorance.
carusmm 5 months ago
For unbendable truth, science clutches to arithmetic, 2 + 2 = 4; religion runs to five. Nothing is ever whole with religion. In this sense it is that the Grand Inquisitor is nihilistic, a friend to violence, a boot to the face of humanity.
carusmm 5 months ago
I came independently to the same conclusion as the video but detailed analysis was lacking. Most interesting and thought-provoking, perhaps I am not as insane as I thought I was. For God's sake, write a book on this theme. If there are already books, please inform me of them. For it is deeply pleasing to see an idea that I thought only I had come to life. Well done, professionalism is always appreciated in hell.
carusmm 5 months ago
One of the most interesting and thought-provoking videos I have watched in a long time. It embarrasses me to admit that the anti-clerical theme of '1984' never occurred to me, let alone the connection with Chesterton. Chesterton himself was a romantic reactionary but with a streak of fanaticism in him, especially where the Jews were concerned. To really understand Chesterton then it is necessary to read about Hilaire Belloc, historian and Catholic apologist, who was a huge influence upon him
atticana 6 months ago
Fantastic analysis. Really loved this. Might plagiarise this at Uni
SecularNumanist 6 months ago
@SecularNumanist Please do
Hamandchees3 6 months ago
The issue of Catholic/fascist collusion had passed?
It STILL hasn't passed. If people are still bitching about it sixty-odd years later, surely one can reasonably think a piece from the same decade might be intentionally highlighting it.
blackacidlizzard 6 months ago
@blackacidlizzard Not just any collusion, but /the/ open collusion of the Church and Fascist parties had passed. If you think the Catholic church still has fascist elements I wouldn't disagree but it wasn't the explicit historical circumstance to which I was referring. Fascism as a word has completely lost its connection to the official ideologies it use to signify. I did put in a pic of Pope Pius XII but even his fascism is under-substantiated and nothing like the pre-WW2 epoch.
Hamandchees3 6 months ago
@Hamandchees3 Agreed. Fascism is such an overused term I hasten to say it means socialism, communism, nationalism, racism, atheism, fundamentalism, pan-slavism, Americanism, egalitarianism, etc.
Quite far removed from Mussolini's original ideas.
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
Being of the totalitarian school myself, at least in historical legacy, I suppose I should give credit where it is due. Theocracy managed impressive methods of control for thousands of years till this very day, yet without the massive technological propaganda apparatus that we have access to (Newspaper, radio, television, internet)
Scientisticsoviet 7 months ago
@Scientisticsoviet Derp
joelberggren1 7 months ago
@joelberggren1 And herp to you good sir! Sincerest Salutations.
Scientisticsoviet 7 months ago
Awesome. So I guess you'd support a perfected totalitarian state with Mugabe at the head?
There aren't very many of you anymore, but I find that totalitarians see themselves at the head of the state. It seems to be an underlying assumption. It's just another form of idealism that people have when they think about the state. The market is argued for or against based on reality, whereas with the state we're supposed to argue based on ideal models. It's a double-standard most don't notice.
fringeelements 6 months ago
@fringeelements I'm not sure if I can still be considered of the totalitarian school, but I certainly used to be.
Note also that because I support a strong state (one which is involved both economically & socially) it does not mean that I support any kind of involvement. After all, there exists an x such that y doesn't mean for all x y is true.
Aside, within the system I envision, I don't see myself as head of state. Not even close. I would probably be some low level adviser or bureaucrat.
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
@Scientisticsoviet
Wait wait... so you think the government should step in on social and economic issues? I thought you were just some progressive liberal type, but atleast you have consistency.
SecularNumanist 6 months ago
@SecularNumanist Indeed. Although exactly where it involves itself is of course a matter of much though & consideration. But essentially I do not reject government being involved anywhere out of hand.
I suppose my views would be a sort of pan-ultimate a/anti-libertarianism; Particularly is the latter is based on the nap.
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
@SecularNumanist *if
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
@Scientisticsoviet
so youre a big fan of violence? Im not being a moralizer, but youre actively anti NAP, not indifferent based on pragmatic reasons?
SecularNumanist 6 months ago
@SecularNumanist Oh no, you were right the first time. I am indifferent to the nap; I am either indifferent or anti- libertarian policy (Although to be clear, not always, just often). Sorry about the confusion. I am eating at the moment and so I am being a bit lazy with typing my ideas out in stringent and excessive detail as I usually do.
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago