Added: 6 months ago
From: 2bsirius
Views: 2,396
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (111)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I have read both 1984 and Brave New World, and loved both of them!

  • Huxley's is more likelier to happen in my opinion due to the fact that it has some genuinely attractive qualties, indeed I myself was actually somewhat attracted to the world state in brave new world whereas Oceania terrified me.

  • I want this video on my VK4100 unit.

  • Your video went viral on Tajikistan

  • Nice summary, nice upload!

  • Turns out its a bit of both - implement Orwells totalitarianism and hide it behind Huxley's distractionism - that way just in-case someone wakes up and realizes he is free they can cut their losses and still maintain enslavement of society as a whole.

  • Posing the question "how should WE live" or "how will WE live" is irrelevant. I'm not sure if you've read my other comment about indirect realism yet, but I feel as if each of us are already living in separate interpretations or representations of reality. Whatever we are interpreting, the constant, the truth, the infinite, potential, etc, etc, is the ONLY thing that connects us all. Each of us are all heading in different directions, to different worlds, all at the same time; for the most part.

  • @tonyfalca However, you could say that some of us are heading one way, while the others head somewhere else. Millions of people are living in a reality constructed for them -- by somebody else. YET, millions of people are now becoming aware of this. Notably, Life appears to be self-organizing, so vaguely, the world is further 'dividing' once again into, vaguely, two other 'collective' simulations; one more accurate of the truth, and the other not so much. Life is 'multiplication' by'division'lol

  • @tonyfalca

    With that aside, I'll bring myself down to another level. Ultimately, I feel as if the 'collective simulation' is heading towards Anarchism, without a doubt; just plain old anarchism without capitalism.

  • @tonyfalca

    Oh yeah, by the way, I feel as if the 'collective simulation' of now resembles what Orwell illustrated, and may be likely transitioning into Huxley's interpretation, of course before anarchism without capitalism :)

  • People will bleed, kill and die in order to overthrow tyrants, but very rarely to overthrow hedonism, becuase it can't be overthrown. A tyrant or ruling elite are but a group of people, whereas a hedonistic society is an entire population.

  • Mankind will split into two species, the greater and the lesser

  • Between the complexities of Pynchon and Wallace's need to fill a great novel with gag. I think our culture is doing fine in terms of producing genius.

    I think this is a bit alarmist, a bunch of culturally prescribed authors (most read Huxley and Orwell in high school and Postman is found on the surface of any reading list). It sounds like a bunch of intellectuals who share an anxiety of future possibilities of intellectuals. I'm more scared of Hitchens than technology.

  • @brokennarcissist

    Yes, Huxley & Orwell are on a lot of reading lists. I don't think Postman's book is superficial at all. BUT it was published in the eighties, and yes, we have a completely different world now, especially technologically. You're absolutely right that Pynchon's and especially Wallace's work have a more contemporary and if possible a bleaker view of the dysfunctions which come from advocating completely to technological forces. Infinite Jest is a brilliant evocation of it

  • Comment removed

  • @TheTempleofNature

    Great comment! I was sorry to see that you had removed it.

  • @2bsirius Just reposted it due to typo! :)

  • @TheTempleofNature

    Good, glad you did!...I just hope you're not contracting my disease of over-editing-itis...I seem to make more typos whenever I try to a make corrections--talk about futility! :)

  • @2bsirius LOL!

  • People just need to wake up and not be controlled.

  • well Should is a kind of wishful thinking while Will requires a crystal ball...howabout weapons of mass Distraction?

  • We need more video output from you.

  • I love dystopic novels!

    We already have both the pleasure and pain controls on us. Both horrors are already true, not all encompassing as they are in literature, but more subtle and just as dangerous. And they were at the time of the authors. The hope was to wake people to the reality, not just to warn of a future.

  • I'd choose to live in a Brave New World if I could. Depth is overrated when compared to happiness. Life's great, have a Soma!

  • they are both wrong...

  • Of course the Question shouldn't be "how should we live" but "how do we want to live" which ultimatly goes towards a utilitarian consenses. We did observe that humans want to be happy, without pain and a life full of pleasure. Orwells fantasies do not offer this, and huxleys does. So the future we would prefer would be a painless carefree future, by any means.

  • I really don't see why huxleys future vision would be any sort of "bad" or not preferable. since everyone is happy due to the drugs we are getting in his society, there is nothing bad about it. The society would work perfectly fine. If the futre offers a society like huxleys than it wouldn't be a not preferable future. Orwells ideas are just not really realistic, a violent society would break down way to fast.

  • I haven't read either book but I will consider doing so now. I think the Huxley prophecy is very true in the USA, but that doesn't really seem so bad to me. Doesn't Huxley style control only work if you let it? It makes it difficult to respond to real problems like global warming and debt, but isn't it impotent against every serious intellectual in day to day stuff?

  • ...what celebrities are doing more than political corruption, global warming, investing in renewable energies, etc.

    As for 1984, I hear the rich are buying up drones. These are not weaponized drones, but I hear it wouldn't take much to do that. So, this is a scary thought in that the rich may be working on ways to defend themselves against a potential uprising of the poor.

  • Cool video! I think I had difficulting understanding Brave New World when I read it in college (or perhaps I was too distracted with more technical courses) and I have yet to read 1984. But, from what you describe, I see elements of both in the USA. We recently heard Mitt Romney cite some paper claiming that rich people are smart. There are also ideas that poor people are poor because they are dumb and lazy. That sounds BNW caste system-ish to me. I also look at how much people care about...

  • I do think we should be careful about over-selling how close we are to BNW. The original novel (revisiting aside) was still a totalitarian state and a eugenic one at that.

    The vapidity of popular culture is a concern, although close historical observation will reveal that this is the normal state of the masses, not the exception. One might argue that shallowness can be a 'value-based choice' -- akin to choosing the Matrix. Sustainability of those options seems the more likely problem.

  • I believe that as inequality grows, this will lead to a civil war and a revolution. People will than learn to collaborate to help themselves. They will exchange goods and services directly without the use of money. They will replace this capitalist world by a more socialist one.

  • Huxley's fear is manifest in the West, Orwells in the East- specifically the middle.

  • I saw an infographic on this recently. The general intent of the infographic is that our society is more like Huxley's vision, and Islamic society is more like Orwell's. I think the web has the potential to keep us from both extremes. While it does provide many distractions, it also allows intelligent discussion of ideas. In BNW, there's not just distraction but drugs and indoctrination.

  • @fortheloveofwisdom I couldn't post the link for the infographic, but if you search Google for "orwell huxley infographic", it is the first search result.

  • Huxley was right and we are living in his brave new world, example, we don't have news anymore, we have infotainment.

  • With all of the angst  caused by people's inability to accept their station in life, and inability to achieve a higher status, there was something I found frighteningly appealing about Huxley's class system where people were born conditioned for their station, no matter how low, taking pride in it and finding it superior to all others.

  • Our present is not theirs. They do not own it. It really shouldn't matter what they or anyone else fears, we should try to make the present what we want it to be. People in the 50's might have been afraid of racial integration or swear words becoming common in the media--So what? This is not their time.

  • Huxley's enemy is one we cannot see - and we cannot fight what we cannot see.

    At least Orwell's enemy is clearly apparent, tangible.

  • Orwell's scenario is a clear and present threat. We know such societies exist and have existed. North-Korea is a great example I guess. Total control. Total obedience. It is not an unreasonable fear to have for the future, but might not work in an advanced society without stunting its development.

    Huxley's is unproven - but if true it would perhaps be far harder to combat. At the risk of sounding a little like a conspiracy-nut: the best slave is one that does not realize that he is a slave.

  • It is rather unfair to compare Huxley's muddled luddite vision of the future to Orwell's rather brilliant depiction of how totalitarian regimes actually operate RIGHT NOW. We can't learn much from Brave New World because none of the things described therein actually exist, whereas 1984 describes accurately the mechanisms by which we are already being controlled. I don't see any cloned epsilons doing menial work, but I sure do hear a lot of Newspeak and witness a lot of Doublethink.

  • This is an excellent review of the two philosophies.

  • reminds me of star trek when they brought mark twain to the future, he seemed pleased

  • Huxley definitely wins between the two. Just ask people on the street who Joe Biden and Snooki are. I'm sure you'll only get one answer. (Snooki)

  • What do I see for the future? The same thing that befalls all societies - decay and destruction from within through the degradation of culture which leads to a rebirth. Recently, I've been contemplating the advantages and disadvantages of a complete corporate state, ie, the entire world controlled by corporate conglomerates with no actual governments. I'd be willing to give it a go at this point. I think we've seen that eventually any society, even democratic ones, cannot be self-sustaining.

  • today we have a mix of those two.. so now both huxley and orwell are right.

    should/will this change how ever then i rather go with huxley but see it as a good thing.

    my reasoning is that people evolve better in a free world with an ocean of knowledge then a desert of emptiness and restraint.

    well what do i know im an anarchist.

  • Huxley's fears seems to have come true at least in Western society.

  • @AQGOAT24

    "..at least in Western society"

    Western society is the one that least resembles Huxley's(and Orwell's) fears.

    You sound like a self hating American "liberal".

    Travel a little before you die. That magical exotic society you've created in your mind doesn't exist. The reality is, it's Western society or a whole lot worse.

  • @jimwal2008 I am not originally from the U.S., and I never said that Western society has gone down the drain and is completely horrible. Obviously, the system is the best way to live, however that does not mean one cannot critique the faults of where they live. You created a false dichotomy Western society or nothing else.

  • @AQGOAT24 Yes but it's also happened in other countries as well. Look at China for example, who have moved towards neo-liberalism and consumerist culture rather than the old police state (though they still have it)

  • I should think that it is fairly obvious that both mens' worst case scenarios are fully at work. That is, the distraction culture is already fully utilized to keep the majority complacent. Those not fooled are then kept in check through fear, either by being afraid, or if not afraid and actively resisting, being dubbed anything from "crazy" to "terrorist". After sufficiently dehumanized, the distracted majority authorizes the use of force.

    Damned if you do....

  • Perhaps Epicurus had it right: live fearlessly and pleasurably, but also moderate oneself and be calm.

  • What should you do if you are in pain, however, and are unable to to avoid it? What do you do if you are suffering yet you feel powerless in the face of that which is causing you to suffer? When your life is out of your control. Stop. Stop going along with it, I suppose. Do what you want to do. Live the way you want to with all the options available to you. Learn what you are capable of and attempt to push those boundaries as far as you can in the direction you want them to do. Life'll progress.

  • To us, we are under the influence of what Huxley describes. To the rest of the world we are the Orwellian nightmare.

    Maybe.

    I don't really see life creating a dystopia for itself. I don't really see the point of saying the world is terrible in any state of it's development. Nor does it concern me much that people have seemed to create the idea of wrong, bad, evil or anything of the sort. Pain is there to alert us of our destruction. That it hurts should only remind us to be constructive instead.

  • @danielcomments "I frequently engage in distractions, because I have little patience with a world which seems to be run by con-artists." Could you expand on this?

  • Yes, interesting alternative dystopias. To recap what I have gleened is the view of the most well-known 'conspiracy theorists' (who I think are onto something-- but obviously that's not an argument)- both are correct; 1st comes the information overload, disinformation, promotion of trivia, and a general impression of a lack of importance about anything, and then comes the brute force when everyone's softened up sufficiently.

  • It seems to me both were right. Huxley perfectly foresaw our present capatilist consumerist culture where control comes from cajoling, tempting and ego stroking and Orwell foresaw the tyranny of oppression and state violence witnessed in communist China, N. Korea etc. People are more likely to recognise and resist a head bashing but less likely to resist being 'fondled'. In a perpetual disco (showing my age) it's hard to concentrate on anything but the music, lights and gyrating bodies.

  • @ballyboneman

    Love having comments from someone who has been through the YT wars here.

    Excellent comment.

    Thanks!

  • @ballyboneman I believe there are patches of state terrorism even in the most Brave New World-ly society. And sometimes Big Brother is internalized, neurotic mind is the 1984 of the soul.

  • We are closer to Huxley than to Orwell simply because there is no Big Brother but instead a civilization that has lost clue and closes it's eyes to reality.

  • @rhbjorn There is no Big Brother? How many modern cities lack cameras, recording in every streetcorner? And let's not talk about phone tapping. Although it is true that the big (or rather little) eye of BB is no centralized: State spies, mass media spy, criminal and/or politicla organizations spy, they spy each other and they spy themselves.

    I'd rather say Big Brother is atomized in cellphone cameras and webcams, Big Brother is everywhere, we are all him.

  • @BlackLaval Sure there are street cameras, but they are mainly used to try and keep people from pick pocketing, or getting into drunken fights, and yes the media spies someone had a hidden camera at Kim Kardashians wedding

  • I'm glad you did this video. Good food for thought in the comparison of Huxley's vision and that of Orwell. Yeah, I'd say Huxley has come a lot closer to nailing it. We are fast becoming a culture of triviality and separation from the pain the brings growth.

  • I just downloaded Hitchen's article, will read it soon. Thanks!

  • good vid btw

  • I haven't read "Brave New World", so I don't have much of an opinion on that. But based on what I've read in 1984... let's just say if the world were in any way like that (which I admitedly fear we're heading off to), such a society cannot be sustained, so we (humans) will seize to exist very soon. Just a thought anyway.

  • Perhaps there are more than just two possibilities... Interesting thoughts 2B thanks for the post.

  • In the worst case, a mixture of both

  • A friend in the States sends me his used copies of ROLLING STONE. It's trippy reading the "serious" articles such as by Taibbi and perusing the "fluff," too. Wow, am I out of it! Okay, in France since '94, no TV, few gadgets or "modern" activities, but this video (uprated, shared) is fascinating! I never could read Huxley. Probably time to try again. I can barely comprehend ROLLING STONE. Most of it makes NO SENSE to me! I'm a dinosaur.

  • As a former corporate strategist, I saw both distraction and dis-information used by neo-liberal PR firms to negate anti-capitalism forces. History since WWII clearly shows a systemic elimination of leftist, democratic governments by big business. As global finance cleans the bones of the US, financial collapse is likely. A post collapse, right wing neo-liberal political scaffolding has been built : a well armed nationalist Christian right; the base for a post-democratic US neo-Facisst state.

  • If you look at the end of the Roman Empire in the 4th century c.e. the devolution to a trivial culture was a symptom of the deterioration of the empire and not a direct cause.

  • just reading Ira Levin's "This Perfect Day" and if anyone has read this novel, it stacks right up there with those two.

    More in line with Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity Is Near".

    Makes one feel a little uneasy after reading.

  • I think Huxley's and Orwell's dark visions of the future (our present) represent the two faces of power on the 20th and 21st century. Low classes are controlled in an Orwellian way, while wealthy people follow the Brave New World model. At least that's how I think things are in Mexico. Consummerism, nihilist hedonism and information overload are privilege of mid/high class. While a rigid and violent control of all aspects of life is the reality of working people. But orgy-porgy is a wholespread.

  • @BlackLaval

    I'd never thought of it in exactly this way, but it makes a lot of sense.

  • @BlackLaval It is the other way around in western society.

    

  • @2plus2make4 I remember that totalitarian control of life in 1984 was limited to the ruling class, proletarians were left to rot in their own alienation and depravity.

  • @BlackLaval Yeah thats right.

    It is similar (obviously not the same) in our society with the 'proles' having a huge freedom to pursue whatever it is that gets them through life, to rot in their own depravity as you put it. Freedoms reduce and the requirement for "buy in" increases as people move through the 'outer party'. Our system is more voluntary and ostrasizing rather than based on outright intimidation like 1984. The threat is still there mind you - try drinking the wrong milk...

  • @BlackLaval I also may be a bit biased in seeing Orwell's prescience - he has been a hero of mine since I was a boy (not just 1984).

    Freedom is the freedom to say two plus two make four..... all else follows.

  • @2plus2make4 I also hugely favor Orwell over Huxley, I think Orwell was a true writer with a spartan style and a pleasing clarity of ideas, while Huxley was verbose and toilsome and slightly a headache to read. Orwell had also the merit of been one of the few intellectuals from the 1st half of 20th century who wasn't caught nor paralysed by the Charybdis and Scylla of Cold War.

  • @BlackLaval or 2nd half...

  • @2plus2make4 Well, yeah... my bad.

  • just a pair of conspiracy theorists those fellas

  • You might be interested in reading philosopher David Pearce's critique "BRAVE NEW WORLD ?

    A Defence Of Paradise-Engineering"

    

  • I've been reading Neil Postman's Technopoly. Very interesting so far. Thanks.

  • Postman: "Who would have thought that Big Brother turned out to be Howdy-Doody." Amusing Ourselves to Death is a great read.

  • @Professoranton

    ROFL...Sort of brings Huxley and Orwell together, doesn't it?

  • I think the world will become worse then either could have imagined.

  • @valhala56 When I was about 8 years old I asked my little brother, who is about 16 months younger than I am, what his favorite weather was. He told me it was rain. I couldn't understand why he would pick such a gloomy answer so I asked him why. He told me because it's nice when the sun comes out after it rains.

    No matter how bad 'it' gets, it will always get better than it ever has been before. In a couple million years, when war means annihilating whole planets of people...

  • ... populations of billions all at the single push of a button, we will still get better afterwards. In billions of years when the children of Earth resemble nothing of the humans or any other animals on Earth today and we are traveling from galaxy to galaxy, harvesting whole stars for fuel and converting planets into spacecraft and islands of life at the push of a button, things will get bad. Weapons may be created to destroy whole galaxies but after that things will get better.

  • We are submersed in a deluge of information where the facts of any matter are difficult to ascertain, because of this people quickly forget what's important and accept the status quo as prescribed by the media, given culture or sub-culture the aspiration to have a sense of belonging. Being a social animal we submit to these norms and comply, even though at times we have heartfelt reservations, this is what makes us Human we have the ability to empathize. Both of these gentlemen were correct.

  • @urquiza78

    Yes, we have a lot of 'information', BUT, as you point out, much of it is little more than manipulation of opinion. It's becoming more difficult to really find and understand the true facts of what's happening "What makes us Human we have the ability to empathize," that seems important. We might find that if we spent more time picturing the existence of others, we might be less prone to be dogmatic & we might become more flexible in understanding of the truth of our circumstances.

  • @2bsirius I agree in more ways than one, it's what these gentlemen set out to express it would appear, their reservations of what the future would unfold and when we truly look at what has we cannot refute their almost prophetic assertions but like I said with the deluge and what u say the manipulation of opinion it is difficult for other voices of concern to surface and be recognised because of the barrage found within the status quo of living in a modern world where dissenters...cont

  • @urquiza78 cont.. are quickly spoken over.

    Another great video 2B

    :)

  • I like Huxley's attitude better because imo he tried to foresee a mass culture and up to a point he was right - internet and YT might be a case in point. We are allowed to speak freely and say what we want but by the same token people seem to lose the interest and ability to follow an argument or understand other person's viewpoint.

  • @pawsoned

    Yes, I agree that the internet has given us great ways to stay tuned in, and yet it also makes it so easy to click on the next diversion or to quickly move on before we understand something. We're often more easily bored. Also, now, it's easy to just click on a music, porn or comedy video & those don't really require a lot of cerebral attention.

    Diversions are a part of any healthy life, but do we lose something when our lives become nothing but diversions?

    Great comment btw!

  • @2bsirius thanks, likewise - great vid <3

  • /cont./

    Although I haven't read "1984" yet, I think Orwell's goal was different from Huxley's because he had in mind eastern communist regimes which ended some time ago, so it's a thing of the past.

  • @pawsoned I wouldn't be so sure of that.

  • @ABitOfTheUniverse yeah, perhaps. Firstly, as we know history repeats itself and secondly there's the Orwellian doublespeak that still lingers on. So, maybe it's not as obsolete as I thought.

  • I am a deterministic so the future set. But to us it is what we make it.

  • both are two of the same,

  • @davidjohn83

    It's interesting that you could think that  is true.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more