Day: September 15, 2017

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

“Nineteen Eighty-Four is famous for the term ‘doublespeak’ —
a powerful form of propaganda that deliberately obscures, disguises, or
reverses the meaning of words. In the book, the government destroys the
very purpose of language by insisting that ‘War is Peace. Freedom is
Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.’”

Nowadays the Orwellian line is “Islam is a religion of peace.” And then there’s “hate speech is not free speech.”

“Orwell’s point in 1984 was that the very kind of
technocratic progressivism which Hillary Clinton praises as the solution
to all social ills is itself the deep and abiding threat.”

Yes, and it’s coming down fast, and unless large numbers of people
wake up quickly to what is happening, it will very soon be upon us.

“Has Hillary Lost Her Grip on Reality? ‘Rely on Big Brother’ Was NOT the Message of Orwell’s 1984,” by Tyler O’Neil, PJ Media, September 13, 2017:

In her new book What Happened, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took a shot at literary interpretation — and twisted George Orwell’s book 1984 to mean the exact opposite of what it really means.

“Attempting to define reality
is a core feature of authoritarianism,” Clinton wrote. “This is what the
Soviets did when they erased political dissidents from historical
photos. This is what happens in George Orwell’s classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, when a torturer holds up four fingers and delivers electric shocks until his prisoner sees five fingers as ordered.”

So far, so good. Then Clinton
draws the exact wrong message from Orwell’s classic. “The goal is to
make you question logic and reason and to sow mistrust toward exactly
the people we need to rely on: our leaders, the press, experts who seek
to guide public policy based on evidence, ourselves,” she bizarrely
added.

But Clinton wasn’t done. “For Trump, as with so much he does, it’s about simple dominance,” she concluded.

Writer and lecturer James Heartfield noted that Clinton’s interpretation is a “bizarre misreading.”

One Twitter user cleverly pointed out how Clinton’s own interpretation of 1984 uses “doublespeak” to subvert the very message of the classic work.

This literary analysis of
Clinton’s paragraph hit the nail on the head. The former secretary of
State started out by correctly explaining Orwell’s point —
authoritarianism does indeed try to redefine reality.

Nineteen Eighty-Four
is famous for the term “doublespeak” — a powerful form of propaganda
that deliberately obscures, disguises, or reverses the meaning of words.
In the book, the government destroys the very purpose of language by
insisting that “War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is
Strength.”

Both the Left and the Right
have pushed narratives that dismiss and demonize the other side, but
Clinton’s use of propaganda here was rather obvious. Again, she wrote,
“The goal is to make you question logic and reason and to sow mistrust
toward exactly the people we need to rely on: our leaders, the press,
experts who seek to guide public policy based on evidence, ourselves.”

In 1984, every single
one of those groups besides “ourselves” is in on the propaganda game.
The political leaders are controlling the narrative, erasing history and
even words from existence. The press is an arm of the state, pushing
the big government’s propaganda (sound familiar?). A powerful group of
“experts” use their position to oppress the people, and Orwell reveals
this system directly, as the main character works in the administration.

Orwell’s point in 1984
was that the very kind of technocratic progressivism which Hillary
Clinton praises as the solution to all social ills is itself the deep
and abiding threat. Since the late 1890s onward, progressivism has
placed tremendous faith in scientific “experts” to reshape society, and
the governing administrative state is a direct result of this movement.

Clinton, as leader of the party
of big government, is infamous for pushing the all-consuming liberal
narrative of political correctness, which brooks no opposition or
question. She unequivocally embraced “intersectionality” during the
campaign, championing “oppressed” groups which actually exert political
power and dismissing those who would dare to disagree as “deplorables.”…

This is why Hillary Clinton’s
misreading of Orwell is so dangerous. So many liberals see themselves as
being on the side of the angels, and they cannot come to grips with the
fact that millions of Americans disagree with them, for rational
reasons that have nothing to do with racism or “hate.”…

______________________________________________________

“Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States and the
primary author of the Declaration of Independence, repeatedly affirmed
the rights of conscience as embodied in the First Amendment’s protection
of speech, religion, and peaceful assembly. To quote him:

“No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience.”

What was Jefferson referring to as “conscience”? Prior to the
American Revolution, particularly in the early 1700s and late 1600s,
Americans were forced to support churches not of their choosing. In some
colonies, ministers of non-approved denominations were imprisoned and
even hanged. From the memory of this intolerance came insistence upon a
Bill of Rights being included in the newly ratified Constitution.”