Orwell vs. Huxley

[Votto]

Huxley vs. Orwell: The Webcomic

Who do you agree with? Both seemed to have varied dark visions of how mankind would destroy himself, but at least they could agree on something.

 

[fncceo]

In Orwell's dystopia ... sex was a crime.

In Huxley's ... it was mandatory

Go, Team Huxley

 

[Shrimpbox]

Thank you so much for that post votto. Very educational.

 

[Sunni Man]

Huxley was right when it comes to western capitalist 1st world countries.

Orwell's predictions fit socialist/communist, and 3rd world countries. ...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

In 1984 reading books was prohibited. In Brave New World no one wanted to read books.

We are much closer to Brave New World. If something makes you think, take a drug until that goes away.

 

[whitehall]

Why should we "agree" with either of them? Huxley was a rather arcane novelist obviously influenced by LSD that he advocated. Almost nobody except college professors ever read his stuff. Orwell was a contemporary of Huxley for a while during the 20th century and his novels came closest to capturing the essence of a bland futuristic world where "Big Brother" was always monitoring behavior. Kind of like today's institutes of higher learning.

 

[night_son]

I voted Orwell but would add a nod toward the Penfield Mood Organ from Philip K. Dick as important social commentary on social media and smart devices. We live in a 'dial your mood age' worse than PKD's own imagination.

 

[Votto]

Why should we "agree" with either of them? Huxley was a rather arcane novelist obviously influenced by LSD that he advocated. Almost nobody except college professors ever read his stuff. Orwell was a contemporary of Huxley for a while during the 20th century and his novels came closest to capturing the essence of a bland futuristic world where "Big Brother" was always monitoring behavior. Kind of like today's institutes of higher learning.

It seems to me that Big Brother is not mutually exclusive to the Huxley realm

 

[skye]

Voted both.

Both were ahead of their time. True prophets!

 

[Moonglow]

I follow the philosophy of Quincy Adams Wagstaff




Why do you ask such hard questions?

 

[whitehall]

Voted both.

Both were ahead of their time. True prophets!

Let's hope not.

 

[skye]

Voted both.

Both were ahead of their time. True prophets!

Let's hope not.

but they are!

so far

 

[Votto]

I follow the philosophy of Quincy Adams Wagstaff




Why do you ask such hard questions?

What difference does it make?

Oh dear, another Hillary fan.

 

[Votto]

Voted both.

Both were ahead of their time. True prophets!

Were the prophets or agitators?

Did they foresee these movements or were the books they wrote instruction manuals?

 

[Sunni Man]

Does anyone here remember the famous Apple Macintosh tv commercial that used an Orwellian dystopian theme to sell their computers? In my opinion, it's the best tv commercial ever made. ...

 

[Votto]

Does anyone here remember the famous Apple Macintosh tv commercial that used an Orwellian dystopian theme to sell their computers? In my opinion, it's the best tv commercial ever made. ...

Hilarious!

At first I thought it was a DNC convention.

I have always maintained that politics is not about unity and fairness. No, far from it. Politics is about division. It is about picking a winning side in society that is divided along the lines of such things as religion, race, sex, etc., then trying to appeal to those groups to support you so that your side will get perks over others in society.

We saw this with Obamacare as certain groups/unions, were able to opt out of some aspects of taxation, etc.

IF politicians all came out to treat us all fairly and the same, who would vote? Who would throw their millions at them to get a leg up on other groups?

This can be seen plainly with the gay marriage movement. You had one group of activists trying to get the government perks obtained through marriage. They did this by campaigning about equality of rights. Then when they obtained them, the forgot about the issue entirely as polygamists continue to be denied these same rights. Hell, even single people should have the same rights. Why should the state favor just certain groups within society like this? Once taken from this vantage point, the whole system becomes laughable and hypocritical.

Having said that, division is a conundrum of sorts. On the one hand, everyone needs something to fight against. If you don't find something for people to fight, they will create such divisions themselves, which may end up harming those in power. But on the other hand, you want a society that embraces a group think. What you don't want are people who can think critically or ask questions like the previous one I presented about gay marriage. The only solution is what you see going on today. You have a subpar educational system that is more in line with indoctrination than education as you see First Graders being sent out into the streets to protest guns even though they do well just to go to the bathroom by themselves. Then you are spoon fed divisive rhetoric down party lines and racial line, carefully constructed and reinforced by the media and educational system. They hypocritically speak of racial harmony, but the first "black" that speaks as a Republican is tarred and feathered as an Uncle Tom.

No, the entire system would collapse if the GOP were entirely made of blacks. This is why blacks in the GOP are treated worse than whites. The same goes for women. Just look at how Sarah Palin was treated.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Why should we "agree" with either of them? Huxley was a rather arcane novelist obviously influenced by LSD that he advocated. Almost nobody except college professors ever read his stuff.

I read both in high school.

Extracurricular, of course. Neither was ever assigned.

 

[rightwinger]

Huxley = Idiocracy

 

[MindWars]

If someone can't see what they've both said TAKING PLACE right now it shows just how fkn stupid your average idiots are.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I voted Yevgeny Zamyatin.