The events in our country prompted me to once again take into my hands the book "1984" by George Orwell, read a few years ago. This book impressed me when I first met and was remembered for a long time. And now, experiencing the invasion of Russian troops on our land, I often see an analogy of the aggressor's behavior with the events described by Orwell in a fictional country.
All the horrors of the totalitarian regime, as if invented by the author of the anti-utopia "1984", can be observed right now, in countries where such a regime exists. And the most interesting thing is that these countries have always banned Orwell's book! And it is even more interesting that it was banned from being read in Belarus, which practically supported Putin in his invasion of Ukraine. It was from Belarus that cruise missiles flew at our heads, and bombers and assault planes rose from its military airfields, bringing death and destruction to our villages and cities. Nobody expected this from the neighboring state ... But when a country cannot react to the long-term totalitarian rule of its President, that is exactly what happens. Orwell will now be read in secret. And I think "1984" will be the most popular book in Belarus in the near future.
The novel was first published on June 8, 1949. Then the world recovered after World War II. Ruins, hunger, exhausted and tired people. In such circumstances, a book was written that shocks and makes you shudder at some recognition of what is described in today's life. For example, about rewriting history. Isn't that exactly what happened in Putin's head to justify the attack on Ukraine? After all, he told the whole world that Ukraine does not exist and cannot exist, historically it has never existed. And this delusion was skillfully instilled in the majority of the citizens of the aggressor country, who still agree to lose their sons for the sake of their Fuhrer ... Do not these slogans of the ruling party in Russia outline their propaganda policy?
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH (quote)
*If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened -- that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death?
The Party said that Oceania had never been in alliance with Eurasia. He, Winston Smith, knew that Oceania had been in alliance with Eurasia as short a time as four years ago. But where did that knowledge exist? Only in his own consciousness, which in any case must soon be annihilated. And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed -if all records told the same tale -- then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' * (quote)
The whole story was a palimpsest, scraped clean and rewritten as often as needed. But under no circumstances was it possible that what was done was done, to prove that even the smallest forgery took place. The largest unit of the Records Division, much larger than Winston's, consisted exclusively of those responsible for tracking and collecting all copies of books, newspapers, and other documents that had to be replaced and prepared for destruction. The issue of the Magazine, which could, due to a change in political alliances or erroneous prophecies proclaimed by the Elder Brother, be copied many times, was still in the archives, retaining its original date, and there was no other copy to disprove it. The books were also recalled and rewritten over and over again, and were constantly republished without any recognition that any substitution had taken place. (quote)
Isn't the "ruler of Russia" like the absurd and horrible Big Brother from Orwell's novel? Who turned the country's population into proles during his long reign? The protagonist of the novel Smith, looking for a way out of the impasse, saw even in the proles a force that could radically change lives for the better. I remain of this opinion, hoping that readers of the novel from totalitarian states will not want to remain trolls. I really dream about it. Because without totalitarianism the world will be different. There will be no rewriting of the history of nations, political zombies of the population, and, as a consequence, peace will reign in the world.
No war!
He wrote :
As long as they are conscious, they will never rise,
but until they rise, they will not be able to become conscious.
This, he realized, was almost a copy of what was written in the Party textbook. The party proclaimed, of course, that it had freed the proles from slavery. Before the Revolution, they were horribly oppressed by the capitalists, tortured by hunger and beaten, women were forced to work in coal mines (in fact, women still worked in coal mines), and children were sold to factories at the age of six. But at the same time, according to the Principles of Duality, the Party taught that proles are natural subordinates who must be kept in subjection, like animals, by applying a few simple rules. In fact, very little was known about proles. It was not necessary to know too much. As long as they continued to work and reproduce, the rest of their activities were irrelevant. Left alone with them, like untied cattle in the fields of Argentina, they returned to a lifestyle that seemed natural to them, which was something like a hereditary tribe. They were born, they grew up in the slums, they went to work at twelve, they went through a very early and rapid period of flourishing beauty and sexual desire, they married at twenty, they reached middle age at thirty, they died, the vast majority, at sixty. Hard physical labor, caring for home and children, petty quarrels between neighbors, movies, football, beer, gambling, and so on, filled the horizons of their thoughts. It was not so difficult to keep them under control. Several Thought Police agents have always been among them, spreading false rumors, tracking down and destroying those individuals they believe could be a threat; but no attempt was made to impose the ideology of the Party on them. It was highly undesirable for proles to have strong political convictions. All they were allowed to do was primitive patriotism, which could always be appealed to whenever they needed to agree to an extension of working hours or a reduction in diet. And even when they became dissatisfied with what happened from time to time, their dissatisfaction turned into nothing, because there was no general idea, they could focus only on trivial specific complaints. The greatest evil constantly escaped their attention. The vast majority of proles did not even have bodyguards in their homes. Even the civilian police visited them very rarely. Among them was the highest crime rate in London, the whole world consisting of thieves, bandits, prostitutes, drug dealers and racketeers of all stripes; but as long as it happened exclusively among the proles - it didn't matter. In all matters of morality they were allowed to adhere to the ancestral hereditary code. The Party's sexual puritanism did not extend to them. Promiscuity remained unpunished, divorces were allowed. For the same reasons, they were even allowed to perform religious rites if the proles expressed any need or desire to do so. They were beyond suspicion. Just as it was proclaimed in the Party slogan: "Proles and animals are free." (quote)
The most horrible thing the Party has done is convince you, killing you in the face, that these are only motives, only feelings that have no weight, while at the same time robbing you with all your might, depriving you of any power in the material world.
And when you were already firmly clamped in the grip of the Party, it made no difference that you felt or did not feel, that you acted or evaded action. Lest you be erased, neither you nor any of your actions will ever be heard again. You have been stealthily cleansed from the flow of history. However, for those people who lived only two generations ago, this may not seem so important, because they did not try to replace history. They were driven by personal affection and family feelings, which they did not question. What mattered so much was a personal relationship, a completely helpless gesture, a hug, a tear, a word spoken to a dying person, could have value in itself. Proles, it suddenly occurred to him, still remained in this state. They were not loyal to the Party, the country or the ideas, still remained to each other. For the first time in his life, he did not despise proles inkought of them only as an inert force that could one day come back to life and restore this world. Proles still remained human. They did not become heartless and stubborn inside. They cling to their primitive emotions, which he must re-examine with his conscious efforts. And during his reflections, he remembered, as if for no apparent reason, how a few weeks ago he had seen a torn palm lying on the sidewalk and how he kicked it into a gutter as if it were a head of cabbage.
"Proles re human beings," he said aloud. "We are not human." (quote)