Project 1

The speaker discusses the concept of the panopticon and how it is used by the government to instill fear and obedience. They mention the manipulation of language and the eradication of individuality. They draw parallels between their society and past regimes of totalitarianism. They also mention a short fiction piece by Kurt Vonnegut that highlights similar themes. The speaker expresses a warning and encourages people to read in order to combat government manipulation. Whatever time period you're hearing this from, listen and acknowledge. You may have many questions. Fair enough. Sit patiently for the next four minutes and we'll explain everything to you. You'll be able to evaluate your perception of history, of truth, of manipulation and of authority. We're here to eradicate the panopticon using anthropological literature. I'm here in the poll district with a historian in William Georgetown who knows the truth behind the experiences of humans across the timeline of history. As a lifelong prole, he has secretly gathered intel from the contemporary corrupt government, a.k.a. the party. You are right. Over the past seven years, I've been closely monitoring the party and their leader, Big Brother. Just to be clear, this so-called Big Brother is not an actual person, but a propaganda figurehead used by the party to instill fear and obedience among their outer upper class and middle class citizens. The party constantly promotes the idea that Big Brother is watching everyone, using posters, slogans, quotes and mottos such as, Big Brother is watching you, which imbues a strong sense of paranoia and surveillance, making citizens assertive and secretive through the telescreens. Now, Henry, as an anti-ideological control literary expert, you mentioned anthropological literature prior. Can you please elaborate? Anthropology, through its examination of past reference, offers a profound lens to understand the intricate tapestry of human experience and the essence of existence. Our current society is a dystopia. How? We're governed by an omnipresent surveillance. There was a course of no way of knowing whether you were being watched, how often or on what system. The thought police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. Is that all? Nope. Manipulation of language. The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the worldview and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible, as well as the obliteration of individuality. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever. Society was modelled from the past regimes of totalitarianism, such as Nazi Germany and the Soviet purge. Similarly, it's orchestrated by the powerful oligarchy, Big Brother draws notable parallels to Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin. Recently, I stumbled upon a short prose fiction piece written by some American author, Kurt Vonnegut, set in the future. Prior to this, I'd only heard vague stories about it, as historical literature is now sadly all but whispers and murmurs. But when I first read it, I instantly identified the correlations between our two societies, being heavily indoctrinated to believe in authority. The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal. This opening line sets a seemingly utopian scene, but the irony lies amongst the description of equality. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. The writer repeats nobody, foreshadowing the advocacy arrayed by the government, forcing uniformity through extreme measures like physical and mental handicaps. The handicaps are buzzers sounding in George's head, his thoughts fled in panic like bandits from a burglar alarm. Vivid, intensive imagery and similes allow readers to acknowledge George's struggle to maintain coherent thoughts in a society where mental freedom is constrained and smothered by external control. Metaphorical punishments for being unique. That's the same as us, and I'm sure these things will occur in the future in societies too. Ingsoc tries to limit individual free-thinking through the principle double-think. The party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others. We are interested solely in power. Where the statement is a stark omission of truth, utilised paradoxically within a context of manipulation. By claiming to work for the greater good while pursuing power for its own tyrant matter, Ingsoc manipulates its followers to the unquestioning loyalty, blindly them to the party's true intentions, and modifying the collective deception of equality. The choice of mankind lies between freedom and happiness and for the great bulk of mankind. Happiness is better. A raise of false dichotomy is suggesting that people must choose between freedom and happiness. It's a form of double-think, implying that the sacrifice of freedom for happiness is justifiable and cannot co-exist. Similarly, in the Kurt Vonnegut piece Harrison Bergeron, Things about living still weren't quite right though. This sets an underlying discontent tone despite the proclaimed equality through the handicapping. The individuals within society are so selfishly oblivious to their perception of equality. Who knows better than I do what normal is? Hezler's utilisation of rhetorical questioning highlights the belief in an understanding of normality. Individuals such as Hezler have fed propaganda, rules and laws so often, they can't encapsulate the true definition of equality. This heavily alters the existential state led by these individuals throughout their lives, further limiting the essence of existence to these beings. We've run out of time. I'm sorry, I wish we could have told you more. William, did you want to say anything else? Yes, I want to spread a warning to everyone. Citizens within Harrison Bergeron, outer and inner party in our current society and future generations to come, wake up. We are all manipulated by the governments. How do we beat them? We read.