5 ms·

1984 might not have had the subtlety of what is happening today, but isn't that true of most literary evils? It was written post-communist takeover of Russia. P

1984 might not have had the subtlety of what is happening today, but isn't that true of most literary evils? It was written post-communist takeover of Russia. Post-Weimar Germany. It abstracted much of what actually happened and what was being attempted throughout the world as power struggles erupted under instability.

NoraCodes 4y ago
My argument here is that centralized, top-down, authoritarian, and violently enforced changes in language are a different and separate issue from decentralized, gradual, and unenforced (or, at worst, socially enforced) ones, since that's how language has usually changed. > Post-Weimar Germany. Very post. 1984 was written in 1948, notably after the fall of Nazi Germany. It was about the dangers of authoritarianism and how authoritarians can use their control of the academy and the media to increase their control on the rest of society, not the dangers of people asking their coworkers to change the name of a Git branch.
- traverseda 4y ago
  Right, it's the standard "racism is privilege+power" argument? 1984 is (this particular toolkit for controlling how people behave)+power? Am I understanding that correctly? Because if I am, I'd say that you're building tools for your enemy to use. There's no reason the alt-right can't use the same tactics on LGBT teens as you'd want to use on alt-right nutjobs. There's no inherent reason why these tools can only be used on the guilty. That's why fairness in discourse is important (to me at least). Think of it as a social Geneva convention. Once you start thinking "the ends justify the means" and using saran gas you're giving the hated enemy permission to do the same. Take a look at the playbook of the trump subreddit before they got banned as an example.. They learned most of those plays they used to dominate the front page and silence outsiders from leftists, often even using automated moderation tools that were initially created explicitly for leftist subreddits. "We don't do that here", if it becomes a normalized part of the discourse, will be used by the hated enemy once they're powerful enough to do so effectively. Enlightenment and free speech are the Geneva convention of discourse. I really don't think it's in anybody's best interest to erode those protection, but I suppose time will tell. Still, it feels like the left is building the social infrastructure for fascism that the right will inevitably figure out how to co-opt...
  - NoraCodes 4y ago
    > 1984 is (this particular toolkit for controlling how people behave)+power? Am I understanding that correctly? What I'm saying is that it's _not the same toolkit_ because it doesn't include state power or historical revisionism. The problems LGBT people have (speaking about the US right now because that's where I am) are with the application of state and state-aligned media power against us, not the application of social power. Social power is important, but it is much less likely to be deadly without state power at least tacitly supporting it.
    - traverseda 4y ago
      Does "much less likely to be deadly" mean it's not a problem?
      - NoraCodes 4y ago
        It means I'm much less motivated to solve it when there are deadly concerns to deal with, yes.
        traverseda 4y ago
        I think that it would be easier to support the idea of the far-ish left in power if you were concerned about it. I don't think that the left will abandon those tools when they do gain control of state media and state power.
        NoraCodes 4y ago
        Since I'm an anarchist, talking about what would happen with someone like me "in power" quite literally makes no sense. I'm interested in removing the power of the state, not turning it to my own ends.
- iratewizard 4y ago
  https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/613948-hitler-has-grasped-the-falsity-of-the-hedonistic-attitude-to https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/613948-hitler-has-grasped-t... Orwell's thoughts on Hitler don't line up with your convenient framing of his book.

NoraCodes 4y ago

My argument here is that centralized, top-down, authoritarian, and violently enforced changes in language are a different and separate issue from decentralized, gradual, and unenforced (or, at worst, socially enforced) ones, since that's how language has usually changed. > Post-Weimar Germany. Very post. 1984 was written in 1948, notably after the fall of Nazi Germany. It was about the dangers of authoritarianism and how authoritarians can use their control of the academy and the media to increase their control on the rest of society, not the dangers of people asking their coworkers to change the name of a Git branch.

traverseda 4y ago
Right, it's the standard "racism is privilege+power" argument? 1984 is (this particular toolkit for controlling how people behave)+power? Am I understanding that correctly? Because if I am, I'd say that you're building tools for your enemy to use. There's no reason the alt-right can't use the same tactics on LGBT teens as you'd want to use on alt-right nutjobs. There's no inherent reason why these tools can only be used on the guilty. That's why fairness in discourse is important (to me at least). Think of it as a social Geneva convention. Once you start thinking "the ends justify the means" and using saran gas you're giving the hated enemy permission to do the same. Take a look at the playbook of the trump subreddit before they got banned as an example.. They learned most of those plays they used to dominate the front page and silence outsiders from leftists, often even using automated moderation tools that were initially created explicitly for leftist subreddits. "We don't do that here", if it becomes a normalized part of the discourse, will be used by the hated enemy once they're powerful enough to do so effectively. Enlightenment and free speech are the Geneva convention of discourse. I really don't think it's in anybody's best interest to erode those protection, but I suppose time will tell. Still, it feels like the left is building the social infrastructure for fascism that the right will inevitably figure out how to co-opt...
- NoraCodes 4y ago
  > 1984 is (this particular toolkit for controlling how people behave)+power? Am I understanding that correctly? What I'm saying is that it's _not the same toolkit_ because it doesn't include state power or historical revisionism. The problems LGBT people have (speaking about the US right now because that's where I am) are with the application of state and state-aligned media power against us, not the application of social power. Social power is important, but it is much less likely to be deadly without state power at least tacitly supporting it.
  - traverseda 4y ago
    Does "much less likely to be deadly" mean it's not a problem?
    - NoraCodes 4y ago
      It means I'm much less motivated to solve it when there are deadly concerns to deal with, yes.
      - traverseda 4y ago
        I think that it would be easier to support the idea of the far-ish left in power if you were concerned about it. I don't think that the left will abandon those tools when they do gain control of state media and state power.
        NoraCodes 4y ago
        Since I'm an anarchist, talking about what would happen with someone like me "in power" quite literally makes no sense. I'm interested in removing the power of the state, not turning it to my own ends.
iratewizard 4y ago
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/613948-hitler-has-grasped-the-falsity-of-the-hedonistic-attitude-to https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/613948-hitler-has-grasped-t... Orwell's thoughts on Hitler don't line up with your convenient framing of his book.