9 ms·
"...there is now a widespread tendency to argue that one can only defend democracy by totalitarian methods. If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must
by t0bia_s 2y ago
"...there is now a widespread tendency to argue that one can only defend democracy by totalitarian methods. If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought."
Geroge Orwell - Proposed preface to Animal Farm, first published in the Times Literary Supplement on 15 September 1972
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/the-freedom-of-the-press/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...
- moshun 2y agoAmazing that we don’t hear this book quoted more often along with 1984, we seem to be living funhouse versions of both.
- tsimionescu 2y agoNote that this preface was not allowed to be published together with the book, it was censored last minute by the publishers. The public narrative about Animal Farm is almost exclusively that it is an allegory for the USSR, an attack on the false equality that they professed. The preface explaining that it's very much intended to attack the UK and more generally European and US governments' tendencies is even today not included in the vast majority of printings of Animal Farm.
- _yb2s 2y agoThose publishers must have been tragically born without a sense of irony.
- ImHereToVote 2y agoThey are just practicing Oligarchical Collectivism.
- mlvljr 2y ago[dead]
- goatlover 2y agoIt's obviously a criticism of both, the farmers and the pigs. Orwell was not fond of the USSR either.
- tsimionescu 2y agoRight, I should have been more clear, my comment does come off as suggesting it's not about the USSR at all, which is obviously false.
- K0nserv 2y agoI wasn't aware of this proposed preface[0]. It's a great read and is, interestingly, somewhat applicable to the TikTok situation. However, you are incorrect, the preface does not say the book is intended as an attack on the UK, European, or US governments. What it does discuss, is how, primarily, the British intelligentsia resisted the criticism of the USSR in the book because of the wartime alliance between the UK and the USSR. The preface makes it quite clear that Animal Farm is in fact an attack on the USSR specifically. 0: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/the-freedom-of-the-press/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...
- K0nserv 2y agoActually, I'm not sure if this is the preface the OP was talking about, in fact it's not clear to me who the author of it is. There's another preface[0], from the Uranian edition of Animal Farm, that they might have been referring to. While it does contain some criticism of the the UK, quite expected as Orwell was a socialist, it also doesn't claim that Animal Farm was really about UK, European, or US governments. EDIT: I found the primary source[1] of the unpublished preface, it does list Orwell as its author. 0: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/books-by-orwell/animal-farm/preface-to-the-ukrainian-edition-of-animal-farm-by-george-orwell/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... 1: https://archive.org/details/TheTimesLiterarySupplement1972UKEnglish/Sep%2015%201972%2C%20The%20Times%20Literary%20Supplement%2C%20%233680%2C%20UK%20%28en%29/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/TheTimesLiterarySupplement1972UK...
- yoz-y 2y agoThe book gets quoted quite enough. But quotes are really bad arguments. Here’s one that flies in the face of the Orwell’s: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. [...] We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. - Karl R. Popper In practice we’ve seen both ways play out badly. So clearly we can’t just hope that full freedom is good, and good guys will win.
- t0bia_s 2y agoYou misunderstood Proppers thoughts. There is interesting article about this topic. https://www.persuasion.community/p/yes-you-do-have-to-tolerate-the-intolerant https://www.persuasion.community/p/yes-you-do-have-to-tolera...
- portaouflop 2y agoTo me it feels more like living in a William Gibson novel crossed with Idiocracy
- sirisaysgpt 2y ago"And TikTok has special characteristics—a foreign adversary's ability to leverage its control over the platform to collect vast amounts of personal data from 170 million U. S. users—that justify this differential treatment. [S]peaker distinctions of this nature are not presumed in- valid under the First Amendment." Unanimous decision to ban TikTok from a divided Supreme Court, 2025.
- ImHereToVote 2y agoChina can buy private data from Metastasis just like anyone else. This argument is bunk.
- Vegenoid 2y agoWhat is Metastasis?
- westmeal 2y agoMeta.
- user_of_the_wek 2y agoIt‘s spreading cancer.
- junto 2y agoPlay on words I assume. - Meta - Facebook et al - Stasi (an abbreviation of Staatssicherheit), was the state security service and secret police of East Germany from 1950 to 1990. It was one of the most repressive police organisations in the world, infiltrating almost every aspect of life in East Germany, using torture, intimidation and a vast network of informants to crush dissent
- amanaplanacanal 2y agoI doubt Meta is going to sell their most valuable asset to a competitor.
- wilg 2y agoyes very brave and original to quote 1984 but actually its not totalitarian in any way. the means here are extremely reasonable and there's no free speech issue.
- selimthegrim 2y agoWow I did not read this preface in high school when we did Animal Farm. Say it ain’t so Mr Kramer.
- ImHereToVote 2y agoIt was censored in your version.
- selimthegrim 2y agoI will point out one of Orwell’s points doesn’t hold up - Mihailovich did collaborate with the Germans towards the end of the war.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- wqaatwt 2y ago> destroying all independence of thought." Not all of it. Just some of it. No need to see everything in such a black and white way. Also Orwell was obviously not talking about major entities run by other countries. Do you think he would have opposed stopping newspapers directly run by Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union from operating inside Britain?
- ImHereToVote 2y agoInstead of censoring. Just teach the populace critical thinking to question the validity of all propagated information. Have public debates on what is correct about what the enemy is saying and what is wrong. Also teach the populace to have the same scrutiny about their own governments lies, like WMDs and such.
- wqaatwt 2y ago> Just teach the populace critical thinking Let’s JUST invent practical nuclear fusion and sentient AI while we’re at it. Both would be probably significantly easier to achieve..
- ImHereToVote 2y agoNobody has ever tried. For obvious reasons. How are you supposed to manufacture consent if it works?
- yoz-y 2y agoThat’s patently false. There are many schools and teaching methods that teach critical thinking. Attending higher education usually does the trick IF the student is actually motivated in the slightest. Massive part of YouTube is about teaching critical thinking for those who can’t attend for many reasons. Still doesn’t work because of the many roadblocks and mostly laziness in general.
- ImHereToVote 2y ago
- surfaceofthesun 2y agoThe US government forcing spinoffs is a core tenant of antitrust enforcement. We’ve seen similar enforcement applied to other applications like Grindr [1]. The fundamental issue is ByteDance ownership. Forced divestiture due to legitimate concern for potential abuses is perfectly acceptable whether by a financial or national security rationale. ——— 1 - https://www.axios.com/2024/04/27/biden-tiktok-sale-grindr https://www.axios.com/2024/04/27/biden-tiktok-sale-grindr
- t0bia_s 2y agoCan you imagine implementing regulations that are not for your safety? All data that they collect are given by user voluntary, by agreeing with their terms of use. Instead of banning, educate about how data harvesting works and why it matters. No one is learning from censorship.
- low_tech_love 2y agoSo the alternative is to defend democracy by letting a foreign authoritarian entity take over your country in the name of (their) freedom? I don’t get how can Americans be so insecure about themselves and have such fragile trust in what they can achieve as a country. This idea that foreign authoritarian regimes should be respected as much as their own people and system is just baffling.
- DiogenesKynikos 2y agoThis ban was precipitated by TikTok refusing to bow to pressure to censor (pro-Palestinian) content that American politicians don't like. The politics of this are exactly the opposite of that you're saying. This is about restricting democratic rights.
- infecto 2y agoDo you have evidence of this compared to what is known, that ByteDance China has in-office seats for the CCP? These conspiracies and what-aboutism make no sense to me.
- DiogenesKynikos 2y agoMany American politicians, including the people leading the charge for the ban, have openly said that this is the reason. Senator Mitt Romney put it very bluntly [0]: > "Some wonder why there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down potentially TikTok or other entities of that nature. If you look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians, relative to other social media sites - it's overwhelmingly so among TikTok broadcasts." Or maybe Mitt Romney is just another conspiracy theorist? 0. https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2024/05/06/senator-romney-antony-blinken-tiktok-ban-israel-palestinian-content https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2024/05/06/senato...
- infecto 2y agoNone of those 1A arguments held up and the SC decision did not use "count of Palestinians" AFAIK. I am sure some of the initial support was drummed up for reasons like what you mentioned but ultimately that is not why its being banned. But going back to your point, mentioning democratic rights for a CCP app is hilarious.
- saalweachter 2y agoCompletely unrelated, in the passage of the New Testament where The Devil Quotes Scripture, the aforementioned Devil quotes a Psalm to Jesus, a Psalm that Jesus presumably believed in, a Psalm perfectly applicable to his current situation, in an attempt to trick him into making the wrong decision. It's weird to me that that idea could be such an important part of culture as to become a common saying yet have so little impact on actual discourse.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago> In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought. Lots of respect for this guy and his writings but it’s naive to believe people are thinking independently because they can watch TikTok. It just becomes a different propaganda vehicle; the thoughts will still be dependent on the messages they see.
- diggan 2y ago> the thoughts will still be dependent on the messages they see. Sure, but even you would agree that if you have even less venues to discover said messages, it'll get more and more heterogeneous? Maybe TikTok isn't "The last standing beacon for Freedom of Thoughts" exactly, but banning it certainly doesn't get you closer to plurality of opinions.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago> but banning it certainly doesn't get you closer to plurality of opinions I think keeping it around is worse. While we’re at it, we need to go after American social media, including entertainment news. People should commune in person and get their opinions from interacting with their community.
- poszlem 2y agoWe will fight for peace until the last bullet