What is Orwellian to you?

[CL]

Orwellian is a brave man, he has a great philosophical mind and his book is compelling. Like Animal Farm, although it's short but his metaphor is a masterpiece, it shows the darkness of 'mankind'.

[Matthew]

Mkfs wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Lucky for all of us, such arguments are not taken seriously much in the outside world"

Perhaps the argument is not fully spelled-out, but it is certainly followed. I've lost count ..."

Really, because I really haven't found many at all. Where do you see them typically? And I'm happy to defy that expectation myself, especially since no one can make me conform to it.

[Matthew]

Otter wrote: "Orwellian is a brave man, he has a great philosophical mind and his book is compelling. Like Animal Farm, although it's short but his metaphor is a masterpiece, it shows the darkness of 'mankind'."

I think you mean Orwell there, Otter.

[mkfs]

Matthew wrote: "Really, because I really haven't found many at all"

As I mentioned, there are too many occurrences to keep track of. Any writing produced by people who haven't read a standard style guide is subject to this: blogs, technical writing, opinion pieces, etc.

For an example of the sort of ignorance that accompanies this usage, see this Stack Exchange question.

[Papaphilly]

Matthew wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Matthew wrote: "John wrote: "Kinan wrote: "North Korea, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc. are Orwellian.
These are the kinds of states Orwell wro..."

Wow. Talking about me being political and look what the cat dragged in. You are correct in one aspect, speech without criticism is meaningless. However, that freedom cuts both ways and BOTH sides get to have their opinion whether you like or not. I notice that you criticize the Right for their views, but not the Left for their views. I guess it doesn't deserve criticism if you agree with them no matter how nasty the dialogue as long as it puts forth an agenda you agree with.

If you can't defend the rights of others to have their say, then you can't believe in free speech. It is only through the staunch defense for those opinions that you detest can you protect free speech. A perfect example is the ACLU defending the NSPA right to march its Nazi flag through a Jewish neighborhood in Illinois.

claiming PCness is censorship ignores the central fact that no one is being deprived of their right to say anything. Calling a person sexist, racist, homophobic, or elitist for saying something sexist, racist, homophobic or elitist isn't censorship. It's criticism..."

Except when it is an attack to censure the person in question. The very idea of these types of charges is to shut down the conversation and BOTH political sides engage in this very act and yes, it can deprive free speech when it is used in this way. It is like being called Anti-American because you agree/disagree with a particular policy of some politician that some other group doesn't like. It is a way to try and shame you into silence or drown out your voice because the charge is easy to make.

You are also wrong in this is Stalinist Russian. PC is attributed to a Thomas Sowell opinion piece. What you are alluding to is Groupthink which comes out of 1984, but certainly is applicable to Stalinist Russia.

[Papaphilly]

Matthew wrote: "Mkfs wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Lucky for all of us, such arguments are not taken seriously much in the outside world"

Perhaps the argument is not fully spelled-out, but it is certainly followed. I'v..."

But you have found some accoridng to your own statement. Think that you cannpt be conformed to PC thinking? Wait to your job is on the line. Remember, freedom of speech does not count in the workplace, only for public speech that cannot be interferred with by the governement. If you are willing to lose a job over principle, then you are a very good man.

[Kallie]

Papaphilly wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Mkfs wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Lucky for all of us, such arguments are not taken seriously much in the outside world"

Perhaps the argument is not fully spelled-out, but it is certain..."

I'm a U instructor. There are many things I could not say in a classroom if I want to keep my job. A lot of them are not 'PC' and most of the ones that are would be hateful.

[Papaphilly]

Kallie wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Mkfs wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Lucky for all of us, such arguments are not taken seriously much in the outside world"

Perhaps the argument is not fully spelled-out..."

Do you find that Orwellian?

[[deleted user]]

Orwellian is the usurpation of the only true power, loyalty.

[Kallie]

Papaphilly wrote: "Kallie wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Mkfs wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Lucky for all of us, such arguments are not taken seriously much in the outside world"

Perhaps the argument is not fu..."

No. I just consider that good manners and speak my mind elsewhere. I think it's also important to keep in mind that they way we are brought up is prejudiced and ethnocentric, and some of the thoughtless things we say reflect that. There's nothing Orwellian about being aware of my un- or subconscious biases and wishing NOT to speak from them. They don't reflect how I think or feel so much as they reflect faulty education.

[E.D.]

Polite or political. Motive is the point, no?

[Roman Adriel]

Every populist government creates an orwellian sensation in terms of the levels of media and information manipulation

[Carrie]

Horrorshow wrote: "Kenny wrote: "What is Orwellian to you?"

The world we live in."

Yes,exactly.

[Carolina]

Everything on plain sight.

[Papaphilly]

Carrie wrote: "Everything on plain sight."

I would be much more nervous on the things out of sight.

[Fernando]

Orwellian is the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

[Kallie]

The politically supported testing industry and its hostile, unproductive effects on education.

[Brian]

I loved most of the comments in this string. One of them was taking disinformation to a whole new level which is Orwellian. I think most of the people that responded would love my new book. If you get a chance, you should read Off the Grid: The Catalyst. http://tinyurl.com/oqw4xnh

[Robyn]

Britain with its cameras on every street corner. Orwell would not be surprised if he came back to his home country now.

[Papaphilly]

Robyn wrote: "Britain with its cameras on every street corner. Orwell would not be surprised if he came back to his home country now."

I work in Emergency Management and it is a great tool to use, but I do find it a bit creepy.

[Robyn]

Yes I've seen that TV programme where crime is controlled by the use of cameras but every type of surveillance has its downsides, I guess.

[Karen]

I had read an article on the internet of UC-Berkeley's new speech impositions. They are proposing to ban such terms as "melting pot." I immediately thought of this thread.

"Fifty years after the birth of the free speech movement at the University of California, Berkeley, officials across the UC system are encouraging faculty and students to purge mundane, potentially offensive words and phrases from their vocabularies."

And who exactly is it that deems which words are potentially offensive? Hmmm...I wonder. It seems to me that just about anything said could "potentially" offend someone, if you ask enough people. Orwellian much? I think between stuff like this and the NSA, 1984 and Animal Farm are not as far fetched as some would like to imagine.

[Graham]

Perhaps it translates as dystopian?