2011: The future has arrived. Orwell’s vision almost complete.

1984 was not an instruction manual

All of a sudden, it’s the year 2011. It sounds to me like a date far in the future, but it’s here right now, minus the flying cars and personal robots to do our every menial chore while we’re out having fun. That’s what it was supposed to be like as I remember from Tomorrow’s World in the 70s. I can’t believe I still have to take the rubbish out to the bin myself.

No, 2011 will be futuristic, but only in a 1984 sort of way. I read Orwell’s prophetic nightmare at school, circa 1979, and when the teacher asked the class if anyone thought we would live under such circumstances one day, I remember thinking that it wouldn’t be as soon as 1984, but it would happen at some stage.

Comparing the book to reality in 2011 makes me wonder how much Orwell knew about the globalists’ agenda from the people in the know who were around at the time, like the Huxleys.

Orwell’s three superstates, Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, haven’t materialised exactly as he envisaged. For example, Great Britain (Airstrip one) is part of Oceania, along with the Americas and what we know today as Oceania, but “Airstrip One” is of course now well and truly part of the bloc which is fast looking like Orwell’s Eurasia (and is popularly known by the first two letters: EU). Of course, we are still America’s plaything too when it comes to support for their illicit wars for corporate greed. We are the world’s biggest mugs. We are being “protected” from the nasty Muslims by the same people who have allowed a couple of million to live here at the same time as stirring up strife in the Middle East. It’s all a con; even politicians aren’t this stupid.

Geography aside, scrolling down the menu on the left-hand side of Orwell Today reads like a fairly substantial list of western governments’ achievements to date.

The category of Surveilance hardly needs explaining, but it is getting worse every year as technology improves and politicians don’t. Walmart in the States are installing telescreens in hundreds of their stores.

WASHINGTON — Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today announced the expansion of the Department’s national “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign to hundreds of Walmart stores across the country—launching a new partnership between DHS and Walmart to help the American public play an active role in ensuring the safety and security of our nation.

Of course, this has been made possible due to another Orwellian trick: create a bogeyman. Orwell’s was Emmanuel Goldstein; the West’s is Osama bin Laden, the man most people believe is “responsible” for the carnage on 9/11, but is in fact not even wanted by the FBI for the crimes. This former CIA “asset” in Bosnia is merely being used to frighten us into agreeing to have our freedoms stolen.

Never show dismay! Never show resentment! A single flicker of the eyes could give you away. It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself – anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime it was called. Your worst enemy was your own nervous system. Any moment the tension inside you was liable to translate itself into some visible symptom.

Not only could a fellow shopper at Walmart think you have something to hide by not conforming to their idea of “normality” as dictated to them via the mass media, Behavior Detection Officers at airports could haul you off just for the way you move or for your facial expression. And how about equipment capable of detecting a person’s level of “malintent”?

A DHS report issued last December outlined some of the possible technological features of FAST, which include “a remote cardiovascular and respiratory sensor” to measure “heart rate, heart rate variability, respiration rate, and respiratory sinus arrhythmia,” a “remote eye tracker” that “uses a camera and processing software to track the position and gaze of the eyes (and, in some instances, the entire head),” “thermal cameras that provide detailed information on the changes in the thermal properties of the skin in the face,” and “a high resolution video that allows for highly detailed images of the face and body … and an audio system for analyzing human voice for pitch change.”

Airport surveillance is becoming notoriously draconian. Searching for weapons may now even extend to female private parts.

A self-described “rule follower” went through an airport pornoscanner wearing a panty-liner (she was menstruating). Because the hygienic item obscured the screener’s view of her vulva, she was made to endure a humiliating fondling, “so invasive that I was left crying and dealing with memories that I thought had been dealt with years ago of prior sexual assaults.”

It’s all part of the dehumanisation. I just wonder what the “officials” were expecting to find down there: Saddam’s WMDs perhaps?

Under Systems of Thought on Orwell Today, we read,

Practices which had been long abandoned … imprisonment without trial… torture to extract confessions … were tolerated and even defended.

Of course. It’s all to keep us safe. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, right?

Keeping Masses Down:

The economy of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation, capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were prevented from working and were kept half alive by State charity.

This has all happened! Our country is being bled dry deliberately.

Falsification of Past:

The past is whatever the Party chooses to make it…. If the facts say otherwise then the facts must be altered.

When Stagecoach boss, Brian Souter, conducted his private referendum a decade ago, seven out of eight Scots who voted wanted to keep Section 28, which protected schoolchildren from having homosexuality promoted to them. The Tories, who introduced the legislation, have now apologised for it. Boris Johnson leads London’s “Gay Pride” parade. David Cameron turfed out his candidate in North Ayrshire and Arran because he posted his beliefs about traditional families on his website.

The Party is opposed to discrimination along the lines of sexuality. The Party has always been opposed to discrimination along the lines of sexuality.

The fact that the vast majority of people used to support Section 28 seems to have been forgotten already. Now, if you’re against children getting the “green light” to have homosexual and bisexual affairs then you are, by definition, homophobic.

Was there ever a word whose meaning was so confused? Is it a real phobia? Is it “hatred”. Is it dislike? Is it disgust?

It’s whatever the Party chooses it to mean in order to criminalise dissenters with homophobic hate crime. That’s how seriously they require our submission to their ideas.

Newspeak:

The whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought.

——–

The name of every organization, or body of people, or doctrine, or country, or institution, or public building, was invariably cut down into the familiar shape; that is, a single easily pronounced word with the smallest number of syllables that would preserve the original derivation. In the Ministry of Truth, for example, the Records Department, in which Winston Smith worked, was called Recdep, the Fiction Department was called Ficdep, the Teleprogrammes Department was called Teledep, and so on. This was not done solely with the object of saving time. Even in the early decades of the twentieth century, telescoped words and phrases had been one of the characteristic features of political language; and it had been noticed that the tendency to use abbreviations of this kind was most marked in totalitarian countries and totalitarian organizations. Examples were such words as Nazi, Gestapo, Comintern, Inprecorr, Agitprop.

How many real examples of oddly named government departments and quangos can you think of? DEFRA, OFTEL, OFWAT, OFSTED…

By the year 2050 – earlier probably – all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron – they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be.

…and Bibles!

God isn’t mentioned much in “1984” but then religion would barely be tolerated in Oceania like it’s becoming here – at least, Christianity wouldn’t be tolerated outside of an approved government denomination – one which offered little or no resistance to the aims of the Party. As Lenin said, “Our programme necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.”

And Christians get the worst of it because our culture and decent laws are built on its foundations.

And humanists and secularists rejoice out of ignorance: ignorance of history and oblivious to cause and effect. What they perceive as “victories” are usually nothing of the sort. They are further erosions of their culture and freedoms.

Thought Police & Snitches:

Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. By the rubbish that was dinned into them at school and in the Spies and Youth Leaque, by lectures, parades, songs, slogans, and martial music, the natural feeling had been driven out of them… They were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party… All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals.

They were systematically turned against their parents and taught to spy on them and report their deviations. The family had become in effect an extension of the Thought Police. It was a device by means of which everyone could be surrounded night and day by informers who knew him intimately.

It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children. And with good reason, for hardly a week passed in which The Times did not carry a paragraph describing how some eavesdropping little sneak – ‘child hero’ was the phrase generally used – had overheard some compromising remark and denounced its parents to the Thought Police.

Here are some recent real-life examples of snitches:

Mark Frearson, 47, was arrested on suspicion of assault after he slapped his seven-year-old son Harry on the back of the legs.

Mr Frearson, a company director, punished his child for leaving his side and wandering off on his own in the dark.

A witness called the police and three hours after the incident, four police officers and a specialist child support officer arrived at Mr Frearson’s home in Plymouth, Devon, to question him and examine Harry for bruises.

They then drove the boy away in a police car and took his father to the station where they locked him up in a cell overnight.

Mr Frearson later found out that he should have been questioned immediately but was locked up because the ‘witness’ was ‘in no fit state’ to be interviewed.

He spent 12 hours in the cell but was released the next morning after the complainant withdrew the allegation.

And from Manchester, a girl reports her dad to the police for giving her a slap.

Community worker Jim McCullough was arrested and cautioned when 13-year old Jess phoned police because he hit her for ‘terrorising’ a neighbour.

Now he has quit the football coaching and community centre work he has done for more than 15 years, because the caution could stop him working with vulnerable children.

Mr McCullough, 44, says he has never hit his daughter before but felt it was the only way to get her to understand what she had done after she terrorised a neighbour by banging on her window at midnight.

The single dad, who has five children, said: “I wish I had asked for my day in court rather than accept a police caution. That way I could have explained that I was trying to do what was right for my daughter.

Parents aren’t meant to have any power – it all belongs to the state and they must deal with it. A couple of good belts sorted me out as a youngster, but the “authorities” would rather things got out of control so they can take command.

Doublethink:

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… The prevailing mental condition is controlled insanity.

Can anyone possibly read the following without thinking of Gordon Brown?

Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing them and to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth. Ultimately it is by means of doublethink that the Party has been able – and may, for all we know, continue to be able for thousands of years – to arrest the course of history…

Further explanation of doublethink and how the Party can claim to be something it isn’t:

The official ideology abounds with contradictions even when there is no reason for them. Simultaneously, true to the principles of doublethink, the Party rejects and vilifies every principle for which the Socialist movement originally stood, and it does this in the name of socialism. It systematically undermines the solidarity of the family all the while appealing to the sentiment of family. Even the names of the four Ministries by which Oceania is governed are a deliberate reversal of facts: The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with War; the Ministry of Truth with Lies; the Ministry of Love with Torture; and the Ministry of Plenty with Starvation. These contradictions are not accidental. They are a deliberate exercise of doublethink. If the High are to keep their places permanently – then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity.

Today we have:

The Department for Education which concerns itself with indoctrinating and dumbing down children;

The Department of Health with unhealthy hospitals, vaccines and attitudes and limited access to lifesaving drugs.

The Department for Work and Pensions with unemployment and poverty in old age;

and the Department of Defence with waging wars overseas while leaving our defences so vulnerable we need to ask the French to help out.

The Proles:

If there was hope, it must lie in the proles because only there, in those swarming disregarded masses, 85 percent of the population of Oceania, could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated. The Party could not be overthrown from within. It’s enemies, if it had any enemies, had no way of coming together or even of identifying one another. Even if the legendary Brotherhood existed, as just possibly it might, it was inconceivable that its members could ever assemble in larger numbers than twos and threes. Rebellion meant a look in the eyes, an inflection of the voice; at the most, an occasional whispered word. But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They needed only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely sooner or later it must occur to them to do it? And yet–! Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbours, films, football, beer, and above all, gambling, filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult. A few agents of the Thought Police moved always among them, spreading false rumours and marking down and eliminating the few individuals who were judged capable of becoming dangerous.

If there was hope, it must lie in the proles. Hence all the distractions, worries and fears to try to keep our minds otherwise preoccupied.

The Lottery:

The Lottery, with its weekly pay-out of enormous prizes, was the one public event to which the proles paid serious attention. It was probably that there were some millions of proles for whom the Lottery was the principal if not the only reason for remaining alive. It was their delight, their folly, their anodyne, their intellectual stimulant.

How often do we hear people saying, “If only I could win the Lottery, I would so X,Y and Z?” Why don’t they keep their money in their pockets and do something with their lives now? Why do so many think they need a vast amount of money to be able to be fulfilled? Consumerism gone mad.

Prolefeed:

The Ministry of Truth had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the Party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the Proletariat. There was a whole chain of separate departments dealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally. Here were produced rubbishy newspapers, containing almost nothing except sport, crime, and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes and films oozing with sex. The rubbishy entertainment and spurious news which the Party handed out to the masses was referred to as ‘prolefeed’. …At school they had sex talks once a month for the over-sixteen and rubbed it into youth for years.

How much worse is it now on that final point? And expected to get worse with Ed Balls intent on sex education for five year-olds. Even Orwell couldn’t envisage the depravity of that, or if he did, he thought it too outrageous an idea to inflict on his readers.

Reality Control:

The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, ‘just to keep people frightened’.

——–

The heresy of heresies was common sense.

Several major terrorist and other attacks are known to be false-flag events, e.g. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, Operation Ajax (removal of Iran’s PM Mossadegh), Operation Gladio (campaign of government-sponsored terror in Europe).

And you all know what I think about 9/11. It was the perfect pretext for ushering in 1984.

Love Instinct & Family:

The Party was trying to kill sexual attraction, or, if it could not be killed, then to distort it and dirty it. The aim of the Party was not merely to prevent men and women from forming loyalties which it might not be able to control. It’s real, undeclared purpose was to remove all pleasure from the sexual act. Not love so much as eroticism was the enemy, inside marriage as well as outside it.

This is the aim of modern “sex and relationship education”. Encouraging promiscuity by promoting taboos as wholesome, handing out contraception, and promising abortions without parents being informed has had the effect of making sex recreational. No fidelity or love is a prerequisite and a lasting relationship becomes increasingly difficult.

This is a rare case where Orwell’s vision differs from reality today:

There were even organizations such as the Junior Anti-Sex League, which advocated complete celibacy for both sexes.

Even the Scouts are now joining in with the promotion of promiscuity under the guise of “safer sex”. They obviously haven’t managed to work out that the more this “education” is peddled, the worse things become.

I suppose it’s another example of doublethink – by promoting sexual activity you reduce the impact of sexual activity.

I haven’t read Brave New World since I was at school. Is it as prophetic as Nineteen Eighty Four?

The two greatest visions of a future dystopia were George Orwell’s “1984” and Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World.” The debate, between those who watched our descent towards corporate totalitarianism, was who was right. Would we be, as Orwell wrote, dominated by a repressive surveillance and security state that used crude and violent forms of control? Or would we be, as Huxley envisioned, entranced by entertainment and spectacle, captivated by technology and seduced by profligate consumption to embrace our own oppression? It turns out Orwell and Huxley were both right. Huxley saw the first stage of our enslavement. Orwell saw the second.

We have been gradually disempowered by a corporate state that, as Huxley foresaw, seduced and manipulated us through sensual gratification, cheap mass-produced goods, boundless credit, political theater and amusement. While we were entertained, the regulations that once kept predatory corporate power in check were dismantled, the laws that once protected us were rewritten and we were impoverished. Now that credit is drying up, good jobs for the working class are gone forever and mass-produced goods are unaffordable, we find ourselves transported from “Brave New World” to “1984.” The state, crippled by massive deficits, endless war and corporate malfeasance, is sliding toward bankruptcy. It is time for Big Brother to take over from Huxley’s feelies, the orgy-porgy and the centrifugal bumble-puppy. We are moving from a society where we are skillfully manipulated by lies and illusions to one where we are overtly controlled.

We have come a long way down the road of totalitarianism, and almost unnoticed by most folk. Feminism has enslaved women, not liberated them. It was only ever meant to change society for the worse – to reduce the importance of men and families; to reduce the birthrate; to convince women they had the “right” to control their bodies by sleeping around and aborting unplanned pregnancies. It’s a sort of adult version of teenage sex education designed to destroy a society built on family ties.

Likewise, the homosexual agenda was a social engineering masterpiece. Mass immigration was designed to dilute our culture. The entertainment industry polluted minds and souls.

But these were just the initial stages to prepare us for a police state – to produce a nation of dumbed down, celebrity-obsessed, sex-mad proles who will vote in the same bunches of traitors who are only too willing to take us to the next stage of our enslavement.

The false-flag attacks on 9/11 proved how gullible the people had become and were the perfect “New Pearl Harbor” event to bring in all manner of anti-freedom legislation to “keep us safe” from Emmanuel Goldstein in an Afghan cave.

Equality and Human Rights laws have had the desired effect of silencing debate. We have no rights anymore.

Our superstate of EUrasia is shaping up nicely as the new Soviet Union, but with fewer freedoms. Unless we get out fast, we will no longer have our own armed forces and police. Past Prime Ministers have betrayed this country by signing away our sovereignty piece by precious piece. They have given away for nothing the freedom which has been bought over the centuries by the blood of millions of our forebears.

David Cameron promised a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but the traitor Brown signed it in private, so after a sigh of relief, no doubt, he then promised to introduce legislation to require a referendum on future transfers of powers to the European Union – those few he has left to give away.

As an indication of his dishonesty and total lack of integrity, his European Union Bill looks as worthless as his cast-iron guarantee on the Lisbon Treaty referendum. Labour MPs are expected to vote down the Bill along with “Eurosceptic” (Eurorealist) Tories.

The shadow foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, said the Bill would be a “lawyers paradise”.

Miss Cooper is said to be sympathetic to the idea of a referendum on future transfers of power and is understood to be willing to look at the possibility of backing Tory amendments.

When Labour was in power it controversially refused to offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

But a Labour source said: “If there is major constitutional change we support the idea of a referendum. Has there been a slight change of tone since Gordon Brown on this? Yes, maybe a fraction.”

After thirteen years of treason, Labour has decided to join with Tory Eurorealists and demand the people be consulted in future.

Controlled insanity.

Labour are patriots. Labour have always been patriots.

But we know they are pretty much all traitors. Most people seem to have a problem understanding the extent to which we have been betrayed by successive governments. Doublethink in action: giving away power to a corrupt club which hasn’t audited its accounts for many years and is composed of 27 other countries, some of which still have hardline Cold War communists in control, is good for Britain. Many think it is doubleplusgood.

I believe it to be treason on an unbelievably massive scale and we really need to get our act together as people of the UK to make sure those responsible are brought to account.

Can’t you imagine Tony Blair – no hint of a smarmy grin – standing in the dock facing charges of treason and realising that it’s a fair cop? As he is marched off to face a traitor’s fate, the whole country can relax as all the other traitors desperately try to make amends by doing everything they can to restore our sovereignty and dignity.

Bring it on.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to 2011: The future has arrived. Orwell’s vision almost complete.

  1. Leg-iron says:

    If Orwell was right, we manage to get out of EUrasia before the final sealing of the borders. We end up part of Oceania. Frying pan and fire.

    With China (Eastasia) gearing up its military, Orwell’s book looks almost like a prophecy.

    Alternatively, someone is using it as a plan and following it to the letter. I wish they had chosen something with a happy ending.

  2. len says:

    It seems that we are entering into a new ‘dark age’ a sort of serfdom.The Orwellian nightmare is becoming a reality.All this has been brought about by subterfuge.Those elected to lead us have sold us out!
    This ‘new society’ , a Godless society, being built in Europe is in fact built on a very old lie ‘You can be as gods.)
    There have been several attempts to build this Godless ‘utopia’and all have failed.Secularists have based these man made ‘kingdoms’ on ‘reason’ or the Darwinian principles of survival of the fittest.

    If a ‘religion’ is to be united with this godless society,(as a token gesture) it will be a man made, man oriented,probably pagan religion.
    The wheel it seems has turned full circle!

  3. English Viking says:

    Len,

    Serfdom was a good thing; every man had his own land and answered only to his Lord, who himself was answerable to the King. Oh for such freedoms nowadays.

    Stewart,

    It’s too late, get out while you can. How many Jews thought people who spoke like me, in ’33, ’34, ’35, etc, were mad. How many realised, too late, in ’39?

  4. Flossie says:

    What an excellent post! Thank you very much!

  5. Stewart Cowan says:

    @Leg-iron – There was no chance of the globalists basing their plans on a book whose last words were “…and they all lived happily ever after.” They are sick, sick people.

    @Len – We can understand the mindset of the EU’s architects (literal and political) when we look at the parliament building in Strasbourg – made to look unfinished and reminiscent of Bruegal’s famous painting of the Tower of Babel. They do indeed think they can be (are) gods.

    @English – I know what you’re saying and I have an idea I’ll know what to do when the time is right. I have one main plan I have been pondering about for quite some time.

    @Flossie – Thank you very much. It makes it all worthwhile to be appreciated.

  6. Ken Craggs says:

    1984: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF OLIGARCHICAL COLLECTIVISM. Chapter 1. Ignorance is Strength. http://bit.ly/hiIFBPhttp://bit.ly/52bMyT

    In the book ‘1984’ Socialism (INGSOC) is the enemy of freedom.

    “What kind of people would control this world had been equally obvious. The new aristocracy was made up for the most part of bureaucrats, scientists, technicians, trade-union organizers, publicity experts, sociologists, teachers, journalists, and professional politicians. These people, whose origins lay in the salaried middle class and the upper grades of the working class, had been shaped and brought together by the barren world of monopoly industry [Capitalists] and centralized government….For long periods the High seem to be securely in power, but sooner or later there always comes a moment when they lose either their belief in themselves or their capacity to govern efficiently, or both. They are then overthrown by the Middle [class], who enlist the Low [class] on their side by pretending to them that they are fighting for liberty and justice. As soon as they have reached their objective, the Middle thrust the Low back into their old position of servitude”

    Have you ever heard of ‘Common Purpose’ ?
    http://bit.ly/b4nizk

    Communitarianism
    http://bit.ly/zYSvM

    Union Now, the U.N and World Government
    http://bit.ly/8kAp7Ghttp://bit.ly/e03Levhttp://bit.ly/cqsQbx

  7. I went to the library today, and could hardly find a book worth reading. This is a part of it as well. The state schools are crap, and kids can’t even educate themselves now that the libraries have been turned into internet cafes.

  8. Stewart Cowan says:

    @Ken Craggs – Thank you for those links – I’ll check them out. Yes, I’ve heard of Common Purpose.

    …bureaucrats, scientists, technicians, trade-union organizers, publicity experts, sociologists, teachers, journalists, and professional politicians…

    …and celebs.

    @Michael Fowke – the irony is that the web opens up a world of knowledge to them if only they know where to look. I imagine many such sites are blocked on public computers.

  9. Ken Craggs says:

    Quote @Stewart Cowen: “Comparing the book [1984] to reality in 2011 makes me wonder how much Orwell knew about the globalists’ agenda”

    George Orwell wrote a review of the book “Union Now” [1939] by Clarence K Streit – ‘1984’ was published ten years later.

    Review of ‘Union Now’ by George Orwell
    http://bit.ly/hQVM2p

    “A dozen years ago anyone who had foretold the political line-up of today would have been looked on as a lunatic. And yet the truth is that the present situation — not in detail, of course, but in its main outlines — ought to have been predictable even in the golden age before Hitler. Something like it was bound to happen as soon as British security was seriously threatened.”

    “In this connextion it is well worth having a look at Mr (Clarence K.) Streit’s much-discussed book, Union Now. Mr Streit, like the partisans of the ‘Peace Bloc’, wants the democracies to gang up against the dictatorships, but his book is outstanding for two reasons. To begin with he goes further than most of the others and offers a plan which, even if it is startling, is constructive. Secondly, in spite of a rather nineteen-twentyish American naiveté, he has an essentially decent cast of mind. He genuinely loathes the thought of war, and he does not sink to the hypocrisy of pretending that any country which can be bought or bullied into the British orbit instantly becomes a democracy. His book therefore presents a kind of test case. In it you are seeing the sheep-and-goats theory at its best. If you can’t accept it in that form you will certainly never accept it in the form handed out by the Left Book Club.”

    “Briefly, what Mr Streit suggests is that the democratic nations, starting with fifteen which he names, should voluntarily form themselves into a union — not a league or an alliance, but a union similar to the United States, with a common government, common money and complete internal free trade. The initial fifteen states are, of course, the USA, France, Great Britain, the self-governing dominions of the British Empire, and the smaller European democracies, not including Czechoslovakia, which still existed when the book was written. Later, other states could be admitted to the Union when and if they ‘proved themselves worthy’. It is implied all along that the state of peace and prosperity existing within the Union would be so enviable that everyone else would soon be pining to join it…Mr Streit’s ingenious ideas will not be put into operation, but something resembling the ‘Peace Bloc’ proposals probably will.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>