Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×



Details

Submitted on
August 16, 2008
Image Size
116 KB
Resolution
960×720
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
308
Favourites
3 (who?)
Comments
8
Downloads
6
×
Orwellian Inspiration by Obak Orwellian Inspiration by Obak
This is what the world seems to be all about, latley more often then not.
Power through Production
Production through Obedience
Obedience through Submission
(Or so i tried to model the phrase, I don't really know latin, just used a free translation service)
Add a Comment:
 
:iconmucho-of-arabia:
Mucho-of-Arabia Featured By Owner Aug 16, 2008
Obediance? Submission? Why would people want to suppress free thought? Are people affraid of ideas? Or is it, the ideas they have are different, and no one likes what is different.

I hate consummer culture...
Reply
:iconobak:
Obak Featured By Owner Aug 16, 2008
A good question indeed, but is this not true? Is man not an illogical creature that rather shut himself insdide his shell of a constructed reality, for is not a constructed reality the only reality we know since we lack the words and sensory organs to fathom all the variables of existance? Can one not then only create a praticular image of the truth?
The world is percieved through the glasses of all human society, but human society is defiend by the artificiall constructs of morals, morals hold no objective truth but only truth as we percieve it. Is therefor not submision and obedience what makes society possible? Is therefor not our world, as percived, a construct of willfull constrictions?
Maybe, maybe not, for no mind is as one, we are deviations of singular principles, matrixes through wich information is processed and generated anew, struggling to give birth to our subjective perception of 'truth' in conflict with the boundries that uphold our society.
Ideas are the cubs that devour their mother and slay their fathers.
Reply
:iconmucho-of-arabia:
Mucho-of-Arabia Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2008
I c your point, but I also think that what makes us different from other animals is that we can create Ideas. These are "fathomed variables of existance", because without thought, truth is just truth, and unbreakable law or "constructed reality". But rather free thought allows images of truth. So why not allow man to shut himself into some hikikomori like shell?

I suppose society (human as you put it) is based on the cultural morality of a certian group. Buddhists believe that "Right and wrong" do not exist, and that the world is merely balance, we just place value on certain things and call them "right" or "wrong" for our own conveniance, hence the submissive culture.

All cultures are submissive, otherwise they would be ruled by anarchy. And obviously Utopian ideal societies (such as Communism) fail because no one wants to work hard without rewards.

Just go read defuncted theories such as Thorstein Veblen's: Liesure Class. And you'll see your very words echoed 100 years ago.

Anyways, Its fine to debate truth and all, but put yourself in a possition of mere survival (life and death literally) and these question go out the window... I live in Iraq, people try to kill all the time, so I get a little taste of this now and again, so I can imagine a setting in which people on a whole are suffering;

those very people would throw freedom out the window in a second for stability. Such is the sad nature of suffering.

So if you want to see were cubs devour mothers and fathers, look at human suffering and see its roots. And see the salution, obediance, submission, and control. The only price you pay is fear.
Reply
:iconobak:
Obak Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2008
Offcourse, one should be allowed to retreat from any society to which principles he does not wish do adhere to. Problem is that this is seldom the reality, either we are forced to obey principles on grounds of nationality and geographical domination of a superior power. Or even more often, we are prissoners of our own inability to take that leap of faith since even one at the bottom of any society at least can claim part of something bigger. Seen from a point of realism, few of us neither have nor ever will have the skills necessary to survive outside society, thus making that choice moot.
The only plausible choice remaining is to reform society, from the ashes of the old create something new. A society where labour pays off, but also where wealth is fairly disitributed.
In a purley political/economical perspective the diference between capitalism/stalinism communism is in the first case surplus value belongs to the capitalist while in the second case it belongs to the party. Given the case, one should then rather strive for a society of several masters (capitalism) rather than a society of only one absolute ruler (stalinism-communism) as no one ruler is ever morally perfect and just, it is infinetly better to be able to choose even a lesser evil. Problem here is that the slaves remian slaves with the only difference being that in one case he might be able to choose his own master while the fundamental problem still remains, control is still in the hands of the few while the wealth of the world is distributed adhering to principles appliable to circumstances defined by a certain brand of society. When distribution faces the darker side of the human nature all that goes out the window.
I believe it is a principle of daosim that heaven and hell are not divine, as much as human, variables. We are capable of turning the world into either, but we seldom see the ends stemming from the means laid before us in plain sight, rather we act on our beliefs, trying to do good, avoiding evil. But inevitably as good and evil are subjective varibles, one action percieved as good from one point of view will be percied as evil from another. Thus it is not so much the principles of good and evil, as you said they might even be concidered meaningless, that is the source of suffering, but rather the society that forms those principles and the conflicts within and between human societies.
Reply
:iconmucho-of-arabia:
Mucho-of-Arabia Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2008
So, one would have high hopes for a society in which labor pays off. Of coarse this is impossible, since someone in the society will be lazy. I live in a very socialist environment, The US Army. It is a society which is closed off to the majority of people (those people have very little understanding of our society), one in which no property is owned, everything is sharred, and you have no real privacy. Of coarse your day is determined ahead of time by the authority, but in this way it is somewhat statisfying. Its like living with a big mommy and daddy. On the down side, we all make about the same amount of money, so no one wants added responsibility, and also, no one wants to do more work than is neccissary (since we get paid the same amount no matter how much work we do). This creates a massive buerocracy in which everything is slow and painful to do. And this is what happens in a society in which everyone is "equal", and is paid "equally".

Now I agree capitalism can just be a thousand tyrants versus one (such as china). But people can only take that kind of abuse for so long. You understand that people want order, they want to submit. Its just that, when these tyrants interupt peoples various escapisms (TV, internet,porn, money...AKA "freedoms"), and no longer do anything but for the betterment of the society themselves, then you have a something like Orwells 1984 (and its 2+2 = 5 shit).

You see the societies with the worst human rights violations, the most suffering are those societies that try to change everything to create a better future for everyone. In the end they just create suffering. And I have no doubt, you and me, would create great suffering if we were rulers of a nation.

The distravution of wealth is has always been a problem, I don't understand why people are living in hovels while Paris hilton gets to be an ass, and respected for it.

Taoism this, Tao that, my dad always says the same thing you do. But I think your right, ethics are based on cultures. Prehaps I eat pork, and that offends others. But one things does hold true (nd bothers me), we have the means to end pointless suffering, such as starvation, poverty, but we will do nothing.

Sure we could escape to the hills and eat worms (I've had SERES training). But then again, I like what society has, like ice cream, and AC.
Reply
:iconobak:
Obak Featured By Owner Aug 28, 2008
I know of what you speak, seven years ago I where drafted into the swedish military forces and spent eleven months training for a war that I hope I'll never see. We didn't see any action so I can not realte to what you are going through in full, but for that part about big Mommy and Daddy, sloth and buerocracy. Well, that I can relate to. The problem as I saw it was that it was that preussian chain of command, whatever you did everyone higher up in rank never paid any attention to any feedback we tried to pass to them. It was this unbridgeable gap between those who laboured out on the fields with raising tents, digging trenches, going on patrols, chopping wood and coocking food and those sitting behind the desks, slept in log cabins and actually having a decent salary, a private car, a house and paid vacation. An old figure of speech comes clearly into mind, "What is right and true for Zeus might not be the same for an oxen". Socialism, as per the deffinition I adhere to is a society without any social stratifications, but the military where full of it.
Still, sometimes when I have trouble sleeping, pondering about my life I sometimes think of that time with fondness, because things where so much simpler back then. Right and wrong where dictated by an almost divine force which workings where completely cloaked for you, but kept one occupied and if there ever was something one didn't understood, it willingly supplied you with a manual for the task at hand.
This goes hand in hand with submission, because one whom fully submits also denies his responsability in the workings of larger things. But without the man at the bottom, the colossus cannot stand, be that the many opressive governments of the world, consumerist companies or the armed agression between states. All these things can be justiefied with morals and ideology but only enacted through submission of the ones doing the footwork.
But stoping to look for the easy answer from the mouths of men, be that preachers, politicians or generals would demand a far greater intake of information and an output of activism. Two things that demands time and money, and since time is money in this society of ours, we find ourselves in a cul del sac.
Reply
:iconmucho-of-arabia:
Mucho-of-Arabia Featured By Owner Aug 28, 2008
You'll have to forgive me, I am very tired, so my intellectual level is low...

Interesting...
So you think that my life is more like a totalitarian dictatorship, then a socialist society?

And I can see what your talking about with the whole prussian thing, and I feel like a prussian right now: That we are an Army with a country (iraq). Versus a country with an army. Or prehaps this quote will say it better "America isn't at war, the Army is".

And I can see that a person would look back on this sort of life fondly. But I don't think I handle much more of this kind of life.

You fail to realise how warlike Americans are. America is probebly the only nationalistic militristic first world nation left in the world. We are also the most backwards.

Anyways, I will say more on this later, but I have a stupid mission tomarow and I need sleep.
Reply
:iconobak:
Obak Featured By Owner Aug 31, 2008
Of all socialist societies I have ever studied, most of them have had that Orwellian element element of "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". I believe he wrote that book as an alegory of the Russian revolution in 1918 and how the ideals of the classless society became corrupted.
It somehow seems that the workings of the human nature is not without a bit of cruel humor, yes I agree with you on the earlier stated point that those trying to do good on a grand scale tend sometimes to act contrary, ending up hurting a lot more people than they intended.
But in the end, we can only judge our own actions based on our current morals. The legacy we leave behind us will one day be reviewed by future gernerations and we will both be scorned and celebrated until finally they fade from common knowledge and into historybooks, and then moral and ethical claims of our actions will remain only as footnotes in the history of our specie.

Following the war in the middle east I have found that most news in Sweden portrays the american soldiers as flawed invaders, fighting for a noble/greedy (depends on the political alignment os the media) cause and the Iraqi/Afghan people are the victims, brutally ravaged by "rotten apples".
In essence, the government of both sides are represented, the civilians of both sides are represented, but there are no one interested in what the soldiers have to say. The man at the bottom, doing the dirty work is either called a terrorist or an invader, ends up taking all the blame when the "flawless" agendas, dictated tens of thousands of miles away, collides with reality and someone looses an eye.
And this I find strange, with an eerie feling down my spine. Please forgive me for prying, but are you allowed to talk to journalists about your experiences and share your oppinions, do you even have a medium through which you can make yourselves heard on a larger scale for the people back home?

Maybe Americans are warlike, more warlike than others even. That cross has been my own ancestors to carry as well, threehundred years ago Swedish armies massacred the population of Polad and northern Germany to the point when songs of their henious deeds still survives in their national athem. I wanted to imply to you that things can change, but it occured to me that this would be tactless as I guess that your major concern over the war are not so much about the moral implications as it is about the war itself, and the hardships it brings. But pardon me, I do not wish to put words in your mouth, merely try to approach your sittuation.
The personal hopes of mine, is that the human sense of empathy is stronger that her lust for material goods, or adherence to blind idealism. Was it not so, then where does the old proverb "The first victim of war is truth" come from?
Reply
Add a Comment: