Skip to main content

Fake Communism and WWII Parallels

 Oceania is clearly a Communist country. In chapters 7-8 there was a strong emphasis on community, with Winston mentioning how risky it was to even take a walk alone because it suggests individuality. However, even with all of the pro-community messaging, 85% of the population lives in slums. The proles seem to be the working class from the pre-revolution world, and are allowed to lead somewhat normal lives as long as they do their jobs. These seems strange to me because Oceania flaunts itself as the perfect communist society, but the proles are on a distinct tier that makes class divides significantly harsher in Oceania than in capitalist society.

I'm not going to pretend like class mobility is very legitimate in our modern society - it's extraordinarily difficult to alter your financial situation so significantly. However, there is at least the prospect of it happening - in Oceania, the divide between the proles and the Party members is impassable. The proles are treated like a different species, which is how the Party justifies their treatment. I can't help but see parallels to Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940s in this justification, as the Nazis also argued that Jews were not really humans. To many, this dehumanization made it feel okay to discriminate against, isolate, and eventually murder Jews. Clearly the proles have more autonomy, space, and access to resources than Jews did in Nazi Germany. However, there are many aspects of this book that are influenced by WWII and I think that the divide between Party members and proles is one of them.

What other details have you noticed in 1984 so far that seem to have been influenced by WWII?

Comments

  1. Anya11 February 2021 at 07:36

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anya11 February 2021 at 07:41

      One thing I'll point out that seems influenced by World War II is the way the government riles up the citizens of Oceania against its foreign enemies. The Party does not view their enemies as individuals, but rather a single dehumanized entity that must be met with extreme hatred. The tactics they use to brainwash the people into sharing this hatred for their enemies, such as brainwashing, (e.g. Two Minutes Hate) are reminiscent of the tactics that the Nazi Party used to rile people up against its enemies.

      Delete
  2. L. Moffitt11 February 2021 at 07:38

    Good post. The fact that the scapegoated enemy is Goldstein, a Jew, suggests ties to Nazi Germany as well.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Will the Party lose steam?

In terms of optimistic book passages, I can't say this one is at the top of my list. Basically what we learned from chapters III-V of Part Three is that the Party will rule the world for all of eternity, and there is no situation in which they will not succeed. Winston protests when O'Brien tells him this, arguing that the Party will self-destruct at some point, or at least some spiritual force in the universe will prevent the eternal rule of the Party. However, O'Brien just mocks Winston. O'Brien makes a very convincing case for the Party, but there is one potential loophole that could topple the Party - decreasing devotion to the cause.  In revolutions, the most passionate generation is the one that actually revolts (obviously). In 1984 , that is the group that is currently running the Party. However, as authoritarian regimes pass down through the generations, this revolutionary fervor dies down, and those in power either loosen their grip enough to destabilize themse...
11 comments
Read more

Isolating the variable: setting in The Plague

Today in class, we talked a lot about how Camus establishes the setting for The Plague . To be honest, a lot of the first section of this book blended together for me - the middle-class French men with unmemorable names, the rats (and then humans) gruesomely dying in the streets, the conversations among medical professionals - many of the finer details are difficult for me to recall. However, the description of Oran stuck with me. The narrator describes one of the blandest and ugliest towns I have ever imagined, with not very nice humans living in it.  At first, I thought it was strange that Camus had selected such a boring setting for his book. Then I realized how intentional it was, and how important. Camus is using the story of the plague as a medium through which to analyze fascism and the Nazis. That is his primary focus, and in order to fully focus on the plague he needs to eliminate all distractions (e.g. a noteworthy setting). He is isolating the variable by placing it in a...
9 comments
Read more

Billy's psychological baggage

Arguably the most defining line of Slaughterhouse-Five is "so it goes". Billy Pilgrim uses this phrase freely throughout the novel, usually in the context of something which would normally be seen as tragic or sickening. The Tralfamadorians use it to remind themselves that time isn't linear, so they shouldn't feel sad or upset when bad things happen. However, Billy tends to use "so it goes" more dismissively, using it to push his problems and traumatic experiences aside. This toxic adaptation of Tralfamadorian culture hurts Billy, as it prevents him from reflecting on and working out his wartime trauma.  From the beginning of the book, it's pretty clear that Billy has some level of psychological damage from the war. He shows recurring symptoms of PTSD, and his uncontrollable time travel could easily be interpreted as traumatic flashbacks. Every time Billy is haunted by his memories of the war, he pushes them away by simply stating, "so it goes...
9 comments
Read more