Parallels of 1984 to Today

Parallels of 1984 to TodayAndrew WestQ George Orwells novel 1984 describes a dystopian prospective in which the goernment visualises its citizens through the use of unvaried management. What parallels rouse be drawn from this novel and the use of surveillance with our burnish today?A George Orwells 1984 which was first published in 1949 is a fictitious novel that shows what the sphere would be same(p) if the government overextended its powers and leadled every face of its citizens lives through manipulation of language and constant surveillance. Even in its own day the novel was considered visionary and futuristic for its predictions ab step forward the future of surveillance. Even though 1984 is science fiction novel that was written over 60 years ago, it still contains a lot of significance for pot and society as a whole today. Science fiction as a genre has always been about the future and what might come about if events and practices at the time the novel was writte n were allowed to continue and become more prevalent. One of 1984s main themes is that of pure(a) war and how it can be apply to control people through solicitude of the Other and the concept of taking aside freedoms under the guise of keeping its citizens safe. As the watchword was written further 5 years after the end of war world two the fear of a nonher war, let alone a perpetual one would suck up prevalent in the opinions of the people at the time. George Orwell use this fear to create a sort of end game culmination to where these practices might lead. His writings lead to the creation of the term Orwellian which is a word use to describe a totalitarian society. Many of Orwells ideas, especially in regards to totalitarianism and the tendency of modern governments to want to watch and control its people, ideas that were once considered the stuff of science fiction have now in this modern age become so much more than that. while it would be an exaggeration to assure that our world has turned into the totalitarian stir out line of reasoningd in the book, we can draw many parallels between surveillance practices used in the novel and ones that atomic number 18 used today.9/11 brought to the surface and accelerated a number of surveillance trends that had been developing lightly and largely un noniced for previous decades(Lyon, D, (2003) Surveillance after 9/11) by and by the events of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the world trade centre, Americas surveillance practices changed dramatically. With the habitual populace fearing a nonher terrorist attack, the American government was able to use the peoples fear to pass a large number of draconian practice of laws that increased spy on American citizens under the illusion of keeping them safe. The most detrimental of these laws was the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was a law passed by the linked States Congress on October 26, 2001, at the request of then President George scrub in response to t he terrorist acts of September 11. The law gave controversial new powers to the justness Department in terms of domestic and international surveillance of American citizens and anyone else within its jurisdiction (Its jurisdiction would grow and change over the years). concord to the main sponsors of the law, the Patriot Act was necessary to address the growing business of terrorism within the US borders and the need to apprehend and prosecute them in the beginning they acted. Many Opponents of the Act, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union, say that the Act was far too bulky and would unnecessarily endanger hiding, well-bred liberties and discourage free speech. Among the powers that the Act grants are the ability of the government to legitimately tap telephone lines and the ability to intercept any Internet get wind including emails and private messages that they wanted. Theoretically this meant that the government had the abil ity to intercept any selective information that they considered relevant to an on release criminal investigation which was a much commence standard than the previous legal guidelines which stated that a crime had to have been committed before data dig is allowed to take place. The very broad guidelines of the Act allowed the government to apply surveillance to the metadata of all American citizens and not just the data of suspected terrorists. In 2007 the NSA (National Security Agency) launched the PRISM schedule which was a clandestine anti-terrorism mass electronic surveillance data mining program. This program allowed the NSA toThese events are strikingly similar to events contained in 1984. In the book the government of Oceania uses the threat of war to pass restrictive laws and abolish freedoms so that the people are easier to control. One of the key elements of 1984 is the term doublethink which is defined as the power to hold two completely contradictory beliefs in ones mi nd simultaneously, and accept both of them. If we look at the use of language used in the name of the law, The Patriot Act, we can see a complete example of this. The use of the word Patriot meaning that this law is expressing patriotism and values that are good for America and if you dont contain with everything the government is doing then you hate America and want the terrorists to win. But this law does not express the values that America was founded upon (which are freedom and casualness for all), in fact the opposite is true as it greatly restricts them. exploitation these laws the government of Oceania slowly began to invade the privacy of its citizens more and more until they began to control every facet of their lives. Constant surveillance and thought crimes became the normalcy, with the government observe its citizens through the use of tele-screens within the persons home so as to quash any rebellious thoughts.So in induction what parallels can be draw between the book 1984 and the surveillance practices of today. As I previously stated our world is much polar than the dictatorial totalitarian state described in the book however plainly because the government hasnt been given the opportunity. Is the government collecting your Metadata and then use it to quash any rebellion or speech against them any different than how the government controls its citizens in 1984. What about allowing corporations to use our data to track what we are doing online so they can dish out it to the government or us it to sell us stuff, is this any different than Big brother is watching you. looking at past and current surveillance practices by the government we can conclude that if given the chance the government would turn the world into that of 1984 but the reason that hasnt quite come to pass is because we have fought against the restrictive acts of the government to try to curtail our freedoms but this is not enough. We cannot stand ideally by while they slowly take away every outlast freedom we have, our indifference is what the governments wants. They want us to slowly give away our privacy ever so gradually, sometimes willingly like with accessible media sites like Facebook and other times forcible without out knowledge like with the NSA spying program. Governments and corporations want to make no reasonable expectation of privacy the new norm because it makes it easier to control and manipulate. We have to draw a line in the sand and say that we dont want to be spied upon when we are on line because if we continue to remain indifferent to what is going on with regards current surveillance practices then we will have only ourselves to blame.First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Trade Unionist.Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.Then they came for me and on that point was no one left to speak for me.(Niemller, M, (1950), Poem about the Holocaust)Joe Austin, 2010. spring chicken nuanceAvailable athttp//www.faqs.org/childhood/Wh-Z-and-other-topics/Youth-Culture.htmlAccessed November 10th 2013Fornas, J., 1995. Youth Culture in Late Modernity.London Sage Publication Ltd.1