Political Stability of the 1984verse

[Aranfan]

So I recently picked up the Political Horror story that is 1984. And I want to know SD.net's opinion on how stable the political position of Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia are. What I mean is: in the absence of an OCP (Outside Context Problem, like an alien invasion) how sustainable is the system?

[Pablo Sanchez]

There actually isn't any indication in the book that the war is going on as described, and the descriptions of the political system derive entirely from Goldstein's book, which was revealed to be black propaganda. What I got out of it, personally, is that the entire world was controlled by the party but they maintained the pretense of a never-ending war to make their power secure. But this is only one reading, part of the point of the text is that there is actually no way to know or prove what is really going on, because the Party's power is based on the subjectivity of truth. In the end it doesn't matter what the truth is, because the end result is the same. Orwell obviously conceived of the 1984 social system as being permanent and unshakable, so I would say that either way they are fully sustainable.

[Stark]

Even if the war was going on as described, which is possible, there's nowhere near enough statistical or demographic data to determine if it can be maintained. Everyone certainly thinks so, and it's been doing so for 60+ years already, so insofar as fucked up fascist revolutions made Orwell sad I'd go with 'maybe'.

[Samuel]

The appendix suggests it falls- it is written with Newspeak being something in the past.

The society itself isn't stable- it has extremely poor ability to react to change. What happens when they run out of one resource or another? Or the thought police miss an area and independant enclaves get set up? Or the power goes out for days? Or...

[Patrick Degan]

The war, and that civilisation's stability, ends when resources start drying up. And since the pursuit of science and any form of intellectual inquiry has been completely dead-ended, the collapse will be a very ugly one. Mere question of time.

[Samuel]

The war, and that civilisation's stability, ends when resources start drying up. And since the pursuit of science and any form of intellectual inquiry has been completely dead-ended, the collapse will be a very ugly one. Mere question of time.

It goes even faster whn you realize that large portions of the planet are conflict zones and hence won't be fully exploited- oil from the Middle East for example. After all, the retreating army can just burn the wells. The lack of civilian usage is offset by the insane spead the armed forces would go through it.

[Stark]

That's only if you assume there's an actual war, which is not necessary, certainly not at a large scale.

[Coyote]

Or that the war is "full-time/hot". I got the impression that "war" at that point was really more like a Cold War/Middle East thing, where it was mostly tension & harsh language with the occasional minor missile strike used as a sort of exclamation point to show that the other side meant business.

[Stark]

Yeah absolutely; even if shit like the flying fortresses actually exist (and they're not just shelling themselves occassionally to keep up the tension) there's no reason why it'd be a WW2-style total war thing all the time. The book expressly states that it's throttled to control society, not that they're actually at war or interested in conquering/winning/etc.

[TC Pilot]

The only way the political systems could collapse is through an exhaustion of resources. One of the things 1984 is trying to say is that, with 'modern' production technology, it is finally possible for things like poverty and hunger to be eradicated. That is why there is supposedly an endless war, in order to waste excess industrial capacity.

It is worth noting, however, that the 'war' as Goldstein's describes it is simply impossible: with only three factions, there is just no way all three factions can be at war with one and allied with another. So it is possible a combined front might overcome a single adversary, given time and luck. But then, it's equally possible that there is no war at all, or that Oceania doesn't even exist.

It's a brilliant book, really.

[Stark]

Yeah absolutely; it's really the ultimate extrapolation of his experiences in Spain I guess. I remember in my teens reading the book and being unable to contrive a method for anyone to change the system from within and no way anyone without can have any power; a powerful novel.

[Samuel]

Crap, could the system survive the collapse of resources? I just realized that even if they run out of nonrenewable resources they can always just have the proles scavange off garbage.

They don't need high tech civilization- they can have their method of oppression work off of alot lower tech. Then they don't need to have so much dedicated to war production as survival will be a bigger concern and a bigger lever.

Thanks for making me think about this and depressing me.

[Patrick Degan]

Crap, could the system survive the collapse of resources? I just realized that even if they run out of nonrenewable resources they can always just have the proles scavange off garbage.

They don't need high tech civilization- they can have their method of oppression work off of alot lower tech. Then they don't need to have so much dedicated to war production as survival will be a bigger concern and a bigger lever.

Thanks for making me think about this and depressing me.

One problem is that the society depicted in 1984 depends upon mass communications and mass surveillance to maintain control over the populace. If things get down to where power cuts start being implemented, and you have periods when the telescreens aren't transmitting or receiving, if fuel shortages restrict the flights of Thought Police helicopters patrolling the cities, that control is weakened. If food shortages start becoming chronic (and there's already heavy rationing as it is), the possibility of revolution starts to lurk around the corner. Unless Oceania degenerates into a state like current-day Zimbabwe, of course. The Party may be able to maintain control for a time, but the whole thing's got to come crashing down eventually.

[Aranfan]

If food shortages start becoming chronic (and there's already heavy rationing as it is), the possibility of revolution starts to lurk around the corner.

You forget, Big Brother just increased the Chocolate Ration to 20 grams a week. (Up from 30.)

[Shroom Man 777]

Regimes can survive through even the worst resource shortages. Look at North Korea. Who knows what is going on in that mad state, where information is tightly controlled and the populace's knowledge of the outer world is dubious at best, where they are probably fed propaganda to make them believe that they are in a perpetual war against other world powers, etcetera etcetera.

For all we know, "Oceania" could just be a totalitarian Britain that's in a similar situation as North Korea is today, with neighboring countries (like France or something) blockading it with a de-militarized zone and having a perpetual state of cold war with it, like how the Koreas are basically just having a half-century long ceasefire, and stuff.

Really, the fact that the Party controls the reality experienced by the oppressed masses means that no one can be sure of anything, and that the only certainty there is in their world is the Party. They win.

When Kim Jong Il screams, there are storms!

[Gandalf]

If food shortages start becoming chronic (and there's already heavy rationing as it is), the possibility of revolution starts to lurk around the corner.

You forget, Big Brother just increased the Chocolate Ration to 20 grams a week. (Up from 30.)

They can't keep that up forever. There is a bare minimum that people can take. Though the choco ration (and other rations) could oscillate between twenty and thirty grams as needed, there's still going to be a lower limit.

The party members may be brainwashed, but if there is hope, it lies in the proles. They're the ones in the factories and farms working the machines of Oceania. When they can't get their vices, they'll start to get cranky. Winston mentioned a small riot relating to a lack of saucepans, so placative item shortages would cause more disturbances.

[Patrick Degan]

Regimes can survive through even the worst resource shortages. Look at North Korea. Who knows what is going on in that mad state, where information is tightly controlled and the populace's knowledge of the outer world is dubious at best, where they are probably fed propaganda to make them believe that they are in a perpetual war against other world powers, etcetera etcetera.

For all we know, "Oceania" could just be a totalitarian Britain that's in a similar situation as North Korea is today, with neighboring countries (like France or something) blockading it with a de-militarized zone and having a perpetual state of cold war with it, like how the Koreas are basically just having a half-century long ceasefire, and stuff.

Really, the fact that the Party controls the reality experienced by the oppressed masses means that no one can be sure of anything, and that the only certainty there is in their world is the Party. They win.

When Kim Jong Il screams, there are storms!

Yes, but how long can they keep that up? It certainly won't be forever, because eventually even the bare minimum of resources has to run out. Worse comes to worst, disease and malnutrition start running rampant amongst the general population. The Party may be able to maintain itself for a time, but eventually, conditions will deterioriate to the point where effective control will become impossible.

As I said, it's a mere question of time —not if the regime will collapse but when.

[Shroom Man 777]

Their situation is infinitely better than North Korea, though. Oceania is much bigger and has more resources, more arable land, more industry, etc. If any of that stuff in the book can be believed, at least. So, if Norkland can last fifty years, then Oceania can probably last a century.

Wasn't it mentioned that the Party was deliberately making things scarce and shitty and wartime-like? If that's true, then maybe they know that they won't last long if their resources are running out, so they might actually be conserving and stockpiling that stuff in preparation for that eventuality.


Aside from resources, another factor in the regime's collapse could be the leadership of the Party. The original Big Brother, if he really existed, and his fellows including Winston's torturer in Room 101, are aware of the nature of what they're doing, they know that they are deliberately manipulating subjective reality and all that. But eventually they will grow old and they will die, and if their replacements aren't as aware of the elaborate deceptions as they are, if the next generation of rulers actually buy into the Kool Aid, then eventually the system will crap up since everything relies on a really elaborate deception. If the guys on top end up believing their own lies, then they'll be screwed.

[Xon]

If any of that stuff in the book can be believed, at least.

This is something which I can not get my head around, people believing the Party. I have seen people seriously 'argue' that Oceania is actually to be believed when they describe they are in a state of war spanning the entire planet burning resources. With actual nuclear weapons and large standing armies.

It boggles the mind.

[Patrick Degan]

Aside from resources, another factor in the regime's collapse could be the leadership of the Party. The original Big Brother, if he really existed, and his fellows including Winston's torturer in Room 101, are aware of the nature of what they're doing, they know that they are deliberately manipulating subjective reality and all that. But eventually they will grow old and they will die, and if their replacements aren't as aware of the elaborate deceptions as they are, if the next generation of rulers actually buy into the Kool Aid, then eventually the system will crap up since everything relies on a really elaborate deception. If the guys on top end up believing their own lies, then they'll be screwed.

We can presume that the Party has already had to deal with this eventuality at least once, since Oceania's existence as a distinct state appears to date from the late 1940s/early 1950s, presumably after a post-World War II atomic exchange, so the next generation of leadership would already be starting to take its place. In Goldstein's book, I think, it's mentioned that the Party oligarchy is an adaptive organisation like the Catholic Church and would recruit its eventual successors from the ranks of the Outer Party if it had to, and adjust their procedures as required to meet whatever situation they're facing (as far as able, of course). I would presume that the Inner Party leadership are made aware of the basic situation in regards to resources when they ascend to positions of power in that system. But, in accordance with the principles of Doublethink, they are perfectly capable of believing that Oceania's material wealth is endless at the same time as they grapple with their scarcity problems. This does not alter the physical situation Oceania faces, however. It merely makes the timeframe for eventual collapse uncertain.

[Setzer]

It might be they're only utilizing a small amount of the resources within their territory, but they also have to have some sort of job for everyone. Even unemployables like Winston Smith in the epilogue had jobs, albeit they were pointless bureaucratic time wasters. So while not all Oceanians are employed in useful labor like agriculture or manufacturing, they pretty much all have jobs. And all these jobs consume resources, whether they're actually feeding cities or just mining ores to be made into rocket bombs. The idea of Oceanian industry is consumption, not efficiency. It's like that one commercial where this guy builds a lathe to whittle a tree trunk down to a single ornate toothpick. Regardless of the end product, the tree is still gone.

[NeoGoomba]

I doubt the Inner Party will have a lack of members. I believe O'Brien even mentions that the Inner Party has no problem recruiting members from the Proles if they had the proper exam results (there was some exam or series of exams that all citizens took at the age of 16, regardless of class), so the Inner Party seems to be looking to bolster its ranks from anyone with a proper mindset, and with ALL of its populace to draw on, they will have plenty of human resources.

[Junghalli]

If any of that stuff in the book can be believed, at least.

This is something which I can not get my head around, people believing the Party. I have seen people seriously 'argue' that Oceania is actually to be believed when they describe they are in a state of war spanning the entire planet burning resources. With actual nuclear weapons and large standing armies.

Given the economic rationale behind the war (to waste resources and create poverty), large standing armies and giant pitched battles make sense. A perpetual WWI type conflict would be perfect for soaking up tons of resources while permitting a stable political situation (it's mentioned they don't use the nukes they're stockpiling, undoubtedly for precisely this reason: somebody might win an actual total war, and at any rate the massive infrastructure disruption would undermine the Party's control).

The main problem I could see with 1984's political system is that it's too reliant on a sort of "enlightened" (I use the term loosely) self-interest on the part of the rulers. If they get too greedy (for instance, if they actually get serious about wanting to destroy their enemies), it will undermine the delicate system that IngSoc relies on for its long-term stability. Given how short-sighted humans naturally tend to be, I think sooner or later you'd be bound to get a short-sighted ruler who would do stuff that would upset the apple cart. Eventually realistically I think the system would probably devolve into "merely" a harsh autocracy, of the sort most historical human governments have been.

Also, as has already been pointed out, its emphasis on will over matter might make it ill-adapted to handling a genuine crisis, like Peak Oil, which will eventually hit their world just like it will ours. Sure, they could theoretically handle something like that, but their will over matter philosophy strikes me as something that would be very conducive to people just sticking their heads in the sand. It's much easier to just say that you're building tons of nuclear reactors and converting your army's hummers to run off fry grease than actually do it. Plus there's their profoundly uninnovative culture, which will prevent a lot of the technologies that could be used to solve a crisis from being developed.

[Samuel]

I doubt the Inner Party will have a lack of members. I believe O'Brien even mentions that the Inner Party has no problem recruiting members from the Proles if they had the proper exam results (there was some exam or series of exams that all citizens took at the age of 16, regardless of class), so the Inner Party seems to be looking to bolster its ranks from anyone with a proper mindset, and with ALL of its populace to draw on, they will have plenty of human resources.

No, they simply kill ambitious and smart proles- they don't take them into the structure.

[Bilbo]

I doubt the Inner Party will have a lack of members. I believe O'Brien even mentions that the Inner Party has no problem recruiting members from the Proles if they had the proper exam results (there was some exam or series of exams that all citizens took at the age of 16, regardless of class), so the Inner Party seems to be looking to bolster its ranks from anyone with a proper mindset, and with ALL of its populace to draw on, they will have plenty of human resources.

No, they simply kill ambitious and smart proles- they don't take them into the structure.

Or they just say that while taking them to a completley different part of Oceania to be trained and added to the Inner Party.