Political Stability of the 1984verse

[Shroom Man 777]

The Thought Police had trouble bugging London's parkland? Winston and Julie thought they were safe there, just like how they were safe in that seedy prole motel room, and they weren't.

We don't know what the hell the Party is capable of, how their surveillance tech or anything works, how their 'novel-writing machines' work, we don't know anything because the proles and the Outer Party don't. For all we know, their methods and machineries could be really quite advanced. They have the technology to produce "flying fortresses" after all. Whatever those may be.

[Big Orange]

The Thought Police were already on to them by that point so they could assign limited resources on them without wastage and they most likely had native informers amongst the Proles in addition to the few infiltrators. I still doubt the Thought Police had the technology and resources to heavily bug the parks and suburban forests.

The Flying and Floating Fortresses are either complete bullshit fabricated by the Minstry of Truth or highly impractical boondoggles that suck up manpower to build, maintain, and crew them, in addition wasting munitions and steel production.

[Jalinth72]

The Flying and Floating Fortresses are either complete bullshit fabricated by the Minstry of Truth or highly impractical boondoggles that suck up manpower to build, maintain, and crew them, in addition wasting munitions and steel production.

I doubt they are complete bullshit - they need fighting vehicles of some type and why complicate things by saying you are building A when you are building B. As far as being "invincible", they might be simply because of the fighting style. A few slow ultrabattleships that are massively overarmoured fire a few shells at each other and call it a battle. A modern day naval battle just doesn't take place as warfare has basically stabilized into a set style with no real improvements in decades. Go back to the old idea of battleships being the "ruler of the seas" before aircraft carriers rudely interrupted them with unsporting dive bombers and torpedo planes and this level would be my view of where warfare is at. Tanks would exist but at WWII levels, flying bombs would be variations of V1/V2s, etc... Sucking up manpower and resources.

[Norseman]

The over elaborate form of surveillance with the telescreens would inevitably fall apart after a couple of decades, since who watches the watchers? It would be a very, very mindnumbing experience to watch the same apartments 24/7 so there would be huge hours long gaps where the assigned Thought Police officers would be playing chess or something instead.

Indeed they randomly check the apartments rather than watch everyone of them 24/7, only thoughtcriminals get the full 24/7 surveillance, roughly like regular criminals getting staked out.

While there is no proof that the Oceania has a presence in North America, even the British Isle would be hard to have 100% security and surveillance over it with remote mountainous areas in Ireland, Scotland, and Wales big enough to have a fair few dissidents hiding out in secret cottages. The Thought Police had trouble bugging London's parklands alone and 1950s style helicopters are not as wide reaching or anywhere near as perceptive as 21st century helicopters.

The book explicitly states that large wilderness areas are free of surveillance, except perhaps for the odd microphone. So sure a handful of people could hide out in the wilderness, but what would they eat? How long would they last? What good could they do even if the state collapsed?

Newspeak was a tool to degenerate the English language into simple jargon talk, but surely it was mainly for the serf like Proles instead of the elite Inner Party? It seems like Newspeak is another potential seed for IngSoc's destruction if people have limited enough language to not expand and maintain civilization.

No, NewSpeak was explicitly for the party, and only the party. Indeed one of the linguists working on newspeak said, "In thirty years no one will understand a conversation such as the one we're having," "Except...", "Except the proles you mean? They don't count."

[frogcurry]

No, NewSpeak was explicitly for the party, and only the party. Indeed one of the linguists working on newspeak said, "In thirty years no one will understand a conversation such as the one we're having," "Except...", "Except the proles you mean? They don't count."

What the hell? So they try and split the population into two, where the majority can't speak to the ruling class except through translation, and the ruling class has the more limited langauge? I can't see that working, the children of party members in 30 years time wouldn't be able to follow through with the proper thought-control processes for the majority of the population (editing info, observing and spying on them). To do so they would need to learn the old language that the proles use, defeating the whole newspeak plan of restricting thought by opening up their minds to a range of new concepts encompassed in the words they'd be learning to do so.

That system wouldn't be stable at all. If thats truly the way 1984 presents it (been about 15 years since I read it so I'm hazy on some things) then Oceania would fail to survive such a change.

Surely, you'd teach the proles newspeak and only those in the party the more complex language, so that the majority of the population had their mental concepts limited, not your ruling class? It'd be more easily done too. The majority of proles probably wouldn't use words like "obfuscate" so their children would only learn such a word from books, papers or education, all which the party could control. After maybe 2 generations to kill all knowledge of such words in the bulk of the populace, "Obfuscate" could then be used as a double-meaning word, with one meaning told to any prole who hears it, and one meaning for those in the party. That's a much more sensible form of "double-speak" than Orwells...

[NecronLord]

They have the technology to produce "flying fortresses" after all. Whatever those may be.

Occam Strikes: The B-17 Flying Fortress was still in service with the USAF when the novel was written, and is a very famous plane. Is there any evidence Orwell would mean something other than the very-well-known B-17 when he used that phrase?

Of course, I'm not sure where you're getting that particular phrase in the book, anyway. Gutenberg's edition does not contain the phrase 'flying fortress.'

Are you sure you don't mean Floating Fortresses?

[andrewgpaul]

It does, however, contain the phrase "Floating Fortress":

Back in the flat he stepped quickly past the telescreen and sat down at the
table again, still rubbing his neck. The music from the telescreen had
stopped. Instead, a clipped military voice was reading out, with a sort of
brutal relish, a description of the armaments of the new Floating Fortress
which had just been anchored between Iceland and the Faroe Islands.

It seems to be referring to a fixed naval installation - like an armed oil rig - rather than an airborne thing. In fact, there are subsequent references to sailors on them.

[Bilbo]

The over elaborate form of surveillance with the telescreens would inevitably fall apart after a couple of decades, since who watches the watchers? It would be a very, very mindnumbing experience to watch the same apartments 24/7 so there would be huge hours long gaps where the assigned Thought Police officers would be playing chess or something instead.

While there is no proof that the Oceania has a presence in North America, even the British Isle would be hard to have 100% security and surveillance over it with remote mountainous areas in Ireland, Scotland, and Wales big enough to have a fair few dissidents hiding out in secret cottages. The Thought Police had trouble bugging London's parklands alone and 1950s style helicopters are not as wide reaching or anywhere near as perceptive as 21st century helicopters.

Newspeak was a tool to degenerate the English language into simple jargon talk, but surely it was mainly for the serf like Proles instead of the elite Inner Party? It seems like Newspeak is another potential seed for IngSoc's destruction if people have limited enough language to not expand and maintain civilization.

Newspeak existed to make resistance more difficult. How you do discuss a topic if there is litterally no words for what you are talking about. Revolutionaries if they exist would probably horde dictionaries as much as possible to allow for proper communication.

[Samuel]

The over elaborate form of surveillance with the telescreens would inevitably fall apart after a couple of decades, since who watches the watchers? It would be a very, very mindnumbing experience to watch the same apartments 24/7 so there would be huge hours long gaps where the assigned Thought Police officers would be playing chess or something instead.

While there is no proof that the Oceania has a presence in North America, even the British Isle would be hard to have 100% security and surveillance over it with remote mountainous areas in Ireland, Scotland, and Wales big enough to have a fair few dissidents hiding out in secret cottages. The Thought Police had trouble bugging London's parklands alone and 1950s style helicopters are not as wide reaching or anywhere near as perceptive as 21st century helicopters.

Newspeak was a tool to degenerate the English language into simple jargon talk, but surely it was mainly for the serf like Proles instead of the elite Inner Party? It seems like Newspeak is another potential seed for IngSoc's destruction if people have limited enough language to not expand and maintain civilization.

Newspeak existed to make resistance more difficult. How you do discuss a topic if there is litterally no words for what you are talking about. Revolutionaries if they exist would probably horde dictionaries as much as possible to allow for proper communication.

Not really. "Fight big brother". They have words for war after all. Not to mention people can create new words- that is how slang comes to exist.

[Junghalli]

It seems to be referring to a fixed naval installation - like an armed oil rig - rather than an airborne thing. In fact, there are subsequent references to sailors on them.

Personally I've always envisioned it them as something like a battleship the size of a supertanker. It would seem to fit pretty well with the Party's style.

[andrewgpaul]

I'm not sure if it's mobile or not; the two relevant parts of the book are:

"... the Floating Fortresses which guard strategic spots on the sea lanes."

and

"... the fragile movable battleship has given way to the almost unsinkable Floating Fortress"

both of which imply they don't move. It's not that important, I suppose.

[Mayabird]

Not really. "Fight big brother". They have words for war after all. Not to mention people can create new words- that is how slang comes to exist.

The ultimate goal of Newspeak, as mentioned in the Appendix, was to remove the higher thought processes from communication entirely, to keep them from thinking at all. I'm not sure how that would even work or how you could have useful communication without any thought, though. All I can imagine is some people receiving orders that they obey by rote.

[Setzer]

I admit I never thought about the Proles. If the leadership speaks a different language, then communication would be impossible with mature Newspeak. And if they want to maintain their mastery of the proles, the Party would have to keep Newspeak close enough to ordinary english that the two can be understood. I think Orwell mainly meant to convey another point about the malleability of truth, rather then create a foolproof way to make people incapable of thinking disloyal thoughts. Someone could just scream "BB Doubleplusungood" during the 2 Minutes Hate or something like that. Try cutting that down to where crimethink can't be expressed. You don't need to publish a full novel on the rights of man and the immorality of the Party to convey rebellion.

[Junghalli]

And if they want to maintain their mastery of the proles, the Party would have to keep Newspeak close enough to ordinary english that the two can be understood.

Or train their own people to speak the proles' language, but that has the same problem (it exposes them to a manner of communication not subject to Newspeak's careful controls). Like you I find the idea that you could completely control people's thoughts through language fairly absurd anyway.

[Norseman]

The average party member has few or no dealings with the proles, except perhaps to shop on the blackmarket. I dare say that the proles that run the blackmarket would learn enough newspeak to buy and sell, and that the rest would learn enough to understand whatever basic regulations were required. A small class of experts would of course be able to understand the language of the proles, but they would also be able to use doublethink to deny that point.

That at least seems to be Orwell's intent.

[Shroom Man 777]

Are you sure you don't mean Floating Fortresses?

Whoopsie I made a poopsie!

I meant Floating Fortresses. The alliteration, and my mind thinking of some sort of super aerial battleship, made me use the word 'flying'. But they're clearly marine vessels, so darn.

[Patrick Degan]

Are you sure you don't mean Floating Fortresses?

Whoopsie I made a poopsie!

I meant Floating Fortresses. The alliteration, and my mind thinking of some sort of super aerial battleship, made me use the word 'flying'. But they're clearly marine vessels, so darn.

The Floating Fortresses are manmade islands or platforms of some sort. There was discussion along these lines in World War II to construct very large vessels, almost the size of small islands, to use as airbases (look up picrete and HMS Habbakuk). Also, the Brits constructed several offshore forts for coastal defence —blockhouses on oil rig platforms. One of them is still there, off the coast, styling itself the independent country of Sealand. Oceania's Floating Fortresses would be upscaled versions of these concepts.

[Setzer]

I always imagined them as huge grey circle shaped boats, littered with guns like toppings on a pizza. The mention of them being anchored into place might imply that have limited mobility, but be too slow for offensive manuevers. Perhaps they're built in shipyards then towed into place out to sea. After all, what eats up more resources, a huge floating battleship or a huge floating battleship and supertanker sized tugboats to move it into place?

[Patrick Degan]

I always imagined them as huge grey circle shaped boats, littered with guns like toppings on a pizza. The mention of them being anchored into place might imply that have limited mobility, but be too slow for offensive manuevers. Perhaps they're built in shipyards then towed into place out to sea. After all, what eats up more resources, a huge floating battleship or a huge floating battleship and supertanker sized tugboats to move it into place?

It must always be remembered that the purpose of the war is not to actually win, or produce practical weapons, but to waste the products of industrial output. It is therefore not necessarily a flaw that the Floating Fortress is horribly wasteful and impractical; only that considerable expenditure in money, time, and labour is spent building one. It's not necessary that even one of the damn things ever be completed, just so long as it continues to waste materiel which might otherwise produce something of benefit to society in general.

[Setzer]

I remember a previous comment made about floating fortresses. Someone said that warships were great for taking the fight to an enemy, but that would abandon the point of continual warfare, hence the more static floating fortresses.

And I know the point of the wars. I'm saying building gigantic support vessels for gigantic weapons will consume even more labor and materials.

[Alferd Packer]

I admit I never thought about the Proles. If the leadership speaks a different language, then communication would be impossible with mature Newspeak. And if they want to maintain their mastery of the proles, the Party would have to keep Newspeak close enough to ordinary english that the two can be understood. I think Orwell mainly meant to convey another point about the malleability of truth, rather then create a foolproof way to make people incapable of thinking disloyal thoughts. Someone could just scream "BB Doubleplusungood" during the 2 Minutes Hate or something like that. Try cutting that down to where crimethink can't be expressed. You don't need to publish a full novel on the rights of man and the immorality of the Party to convey rebellion.

Newspeak is also engineered to convey the absurdity of rebellious thoughts. Saying "BB is ungood," is likened to a person saying "I am a golden toaster oven." Yes, the sentences can be formed, but in Newspeak, every word has an extremely narrow, precise definition. BB is, by definition, good. Saying he is ungood is contradictory to the definition of BB, thus the sentence is patently and obviously false to a Newspeaker. In that way, crimethink can be expressed, but who cares? Anyone who hears it will automatically dismiss the statements as absurd, false, and, via the principles of doublethink, will have never heard them.

[NecronLord]

Newspeak is also engineered to convey the absurdity of rebellious thoughts. Saying "BB is ungood," is likened to a person saying "I am a golden toaster oven." Yes, the sentences can be formed, but in Newspeak, every word has an extremely narrow, precise definition. BB is, by definition, good. Saying he is ungood is contradictory to the definition of BB, thus the sentence is patently and obviously false to a Newspeaker. In that way, crimethink can be expressed, but who cares? Anyone who hears it will automatically dismiss the statements as absurd, false, and, via the principles of doublethink, will have never heard them.

That may be the intent. Human language doesn't actually work that way (as Orwell no doubt knew; I'm firmly in the camp that says the appendix's in universe, past tense, 'the Party in oceania tried...' phrasing indicates a post-fall-of-IngSoc in-universe writer - the book's about the way oppressive systems work, not about how inevitable thier triumph is) just look at how the word 'bad' was adapted in slang in the 80s/90s. It's quite common for a word to completely change meaning.

[Big Orange]

If you teach the central leadership to have a very narrow focused jargon talk they're going to be more useless than usual in running the government and economy, it would just give the more numerous Proles an advantage to outmaneuver them in a few decades if they still think and communicate with each other somewhat normally.

I can imagine Floating Fortresses to be good over engineered, over garrisonned boondoggles that look impressive out at sea but are of little practical offensive purpose and could actually be floating guard posts to stop people escaping Airstrip One if Airstrip One is all there really is, with no wider global war between Oceania and two other similar superpowers. Goldstein's book really could be Ingsoc propaganda if it claims the rest of the industrialized world is run by totalitarian superstates similar to the Ingsoc regime to spread dispair and show there is supposedly no refuge since going to Europe would be akin to climbing a wall out of one prison yard into another.

There could be airborne versions of Floating Fortresses, but instead of fast high-altitude bomber planes they would more likely be lumbering, armour plated airships bristling with 90mm flak cannons. Ridiculous as real military aircraft but they would make sense in the context of a prolonged 'phoney' war that uses up war material in wasteful ways with the illusion of doing something.

[Setzer]

That might be a possibility for the end of the Party. They were so obsessed with threats from within the ranks that they made themselves incapable of running the country.

[Big Orange]

That might be a possibility for the end of the Party. They were so obsessed with threats from within the ranks that they made themselves incapable of running the country.

The Ingsoc regime is a horribly inbred system that wants to keep every aspect of society in suspended animation and how could they realistically fend off any outside threats if they willfully made Oceania grind to a halt in all fields? If there is an artificial global war according to Goldstein's book, kept under control through extreme, comical arms treaties, that still leaves too many variables if there are two big superstates out there who are more likely to employ more economic and scientific innovations to gain advantage. Even if they are authoritarians similiar to Oceania, they wouldn't necessarily be puritanical and relentlessly invasive enough like Ingsoc to indoctrinate their citizens with a mentally limited language.