Weird, the very same image I used on the other posts ended up rotated 90 degrees in the Word Press library. I have no idea why or how because I didn’t even take the photo in that orientation nor did I edit it. I tried to rotate it in Word Press but it said that it couldn’t access the meta data and therefore edit. The only thing that I can see different is that the first three embeds were done at once and this one was two weeks later. Anyway, keep an eye out for technical gremlins.
This chapter has Farmer Jones and his buddies riling up each other to take back the farm. The humans march on the farm and “The Battle of Cowshed” ensues. Despite having weapons and gumption, the animals beat back the humans. There is one casualty, a sheep is shot and killed by Jones. This whole chain of events inspires and solidifies the animals to their cause and their dedication to it.
In this short chapter, what is being laid out is the celebration of war and the resulting ceremony. I think that these events are crafted into propaganda as unifiers toward the entity. Said another way “aren’t we so proud that we defeated our enemy”. To a small degree, the United States does this but then other countries like North Korea have built a calendar out of it.
Military celebration seems to be a central theme that autocratic regimes have adopted probably because they don’t have much else to celebrate. I think it is because they desperately try to shed other traditional trappings of culture and religion in efforts to solidify power absolutely.
The title “Animal Hero, First Class” is created and bestowed to the fallen sheep. Once again, eliminate old beliefs and build new ones. A hero that dies for the cause becomes a martyr in the situation. By awarding a title, this act helps legitimize the leaders of the movement.
Honestly, I can’t think of one actual US holiday that is based on a military victory. I am familiar with what is called VE day or Victory in Europe Day which is a named day on the calendar, but not a holiday. There may be celebrations or events in combination with the date, but it has limited recognition.
There are two actual holidays that have military origins. This would be Memorial day which was originally the ending date of Battle of Antietam in the Civil War and Veterans day which was originally Armistice Day or the ending of World War I. I would say in either case, they do not celebrate a victory.
This is not to say that we are better than Animal Farm, but it is a different kind of spirit. For those that actually participate in the American ceremonies, I would say that they lack the exuberance of celebration in favor of a somber remembrance. That being said, celebrating victory, service or sacrifice fills the same role, solidification of the might of the nation.
End Your Programming Routine: Orwell is a complicated guy. I thought that he had spent time in the USSR, but upon further research I was wrong. Apparently his politics were leftist however his anti-communist business associates were what inspired him to write Animal Farm. On one hand, I don’t see the two going together. But on the other, people involved in politics and business are all about getting theirs. Create laws that eliminate competition no matter what side of the dichotomy you are on.
This is week three and things are progressing pretty much the way that history has taught us. More on that later but maybe this book isn’t as revolutionary as it was when it was written in 1945. Because I grew up in the 1980s, there was a lot of talk/movies/propaganda about how people thought the USSR was, maybe not how it actually was. I would say that it was pretty hard to imagine from the outside what life was actually like under the Soviets in 1982.
We all know the arc, trajectory and result of the hard, Marxist movements. Instead, I want to focus more on movements themselves rather than one specific one because I think that they share the same similarities as the conclusion of the USSR. Now to the the book.
The chapter starts out with the animal doing harvest. It was performed with exuberance and better than normal results. I think that this is a pretty normal situation. Participants are excited to be part of something. There are lots of hands for work. The momentum carries the animals not just on an emotional high of the task but a phyiscal high of the results, more hay put away.
For some, the exuberance dies rather quickly. I am speculating that for those individuals, they were not really committed to the cause in the first place. It was more likely that that they were ignorant of the goals and aims and the excitement of newness to everyone was the result of initial commitment. Some animals are starting to shirk their equal contribution i.e. the cat.
As the movement matures, changes in the fire and brimstone of the core values sometimes change. Sometimes they are refined but other times they are edited to retain adherence to the group. In this case, it was stated that not all the animals could read or understand the seven commandments. As a result they were simplified to to one “Two legs bad, four legs good”.
As the pigs start to take ownership of the leadership roles, some interesting things start happening. For instance, Snowball is sequestering all of the offspring for ‘education’. It is not just that, but the pigs are carving out special exemptions for themselves, because they can and no other animal realizes what is happening.
The United States has been full of movements. Religious utopias, racial and women’s rights, temperance, labor and political to name a few. In my opinion anyway, movements either have an endpoint or they are point in time. What I mean by that is that Movements that are results oriented, like temperance or women’s suffrage I would say were successful because the had specific, targeted outcomes. Things like the ‘Tea Party Movement’ of 2009-2012 failed because they had unrealistic, non-measurable outcomes.
There is one more concept to take in with this. That is The Iron Law of Bureaucracy. There are those within any organization (including movements) that committed to the cause and those that are committed to the organization. Tacitly, when an individual is committed to the organization, they start making decisions on what is best for the organization and not necessary accomplishing the mission. I think that the pigs belong to the second group.
End Your Programming Routine: I will let that sink in. What we have in US politics is people committed to the organization. To make it worse, most legislation or regulation is wrapped up in paper that tries to make it look like what is being proposed is for the mission. Why else would we have 80 year old senators? Is that what is best for representing the state or is that what is best senator? I really can’t imagine working sixteen hours a day six to seven days a week at that age when the average life span is less than that.
And in this corner coming in at Week 2, we have the bantamweight champion of the dystopian fiction universe, Animal Farm. There is still a lot of fight left in it as we have only seen one chapter. Animal Farm came out swinging with the Animal’s grievances against the human population. They landed some solid hits with accusations of starvation and abuse. This chapter they are going to put their fight plan into action but I think the humans are going on the ropes before it is all over.
Kind of silly of me but, I heard it in my head when I sat down to write. I hope that I can always laugh at myself and take some chances. Life is too short to be stiff and serious all the time.
All chapters of this book are short, so I am not going to keep repeating that. But as a synopsis of the chapter we have the animals chase out the Jones. Manor Farm is renamed Animal farm. The new leaders of the movement are the pigs Snowball and Napoleon. They come up with seven rules to represent the new movement. They are as follows.
Whatever goes on two legs is an enemy
Whatever goes on four legs, or wings is a friend
No animals will wear clothes
No animal shall sleep in a bed
No animal shall drink alcohol
No animal shall kill another animal
All animals are equal
While this is seven specific rules, another word for that is a core values. Each successful movement is guided by things such as core values. Values differ from beliefs as values drive internal behavior as well as being outwardly visible. They help devise a code of conduct for behavior as well as provide a framework for evaluation when specific rules do not exist.
While not surprising, you could probably describe these values as anti-human. This type of behavior is sometimes described by the boomerang effect. Briefly, that means that when people get tired of a long period of one set of ideas or operating parameters, they often double down on on going the opposite direction in policy and attitude. The periodic swings in the US House of Representatives is a good representation of this.
I thing that it also goes without saying that movements are judged by their core values or more specifically adherence to. I think most people consider the legitimacy or sincerity of all members particularly leaders when they meet and live their core values. How many times are Christians chastised for not living up to values? Ironically, most non-believers have no concept of sin and fallibility. Nevertheless, it is an example that most people can relate to.
It is a little early to say how this will go, the animals just got started running their own farm. Will they all get it? Will they all buy in? Will they truly be equal? I think that we have enough human data to answer the question, but will the animals be any different?
End Your Programing Routine: Buying into core values are the first step to programming. Once the premises have been accepted, many decisions are boiled down to litmus tests. “Is this situation good” is compare to established criteria within your values and there is really very little additional judgement is involved because the outcome has already be predetermined.
We have a new book this week, George Orwell’s “Animal Farm”. I know that this is a short book and originally I was thinking that I was going to cover it in four sessions. Once I started reading, it became very apparent that each chapter is it’s own subject. Or said another way, I don’t think that chapter one has that much to do with chapter 3 in terms of concepts. They are interrelated but they are also very standalone.
Unlike 1984, we do know from Orwell (Blair) that this was deliberately written as a precautionary warning against Communism. It’s a cutesy little tale some might call a parable or a story with point. This isn’t my first time through the book, I read it in 2019. But, it definitely fits into my Friday genre.
It is no small consequence that Orwell picked the pig to be the instigator. They are among the smarter domesticated animals and they have a penchant for breaking the rules. In farm terms, that means destroy things, escape, etc. They can be brutal, killing other animals that they perceive to be weak. And finally, if they truly do escape they become feral within a generation.
Major, the pig had a dream. He dreamt that there was a place that the animals were in control of production and therefore their lives. The animals would band together and work in lock stock together to perform all the tasks that they have been forced to do throughout their lives.
Along with working toward the common goals, they would also reject all things that are seen as human. These would be things like wearing clothes, sleeping in beds living in houses, using money, drinking/smoking, use money or trade. Major died a few days after revealing his idea. I believe that Major was a caricature of Lenin.
It is perfectly natural for beings to want to own their own production. The opposite of that is actually defined as slavery. I think that is is also natural for an oppressed group to reject all trappings of their oppressors. It’s either that or the trappings become appropriated.
As with all ideas, they are just that. When attempted to be put into practice, it is often times more complicated that it would be seem. In addition to that, when things are large it can take more than a lifetime to come to fruition. When others assume the tasks, they may not take them in the same direction as the visionary intended.
I was reading about Lenin and while he was no Stalin, he certainly was not afraid to make some heads roll. It would seem like his galvanization into the ways of Marx was the execution of an older brother in 1887. But in reading about his first government apparently he was not the most radical. I had never realized that the Bolsheviks were not one and the same as Lenin. They wanted total conversion of all private assets to be redistributed while Lenin was a more reserved socialist.
My point with all of this is that a Visionary sets the path and the tone. But, no one lives forever and once that power has transitioned, the vision will be molded or adapted to the person succeeding. Therefore, the manifestation of the original vision may be far from what the founder intended.
End Your Programming Routine: I will take this week by week. As it stands, this will be a ten week series, one per chapter. But if it makes sense, I will combine chapters in the course of this study. This chapter was only an introduction. The lesson this week is a revolutionary has an idea of something different than what is. It’s not hard to persuade a population that understands and identifies with the benefits of the revolution.
To understand Fahrenheit 451 is to understand the backstory to how it was written. Of course, none of this is written in the book but it was part of mine as an appendix. Fahrenheit 451 is an evolution and combination of several short stories and an ongoing effort to get published. Unlike Orwell, Bradbury was alive for many decades after it’s publishing and indeed had some words to say in confirmation of what I am about to write.
The inspiration for the story came from a book called “Darkness at Noon” by Arthur Koestler. This is not a book that I have read or am familiar with, but the description seems worthy of going on the reading list especially if it inspired Bradbury. It is a story of persecution in a totalitarian regime. It was at that time that Bradbury decided that science fiction was the genre of literature the permitted the most leeway for his beliefs and story. All that being said, I don’t think that this was a protest story as much as it was a warning.
Though not formally educated, you could probably say that Bradbury had a desire to write. One of the precursor stories to Fahrenheit 451 was a short story called “The Pedestrian”. Essentially, this was based on an encounter with police that Bradbury thought he was wrongfully accused. This interaction pissed him off enough to write a story about it.
Later, Bradbury developed another short story titled “The Fireman” as a science fiction magazine submission. This was the true basis of Fahrenheit 451 with the portions of “The Pedestrian” weaved in. That part of the story was Montag’s interaction with Clarisse whereas most of the rest of it was “The Fireman”. This was all done in an attempt to make a book length story for publishing.
On an interesting note, as Bradbury’s work got critical acclaim it began to be read in schools in the 1960s. The publishers took it upon themselves to sanitize the book from the largest adult themes such as language unbeknownst to Bradbury. It was some years before it was brought to his attention and Bradbury immediately demanded that be stopped, which they did. I think that you can say that he walked the walk.
In the grand scheme of things, Bradbury was no slouch. He could read the tea leaves on the way things were going and the subject manner of banning books was no coincidence. With the age of new media coming, and I mean TV he could anticipate that books being passed over. The reason the subject matter was banning books was because it was more palatable considering TV was quickly surpassing reading for entertainment. It was also Bradbury’s belief (and mine) that there was more to lose banning them. You see, with books you have to think about what is being said and interpret what is happening. Thinking is what makes them “dangerous”.
I realize that this has been a little different than some of my other wrap-ups because I have a lot of information on and from Bradbury himself. With that, I think I will leave the analysis there. This is a short book that can easily be read in a couple sessions. The story is easy to follow and I think that it is approachable science fiction. In today’s world, it doesn’t even seem too far out there. That was probably different when it was written in the 1950s.
You can probably tell from my complimentary tone that I hold a high opinion of the book. I think a lot of factors come together between the story, the length and the approachability to make that happen. If I had one criticism, I would say that the ending was a little unbelievable. I am not totally convinced that after multiple nuclear detonations that it would be possible to go back to the city. I imagine that the radiation and fallout would be off the charts.
But, in Bradbury’s defense the first nuclear bomb was tested in 1952 which was one year before the book was published. We know so much more about the effects of nuclear detonation now the at that time. Plus, we have the benefit of almost instantaneous and comprehensive information with the internet. I am sure his depiction of nuclear war was was colored by the perception what the public thought about war at the time with the information that was available.
End Your Programming Routine: The warning that I am referring to in the first paragraph is the warning about taking in your surroundings or some people use the phrase being in the moment, that is living. With your earbuds in, driving around at 200mph to get home and watch TV people are losing touch with reality. I feel like that is just as relevant today as it was in 1953. And maybe even a little more so as we approach that era of life in a four-screen environment.
Sometimes I get lazy and put up books that I have read because it is convenient not necessarily because I thought that it was interesting. This is not one of those times, I was fascinated with the concept from the title through the end.
A History of the World in 6 Glasses by Tom Standage proposes a world view of history through six different drinks. I don’t think I am giving away too much by listing them as beer, wine, spirits, coffee, tea and Coca-Cola. It isn’t a long or difficult read by any means. The book is 250 pages and takes the position of reader as a novice.
If you were looking for an anti-racist approach, you will be sorely disappointed. This really takes the approach of history through the drink. For instance, I think that tea gets a little short shrift. The book is the western perspective about the tea trade and proliferation of tea through the British Empire with only a handful of pages before that. So, it is not totally ignored but what a fascinating perspective that the British Empire was fueled on tea.
I think part of the fascination of this book for me is the transition of one drink to another. This is the explanation of how one drink overtook the other. A lot of it had to do with rise and fall of empires but what a unique take to frame them through drink. I thought that it was particularly interesting about how the political decisions drove economic activity and made or broke empires.
Another wildcard for me was how a brand came to represent an empire. I don’t know if I totally buy the premise however I certainly understand how the brand represented a philosophy and the philosophy symbolized a way of thinking and a way of doing. It was that thinking and doing that was novel and therefore the empire grew as a result of a better idea.
Since the book is short and the it is all about history which of course is already known, I don’t want to spoil the remaining secrets that are within. I definitely had no problems keeping up and reading the book. I didn’t find it dry in the least. For that, I would say that if you run across a copy, it is definitely worth reading.
End Your Programming Routine: It isn’t that often that someone gives you a book that they haven’t read that actually turns out to be good. From that standpoint, I wouldn’t have taken it if I didn’t think that it looked interesting from reading the jacket. For me, the programming is looking at things the same way, over and over. This is not that. This is looking at history by aggregating events through the perspective of a drink. What a novel concept.
This week, I am looking at the concepts of chapter 3, the last chapter in Fahrenheit 451. As the second time reading it, I can honestly say that I don’t remember a single thing about this book. I had a slight hope that maybe it would come back to me as I went along, but – nope. That is OK, because now I can come at it with a fresh and unbiased prospective.
If you read the book, then you know where the chapter starts. I’ll just say that there was a lot of burning of things. This translated into a failed manhunt and ending with nuclear war. And when once over, it was time to rebuild society. A little simplistic and abrupt if you ask me.
I have to be careful that I keep things in line as I write today. I am simultaneously thinking about this chapter and the overall wrap-up next week. While they are related, they are most definitely not the same. It has more to do with the origin story of the book rather than what is happening in this particular chapter.
Enough flowery non-sense and platitudes, let’s get into it. What I wanted to talk about today was a particular incident in the book. After Montag escaped from the scene of his troubles and his pursuers lost the trail something happened. What happened was that a fill-in for Montag was identified. The mechanical hound pursued, attacked and executed that person. All the while the event was filmed for TV and the action was conveniently abstract by camera angle, action and distance.
I definitely shouldn’t admit this but I will anyway. You see, I believe that people are stupid, until they are not. What I am saying is that people will believe almost anything reasonable until proven otherwise. Generally speaking this is related to issue that never effected me until they did and then they were real or wrong.
A political response to covid was believed and accepted by all sides because all sides were pretty much saying the same thing. Until your job was deemed ’essential’ or your job required a vaccine card or your dentist made you wear a mask in the lobby. It was then people said “wait a minute, this isn’t right. We are all in this together, or are we?”
You see, for propaganda to be effective, it has to be seen as accurate or true. When the mechanical hound killed the stand in for Montag, it was for show. It was to prove that a renegade’s actions has consequences and justice was served. As long as the greater population believed that there was no escape or no hope of resistance, there actually wasn’t.
An artificial society where friends and relatives are TV images, reality is built on whatever is seen. We all know that TV is staged and scripted. So the saying that perception is reality clearly germane to the topic. All my friends are on Facebook/Instagram/Snapchat/TikTok. You catch what I am saying? I a saying that we are halfway there to living in an artificial society.
How many times have you heard about people that beat a disease are the ones that fight it at every turn? When my wife was going through cancer treatment, I read case studies provided for support members that spoke to the very situation. Of course, this is not everyone’s destiny but certainly when the stars align and the person has the right attitude, sometimes the seemingly impossible can happen.
End Your Programming Routine: I am certainly not advocating for doing something crazy or life threatening by fighting a tyrannical entity with deadly consequences. The definition of changing your programming is challenging the status quo. You must observe and question what you see versus what you know. A worthy fight is one that is worth the risks.
We are off to the races. It feels strange to say that with this chapter, we are over half way through the book. After months and months with Atlas Shrugged, we are going to finish this whole endeavor in one month. And that includes a summary of the entire book as well.
There is a lot going on in this chapter. It has to be the case because there is less than sixty pages remaining. So, the action has to go pretty quickly. I guess that this is the transition chapter or the beginning of the awakening within Montag.
The chapter began with Montag questioning his happiness. Using natural reckoning, he surmised that if he was unhappy in his position, then maybe doing the opposite would be the solution. The opposite would be instead of living in an artificial fantasyland like wall to wall TVs stroking your ego all day long, read, think and discuss with others to come to a higher understanding. This of course was highly illegal.
Along the progression of the story, Montag seeks self validation, a mentor and then finally proselytizing. I wouldn’t expect anything but trouble from this, but I won’t spoil the story completely. Instead, let’s turn focus on the concepts of the chapter. There are a lot of things I could say about different themes going on but, I think all roads lead to this quote from the character Faber.
“Number one, as I said, quality of information. Number two: leisure to digest it. And number three: the right to carry out actions based on what we learn from the interaction of the first two.” Depending on what side of the fence that you are on, this is Bradbury’s definition of the value of books (or the danger thereof).
I take it a step further for not just books but media content in general. I suppose at Bradbury’s time, the choices were quite a bit more limited and even dare I say definable. If Fahrenheit 451 were written today, it would have to include podcast, video streaming and movies and TV, etc. I am starting to develop some ideas of my own in my journey with philosophy. But, this is a topic for another day. Right now, I am focused with Bradbury on his stance that the ability to read/watch/listen to what you want is an important tenant of freedom. Since we are discussing Bradbury, I will use the word read to mean any form of media consumption for leisure in this post.
Media can be propaganda and propaganda can be media. So, while I am all for the freedom of choice to consume whatever materials people find interesting and satisfying. we have to be guarded that our choices aren’t ‘shining our own shackles’ if you will. The counter point to this is what people often label as ‘mental masturbation’. I will elaborate more on these two below.
As a recent phenomenon, some people binge watch a show like ‘The Bachelor’. This is an example of what I am referring to as ‘shining your shackles’. I say this because I have never found anything redeeming about the series and I question even the entertainment value of the concept. It remains extremely popular because of lack of depth and even re-enforces a fairy tale delusion. People watching it are proud that they have seen every episode and even pick sides like at WWE style event, meaning it has a scripted outcome and artificial action. There are even oddsmakers in Las Vegas on the whole process.
Like a three ring circus, keeping people dim and entertained is a strategy for manipulation working in concert with advancing more sinister ideals. Sure, the media companies goal is to make money. All the while, attention to any sort of controversial or important subjects are out in the background. People in this circle tend to base decisions on how they feel about something rather than the facts of the situation.
Contrast this to the opposite side, maybe someone more like myself. I am reading all these books like 1984 and Atlas Shrugged for fun. I do end up trying to advance what I see are the values of the books by writing but there is a cliff there. What I am saying is that too much of this self-validation becomes mental masturbation. If all I ever do is read and write on all of the points that I already believe then I am just as guilty of being in la-la land as ‘The Bachelor’ crowd.
I of course believe that reading what you want is important. The zen master is able navigate both sides of the spectrum and really get to meaningful purpose. Some degree of absolute entertainment is fine. Some degree of value based entertainment is fine. Really to make it work effectively, those two groups and concepts have to meet in the middle.
I will go back to the structure of the quote now. For the most part, the leisure portion of the equation is not a question in the United States and in the book. As such, I will ignore that one. Quality information is hit and miss. This is what I was getting to with the propaganda sentence that started this post out. I do think that this is worthy of its own discussion. Suffice to say, we have both quality and non-quality work prevalent in society. And in theory, we have the right to discuss.
Now I know that this is going long but it is worth staying here for a bit. Let us assume that we had quality information about a vaccine discussion. Technically, we have the legal right to discuss pros and cons of such. However, the places of such debate were labelled as ‘Dangerous misinformation’ on social media. I ask you, what is more dangerous having the debate or silencing one side?
I will leave with this, 1938 Germany. Official government policy was to promote and cultivate a master race, read not-Jews, not-central Europeans, you know the list. Dangerous misinformation was to stand otherwise to that policy even though plenty of people secretly didn’t believe it. They had no real safe way to fight back except in the underground at the risk of death.
My grandparents were alive (and adults) at such time. My father was born the year after the war ended. We think that we are so far removed and much more sophisticated to ever go back to such a horrible place. It’s not that society has changed, the level and mechanisms of propaganda has changed. Even our recent ancestors had a better sense of values that we do now. As such, they didn’t tolerate a man calling himself a woman to win every swimming event. That’s OK, there is a new season of ‘The Bachelor’ out. We can deal with this problem another day.
End Your Programming Routine: How do we end our programming when we are strung out on anti-depression pills and zombies in front of the TV? My belief is that we have to do what matters. What that actually looks like and how it is done I suppose is the real solution. I try to bring a mixture of problems like these types of books and then solution like building or fixing or making something. I am not ignoring the problem it is just like the scale is so massive that I can’t do it alone. So I do what I can.
If you look at all the lists of books like or books related to or if you liked insert 1984/A Brave New World/Atlas Shrugged, Fahrenheit 451 is on the list. You knew it didn’t you? The fact is, I have been watching the library since I finished 1984 (which was 2021 now) and it just hasn’t been available. Since Covid, the library automatically renews books that have exceeded the due date. I suspect that Fahrenheit 451 is lost.
This is a book that I read as a 16 year old. I remember checking it out from my high school library. It is like reading it all over again because I don’t remember a thing except what the cover looked like and that it was a paperback. While I have technically read it, you can safely assume that I won’t have preconceived notions at this point.
Some of these books, I don’t know if it makes sense to do a chapter by chapter review. Although, it is difficult to determine if you haven’t read or don’t remember the book how to actually approach it. At least this time, it will be what it will be. I am going to examine the concepts of Chapter one.
Let’s first introduce the main character, Guy Montag. Guy is a what is called a fireman. In this day and age, a fireman is someone who burns books. With it is also the house, it’s possessions and sometimes the occupants are burned. What is supposed to happen is that the building is fire resistant and the occupants are arrested which means only the books and flammable possessions are burned.
Guy is married to Mildred. She has clearly drank too much of the Kool-aid. Our first introduction to her is in an overdosed state, zoned out on life by pills and reality with earbuds in. She is the manifestation of the society: programmed by TV and propaganda and depressed as a result.
Guy has a short. platonic relationship with a 17 girl named Clarisse. She seems to be a wild-child in that she no longer attends school and acts as she pleases. While she seems ignorant of the political environment and social norms, it is that same characteristic the leads her to draw her own conclusions in life without the influence of propaganda.
Between Guy’s career, his wife’s mental state and Clarisse’s intuition, is the concept of the chapter. Idle time leads to reading, communicating and thinking, Those activities lead to questioning the status quo. As a result, reading is banned, communicating is limited and thinking is diminished. Those activities have been replaced by the TV. Boy isn’t that the truth.
My kids are in high school. Since I live on Main street and that is also the same street as the high school, I often see a lot of kids walking to and from school either passing by my house or me travelling back and forth to school. The number of kids that I see walking and staring at their phones is incredible. My kids do it too.
Electronics have been around a long time, ninety years since radio was a mainstay in the home. Never has such a device created zombies but before cell phones. The minute that they leave the school, they have to see what they missed on the phone. That takes priority over the environmental factors such as the weather, traffic and life all around them.
Ironically, we live in a time where it is easier than it has ever been to be both informed and to research information. Yet society is becoming dumber and more ignorant than it has ever been. You would likely say that the newspaper is irrelevant. That being said we have less outlets producing journalistic level news stories. In theory, that is non-biased, properly sourced articles written to inform the reader.
That has been replaced by twitter polls, Facebook rumors and TikTok dances. Nextdoor is a pile of garbage that is more concerned with proper parking and home owners association rules than meaningful neighbor interactions. My point with any of this is that we have replaced curated information produced with ethical standards to a free form of mind control. And with that, people are driven into ideological camps never to return, along with their degree of logic, rhetoric and grammar.
We no longer have to worry about idle time. People are blue pilled in the Matrix and they do it to themselves. As soon as they get a chance, they plug themselves back in to the programming. Even to the point that they can’t even walk home without staring at the screen.
End Your Programming Routine: It seems obvious that to end your programming you have stopped doing it to yourself. I think that it is important to realize what is going on around you so that you know you are being programmed. Only then can you make the decision to stop self-inflicted problems. I hope people are not so apathetic as to not care, but I am very suspicious. As with all problems, start with your circle of control, yourself.
It doesn’t look too worse for wear. On the right is what the book looks like now. The original wrinkles in the cover were from when I packed it with me to Spain, in my luggage. I try really hard not to mash up paperbacks. I know… this is kind of their intended purpose but I like nice looking books. I am sure that is not why you tuned in though. So, let’s get into it.
What did we learn from all of this? Ayn Rand, who fled communist Russia in 1925 was an illegal alien. Meaning she got a visa to visit the United States and never left. But, that wasn’t in the book. The part of it that was important was that she had already observed the societal destructiveness of collectivism in just seven years. I think that is why the book was keenly insightful on the ilk living for others.
The one thing that I took away was an interest in Philosophy. I am not exactly sure of what I am going to do with it yet, but to look into it some more. It is not going to supersede my current reading plans, but once I get to a place where I am thinking about what is next.
So, what did I think? That is a complicated question. I was marveled by the parallels of what happened in the book. I was strongly concerned that we are following many aspects of the story page for page. I was annoyed at how long the book was; there was a lot of extraneous details that really didn’t lead to the core of the story. I enjoyed my time reading the book, in general.
I have been asked if this is a must read. I would say that if you like reading, you are into dystopian fiction or classical literature and you either like to validate your own values or you are open to changing your opinions then yes. I don’t give this a must read because I just feel that it is way too long. Something like 1984 that is a couple hundred pages has a lot more impact much quicker. Think of it this way, you could read 1984 easily three times in the same time as Atlas Shrugged.
Since this series has gone on so long, I feel like I have little to say about the overall work remaining. I felt like the ending was a little anticlimactic. The readers are left with little justice as most of the bad guys drive away or are abandoned at the end of the story. Two minor characters blew themselves up in a Mexican standoff and the Galt gang just flies off to Colorado ostensibly to live their best life while the rest of the country is left.
Maybe it is because I am a man, not a woman that I have a hard time identifying with Dabny, the primary character. She is in a three way love square (not triangle). She loves the one she cant have, she has the one she doesn’t fully love but respects and admires and she can’t move beyond the first love. She is portrayed as this very logical person yet cannot make binary commitments required for a proper relationship. If I am being honest, that indecisive love theme of the story irritated me.
One aspect that didn’t play as well was the labor situation. It seems like in the story, every time someone quit a job there was a replacement available. I think that if we have learned anything post-pandemic that is just not true. If people were really dropping out of society at such rates as written, those jobs would not immediately be filled in the real world. And even as low skilled as building or running a railroad might be, people are not going to immediately pick-up where someone left off.
Outside of the agonizingly long story arc, I do believe that Atlas Shrugged was well written. The book itself could almost be timeless because there is very little reference to technology. There is a record player mentioned a couple of times, cars trains and airplanes. What there is not is science fiction gizmos that never came to fruition nor is there science fiction/fantasy tendencies to come up with out of this world names or races or any other thing that is difficult to understand. I suppose what I am really trying to say is that it was written in plain language.
I have read that Atlas Shrugged was supposedly set in the 1990s. Outside of the technology changes that weren’t that different than the 1950s, the timeline is actually pretty spot on. The book supposedly took place over something like a ten year period.
I think that if we look at our history compared to Atlas Shrugged, our collectivism journey really got into gear in the early 2000s. I know we had the war on poverty of the 1960s which largely started the welfare state but it was the combination of the police state with the Patriot Act that has the two interests accelerating the transition.
Really, the pace of Atlas Shrugged was much quicker that what we are seeing in real life. We are now twenty plus years from the Patriot Acts and fifty years of entitlements and we still have not seen the implosion as a result of bad policy. Although we are getting there. I wouldn’t be surprised if another Covid type event split the country.
There are now three books in my liberty series. I am going to rank them 1984 > Atlas Shrugged > A Brave New World. I have already started the next one and I bet that you can guess what it will be. So stay tuned to next week for a new review starting on Friday.
End Your Programming Routine: Despite my criticisms, I am glad that I read this book. It entertained and stimulated me for seven months. That being said, its not one that I will likely ever read again. If I play my cards right, I will have all of these posts to refer back to if the subject comes up again. The next two books are going to be re-reads for me. But, there is something kind of exciting about going on the journey into the unknown like Atlas Shrugged was. This will not be the last we hear from Ayn Rand either, just not in the near future. It’s time for something different.
Recent Comments