Herland Report: As the Western elites again are enticed by totalitarian systems and the deprivation of civil liberties among its citizens, Aldous Huxley is worth remembering.
He provided an excellent description of the road to tyranny in his celebrated book Brave New World (1932).
Huxley shows how restricted society becomes if personal initiative, individualism, social responsibility and the right to have different opinions disappear.
He demonstrates the demonic state of a society where religious freedoms are abolished and the mass media propaganda control the population.
Only strict secular uniformity without respect for history remains in the state that regulates and dictates all elements of private life for its citizens, writes historian of comparative religions and author, Hanne Nabintu Herland, founder of The Herland Report.
Brave New World tells the tale of a world where babies are genetically engineered, any discontent quelled by medication and entertainment.
This dystopian world produces individuals who simply do not pose critical questions, and those who do end up in Huxley’s definition of Gulag.
Brave New World: The rise of dictatorship, genetic cloning, the rampant use of medication to remove depression and feelings of discomfort, a mass media which speaks with almost one voice and much more – has later come to pass in the modern systems we find ourselves in.
Aldous Huxley watched how modern society was developing during his lifetime and came to the conclusion that modern democracies are not heading in the right direction.
In his book, he horrifyingly explains how the bureaucracy, the media propaganda channels, modern technology and societal elites work together in order to create social pressures that induce a variety of false narratives into the population. These narratives are constructed to distract people from the real and important issues.
The well-known philosopher Hannah Arendt also discusses the topic of totalitarianism in her book The origins of totalitarianism. Arendt specifically analyzed the origins of Nazism and Communism.
The Second World War demonstrated clearly how evil can be systematized in a modern democratic state focused on the active bureaucratic control over its citizens, combined with active fear mongering and mass media control.
Many forget that Nazism was not extreme right-wing. It was extreme left-wing. The popular term NAZI is an acronym for the National Socialist Labor Party in Germany.
RELATED ARTICLES:
- New Left Tyranny: Globalist Capitalism reintroduces the feudal system with Oligarch Overlords
- Christianity was Central in creating Western Civilization. Hanne Herland, WND.
- 1960s: How the neo-Marxist New Left destabilized the West, Hanne Herland.
- The New Left’ desire to silence the Majority – Nabintu, WND.
- Universities as Globalist New Left propaganda tools – WND.
Brave New World: Hitler demanded a cohesive citizenry and woe to them that did not follow his dictates. This was a strong socialist state that controlled freedom of expression and limited the individual´s sphere of action to what the elite in power defined as correct.
The centralized power of the state was a very important agency for directing the population. Here there was little individual freedom and respect for differences and natural plurality.
We know very well how the racially oriented Nazism opened for an appalling lack of respect for different opinions. People were terrified in the NAZI system, as the mere suggestion that a person had critical thoughts towards the Hitler system, could lead to the most serious reprimands. People lost their jobs, were sent to prison camps, lost all social credibility, were spoken ill of in the media propaganda system.
The very story of the Holocaust is a grim reminder of the human capabilities for evil, once the social setting demands cruelty.
People were condemned based on mere indications and allegations, for having “the wrong” tone of voice, many were exposed in the media and compared to murderers and traitors, denied leading positions in society and fired from their positions, — as a conscious step towards silencing any political opposition.
The method worked very well, as it now also does in the United States. The remarkable silence from the German pre-war intellectual elites says it all. Fear was rampant everywhere, the very tool of repression as people remained silent out of pure fear of the above.
Arendt illustrates how the individual´s freedom is strangled when group thinking takes over in such a way that the “masses” are controlled by the state. She points out that totalitarian governance is worse than dictatorship. In a dictatorship the elite strive to amass political power and persecute the opposition simultaneously.
The elite of democratic totalitarian regimes aspire not only to political power, but to dominate every aspect of their citizenry ideologically, and to determine what they think down to the smallest detail. What they should believe about family, sex, partnerships, religion, school, priests, police and the law.
Their goal is to have full control over the development of society, with a universal desire that the entire world should eventually develop in the same direction.
Brave New World: Civil rights, the sovereignty of nations, the right of other cultures to define which values and ideals are important in their own culture – none of these rights are respected. Their purpose is to dominate the world and to govern all others according to their own political-ideological goals.
In the quest for control, media propaganda is a most cunning weapon. Propaganda is a form of media-communication that does not purport to provide citizens with objective news, but to present to them the state official narrative.
Instead the news provides the impression of being objective when it really only presents a portion of the truth. Propaganda is used consciously to influence the individual in a defined political or ideological direction.
Someone once said: “If you repeat a lie often enough, people will eventually believe it”.
Noam Chomsky has been voted by both the New York Times and The Observer the world´s most important intellectual and is the most cited living author in the social sciences and humanities.
In his book Necessary illusions. Thought control in democratic societies, Chomsky is highly critical of many trends in Western democracies, particularly in the USA, and states that political forces limit freedom of the press and freedom of expression in democracies far more than people commonly think.
In the West the press is largely an instrument for western propaganda that functions to cloak a reality where the media, also in democracies, is manipulated by a political-ideological elite with a continual need to control mass opinion. The reason is simple: in democratic countries the people determine the results of political elections. According to Chomsky, control of opinions is therefore critical.
Aldous Huxley, Brave New World: In his books, for example in Manufacturing consent, Chomsky discusses this in great length. He believes that private market forces are so strong that propaganda influences the flood of information to a large degree.
Chomsky does not consider the USA to be a democracy, since the mixture of political power and private capital is so pervasive.
Those that once participated in the neo-Marxist 1968 rebellion against the ruling bourgeoise are the same that today form the elites of society. The roles are reversed. Robin Hood has become the Sheriff of Nottingham. He takes from those that are “outside” and provides in the name of solidarity only to those that are ”inside his own narrative” and work to fulfill his political and economic ambitions.
Democracy in its true form depends on free courts, free media, free private business and a free parliament where the perspectives of the various parties are actually respected by the government.
Temporarily elected governments with limited power prevent the development of systematic misuse of power. Thus the perspectives of a few political groups are unable to assume a disproportional dominance, while other political views that the majority of the population might wish to receive attention, are consistently discriminated against to the point of meriting the term undemocratic.
How democratic is it when such extremely marginal groups have such broad influence? They represent nearly no one, and certainly not the majority of people´s interests. It is one thing to respect marginal minorities and allow them freedom of expression, it is quite another thing to allow them preeminence and right-of-way at the price of the rest of the population´s preferences.
We need a solid measure of individual freedom combined with increased social responsibility, more religious freedom and respect for other religions, respect for differences and respect for the traditional culture´s traditional emphasis on morals and ethics. Only then will we put an end to some of the tragic social trends that have riddled us the last decades – in our schools, our police, our churches and our families.
