Tag Archives: Aldous Huxley

The Promise of Pleasure or the Threat of Pain: Reflections on Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four and the Future of Life on Earth, by James Kullander

Whips and chains or mindless, moronic diversion and psychotropic drugs? Which works better to enslave a population? From James Kullander at lewrockwell.com:

“And if ever, by some unlucky chance, anything unpleasant should somehow happen, why, there’s always soma to give you a holiday from the facts. And there’s always soma to calm your anger, to reconcile you to your enemies, to make you patient and long-suffering.” – Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever.” – George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Soon after the publication of George Orwell’s novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, his publisher sent a copy of it to Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World. Orwell’s book describes a dystopian hell realm of a world ruled by an invisible yet omniscient “Big Brother,” whose minions keep the masses in check with twenty-four-hour surveillance everywhere, even in one’s home and with threats of violence should any “prol” (short from proletarian) disagree with, and part from, the one and only totalitarian narrative and its demands. Having read that novel years ago, I reread it recently because I recalled that it had quite accurately described back in 1949 when it was first published much of what’s happening in the world today.

Brave New World was published in 1932, 17 years before Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. A lot had happened in the world in those 17 years: the Great Depression, the fascist overthrow of Spain at the end of the Spanish Civil War, and WWII. Orwell, an Englishman, had joined the International Brigades to fight against Francisco Franco and the Nationalists. Orwell was wounded in a battle in the Spanish countryside—shot in the neck—only later to be hounded and hunted in the littered streets of Barcelona during skirmishes between different factions of the Spanish Republican Army as it met its violent demise. It is said that some of what Orwell experienced and witnessed during those years—the relentless and bogus propaganda coming from both sides, the frenzied destruction of churches and the killing of priests and nuns, the fanatical in-party fighting among those who were supposed to be compatriots, and a “general ‘bourgeosification,’ a deliberate destruction of the equalitarian spirit”—had found its way into his Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Continue reading→

The War on Science and the 20th Century Descent of Man, by Cynthia Chung

Run, don’t walk, from those espousing their great ideas for improving humans, and then do everything possible to expose them for what they are: misanthropic killers. From Cynthia Chung at strategic-culture.org:

Huxley makes it crystal clear that he considers the world to be overpopulated, and that science and progress cannot be free to advance without limits.

In Part 1 the question was discussed what was Aldous’ real intention in writing the Brave New World; was it meant as an exhortation, an inevitable prophecy or as an Open Conspiracy? An Open Conspiracy closely linked to not only H.G. Wells, who clearly laid out such a vision in his book by the same title, published in 1928, but a vision also in the vein of Aldous’ famous grandfather Thomas Huxley “Darwin’s bulldog” and mentor to Wells.

It is from here that we will continue to discuss what exactly were Aldous’ views on such matters, did he in fact believe in the need for a scientific dictatorship? A scientific caste system? Was he actually warning the people that such a dystopia would occur if we did not correct our course or was it all part of a mass psychological conditioning for what was regarded as inevitable, and that Aldous’ role was rather to “soften the transition” as much as possible towards a “dictatorship without tears”?

Continue reading→

Who Will Be Brave in Huxley’s New World? By Cynthia Chung

Was Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World a prophetic warning or an instruction manual? From Cynthia Chung at strategic-culture.org:

No wonder that the Tavistock Institute and the CIA became involved in looking at the effects of LSD and how to influence and control the mind.

 “ ‘Science?’….’Yes,’ Mustapha Mond was saying, ‘that’s another item in the cost of stability. It isn’t only art that’s incompatible with happiness; it’s also science. Science is dangerous; we have to keep it most carefully chained and muzzled…I’m interested in truth, I like science. But truth’s a menace, science is a public danger. As dangerous as it’s been beneficent. It has given us the stablest equilibrium in history…But we can’t allow science to undo its own good work. That’s why we so carefully limit the scope of its researchers…We don’t allow it to deal with any but the most immediate problems of the moment. All other enquiries are most sedulously discouraged…Our Ford himself did a great deal to shift the emphasis from truth and beauty to comfort and happiness…[but] People still went on talking about truth and beauty as though they were the sovereign goods. Right up to the time of the Nine Years’ War. That made them change their tune all right. What’s the point of truth or beauty or knowledge when the anthrax bombs are popping all around you? That was when science first began to be controlled – after the Nine Years’ War. People were ready to have even their appetites controlled then. Anything for a quiet life. We’ve gone on controlling ever since. It hasn’t been very good for truth, of course. But it’s been very good for happiness. One can’t have something for nothing. Happiness has got to be paid for. You’re paying for it, Mr. Watson – paying because you happen to be too much interested in beauty. I was too much interested in truth; I paid too.’ “

Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World

Where does one start in discussing the famed fiction novel of Huxley? Although most agree that there is a definite brilliance to the piece, most are also confused as to what was Huxley’s intention in writing the extremely influential dystopic vision. Was it meant to be taken as an exhortation? An inevitable prophecy? Or rather…was it meant as an Open Conspiracy?

What do I mean by an Open Conspiracy?

If we are going to talk about such things our story starts with H.G. Wells, whom Aldous acknowledged he was most certainly influenced by, particularly by Wells’ novels “A Modern Utopia,” “The Sleeper Awakes,” and “Men Like Gods,” when writing his “Brave New World.”

Continue reading→

Will You Love Your Servitude? by Joseph Mercola

Of course you’ll love your servitude! Everything provided by the government and all you have to do is swear fealty. From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:

Aldous Huxley, an English writer and philosopher, wrote nearly 50 books, the most famous being “Brave New World,” a dystopian science-fiction novel published in 1932. The world in the novel is a futuristic one based on science and technology. Emotions and the sense of individuality are eliminated, starting in childhood, via the use of conditioning.1

It’s a work of fiction, but concepts on which it is based, including the power to condition humans to accept an abnormal state of life, are not. In the video above, you can hear a 1962 interview with Huxley, in which he speaks about the use of persuasion and conditioning to gain ultimate power and control over society.

“If you are going to control a population for any length of time you must have some measure of consent,” he said.2 His words ring eerily true in 2021.

Continue reading→

Aldous Huxley foresaw our despots — Fauci, Gates, and their vaccine crusaders, by Patricia McCarthy

Can people be trained (and drugged) to love their own servitude and subjugation? From Patricia McCarthy at americanthinker.com:

In 1949, sometime after the publication of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, Aldous Huxley, the author of Brave New World (1931), who was then living in California, wrote to Orwell.  Huxley had briefly taught French to Orwell as a student in high school at Eton.

Huxley generally praises Orwell’s novel, which to many seemed very similar to Brave New World in its dystopian view of a possible future.  Huxley politely voices his opinion that his own version of what might come to pass would be truer than Orwell’s.  Huxley observed that the philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is sadism, whereas his own version is more likely, that controlling an ignorant and unsuspecting public would be less arduous, less wasteful by other means.  Huxley’s masses are seduced by a mind-numbing drug, Orwell’s with sadism and fear.

The most powerful quote In Huxley’s letter to Orwell is this:

Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.

Continue reading→

Technology: distracting, Disturbing, Deceiving and Deluding Ourselves to Death, by Jim Quinn

One way to tyrannize people is to distract them from what you’re doing. From Jim Quinn at theburningplatform.com:

“What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate. In the Huxleyan prophecy, Big Brother does not watch us, by his choice. We watch him, by ours. There is no need for wardens or gates or Ministries of Truth.

When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; a culture-death is a clear possibility.”Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business

Image result for huxley amusing ourselves to death

Something as mundane as using the restroom at work sometimes ends up triggering deeper thoughts about technology – its benefits, deficiencies and danger to our culture. I’ve been using the same restroom at work for the last twelve years. They remodeled the restroom a few years ago with the latest technology – automatic flushers, automatic soap dispensers, automatic spigots, and automatic towel dispenser. This technology is supposed to make things better, but from my perspective the technology just added complexity, glitches and unnecessary complications.

First off, these technological “improvements” did not eliminate any humans from the equation. The housekeepers responsible for the restrooms continued to be employed. Prior to the remodel they would fill a metal bin with individual paper towels and fill the soap dispenser with liquid soap. Now they have to insert a roll of paper towels in the electronic dispenser and a cartridge of soap in the electronic soap dispenser.

Continue reading→

Government Eyes Are Watching You: We Are All Prisoners of the Surveillance State, by John W. Whitehead

The state and its corporate partners have constructed an electronic Panopticon. From John Whitehead at rutherford.org:

“We’re run by the Pentagon, we’re run by Madison Avenue, we’re run by television, and as long as we accept those things and don’t revolt we’ll have to go along with the stream to the eventual avalanche…. As long as we go out and buy stuff, we’re at their mercy… We all live in a little Village. Your Village may be different from other people’s Villages, but we are all prisoners.”— Patrick McGoohan

First broadcast in America 50 years ago, The Prisoner—a dystopian television series described as “James Bond meets George Orwell filtered through Franz Kafka”—confronted societal themes that are still relevant today: the rise of a police state, the freedom of the individual, round-the-clock surveillance, the corruption of government, totalitarianism, weaponization, group think, mass marketing, and the tendency of humankind to meekly accept their lot in life as a prisoner in a prison of their own making.

Perhaps the best visual debate ever on individuality and freedom, The Prisoner (17 episodes in all) centers around a British secret agent who abruptly resigns only to find himself imprisoned and interrogated in a mysterious, self-contained, cosmopolitan, seemingly tranquil retirement community known only as the Village. The Village is an idyllic setting with parks and green fields, recreational activities and even a butler.

While luxurious and resort-like, the Village is a virtual prison disguised as a seaside paradise: its inhabitants have no true freedom, they cannot leave the Village, they are under constant surveillance, their movements are tracked by surveillance drones, and they are stripped of their individuality and identified only by numbers.

The series’ protagonist, played by Patrick McGoohan, is Number Six.

Number Two, the Village administrator, acts as an agent for the unseen and all-powerful Number One, whose identity is not revealed until the final episode.

“I am not a number. I am a free man,” was the mantra chanted on each episode of The Prisoner, which was largely written and directed by McGoohan.

In the opening episode (“The Arrival”), Number Six meets Number Two, who explains to him that he is in The Village because information stored “inside” his head has made him too valuable to be allowed to roam free “outside.”

Throughout the series, Number Six is subjected to interrogation tactics, torture, hallucinogenic drugs, identity theft, mind control, dream manipulation, and various forms of social indoctrination and physical coercion in order to “persuade” him to comply, give up, give in and subjugate himself to the will of the powers-that-be.

To continue reading: Government Eyes Are Watching You: We Are All Prisoners of the Surveillance State

He Said That? 1/5/18

From Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), British author, Ends and Means (1937):

So long as men worship the Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will duly rise and make them miserable.

He Said That? 7/18/17

From Aldous Huxley ( 1894-1963), British author, “Knowledge and Understanding” in Collected Essays (1958):

Ours is an industrial civilization, in which no society can prosper unless it possesses an elite of highly trained scientists and a considerable army of engineers and technicians. The possession and wide dissemination of a great deal of correct, specialized knowledge has become a prime condition of national survival. In the United States, during the last twenty or thirty years, this fact seems to have been forgotten. Professional educationists have taken John Dewey’s theories of ‘learning through doing’ and of ‘education as life adjustment,’ and have applied them in such a way that, in many American schools, there is now doing without learning, along with courses in adjustment to everything except the basic twentieth-century fact that we live in a world where ignorance of science and its methods is the surest, shortest road to national disaster. During the past half century every other nation has made great efforts to impart more knowledge to more young people. In the United States professional educationists have chosen the opposite course.

Prisons of Pleasure or Pain: Huxley’s “Brave New World” vs. Orwell’s “1984”, by Uncola

Visions of human enslavement can be frightening and painful, or mind-numbingly blissful. From Uncola at theburningplatform.com:

Definition of UTOPIA

1:  an imaginary and indefinitely remote place

2:  a place of ideal perfection especially in laws, government, and social conditions

3:   an impractical scheme for social improvement

Definition of DYSTOPIA

1:  an imaginary place where people lead dehumanized and often fearful lives

2:  literature:  anti-utopia

Merriam-Webster.com

 Many Americans today would quite possibly consider Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” to be a utopia of sorts with its limitless drugs, guilt-free sex, perpetual entertainment and a genetically engineered society designed for maximum economic efficiency and social harmony.  Conversely, most free people today would view Orwell’s “1984” as a dystopian nightmare, and shudder to contemplate the terrifying existence under the iron fist of “Big Brother”; the ubiquitous figurehead of a perfectly totalitarian government.

Although both men were of British descent, Huxley was nine years older than Orwell and published Brave New World in 1932, seventeen years before 1984 was released in 1949.  Both books are widely considered classics and are included in the Modern Library’s top ten great novels of the twentieth century.

Brave New World

Aldous Huxley was born to academic parents and he was the grandson of Thomas Henry Huxley, a famous biologist and an enthusiastic proponent of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution who was known as “Darwin’s Bulldog”.  Huxley’s own father had a well-equipped botanical laboratory where young Aldous began his education.  Given the Huxley family’s appreciation for science, it makes perfect sense that Brave New World began in what is called the “Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre” where human beings are artificially grown and genetically predestined into five societal castes consisting of: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Epsilon.

To continue reading: Prisons of Pleasure or Pain: Huxley’s “Brave New World” vs. Orwell’s “1984”