Would Orwell Be Proud?

It would seem, just like with Benjamin Franklin’s satire on the idea of day light savings time (now a standard all over the world and led by the Anglos), Orwell’s 1984 was not taken as a warning but instead as a guide book on how to “properly” structure Anglo society and the West in general, as well as the structures of foreign policy.

Photo: Would Orwell Be Proud?

Would Orwell Be Proud?

Particularly, one must pay attention to the social aspects of that bee hive, loyalty to the state structures.

All Marxist regimes have attempted to force the loyalty of the people to the State, definitely not to God or Family. All made examples of the “heroes” of the State, people who betrayed their own families to the authorities. These “heroes” and those who emulated their examples, however, were always a minority, as society’s basic structures have always endured any such shocks and pressures and preserved themselves.

In the West, specifically the Anglo West, a more insidious program has been ongoing, for over two generations. The Marxist elites have learned from failed past lessons that radical change to an organism will invoke a defense response in the organism and is bound to failure or to destroy the organism. The Marxists do not want a destroyed organism, they want it healthy and strong, just working in the directions that they desire.

To that end, they have taken a multi-generational approach. First came the “Free Love” of the 1960s, a disease that spread throughout the West, undermining relationships and creating a view that transient sexual relations were ok. This of course had the desired effect to undermine the family structure, with children being born and growing up with either one parent or multiple sets of parents, as their own biological parents divorced and remarried and so on multiple times.

Then came the trend named Cocooning, through various technologies and mass media, to isolate neighbor from neighbor. People no longer felt that they were part, and thus loyal to a community. They no longer felt and were less drawn to the group moral structure, being able to exploit any kinks in their own psyches to any degree they wanted. After all, as long as you like it, in your own little world, what does anyone else’s opinion matter? Ever notice how the number of crazy people in the West is growing? I see it here in Russia, though it is still in a minor stage as compared to the West. Every time I visit a Western country, I am shocked at how much more insane the public at large appears.

Now come the final programs to separate the individual from all strong and formal bonds to society, at large. A new series of programs, in the US and UK aimed at “preventing” bullying and thus “saving” the child is working to destroy cliques and make children more “inclusive”. While on the surface this seems to appear like a noble idea, like most of the most deadly and evil of the Progressive ideas, it is in truth, one of vile evil.

What the program does, is destroy any meaningful relationships that a child has. As is, most children in the West, especially in America, lead extremely structured and paranoid lives, where even their play time is controlled by adults so that they get “value” out of it. As if children are some worker drones and play for fun is not full of value of its own. Ever watch American cartoons like Builder Bob or SpongeBob Square Pants, we have all of these through the magic of satellite television. All show perfect little worker drones whose only major enjoyment of life is not art or friendship but work, work and obeying their owners, first and foremost.

“I think it is kids’ preference to pair up and have that one best friend. As adults — teachers and counselors — we try to encourage them not to do that,” said Christine Laycob, director of counseling at Mary Institute and St. Louis Country Day School in St. Louis. “We try to talk to kids and work with them to get them to have big groups of friends and not be so possessive about friends.”

“Parents sometimes say Johnny needs that one special friend,” she continued. “We say he doesn’t need a best friend.

A Best Friend? You Must Be Kidding

Of course your elites do not think so, friendship builds loyalty and a morality of its own, in a Progressive Marxist state, loyalty can and must only be manifest towards one entity: the State. There can be no other competitor for the attention or the needs of the individual, because there can be no individuals. Friends do not surrender each other, they tend to do the opposite, cover and support, thus give hope. Only the State can have that role.

Many parents have already been co-opted in to breeding and raising the worker drones and storm troopers of the future, who may very well turn on them. Most are to ignorant to realize what they are doing. From the same article:

For many child-rearing experts, the ideal situation might well be that of Matthew and Margaret Guest, 12-year-old twins in suburban Atlanta, who almost always socialize in a pack. One typical Friday afternoon, about 10 boys and girls filled the Guest family backyard. Kids were jumping on the trampoline, shooting baskets and playing manhunt, a variation on hide-and-seek.

Neither Margaret nor Matthew has ever had a best friend. “I just really don’t have one person I like more than others,” Margaret said. “Most people have lots of friends.” Matthew said he considers 12 boys to be his good friends and says he sees most of them “pretty much every weekend.”

The process is of course well organized and institutionalized. Again, from the same article:

As the calendar moves into summer, efforts to manage friendships don’t stop with the closing of school. In recent years Timber Lake Camp, a co-ed sleep-away camp in Phoenicia, N.Y., has started employing “friendship coaches” to work with campers to help every child become friends with everyone else. If two children seem to be too focused on each other, the camp will make sure to put them on different sports teams, seat them at different ends of the dining table or, perhaps, have a counselor invite one of them to participate in an activity with another child whom they haven’t yet gotten to know.

“I don’t think it’s particularly healthy for a child to rely on one friend,” said Jay Jacobs, the camp’s director. “If something goes awry, it can be devastating. It also limits a child’s ability to explore other options in the world.”

So Anglos, the generations that is starting to come into adulthood will finally have all those core Anglo values, or rather new core Anglo values, that your sage Orwell warned you about. You must be so proud.

Stanislav Mishin
Mat Rodina Blog