The society of Oceania in Orwell’s 1984 employs
entertainment of the utmost
vulgarity and a perversity not encountered by a man of proper
tastes in order to satisfy the “instinctive urges” of its
proletariat. Their music possesses an inhuman crudeness and
resembles more the severe thumping of a drum than a melody. Their
films are pornographic and founded on crude animal lust instead of
reason. Their encouragement of prostitution and outright
debasement of the human condition plunge the metaphorical boot of
oppression further into the face of man. Our society, musically,
cinematically, and culturally, has, as a man of conscience will
shamefully admit, descended to the same indoctrinating level which
diverts individuals away from the exercising of their unalienable
rights.
A skeletal
history of the evolution (retrogression, however, would be a more
fitting term) of fashion trends will demonstrate that mass
following for the hippie culture has by no means become
diminished. It has grown and simultaneously plummeted deeper into
the chasm of decadence. Yet it is in the "Live and Let Die"
doctrines broadcast by popular indoctrinators of the 1960s that
the movement's origins can be pinpointed. The original song of
such a title was concocted by Paul McCartney of the Beatles, which
had in that decade gradually shifted from the status of an
innocuous "boy band" to that of deranged fanatics. The philosophy
advocated within the title and lyrics is one of utter submission
to the status quo; because a man happens to be breathing at the
present moment he should not, as would state common sense, deprive
himself of his existence, however he should remain passive to his
surrounding conditions and should not attempt to reverse the
destructive toll of universal decay, while fatalistically keeping
in mind the fact that the decay will eventually claim him as well.
In effect, it is a framework which prohibits any manner of
intervention with the natural state of things, one that dictates
that a man accept his own presence only for so long a time as it
is "given him", to let himself perish "when time comes." It is a
restatement of the Ishmaelian ethic that man must relinquish his
power over life and death (unlike the laissez-faire expression,
"Live and Let Live" which embodies the desire of Western man to
ameliorate conditions to such an extent where complexity and
prosperity can reach all individual persons, where man wields
power over his own life, but has no right to trample on the lives
of others) and is, in essence, a recipe for suicide.
Members of
The Beatles, both prior to and following the band's dissolution,
have packaged suicidal philosophies into their music, disguised as
clever metaphors. The music itself, although fairly simplistic in
comparison with the great Classics, does not evoke repulsion. The
tainted nature of their lyrics, however, had evaded the conscious
evaluation of devoted fans, who had thus absorbed them and
connected with them through the unconscious bond upon which an
orthodoxy relies. One might console himself by stating that the
song, "I'm a Walrus", was a mere lapse of The Beatles into the
delusions of narcotic intoxication. However, a deeper message can
be detected, as devoid of thought as the superficial blunders of
the lyrics. It is one of equating the standing of man with that of
an animal, a creature lacking in sentience and reason, a complete
instinctive automaton of the Wilderness. Since animals are
incapable of rational education and a thorough introduction into a
civilized lifestyle, the suggested process of fulfilling the
equation would be the diminution of man into the position of a
slave to untamed Nature. "Imagine" was another more directly
ideological song in which the author, John Lennon, preached on the
matter of an ideal society, "a world that is one", where freedom
of religion is nullified, technology is discarded, private
property is abolished, and all men are bound by a collective
"brotherhood". The inherent anti-individualism of such a
perception, as opposed to free worship, progress, and
laissez-faire economy, is blatantly exposed by the lyrics
themselves, without the guise which had been placed upon earlier
projects such as "I'm a Walrus."
Which is but
the foremost example of overtness in the pop-culturists' tirades
increasing with the passage of time. Clever analogies and
metaphors are no longer a fitting means of indoctrination because
each subsequent generation reared in a Deweyite setting is
afflicted by doublethink to a greater extent than the previous one
and is thus empowered with the awesome capacity of not grasping
them. Yet, civility plummeting and instinctive savagery on the
rise, the typical youths are thoroughly supportive of the Witch
Doctors’ propaganda to such an extent that even the unveiling of
its intentions in their crude sincerity will not alter the
witchlings' lack of resolve to oppose them.
At present
the pinnacle of the fashion elite is occupied by an abomination
known by the pseudonym, "Eminem". The "musical" style practiced by
this man is referred to as rap, i.e. naught but the rare beating
of drums (with a primitive rhythm) and the mouthing of lyrics, in
the case of males with a voice distorted and high-pitched and in
the case of females in a tone coarse, piercing, and low to such an
extent that both become the virtual antonyms of the voices of
opera signers of their respective genders. Rap is a torrent of
cacophony which is erratic and crude as is but requires the
support of thousands of broken voices, screeching and hollering
out of tune in order to uphold that, which triggers their
destructive urges. It depends upon, in other words, the violent
and uncivil energy of a unit politely referred to as a collective
while its genuine name should be "horde". This corresponds almost
identically with the depiction of a savage drumbeat enlarged by
numerous fanatical yells in 1984 as the music of the Party
during Hate Week.
The messages
broadcast by Eminem are, to even greater disturbance, also those
of unrestrained hatred. In every "tune" he threatens to murder,
rape, devastate, abuse, and deprive of dignity fellow human
beings. Frequently such threats are accompanied by names. At other
times they are general and aimed at the public. But the purpose
remains the same, the imposition of sheer terror which, giving its
recipients the option to either join the horde or be desecrated by
it, will result in the targets themselves upholding this credo and
entering the suggested spree of fanatical degradation incited by
such a crucial "authority" in their lives as Eminem. The youths of
today, even those of high academic performance and a reputation of
intelligence, frequently offer reverent praise to this "artist"
for his "unparalleled creativity and innovation". Their puny and
unquestioning minds neglect the fact that he had composed no
melodies and even devised no new rhythms, that his language is the
repulsive Newspeak of the slums, and that the sentiments he
manifests are not the result of an active imagination but of the
Wilderness shackling the creative spirit and bludgeoning into the
brain the previously latent obsessions: to maim, to tarnish, to
destroy...
Between the Beatles and Eminem had existed transitional stages
spanning thirty years. The melodies themselves forfeited any
traces of complexity they had possessed during the 1960s. The
moderate "rock" music of the Beatles decayed into a louder form
dependent to a greater extent on percussion and to a smaller
extent on the impression of dignity conveyed by the performers.
The Beatles themselves had shifted to such a form in their later
years, swept into the current of Oriental Daoist ideology to
justify their tasteless and demeaning conduct of "Sex, Drugs, and
Rock-and-Roll". During the 1970s a harsher variety of vulgar
"music," known as "disco" was devised. The revolutionary aspect
introduced by this form was that of creation predominantly by a
machine known as a synthesizer. The element of human creativity
when producing popular entertainment had begun to fade; musicians
and composers were no longer of key significance. The
popular-culture industry neared in time proximity the Orwellian
versificator, an utter detachment of the human mind from the
crafting of musical works.
The subsequent
step in the devolution of mass obsessions was initiated in the
1980s under the name of "hip-hop" (defining the movements which
the paradigm expects the victims of its melodies to replicate, a
graceless, awkward, rapid swinging of the hips, of which a
parallel can be seen in the realm of haphazardly hopping animals),
"music" almost entirely dependent upon the beating of drums and
the emissions of a synthesizer. Played at a swift and monotonous
pace and with extraordinarily high volume, its intent is to
produce collective orgies of bodily distortion into numerous
inhuman forms, bent out of shape in every manner imaginable. Still
a powerful influence today, its lyrics are occasionally indecent,
frequently violent, usually simplistic, and always devoid of
logical reasoning. Their "authors" seek to hold the attention of
the masses with variations on a theme which can be called anything
but love, for it lacks in chivalrous nobility and respect for the
opposite gender. Hip-hop and its subsequent mutations are odes
instead to sadomasochistic rape, where the lyrics ostensibly
display the intent to "enslave one", "to become one's slave", "to
beat one", and other abominable desires not to be mentioned in a
proper public setting.
The most
recent wave of hip-hop idols have themselves taken to wearing
scandalous clothing, and mutilating their images in every which
way in order to present living embodiments of "their" "music".
Themselves, they are, like Big Brother, mere figureheads. Britney
Spears, the prime target of worship for mindless witchlings of
today, does not compose her mostly computer-generated "hits", does
not play a musical instrument, and is frequently accompanied by
other voices on stage or dubbed over with another woman's
replications of the mindless lyrics in "her" songs within “her”
recordings. Her figure is artificially engineered through heaps of
makeup and computer "modifications". She remains absolutely devoid
of any manner of talent in music or performance; the fabrications
encompass every field of her activity. She is not compatible with
a "great man" personality, but as in the situation of Big Brother,
the reverence displayed for her fuels the indoctrinating capacity
of the collective behind the image. The masses possess the access
to resources necessary to discover the fraud that is Britney
Spears. Yet they, in their majority, continue to pervert
themselves before her likeness. Why? Because popular culture is
not dependent upon conscious reasoning. Had it been, its absolute
rejection by all as irrational would have occurred simultaneously
with its inception. Its hold remains because it is illogical,
subconscious, and employs appeal to “instinct” over reason. It
is the Wilderness rendered socially permissible. A branch of the
hip-hop movement is the monstrosity known as rap, which had
completed the passage from hidden implications of collectivism to
outright manifestations of murder. Popular culture, in its
retrogression, has reduced to its bare essence the fact that
collectivism is murder, but the masses are no less eager to
embrace its doctrine. The movement of the hippies has not
disappeared; it has been, in the true spirit of a collective,
carried on by different individuals, all disposable in a tribal
framework, but as the same "ideal," revealed in greater detail by
each subsequent performer and variation.
Numerous films and periodicals of present days are, too,
compatible with Mr. Orwell's depiction of the superficial material
loaded with aimless sentimentality and indecent conduct, designed
not to teach a truth or to provide food for thought, but to create
sensations, to awaken temptations of the wild in order to suppress
aspiration. So-called "bathroom humor" has spread from the mouths
of the uneducated onto the big screen. Comedies are designed not
through wit and insight, but through obscenity, profanity, and
hollering. Films with a theme of romance no longer portray poetic
manifestations of admiration, nor courageous deeds performed in
the name of love, nor a rational calculus which would somehow
suggest that the existence of such undertakings is of greater
benefit than their absence. Instead, they display entanglements of
human flesh in surface-based physical exchanges, replete with
lust, the prerequisite of molestation. They are films of couples
demeaning themselves to the level of animals, with no nobility
remaining in their interactions. Because such cinematic
abominations awaken a subconscious sympathy within the irrational
and cause it to be elevated to the brain's metaphorical surface,
the overall submission of the viewer to instinct becomes
augmented. A preference for lewd and vulgar behaviors replaces
objective moral values. Shelves in grocery stores are with far
greater frequency than previously packed with what can be referred
to as "yellow journalism". The scandalous magazines in question
are not merely littered with slandering "news" stories of no
credibility, but also of photographs where the human organism is
indecently exposed and of articles where the personal lives of
celebrities are prodded at for the purpose of evoking a tainted
amusement from ignorami whose lives are centered on divulging
matters which are none of their business. This mixture of
deception, pornography, and space occupiers is identical to the
literature spread by the Party to the proletariat of Oceania.
Aside from enforcing the order of chaos desired by the Witch
Doctors, even such base forms of entertainment seek to instill not
merely behaviors but an ideology as well. Professor Thomas Hibbs
at Boston College has been performing in-depth explorations on the
attitudinal repercussions of popular culture, discovering the
growing trend of nihilism among its slaves.
"Hibbs
describes nihilism as a state of spiritual impoverishment in which
'there is no higher or lower, in which the higher aspirations that
have motivated mankind over the ages lose their attractions for
the human soul,' and in which 'there is no fundamental meaning or
ultimate point in human life.' He sees a trend toward such
shrunken aspirations in the greater culture reflected in American
films, television and music of the past generation. Films once
presented evil as a serious threat that was to be overcome by
virtue, Hibbs said. But in recent years, provision has rarely been
made for the pursuit of justice. Rebellion has been all, he said,
and the result has been a void. 'If nothing positive comes out of
rebellion, both rebellion and convention seem foolish,' he said,
'and you're left with snickering irony,' a smirking 'detachment
from everything' a la 'Seinfeld' that is the seedbed for cynicism.
Evil ceases to be terrifying and becomes merely banal, he said,
resulting in a comic view of life as meaningless."
(Mark Sullivan, Newspaper Staff Writer at Boston College.
"Nihilism and Popular Culture: Hibbs' Class Strikes Chord with
Students")
Here Professor
Hibbs reveals a noteworthy detail. In modern popular culture as
well as in that of 1984, the proletarians who were exposed
to indecent entertainment or that littered with opposition to the
Absolute Morality perceive that their reverence for this degrading
material stems from a desire to rebel and to separate oneself from
the crowd. This is yet another still present disguise that grants
evil a moral sanction. The men falling prey to popular culture
commit the most disgraceful acts of conformity and, in their
actions, reject the very concept of genuine rebellion. Their
subconscious rushes toward imitation of the herd and
self-debasement, and what remains of their reasoning minds is
occupied with the delusion of defiance. The deception plaguing
them is that the acceptance of nihilism possesses an
individualistic motive. But, in reality, nihilism is fundamental
in all ideologies which seek to deprive human life of value.
Michael Miller explains.
"An early
nihilist mutant hid behind the good of other men. It held that
pursuing your own good is wicked, but you could rescue your virtue
by serving other men's good. This, of course, is altruism.
Altruism had a long run, but was doomed by its own nihilist
origins. After all, other men's good means other men's
selfishness. Collectivism is another nihilist mutant. It holds
that seeking individual goods is wicked, but seeking group goods
is virtuous; there is virtue in serving the Race, the State, the
Fatherland, the Proletariat, Womankind or what have you.
Collectivism, too, is doomed by its nihilist essence. Groups are
made up of members, and there is no good of a group apart from the
good of its members. So we're back to plain old individual
selfishness. Environmentalism is the latest nihilist mutant. It
holds that man's good must be destroyed, but the good of other
species preserved. There is virtue in seeking the good of trees,
birds and soft-shelled clams! Environmentalism, too, is doomed by
its own nihilist essence. It will die when enviros see that every
living being seeks its own good. Then even the enviro ideal of a
wilderness devoid of human life will be damned as a cesspit of
selfishness, in which all inhabitants-from bacteria to beans to
bugs to buffaloes-ceaselessly, selfishly seek to live! Rejection
of self-interest boils down to rejection of life. Nihilism's final
ideal is a moonscape scrubbed clean of life."
(Michael Miller, Engineer, Objectivist philosopher, founder of
Quackgrass Press. "Nihilist
Mutants.")
Sacrifice,
tribalism, and the
Ishmael Paradigm
are all abhorrent stems off the root of nihilism. All were devised
by men like the Party bureaucrats, who were driven by the savage
urge to inflict evil as an end in itself. Relativism, too, is an
offspring of nihilism. It accepts the nihilistic premise that
objective values must be combated; it merely takes the blunder a
step further by mandating the acceptance of arbitrary perceptions
devised by a herd.
The mass indoctrination industries of today through their
commodities, be those vulgar comedies such as "Seinfeld",
hate-filled hollers such as those of Eminem, pornographic
literature, or films advocating the humiliation of man, seek to
institute the ideology of nihilism in the populace precisely
because it will result in a voluntary rejection of such a
fundamental absolute virtue as individual life by the very persons
whose destruction is the aim of the leftist paradigm. It is no
coincidence that the hippie generation had been educated under the
(anti)"progressive" system and had engaged in the first massive
outbreak of nihilism in the United States. It is also no
coincidence that the youths of today, educated in the elite
universities by adult hippies, have embraced a more frightening
variation on the same brutish theme. They support the nihilism
under pretext of "self-expression" when they in reality but
replicate automatically the stern commands imposed upon them from
all directions by the establishment, killing the self. In that
same manner, they support prostitution under pretext of "free
love" when it is merely the exertion of the Wilderness's urge to
molest, to rape, to exploit those who are suffering. Such a brutal
trade in human flesh has not declined or ceased in our society
despite its abolition by law. It had not declined in Oceania,
either. |