Can you point out the part in your Hannah Arendt’s quote that talks about the sowing of mistrust in leaders, experts or press?
Can you…not?
Hillary Clinton clearly got the message of the book completely bass-awkwards, since the goal of the authorities in 1984 was not to sow distrust towards the leaders or the press and experts that they completely controlled, but there’s no way to contort that statement to say that she’s claiming the message of the book is ‘trust your leaders’, especially since the list of people she thinks they were sowing distrust towards includes ‘ourselves’. Clinton is an awful enough person and candidate that you can find reams of material of bad things about her, I’m not sure why you’d make up something that’s immediately disproved by the quote you try to prove it with.
Because they had alrady been crushed and their works were being thrown down the memory holes. The population was being conditioned to accept only what the Party said right now regardless of evidence even if previously created by the Party’s own media and experts if it stopped being convenient.
Emmanuel Goldstein counts as a leader, surely. The press is depicted as an organ of the state, so there’s no distinct “press” for the state to target.
This one’s easier: the victims of the Great Purge; the Russian Orthodox Church (pre-war); the 3,000 biologists imprisoned, killed, or fired for opposition to Lysenkoism, for a start.
Hanna Arendt’s idea was that people mistrusted authoritarian lying leaders. Hillary’s claim is that the point is to make the citizenry mistrust the “good”, democratic, non-lying leaders. How is Arendt’s quote in any way supporting Hillary’s claim?
I’m going to agree with the OP on this one. That is a bizarre interpretation of the message of 1984.
Yes, O’Brien’s goal is to make Smith distrust logic and reason. But O’Brien wasn’t trying to sow mistrust in authority. He was doing the opposite by making Smith give blind obedience to authority.
Personally, I doubt that’s what Clinton really believes. I feel this was probably just a really poorly written line.
Stalin’s “alteration of reality” and the oppression in general was designed to control and brainwash the population. NOT to “sow mistrust” in press, leaders or experts. Since all the “press, leaders or experts” were the government ones, and the program’s goal (and a hugely successful one, actually) was to make the public trust the government’s leaders, press and experts. Not to mistrust them. Same with 1984.
You’ve misunderstood both Arendt and Clinton, actually.
Arendt was saying that authoritarian leaders try to sow mistrust of all truth, and they don’t care if that ends up sowing mistrust of themselves, because the destruction of truth and the increase in cynicism ultimately benefits them. Indeed, it establishes and reinforces their power to have them lie to you and you have to accept it.
Hillary was paraphrasing that same point. She probably should have cited Arendt (although maybe she did?).
This is news to you?
Regards,
Shodan
The fact is that Stalin’s “alteration of reality” program was hugely successful in brainwashing the general citizenry to trust and have faith in the government and, especially in Stalin’s case, worship the leaders. I don’t think Arendt is correct in her general analysis - maybe that’s the end result in some cases, but definitely not in all, and definitely not the goal.
There are perfectly fair criticisms of Arendt.
But my point was that 1984 was making the same argument as Arendt, and Hillary is correctly interpreting 1984. The OP’s reading of Hillary’s comments is incorrect. Hillary appears to understand the book better than OP.
I don’t think it was. At least that’s not my reading of the book. And no, Hillary (as others pointed out in this thread) is completely misinterpreting the book. Yes, redifinition of reality is the core feature of authoritarian regimes. No, the goal is not to sow mistrust in the leaders, press or experts - since the leaders, press and experts are of the regime, and another core feature of authoritarian regimes is denying their citizens access to alternative points of view.
Or maybe since I would be perfectly comfortable with Elizabeth Warren or Jill Stein as president, or even Carmen Electra over Hillary, you are just flailing, since your authoritarian old fool lost.
I never read the book. But I think I read Moby Dick.
Uh huh. I’m sure you have female friends too.
There’s a possibility she didn’t write the line even, but an outsourced ghostwriter did.
Nah. Her interpretation is the standard one. Here’s Michiko Kakutani on the subject.
Don’t you ?
About that: in the Nexus ad, isn’t that an awfully jaunty font for old Moby ?