blah blah
...r of fact war guaranteed stability by consuming the economic overproduction and thus prevented a rising standard of living and incidentally also generated more faithful Party adherents. Another threat to the system is the empirical method of thought which Goldstein identifies as opposed to the most fundamental principles of Ingsoc. It is a way of thinking essentially based on the belief that the acquiring of knowledge is only possible through careful observation and experiments. Moreover it is a concept of reasoning which is not only the basis for any further scientific research or technological development but also stimulates and influences the way people behave in general. It is a concept of thinking which is closely linked to an objective perception of reality. The Party however agreed that in order to maintain permanent rule it was necessary to dislocate any sense of reality. Hence the denial of any objective reality and the complete manipulation of reality became central features of Ingsoc : ‘Whatever the Party holds to be truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party’ (O’Brien during Winston’s interrogation 1984 p.261). To achieve this aim the Party ultimately denied their members all means of checking information. Yet through careful observation (as for instance Winston did) people could realise that indeed the Party insidiously manipulated their existence. As a matter of fact this is one of the potential dangers of empirical thinking for the system : By carefully controlling and judging information people might notice that for instance the whole functioning of society, the devotion of the government and the father figure of Big Brother, all was a carefully constructed lie. As a matter of fact contrary to the Party propaganda their standard of living was not constantly increasing, Goldstein did probably not exist nor is there any threat of an immediate invasion of any part of Oceania. Ultimately an awareness might arise that the state massively manipulates and blurs reality and that their whole ‘party-distorted’ existence has no relation to reality whatsoever but only aims at sustaining the Party’s authority. Winston’s rational behaviour reveals to which extent an empirical way of thinking constitutes a threat to the system. Although small and unimportant as a person himself, many ‘Winstons’ might eventually cause the downfall of the Party. Indeed Winston is the living evidence of Goldstein’s statement that empirical thought opposes the Party’s principles. Another crucial concept contrived to maintain the system is the concept of ‘doublethink’. In practise it means the power of holding simultaneously two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind and accepting both of them. In Nineteen Eighty-Four this is not merely a way of thinking, it is a doctrine. It is a concept which lies at the very heart of Ingsoc. Undoubtedly an empirical point of view radically contradicts the concept of ‘doublethink’. Hence this is another fundamental reasons why Goldstein’s book identifies empirical thought as ‘opposed to the most fundamental principles of Ingsoc’. Indeed it refutes the very relativism (i.e. 2 x 2 = 5) as displayed by the regime’s spokesman O’Brien in the Ministry of Truth during Winston’s interrogation. Another example of ‘doublethink’ is the idea of world-conquest which ‘is believed in most firmly by those’ Inner Party members ‘who know it to be impossible’ (1984 p.225). As a general rule the greater the understanding the greater the delusion: the more intelligent, the less sane. Hence the somehow paradoxical conclusion that ‘the prevailing mental condition’ in Oceania ‘must be one of controlled insanity’ (1984 p.225). Eventually it is ‘the denial of reality which is the special feature of Ingsoc’ (1984 p.205). Finally apart from the permanent surveillance of Party adherents and the distortion of reality, the mutability of the past is another crucial tenet of Ingsoc. In fact as far as the philosophy of the regime is concerned there is a significant correlation between the future, past and present. ‘Who controls the past’ the Party slogan runs ‘controls the future; who controls the present controls the past’. To admit that there has been a change is a threat to stability itself and a sign of weakness as well. Hence the Party’s exertions to alter the course of history in an attempt to make it comply with its program. The importance of this issue is clearly highlighted by the incredible commitment of the Ministry of Truth. Indeed a whole department continuously extends the Party’s claim on the past and rewrites history in such a way as to agree with Big Brother’s previous policy. Hence if for instance Eurasia or Eastasia is the enemy today, then that country must always have been the enemy. And if the facts say otherwise, then the facts must be altered. ‘Thus history is continuously rewritten. This day-to-day falsification of the past, carried out by the Ministry of Truth, is as necessary to the stability of the regime as the work of repression and espionage carried out by the Ministry of Love’ (1984 p.222). An empirical way of thinking however would utterly refute this continuous manipulation of facts. An example of this is Winston’s careful observation and collection of evidence which unmasks the distortion of facts by the system. Thus for instance Oceania has not always been at war with the same enemy nor has the helicopter been invented by the Party. Eventually the protagonist’s main exhibit, the picture showing the apparently treacherous Inner Party members which he knows to be faked, clearly denounces the Party propaganda as essentially deceitful. In addition the Party is also interested in reducing the impact of science and technology as they are based on empirical thought and hence do not harmonise with the Party’s regressive policy. Science might imply change and as such is no longer tolerated: ‘Certain backwards areas have been developed, but experiment and invention have largely stopped’ (1984 p.197). Incidentally an empirical method of thought also fosters curiosity and doubt. It embodies the idea of controlling information and promotes a critical way of thinking which directly opposes the Party’s interest in blind submission. As a matter of fact the Party is essentially concerned of how to prevent any ‘infectious’ idea from disseminating. Hence the extreme control and surveillance of its members. An empirical way of thinking must not be allowed to disseminate lest like a bushfire, it should spread beyond control. Therefore the Party policy quite narrowly pursues the idea of constantly keeping their population in a state of total ignorance. Each block is highly separated and keeps its inhabitants in a ‘sealed world’ (1984 p.204). But not only is each superstate a ‘separated universe’ (198...