1984 Plato And Orwell Analysis

Plato’s Republic and Orwell’s 1984 display contradicting societies. In the society presented by Plato, the ideal kingdom was constructed in a way that everyone had everything they needed. People were working in the fields that they specialized in such as in the Greek "organic" view of state; combining the roles of the appetites in the body, the heart, and the head. The government made sure that people were not exposed to evil. On the other hand, Orwell’s society was oppressive and totalitarian where people suffered a great deal. The government prosecuted them for thought crime the government made use of manipulating false information and propaganda to further its power. Comparing the two societies might seem counterintuitive because of the

stark differences between the two. One society is totalitarian and horrific while other is based upon a Greek utopian fantasy of an ideal government. However, the themes and plot devices show that there are many parallels to be made between the two societies. Both Plato and Orwell commenced societies where the form of government relies heavily upon repression with the difference that Plato presents the repression in a positive way while Orwell depicts in a negative way by the right to rule, propaganda and perception of the masses in the society.
It is visible in both writings that only a few individuals are given the right to rule. There is no democracy in each writer’s ideal society. In Plato’s society, there is the selected few who have delegated the authority to rule. The selected few are trained and educated for their roles in society their whole lives which hone their intellect and gives them the superior knowledge to rule. However, in Orwell’s society, the power resides with the Party of Big Brother which keeps it between the like-minded individuals who would further the goals of the Party.
The difference between the two societies, though, is that Plato’s society gives the rule to a chosen few under the pretext that only an educated few where their quality of the soul is set in the head with the appetite of wisdom. The chosen few should work in their particular field, not anyone else. Plato says through his character Socrates: " And the shoemaker was not allowed by us to be husbandman, or a weaver, a builder−−in order that we might have our shoes well made; but to him and to every other worker was assigned one work for which he was by nature fitted." (Republic Book II, Political Theory and the Human Predicament, pg. 60 paragraph 374.). Plato proposes that since only a person who is best at their profession should do it, it makes sense for rule should be made by someone who is superior to the knowledge and wisdom to rule. This statement means that democracy is not the right way of governing because it gives a voice to people in the matter of government who are not best at running the society's government. These select few individuals who would be best at governing would be selected based on their natural characteristics such as intelligence that could contemplate larger principals and wisdom. They will also be taught and raised to rule by shaping their appetite of personalities of the head, the heart and the body fit for ruling the government. This act can be performed through education and carefully audited ideas exposed to them from childhood. Plato's suggestion clearly shows a division in society, giving the selected few individuals right to rule while forcing others into professions they did not choose.
This division of classes is also visible in Orwell’s society where, again, chosen few have the right to rule. These individuals are chosen, just like Plato’s society, based on their merit, as opposed to birth or any other characteristics. Whether one has merit is determined through an “examination taken at the age of sixteen” (Orwell 2013, p. 263). This is similar to recognition of certain qualities in Plato’s Republic by the current rulers in the children of the society. Orwell’s society nominates successor by who can further the party’s goals and agendas. In 1984 it stated, “A ruling group is a ruling group so long as it can nominate its successors. The Party is not concerned with perpetuating its blood but with perpetuating itself” (Orwell 2013, p. 265).
Both Orwell and Plato both depict societies where governments make use of propaganda to further its goals or for the greater good. In both societies, there is no democratic way of government. The power resides with a few individuals who are considered to be superior to the rest of the society, thus giving them the right to rule. Both societies are shaped in such a way that keeping the truth from the public through manipulation of misinformation and propaganda is thought to be correct because truth is considered to bring discord to the society. However, the difference between the oppression in two societies is that Plato’s propaganda is aimed towards improving the intellect of guardians, the select few chosen to rule, from the start. In Orwell’s society, it is used as a way of protection of national security against others such as the protection from their nation's enemy, Eurasia. Plato provides adequate reasons for the propaganda in his book.
Plato believes that the children in his Republic should be told the stories and myths that are tailored towards making them better people. They will be shielded from all material that is deemed unimportant or counterproductive for them to know while exposed to the content that would improve the qualities that should be present in a ruler. Plato insisted that these Guardians are not told about acts of gods as absolute good and evil so that they are not too much influenced by such notions. Plato wants them to have their individual opinions about what constitutes good and evil; thus, he would rather they are not told about the decisions of gods. Plato says, “And if a poet writes of the sufferings of Niobe… either we must not permit him to say that these are the works of God, or if they are of God, he must devise some explanation of them such as we are seeking” (Republic Book II, p. 50). This close censorship of children’s mind and exposing them only to the right content, so they grow up to be exactly how the rulers shape them to be, show the level of censorship in Plato's utopian society. The education with priorities in good intentions and wisdom will prevent them not to be corrupted. This censorship, despite the good intentions, has the potential of being horribly misused or backfired if, or rather when, the power goes into wrong hands.
Same is the case with Orwell’s society where the government spreads manipulating misinformation and propaganda at a very young age to the children by the telescreen. In 1984, it stated, “Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worst of all was that by means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages…they adored the Party and everything connected to it.” (Orwell, Pg. 26). They feed such information to the children that they grow up to be more loyal to the party than their parents. Everyone believes in what the Ministry of Truth tells them while the Ministry tells them nothing but lies. The difference is that while the truth is not objective in Orwell’s society, Plato’s society would be so heavily regulated that free speech or debate would be near to impossible. Rulers would have the absolute say about what does, or does not, constitutes as truth or should be taught.
In Oceania, the society is divided into three main class systems. They are the Inner Party, the Outer Party, and the Proles. “Big Brother is is infallible, and all-powerful… all knowledge, all wisdom, all happiness, all virtue, are held to issue directly for his leadership and inspiration.” (Orwell, pg. 208.) Big Brother is at the very top of the society as well as the leader of the Party, whom rules and possess a great deal of power. In Plato’s Republic, the philosophers are at the top, who possess wisdom and knowledge to rule. Socrates stated, “Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy, and political greatness and wisdom meet in one….cities will never have rest from their evils.” (The Republic, Political Theory and the Human Predicament, pg. 85. Paragraph 473.) The role of the philosopher kings is that they obtain the moral, intellectual and just virtues that are fit to rule. They will have the society’s best interest at heart. Both rulers act as a protector and oversee the overall well-being of the society. The role of the citizens are similar as well by the three classes are doing their natural job and not get involved with one another. Big Brother’s sole interest is to the Party’s success, manipulating the masses by making them feel like they are protected for the sake of their own good. Plato’s philosopher kings’ are different in which their sole interest is the overall perfectly just state. Where the quality of the soul, in virtue of which men set, is working harmoniously to reach the perfect just state.
In conclusion, there are many parallels to be made between the themes of 1984 and the Republic.

The two most prominent similarities between the two societies are the system of government and transition of power, and the way both governments make use of propaganda to further their goals. An interesting observation can be made here that despite the fact that the government in Orwell’s society is blatantly and shamelessly oppressive. As opposed to Plato’s benevolent and good-intended government trying to look after its citizens, it is clear that the government in Plato’s proposed utopia would be worse in many ways in comparison than that in Orwell’s novel. This might seem counterintuitive because Plato’s Republic genuinely seems concerned with the good fortune of its citizens while the Party is interested in increasing its power and fulfilling its agenda. However, this can be observed from the fact that, while the Party spreads manipulating misinformation among the masses and keeps them misinformed through propaganda, the Party itself knows that what it is doing is wrong, on some levels. This is not true for the Republic which considers itself to be in the right and thus does not see the wrongs of its ways. Plato’s government in his utopia would be certain of its ways and the steps it takes because it would consider itself to be doing work for the greater good. There is a hope that, because they know that what they are doing is wrong, the wrongs in the Party might be slightly improved. Since the Republic’s Guardians would think of themselves as saviors, there is a very lesser chance, in comparison, that they would stop to think and amend their ways. This supports that the Republic’s government can be considered to be worse than the Party in certain ways when compared with each

other.