Similarities Between 1984 By George Orwell

George Orwell’s 1984 details a nightmarish future society in which the government controls every aspect of civilian life and citizens do not even have privacy in their own thoughts. The English Socialist Party, or Ingsoc, successfully uses tactics such as language manipulation, propaganda, and constant surveillance to maintain their absolute hold on power. While many have read the novel as a sharp criticism of Stalin’s communist government, Erich Fromm writes in the novel’s afterword that “it would be most unfortunate if the reader smugly interpreted 1984 as another description of Stalinist barbarism, and if he does not see that it means us, too” (326). So is our society more similar to Winston’s than we would like to believe? Are we destined

to end up as poorly off as Winston Smith and the other citizens of Oceania? Based on events and societal structures going on in our own world, Erich Fromm is incorrect in his claim that 1984 ‘means us, too’ because despite similarities in the two societies, there is a difference in the intent of the governments that hold power.

However, it is very possible that our society devolves into one resembling Orwell’s in the future, as the requisite technology and government practices are already in place for one malignant leader to misuse.
There are several frightening similarities in the means by which the Party maintains control and technology available in the present, namely the ability to watch and listen to everything that a citizen does. One of the Party’s main means of intrusion is the telescreen, a device that is able to both transmit propaganda and see and hear everything that Winston does in his apartment and other places. This technology introduces the possibility of

constant, uninterrupted surveillance of all citizens, rendering the concept of privacy completely obsolete. Citizens of Oceania “had to live [...] in the assumption that every sound [...] was overheard, and [...] every movement scrutinized” (Orwell 3). The government of Oceania achieved the ability to see everything their citizens say and do, a degree of surveillance that is increasingly prevalent in our society as well. In the midst of a worldwide technological revolution, Americans have less privacy nowadays than ever, and the government is only becoming more intrusive. In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee, revealed that . Media projections predict that there will be 45 billion cameras in the world by 2022, watching and recording all actions we make. Popular ‘home assistants’ such as Google Home and Amazon Echo All of this contributes to the inescapable feeling that we are being watched, that everything we do can be caught on camera and scrutinized and everything heard by others. No place is free of the watchful eye of an endless stream of cameras, recording what we do for anyone to see. Parallels between 1984 and America in the present can be seen in both governments’ incessant examination of everyone’s every move, and the resulting lack of privacy.
After being shown these similarities, one might wonder as to how our societies are different?

If everything we do is being recorded and examined, and the government knows every bit of information that there is to know about each and every single one of us, how are we any better off than Winston? The key difference lies in intent. Oceania is run by an oppressive and restrictive government whose sole aim is to control the political orthodoxy of its citizens in order to maintain its power and crush any possibility of resistance. O’Brien bluntly sums up the Party’s goals to Winston when he says, “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake [...] Power is not a means, it is an end” (Orwell 263). Thus, the Party surveils the populace of Oceania to make sure that everyone is toeing the line and there is no threat to their absolute power. In contrast, the United States government uses surveillance as a means to ensure the safety of Americans. This is evidenced by the existence of a Bill of Rights specifically intended to prevent citizens from living the same deprived existence as the people of Oceania in 1984. Rights guaranteed in Amendment I, the right to freedom of speech, assembly, press, and religion, Amendment IV, the right against unlawful search and seizure, Amendment V, right against self-incrimination, and Amendment VII, right to trial by jury, are clearly written to prevent the government from intruding on the rights of the people. Contrast this with 1984, in which

citizens are not allowed to even think thoughts that oppose the party (thoughtcrime), the Thought Police can enter and someone’s house whenever they want to, torture is used to force false confessions, and people can be arrested and their existence erased from history at any time. These protections offered by the American government would clearly be counterintuitive to the aims of the Party, who seek to make rights a foreign concept and devotion to Big Brother the sole focus of the people. A government that aims to control its citizens fundamentally cannot be the same as a government that aims to protect its citizens. Thus, Erich Fromm is incorrect in his claim because despite similarities in how the two nations operate, Oceania and the present-day United States perform these practices with vastly different intentions.
Despite the clear differences between our society and 1984, there is substantial potential for American life to eventually become similar to that of the citizens of Oceania. While their intended use of surveillance is generally to protect the safety and wellbeing of its citizens, the fact remains that the government possesses the technology necessary to be capable of extensive, malicious surveillance. Instances of misuse of technology have already occurred; Indeed, this disturbing possibility is not surprising; it is present in any country whose government is able to watch their citizens. Just as England was once a free and democratic country before devolving into part of the totalitarian state described in 1984, it is possible that well-intentioned and beneficial supervision of the public becomes encroaching and oppressive. All it takes is one power-hungry autocrat or fanatical former reality television star to become president for our societal fabric to come crashing down, and for the mustached face of Big Brother to make its way into the everyday lives of Americans.

It is important to recognize threats to sovereignty, combat it; England was at one point free and eventually transitioned to become Oceania. This is Orwell’s message: people not being politically engaged, tyranny unchecked leads to 1984