“1984” by George Orwell Analysis Essay

When two claims contradict superstar a nonher, it is futile and expendless in endeavouring to analogize between the two. George Orwell, the power of the raw 1984, defines doublethink as the power of attri savee two contradictory beliefs in integritys mind simultaneously, and pass judgment both of them. It is the idea of in truth accepting two conflicting ideas, which eliminates an psyches capacity of creation adequate to think or act freely. Dinh, the author of both the patriot Act and the turn up How the USA nationalist Act Defends state, uses a modern twenty-four hour period form of double think in an attempt to give up the nationalist Act, an act which unconstitutionally violates the man-to-mans right(a) of privacy through the clandestine use of date. Gelsey, the author of the essay The FBI is Reading over Your Shoulder illustrates the potential effect of the Library Records Provision of the patriot Act, other than liven as Section 215. Section 215 allows th e giving medication to search and obtain the records of every single without the individuals consent or knowledge. Gelsey claims that intimidating readers in such a manner is, in effect, supreme what we read and how we think, olibanum it circumvents the First Amendment by threatening readers rather than prohibiting what they read.Gelsey comp atomic number 18s this didactics to Winston Smith, the protagonist of the novel 1984, whose capacity of free thought and self expression is impaired and damaged due to continual monitor and surveillance. The two conflicting claims of both Dinh and Gelsey bring in to point the issue of protecting individual rights versus the right of the state to access an individuals private information. Dinh claims that a balance of ideals and techniques is necessary and postulate for the rights of the individual to be protected. However, these techniques of surveillance and monitoring violate those ideals, which are the constitutional rights that protec t an individual from state power. Dinhs contestation of combining ideals and techniques canister be viewed as a modern day form of doublethink because Dinh attempts to shrive the patriot Act through the explanation of how the rights of an individual can lonesome(prenominal) be protected when those rights are unconstitutionally violated through the exposure of privacy.Doublethink, which is the simultaneous belief in two contradictory ideas bit being unaware of its compatibility, is a form of manipulation of the mind. In the novel 1984, the protagonist Winston Smith is forever and a day under monitor and surveillance, which has altered and mangled his mind. Thus he becomes incapable of being able to know which thoughts are truly his, and is no longer able to express himself of his testify free will. The perpetual government surveillance in the novel forces Winston to secretly purchase a diary in which to write his own thoughts. However, the pressure of being under incessant mon itoring has made Winston incapable of expressing his own thoughts, as he is only able to write the same phrase over and over. This creates a sense of paranoia that is also seen in Gelseys essay as she writes well-nigh the interminate surveillance and monitoring of innocent and unsuspecting individuals. Gelsey states that the feeling of being monitored inhibits freedom of thought as seen in Winston, and also in modern lodge today.However, Dinh, the writer of the patriot Act, claims such fear and paranoia are absurd, and states that it is historically and legally unfounded to compare government surveillance to that of the surveillance used in 1984. In the novel, the Party, who are elites, uses doublethink as a massive campaign in secern to psychologically manipulate the individuals of the participation they live in. By using double think, the Party is able to drop the individuals cap faculty of being able to think independently. They manipulate the individual into believing whats oever they are told to believe. The official slogan of the Party, which is war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength is the first example and introduction to a form of doublethink. The words of the slogan all contradict one a nonher. Yet the party is successfully able to manipulate society, which allows them to force individuals into believing whatever is needed to believe, regardless of how illogical or contradictory the statement may be. By being manipulated and coerced into accepting the ambivalent and conflicting nature of doublethink, the independence and self ending of individuals begin to dwindle and diminish.In 1984, doublethink is seen once more as Winston Smith deletes disturbing yet on-key facts from the public records. He is then forced by the Party to believe the fabricated version of the truth. A modern day form of doublethink is used by Dinh, the author of the Patriot Act. Dinh expresses a modern day form of double think as he arfues that the Constituti on, which protects individualsfrom government power, must be violated by the government in prescribe for the individuals right to be protected. This unconstitutional claim contradicts itself, thus Dinh has incorporated a modern day form of double think in his essay. As the dapple of 1984 progresses, it is clarified that newspeak must be present in order for doublethink to be effective. Newspeak is the official language of the society in 1984.The Party created Newspeak with the purpose of limiting a persons thought and speech, thus eliminating any rebellious thought. This allows the Party to constantly monitor individuals and to further ensure that everyday thought and speech can be limited and manipulated. Newspeak is the method the Party members adopt in order to control and manipulate persuasion through the alteration of language, while double think is the technique the Party members use to directly control individual thoughts. Doublethink also allows the Party, or in Dinhs case , to hide its own wrongs from itself and society through the unvarying use of surveillance and propaganda. This proves to affect not only the individuals thought and actions shown in 1984, but also that of the individual members of the Party. Doublethink proves to be an effective method of persuasion and manipulation not only in the novel 1984, but in modern society as well, as seen in the issue brought upon by the Patriot Act.When the individuals right to privacy is tested by the government, it is justifiable for the principle and piety of the government to be tested by the individual. The Patriot Act, written by Dinh, claims to balance the ideals and techniques that are required for the protection of the individuals rights granted by the Constitution. Section 215 of the Patriot Act grants the government the ability to obtain the records of any individual, such as library book records, providing that the government assures that it is trying to protect against terrorism. It is ve rbalise in the First Amendment that an individual has the right to read whatever book or material they confide to read. However, Section 215 of the Patriot Act violates the right of being able to freely choose what an individual wants to read. If the rights of one person are violated, then the rights of every individual of this country are violated. Therefore it is constitutional and participatory for the right of every individual to be protected, not just a select few.In society today, the free communication between people is thebasis for free thinking. the freedom of thought is curtailed if there is no free communication, which results in restricted thinking. Gelsey writes that the FBI is policing our minds by purporting to read them. Although Dinh claims that the Patriot Act protects the rights of individuals, Gelsey believes that this section violates the most substantive right granted by the Constitution, which is that giving up privacy rights cant guarantee physiologic saf ety, but it will almost certainly inhibit intellectual freedom. She states that she does not want to give up liberty for security because it does not guarantee security. However, the pressure of being watched and monitored will take away the individuals ability to properly think, as shown by Winston in the 1984. This is where Dinh disagrees.He states that such concerns expressed just about official surveillance of US citizens are reasonable and should be addressed. He then attempts to explain how the Patriot Act does not violate individual rights by stating that the society should trust us. The government wouldnt holler these new powers against individuals. However, it is difficult to trust Dinhs claim based on his lack of credibility. From the beginning of his essay How the USA Patriot Act Defends Democracy, contradictory statements are already evident.Although he wrote the Patriot Act, Dinh thinks that the Patriot Act is one of the most important legislative measures in America n history. If Dinh thinks that the Patriot Act is only one of the most legislative measures, it shows that Dinh himself is not sure whether or not it is important at all. He also states that the terrorists are nihilistic, which is untrue. Terrorists are religious fanatics and true believers in religious or personal causes. all in all these inaccurate and false statements demonstrates Dinhs lack of credential. Therefore the readers have valid reason of not accepting Dinhs claims. As a result, Dinh attempts to use a modern day form of doublethink in an attempt to justify his claims in order to persuade the reader.Chaos and discord is inevitable without a certain measure of balance. In the concluding paragraph of Dinhs essay, Dinh attempts to clarify the relationship of ideals and techniques. Dinh states that the knowledgeableness of liberty is under round down Although he persuasively attempts to articulate this claim, the foundation of liberty is in fact not in jeopardy. Thefound ation of liberty is the Constitution, which states the rights of citizens in this democratic nation. These rights include the Bill of Rights, which are the amendments of the Constitution. Dinh alerts the readers that terrorists are attempting to attack the foundation of liberty, the Constitution. However, terrorists do not prioritize in the undertaking of missions to eliminate the rights of U.S. citizens. Terrorists attempt to define their reason of terrorism by attacking capitalism. Capitalism and majority rule are not similar systems. Capitalism describes the efficient system, while democracy is the political system.Terrorists attack capitalism, not the Constitution, through the destruction of symbolic buildings in order to halt the economical egress of the United States. Further in the paragraph, Dinh exclaims that it is critical that we both reaffirm the ideals of our constitutional democracy. Dinh defines ideals as the rights wedded to each individual that protects from gov ernment power. The constitutional democracy he also writes about is not the magic trick of economic opportunity, but it is Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Dinh also states that it is important to discern the techniques necessary to secure those ideals against the threat of terrorism. Dinh believes that the Patriot Act is the necessary technique that can extend the powers of government by going beyond what the law permits. These techniques violates the Constitution through the surveillance of individuals by the order of the state.By declaring that these techniques are necessary in order to secure the ideals against the threat of terrorism, Dinh is acknowledging the fact that the Constitution must be violated in order for it to be protected from terrorism. However, it is was already mentioned that the terrorists do not pursue the Constitution, but rather the economic growth of the U.S. Dinh indicates that the government must violate the rights which protect individuals from stat e power in order to protect those rights. This is an evident use of modern double think, which is the the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in ones mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them Dinh continues by quoting a renowned law professor who knows nothing about the terrorists that Dinh is warning the readers about. The quote ideals without techniques are a mess.But technique without ideals is a menace does not subsume to Dinhs Patriot Act. Dinh simply uses Llewellyns quote without even explaining the intended meaning of it. Dinh attempts torelate the Patriot act with the ideals and techniques, but it is evident that the two cannot be compared in any aspect. There is only the anadiplosis and repetition of the words ideals and techniques, which does not clearly explain the meaning or purpose of Dinhs use of those words. Dinh merely states that the combining of ideals and techniques will shield democracy, and then uses double think in order to justify how the Patrio t Act violates the Constitution and individual rights.It is evident that Dinhs statement can be viewed as a modern day form of double think because it attempts to combine the contradictory claims that an individuals rights can only be protected through the violation of those rights. Gelsey claims that the governmental techniques, which involve surveillance and obtaining groundless records, directly violate the ideals and rights that Dinh claims to protect. The capacity of being able to think and act freely are prohibited, if not restricted, hen people are aware that they are under constant surveillance, Innocent individuals being monitored would not be able to act freely because they would not know what actions are capable of being considered suspicious.Gelsey connects her statement to 1984 and its protagonist Winston Smith, whose capability to act and think freely was tampered with due to the strain of being under constant surveillance. Yet Dinh argues against such claims by stati ng that During these times, when the foundation of liberty is under attack, we must reaffirm the ideals of our constitutional democracy and also discern the techniques necessary to secure those ideals against the threat of terrorism. Beneath all of the fanciful dictation and reduplication of words, the readers discover that such techniques only violate those ideals. The violation of privacy rights can only be regarded as a direct violation to the Constitution, not as a shield to those ideals. As Dinh discards the comparison of the Patriot Act with Orwells illustration of the states potential to invade individual rights, the readers discard Dinhs credentials as well, due to the inaccurate and inconclusive use of the techniques and ideals he regards as necessary in the fight against terrorism.Citing SourcesGelsey, Zara. The FBI is Looking Over Your Shoulder. The Brief Bedford Reader.Ed. X. J. K. Kennedy, Dorothy M. Kennedy, and Jane E. Aaron. 9th. Ed.Boston Bedford, 2006. 473- 478Dinh , Viet. How the U.S. Patriot Act Defends Democracy. The Brief Bedford Reader.Ed. X. J. K. Kennedy, Dorothy M. Kennedy, and Jane E. Aaron. 9th. Ed.Boston Bedford, 2006. 479- 485Orwell, George. _1984_. Afterword by Erich Fromm. New York Signet, 1992