He who controls the past controls the future, but only to the extent to which he can control the population. In 1984, Big Brother controls the past and controls the population, making the only people capable of rebellion those who are old enough to remember how it was before or those who can look past the principles of doublethink and see the past being actively changed. This may happen more then Winston knows, however it would be impossible to verify due to the nature of the society he lives in. This is also made irrelevant by the thought police. While you may be able to rebel in your head, you cannot go against what the government says either publicly or in the privacy of your home, making the slight amount of thought freedom you would enjoy useless. Therefore the government can control the future without having complete control over the past by having control over the citizens.
I agree that one temporarily controls the past through controlling and influencing the population that is controlled in the present. Because political propaganda is forced day after day upon the people in 1984, they eventually begin to believe this information about their past to be true, though the validity of these statistics is questionable. However, who controls the past cannot control the future, though he may affect the future. In 1984, Winston writes his diary having some sort of hope that it can useful in the future and that the future will hold better times. He assumes that there is a chance that Big Brother will not control the future. For the time being, he controls the people and their opinions, "vaporizing" anyone who disagrees with his views. Big Brother will no doubt have an affect on society, but he can never control the future of this society, no matter how many minds he brainwashes nor how many "free thinkers" he executes. What the future holds is unknown and unpredictable, therefore an attempt to control the future will fail. While Big Brother may control his people for the present and the near future, sooner or later something or someone will overrule this power, be it Goldstein or even the proles. It is the uncertainty of what will happen that prevents one from controlling the future.
This is Erik (for some reason blogger wont let me sign in) but anyway I agree entirely with the statement "he who controls the present controls the past," though not entirely with the latter phrase. We get all of our information about the world from various sources, be it the internet or on TV, and just like the Ministry of Truth in 1984 there is some entity that controls those sources. Now I'm not saying it's all the same source (and thus leading to a singular bias, as in Oceania) but they control what we know, and so then what we think about the past. If a false act was added to the history books in some harsh future, then those learning it would believe it true. The complete control of the Party in 1984 allows them to freely shape this past so that it is constantly shifting to their own current truths.
I believe both of these statements are correct, and I agree with both of them. However, I can only agree with both of them when they are paired as a chain. "Who controls the present controls the past; who controls the past controls the future." The people in control of the past are not necessarily those from that time. The people of the present in power, such as Big Brother and the Party in 1984 were able to control the past from the present, and believed with that chain they were able to control the future. As, if the people are brainwashed into believing the society they live in dominated the recent past, the faith in the ruler and his followers are solidified, furthering the power (of Big Brother). Normally, though, the people from the past can never control the future, they can only create a form of influence. It is in nature that nothing can be perfect, and for that reason, no self-supported civilization or society can live on forever. This means that the control of the future is naturally impossible. But, the people of the present can bend these natural rules to their will, able to control the people from then on to believe in the power of the controllers.
I too would have to side with Steven on that both these statements as being valid. The statement of "who controls the past controls the future" seems to imply that an influential entity in the present has a great grasp of the public, as with the case in 1984. By having an overwhelming side of supporters, one could then manipulate the public on their knowledge of what happened in the past and thereby influence and "control" the future.
With the next statement saying "who controls the present controls the past" is directly related to the previous statement in the sense that forms of powerful and all-ruling governments can regulate what resources the masses of people can obtain. By doing this, they can alter information of events in history that were beforehand facts, and suddenly now myths. As seen in North Korea, regulating what people can and can't do has an immense impact on the mentalities of many such as in 1984.
I agree with this statement. If we learn and can understand the past, we can have a better control what might happen in the future. However our society has not implemented that quite yet. Take the Ixtoc and BP oil spill for example. In 1979, the Ixtoc oil rig leaked, caught fire, and sank in the Gulf of Mexico. Sound familiar? To stop the oil leaking into the gulf, the company that owned Ixtoc also had their version of the “top hat” method. Did that work? No. So then they tried shooting junk into the open well. That didn’t work either. They finally stopped the flow of oil when they drilled a relief well. If only we had learned from those mistakes, the BP oil spill may not have lasted as long. Oh, and guess what, the Ixtoc rig also lacked the special blowout preventer on their rig too. So far it has seemed that we have virtually learned nothing from the past. The statement of “who controls the present also controls the past” does hold truth. Like in 1984, so many of our documents can be falsified to promote the present yet destroy the past. Hopefully our society will never come to the extreme shown in the book, but today we can see that the past is being falsified with the use of the internet. Anyone can put anything on the internet, and somewhere someone will believe it. It is so simple to strip down the past just for someone to have control over a group of people. I may not have any examples of this occurring currently, but sooner or later the internet will deform the past by not yielding all the truth or by completely altering the story.
I agree with Michelle when as she says that the future can only be affected so much by the present and past. The present and past will shape the future but the future will not be not be controlled by any single power. He who controls the present controls the past is 100% true. The expression "the winner gets to write the history" is shown here. In all cases throughout history the written records that world historians rely on for information are written by the victorious nations and the stronger societies. Every moment of time there are some nations who control others and the leaders of the stronger nations get to pick the history of their nation. History is full of ethnocentric and falsified information that over time has been taught and learned as true, and that is why the present controls the past, meaning history.
I believe that 1984 is clear evidence that "who controls the present controls the past." The Ministry of Truth is the hub for revising, controlling, and creating a story of the past that fits the ideas and opinions of the present regime such as the Party. I do though believe that isolation has a large part to do with the extent of a governments control of the past. For example, if North Korea was fully participating in world trade and negotiations, they would not be able to completely control the past. Outside influences would prevent a government from doing so. With no connection to the world, a change in history must be followed, for there is no evidence of otherwise. Regarding the ability of the present to control the future, I agree with Steven. A civilization has a strong desire for its "successful" method of ruling to continue as a legacy with future rulers. There is however a limitation on controlling the future. Influence can be very strong, but once a ruler dies, there is no certainty that 100% of his laws would be carried through. The future ruling class can however learn, develop, and inherit ideas that will be implemented in the future. In conclusion, the present cannot control the future because of a lack in the previous ruler, along with his method of governing.
I agree with this statement because there are examples of history when empires allowed for freedom of the press and with the introduction of a free media these empires fell. The Soviet Union is a good example. In the Soviet Union the Govermant controlled the media and attempted to control the ideas of the past that were presented to the citzen's of the Soviet Union and the country remained a stron Empire. When economic decay started to come into affect in the Soviet Union, the empire managed to still mantain itself but, when a free press was introduced it dismatles the empire and led seperation of over 10 countries from the former Soviet Union because Ideas where presented to the mass that did not exist when the govermant controlled what ideas the people would see in there entire lifetime.
It is true that the manipulation of a person's foundation knowledge, or brainwashing, will influence both the person's present way of thinking and the future of that person's thinking. A great example of that would be North Korea. North Korea's strict control over the information given to its residents has allowed the nation to gain a political and military presence. If the citizens of North Korea knew that their poor living conditions were magnified by their leaders, rebellion would obviously occur. Winston makes the same observation. He notes that the people who have the real power are the masses; he also realizes that his government's oppression of knowledge is the cause, and will continuously be the cause of the rule of The Party. Quote from Winston's diary: "Until they become conscious they will never rebel..." They will "never" rebel, implying that the control of the past controls the future AND present.
I definitely agree with the statement that claims, "who controls the present controls the past" as those who control the present have the capability of brainwashing, so to speak, people. They can manipulate facts, misleading the "properly uneducated" people into believing that the past was different than what they deserved to know, the truth. The strict environment in which people lived in clouted their vision to see the truth, causing them to believe otherwise. However, this is not to say that those who control the past will necessarily control the future. Future is a dimension of uncertainty and unpredictability. Brainwashing people is merely an act to fulfill the government's immediate needs of impeding people's right to know the truth. This cannot mean that they will control the future. Even though the government may be able to influence the future to a certain degree, they will not be able to control the future as it is not as simple as a mathematical equation that will have the predicted result as manipulated.
In reference to this quote, I believe that the question we should be asking ourselves ought not to be "Can the Past Be Controlled?", rather "Can the Future Be Controlled?"
"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past." Ergo, who controls the present controls the future. The transitive property strikes again!
As Kean so aptly pointed out (before I could :P), the degree to which the future can be controlled has its limits, so this “equation” must therefore be false.
However, I disagree.
Remember that in this "equation" the past is not literally changed - merely the perception of the past is altered. Just as the past cannot literally be changed, the future cannot be literally changed, either. However, the perception of the future can be altered. In this sense, it is possible to control the future. It all seems kind of wishy-washy in theory, but we’ve seen it happen throughout history.
One example of this occurred during the European colonization of South America. Natives with their own sets of beliefs – beliefs that explained the future and the past – were conquered and then converted. During this process of conversion, missionaries told natives of a past different from their own, involving a guy named Jesus who, it was predicted, would return and perform all sorts of magic and maybe even a little voodoo. The European missionaries, having conquered the natives, controlled the present enough to be able to alter the natives’ perception of the past which in turn altered the (converted) natives’ perception of the future.
The obvious examples involve religion (can anyone say, “Constantine?”), but I’m sure there are worldly examples of this phenomenon.
I agree with the statement "Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past," but in a more abstract way than literal interpretation of this quote in it's context would support. I don't think the main point here is the famous quote that lends to the idea of "learn history or you'll be doomed to repeat it." I think the quote is meant to support instead the cause-and-effect variable inherent in history. This is to say that one thing always follows another, and generally in a reactionary way. This lends also to the idea of a dialectic: thesis, then antithesis, then synthesis. We see this all the time today in international relations. Because one nation does one thing, another nation reacts by working around or with the first nation's actions, and life goes on. Whoever controls, or performs, the first act of the past will inherently be responsible for the domino effect (whether good, bad, or neutral) that follows. If we are to consider the quote solely in the context of 1984 and brainwashing, the quote remains true but for a parallel reason: mental conclusions are based on precedent. If I am capable of manipulation the facts of the past, that which actually happened is of little consequence because the emotional reaction that occurs has little investment in truth if it only supposes truth. Also in a more contextual interpretation of the second part of the quote, I think it's obvious that because Big Brother controls the present, he has the power to manipulate the records of the past. Clearly this is supposing absolute control, much like we see in North Korea, because one grain of truth can spread like wildfire and shatter the mass illusion.
I agree with all who have said that they have agreed with the statement. As has been stated, this is not a literal phrase. One cannot actually assume full control over the past and the future, only the present. However, let us examine what the past is. The past is nothing more than events that have passed. The past, as of the present, no longer exists. It is only present in the form of memories and evidence that it has created. Without these no one can truly say that the past and what happened in it ever existed. In fact, the only thing that can truly be known for sure as stated by the great French philosopher, Descartes, is "I think therefore I am". Everything else can be altered, at least in the minds of the people, including their knowledge of the past. The future is a much more complex item. People's perception of the future cannot be changed in the same way as their perception of the past. Anything can happen in the future. Yet still, if one controls people's knowledge of the past they can heavily influence their actions in the future. This has been demonstrated throughout history. In these ways are the the statements true.
As a teacher of history for over a quarter century (both US and World - albeit in a public school - OK - crucify me - but full disclosure) - I will say that this is not about brainwashing; it's about education.
For instance, if you could convince a generation that the likes of Washington, Jefferson, Et Al. were no more than a bunch of greedy, racist, slave-owning, sexist pigs who solidified their grip on the economy through manipulation and coersion, then you can also legitimately demean and dismantle the Constitution that they produced
17 comments:
He who controls the past controls the future, but only to the extent to which he can control the population. In 1984, Big Brother controls the past and controls the population, making the only people capable of rebellion those who are old enough to remember how it was before or those who can look past the principles of doublethink and see the past being actively changed. This may happen more then Winston knows, however it would be impossible to verify due to the nature of the society he lives in. This is also made irrelevant by the thought police. While you may be able to rebel in your head, you cannot go against what the government says either publicly or in the privacy of your home, making the slight amount of thought freedom you would enjoy useless. Therefore the government can control the future without having complete control over the past by having control over the citizens.
I agree that one temporarily controls the past through controlling and influencing the population that is controlled in the present. Because political propaganda is forced day after day upon the people in 1984, they eventually begin to believe this information about their past to be true, though the validity of these statistics is questionable. However, who controls the past cannot control the future, though he may affect the future. In 1984, Winston writes his diary having some sort of hope that it can useful in the future and that the future will hold better times. He assumes that there is a chance that Big Brother will not control the future. For the time being, he controls the people and their opinions, "vaporizing" anyone who disagrees with his views. Big Brother will no doubt have an affect on society, but he can never control the future of this society, no matter how many minds he brainwashes nor how many "free thinkers" he executes. What the future holds is unknown and unpredictable, therefore an attempt to control the future will fail. While Big Brother may control his people for the present and the near future, sooner or later something or someone will overrule this power, be it Goldstein or even the proles. It is the uncertainty of what will happen that prevents one from controlling the future.
This is Erik (for some reason blogger wont let me sign in) but anyway I agree entirely with the statement "he who controls the present controls the past," though not entirely with the latter phrase. We get all of our information about the world from various sources, be it the internet or on TV, and just like the Ministry of Truth in 1984 there is some entity that controls those sources. Now I'm not saying it's all the same source (and thus leading to a singular bias, as in Oceania) but they control what we know, and so then what we think about the past. If a false act was added to the history books in some harsh future, then those learning it would believe it true. The complete control of the Party in 1984 allows them to freely shape this past so that it is constantly shifting to their own current truths.
I believe both of these statements are correct, and I agree with both of them. However, I can only agree with both of them when they are paired as a chain. "Who controls the present controls the past; who controls the past controls the future." The people in control of the past are not necessarily those from that time. The people of the present in power, such as Big Brother and the Party in 1984 were able to control the past from the present, and believed with that chain they were able to control the future. As, if the people are brainwashed into believing the society they live in dominated the recent past, the faith in the ruler and his followers are solidified, furthering the power (of Big Brother). Normally, though, the people from the past can never control the future, they can only create a form of influence. It is in nature that nothing can be perfect, and for that reason, no self-supported civilization or society can live on forever. This means that the control of the future is naturally impossible. But, the people of the present can bend these natural rules to their will, able to control the people from then on to believe in the power of the controllers.
I too would have to side with Steven on that both these statements as being valid. The statement of "who controls the past controls the future" seems to imply that an influential entity in the present has a great grasp of the public, as with the case in 1984. By having an overwhelming side of supporters, one could then manipulate the public on their knowledge of what happened in the past and thereby influence and "control" the future.
With the next statement saying "who controls the present controls the past" is directly related to the previous statement in the sense that forms of powerful and all-ruling governments can regulate what resources the masses of people can obtain. By doing this, they can alter information of events in history that were beforehand facts, and suddenly now myths. As seen in North Korea, regulating what people can and can't do has an immense impact on the mentalities of many such as in 1984.
I agree with this statement. If we learn and can understand the past, we can have a better control what might happen in the future. However our society has not implemented that quite yet. Take the Ixtoc and BP oil spill for example. In 1979, the Ixtoc oil rig leaked, caught fire, and sank in the Gulf of Mexico. Sound familiar? To stop the oil leaking into the gulf, the company that owned Ixtoc also had their version of the “top hat” method. Did that work? No. So then they tried shooting junk into the open well. That didn’t work either. They finally stopped the flow of oil when they drilled a relief well. If only we had learned from those mistakes, the BP oil spill may not have lasted as long. Oh, and guess what, the Ixtoc rig also lacked the special blowout preventer on their rig too. So far it has seemed that we have virtually learned nothing from the past.
The statement of “who controls the present also controls the past” does hold truth. Like in 1984, so many of our documents can be falsified to promote the present yet destroy the past. Hopefully our society will never come to the extreme shown in the book, but today we can see that the past is being falsified with the use of the internet. Anyone can put anything on the internet, and somewhere someone will believe it. It is so simple to strip down the past just for someone to have control over a group of people. I may not have any examples of this occurring currently, but sooner or later the internet will deform the past by not yielding all the truth or by completely altering the story.
I agree with Michelle when as she says that the future can only be affected so much by the present and past. The present and past will shape the future but the future will not be not be controlled by any single power. He who controls the present controls the past is 100% true. The expression "the winner gets to write the history" is shown here. In all cases throughout history the written records that world historians rely on for information are written by the victorious nations and the stronger societies. Every moment of time there are some nations who control others and the leaders of the stronger nations get to pick the history of their nation. History is full of ethnocentric and falsified information that over time has been taught and learned as true, and that is why the present controls the past, meaning history.
I believe that 1984 is clear evidence that "who controls the present controls the past." The Ministry of Truth is the hub for revising, controlling, and creating a story of the past that fits the ideas and opinions of the present regime such as the Party. I do though believe that isolation has a large part to do with the extent of a governments control of the past. For example, if North Korea was fully participating in world trade and negotiations, they would not be able to completely control the past. Outside influences would prevent a government from doing so. With no connection to the world, a change in history must be followed, for there is no evidence of otherwise.
Regarding the ability of the present to control the future, I agree with Steven. A civilization has a strong desire for its "successful" method of ruling to continue as a legacy with future rulers. There is however a limitation on controlling the future. Influence can be very strong, but once a ruler dies, there is no certainty that 100% of his laws would be carried through. The future ruling class can however learn, develop, and inherit ideas that will be implemented in the future. In conclusion, the present cannot control the future because of a lack in the previous ruler, along with his method of governing.
I agree with this statement because there are examples of history when empires allowed for freedom of the press and with the introduction of a free media these empires fell. The Soviet Union is a good example. In the Soviet Union the Govermant controlled the media and attempted to control the ideas of the past that were presented to the citzen's of the Soviet Union and the country remained a stron Empire. When economic decay started to come into affect in the Soviet Union, the empire managed to still mantain itself but, when a free press was introduced it dismatles the empire and led seperation of over 10 countries from the former Soviet Union because Ideas where presented to the mass that did not exist when the govermant controlled what ideas the people would see in there entire lifetime.
It is true that the manipulation of a person's foundation knowledge, or brainwashing, will influence both the person's present way of thinking and the future of that person's thinking. A great example of that would be North Korea. North Korea's strict control over the information given to its residents has allowed the nation to gain a political and military presence. If the citizens of North Korea knew that their poor living conditions were magnified by their leaders, rebellion would obviously occur. Winston makes the same observation. He notes that the people who have the real power are the masses; he also realizes that his government's oppression of knowledge is the cause, and will continuously be the cause of the rule of The Party.
Quote from Winston's diary:
"Until they become conscious they will never rebel..."
They will "never" rebel, implying that the control of the past controls the future AND present.
I definitely agree with the statement that claims, "who controls the present controls the past" as those who control the present have the capability of brainwashing, so to speak, people. They can manipulate facts, misleading the "properly uneducated" people into believing that the past was different than what they deserved to know, the truth. The strict environment in which people lived in clouted their vision to see the truth, causing them to believe otherwise. However, this is not to say that those who control the past will necessarily control the future. Future is a dimension of uncertainty and unpredictability. Brainwashing people is merely an act to fulfill the government's immediate needs of impeding people's right to know the truth. This cannot mean that they will control the future. Even though the government may be able to influence the future to a certain degree, they will not be able to control the future as it is not as simple as a mathematical equation that will have the predicted result as manipulated.
In reference to this quote, I believe that the question we should be asking ourselves ought not to be "Can the Past Be Controlled?", rather "Can the Future Be Controlled?"
"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past."
Ergo, who controls the present controls the future. The transitive property strikes again!
As Kean so aptly pointed out (before I could :P), the degree to which the future can be controlled has its limits, so this “equation” must therefore be false.
However, I disagree.
Remember that in this "equation" the past is not literally changed - merely the perception of the past is altered. Just as the past cannot literally be changed, the future cannot be literally changed, either. However, the perception of the future can be altered. In this sense, it is possible to control the future. It all seems kind of wishy-washy in theory, but we’ve seen it happen throughout history.
One example of this occurred during the European colonization of South America. Natives with their own sets of beliefs – beliefs that explained the future and the past – were conquered and then converted. During this process of conversion, missionaries told natives of a past different from their own, involving a guy named Jesus who, it was predicted, would return and perform all sorts of magic and maybe even a little voodoo. The European missionaries, having conquered the natives, controlled the present enough to be able to alter the natives’ perception of the past which in turn altered the (converted) natives’ perception of the future.
The obvious examples involve religion (can anyone say, “Constantine?”), but I’m sure there are worldly examples of this phenomenon.
Whoops, I meant to say BJ, not Kean.
I agree with the statement "Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past," but in a more abstract way than literal interpretation of this quote in it's context would support. I don't think the main point here is the famous quote that lends to the idea of "learn history or you'll be doomed to repeat it." I think the quote is meant to support instead the cause-and-effect variable inherent in history. This is to say that one thing always follows another, and generally in a reactionary way. This lends also to the idea of a dialectic: thesis, then antithesis, then synthesis. We see this all the time today in international relations. Because one nation does one thing, another nation reacts by working around or with the first nation's actions, and life goes on. Whoever controls, or performs, the first act of the past will inherently be responsible for the domino effect (whether good, bad, or neutral) that follows.
If we are to consider the quote solely in the context of 1984 and brainwashing, the quote remains true but for a parallel reason: mental conclusions are based on precedent. If I am capable of manipulation the facts of the past, that which actually happened is of little consequence because the emotional reaction that occurs has little investment in truth if it only supposes truth. Also in a more contextual interpretation of the second part of the quote, I think it's obvious that because Big Brother controls the present, he has the power to manipulate the records of the past. Clearly this is supposing absolute control, much like we see in North Korea, because one grain of truth can spread like wildfire and shatter the mass illusion.
I agree with all who have said that they have agreed with the statement. As has been stated, this is not a literal phrase. One cannot actually assume full control over the past and the future, only the present. However, let us examine what the past is. The past is nothing more than events that have passed. The past, as of the present, no longer exists. It is only present in the form of memories and evidence that it has created. Without these no one can truly say that the past and what happened in it ever existed. In fact, the only thing that can truly be known for sure as stated by the great French philosopher, Descartes, is "I think therefore I am". Everything else can be altered, at least in the minds of the people, including their knowledge of the past.
The future is a much more complex item. People's perception of the future cannot be changed in the same way as their perception of the past. Anything can happen in the future. Yet still, if one controls people's knowledge of the past they can heavily influence their actions in the future. This has been demonstrated throughout history. In these ways are the the statements true.
As a teacher of history for over a quarter century (both US and World - albeit in a public school - OK - crucify me - but full disclosure) - I will say that this is not about brainwashing; it's about education.
For instance, if you could convince a generation that the likes of Washington, Jefferson, Et Al. were no more than a bunch of greedy, racist, slave-owning, sexist pigs who solidified their grip on the economy through manipulation and coersion, then you can also legitimately demean and dismantle the Constitution that they produced
Post a Comment