Part Two, Section 9
The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism begins with "Chapter 1: Ignorance Is Strength." In this chapter, author Goldstein describes a theory of history with great similarity to Marx's contention in The Communist Manifesto that "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle." It also sounds a lot like a game of Shapeland. In what ways do you think Chapter 1 of Goldstein's book is an accurate description of history? In what ways do you think it is not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I agree with Goldstein in that social standings have been an important factor in history however, I disagree with some of his thoughts on the relationships between the High, Middle, and Low groups. I do agree with him on “The aim of the High is to remain where they are. The aim of the Middle is to change places with the High”. I do not think the aim of the Low is for equality. Sure, you can have the few Low people who believe that, but I think the real aim of the Low is for the High to switch places with them so that the High can have a taste of the Low’s life, or to see the High fall apart in flames. All this could be seen in ShapeLand. The Triangles wanted to move to Squares, the Squares stayed where they were, and in the beginning the Circles wanted to switch places with the Squares and as the game progressed, they wanted to see the destruction of the Squares. At a certain point, the Circles gave up and ignored the game. This goes back to Goldstein when he says “when [the Lows don’t] have an aim […they are not] conscious of anything outside their daily lives”.
I believe that Chapter 1 of Goldstein's book is an accurate description of history, and other common events. Goldstein states that the High want to stay put, the Middle want to be the High, and the poor "Low" want equality. While there are numerous examples of this in recorded history, mostly dealing with government overthrows and reshuffling, the main examples are found in today's society. In our society today, as history follows us nipping at our heels in the present, the main goal of the Middle class is to gain further power. This is so, because this group of people has had the taste, the little hint of a furnished and healthy life. This craving of a better existence drives the Middle to seek office in the High. The High, pleasant where they are, continue to enjoy the benefits of an upscale lifestyle, with nothing much to worry about. The poor people, or the Low, have not had this "bait" the Middle has tasted. Because of this, the Low has no real drive to attain further success in life, as they do not know what it is like in the first place. So, if the Low cannot have better luxuries and other things, the only solution must be equality! This compromise however is shrugged off for the most part by the Middle and High.
But, some events can show these generalizations more clearly. In the game of "Shapeland," the squares were on top, or the "High", the triangles were in the "Middle," and the circles were the "Low." The triangles continued to push for gaining a spot in the square group, because they knew because they were so close, they had a chance to attain perfect square-ness. However, the circles wanted everyone to come together and give equal chances to one another. The squares, in an attempt to quell the rebellious actions of the lower people in order to maintain their position. In this year's case, a constitution. However, this did not please the lower groups, and in a last attempt for power, the circles and triangles, seemingly working together as friends, tried to gain access to the squares. However, this event turned into a catastrophic failure, with a man whose name starts with Gideon and ends with Gross completely sabotaged and back stabbed his once known friends in the face of power. That essence of power that keeps the High in the top, left Gideon with the wanting to stay on the High forever, and not let the Lows or the Middles interfere with his activities whatsoever.
"The story of Gideon Gross is a tragic one indeed."
I wanted to address Lara's comment and say that I agree with her opinion and her ties to shapeland. I would disagree, however, with her opinion of the circles wanting the upper class to suffer. In my opinion, the circles want to be members of the triangles, which is to say they want socialism. I believe that the reason the 1984 society worked so well was because the lower classes were allowed to rule themselves, and the upper classes were all but enslaved. The members of the highest classes were held in check by their desire to stay in the upper class, knowing that in a rebellion they would be replaced. The middle class is watched closely to ensure they cannot plan a rebellion. finally the lower classes are given relative freedom, and are forbidden from most interactions with the upper classes. Uneducated, they are forced to believe what the government tells them. The only hole in the story, I believe, is that the lower class could live in such close proximity without forming a class consciousness.
First of all, I could not help but to frown upon the reference of shapeland in which I clearly experienced the class struggle that might have been similar to that of the peasants in the past. I agree with Lara's comment about the desire of each classes except that towards the end of the shapeland period, the circles gave up, so to speak, to climb up to the higher class. We rendered the movement of classes for us impossible, and we started to have an internal struggle to be the 'lesser of the evils' as we did not want to embarrass ourselves, at least. Sometimes, we did want to switch places with the squares so that they will better understand and take into account those many difficulties and challenges that the lower class faces every time they come up with new rules. However, it wouldn't be surprising that we (the circles) would be living in peace without the thought of rebellion if we didn't have class consciousness. In other words, without knowing the class you are in, and not knowing that there is a higher class that is more privileged, we wouldn't have rebelled as there is no need for a rebellion. The circles or the lower class would be thinking that they live in a perfectly good society. And therefore, I think ignorance is bliss.
I too agree with Laura's initial comment of the Squares wanting to stay "put", the triangles aspiring to move up, and the circles wanting equality. Being a triangle, I always felt agitated an anxious in that the next possible round could have been my last, where I would then ultimately move down the the ranks of BJ and his fellow circles. But in my opinion, I believe that it is in the best interest of the squares and triangles to unite against the circles for only then can a possible reform actually happen; the enemy of my enemy is my ally. I believe that this entire idea of social classes is very important and accurate to the history of the world for social issues and injustices seemed to have linger and affect society in many ways. Looking at the Russian Revolution, the Mexican Revolution, and quite possibly all of the revolutions that occurred during the 19th century had issues over social classes which were driving factors. It is important to mention though that in many of those revolutions, the issues of social classes were used as propaganda to further and speed up the particular causes. Shapeland helped in demonstrating this for the anxious feeling of uncertainty during these rounds was a testament to the extent of social classes being a main motive to change in the history of mankind.
I believe that the description in chapter one of Goldstein's book is an accurate though broad description of history. It captures the very basics of human nature and applies it to social heirarchy. Humans are driven by competition and a need to be better than other humans. As the others have commented before me, the high wish to stay high, the middle wish to become the high, and the low wish to be equal to everyone. As Steven stated the middle wish to gain the status of the squares because they have are closer to attaining it than any others, and yet so very from reaching it. They wish to attain this at all costs. Naturally, as Goldstein stated, unless they are prevented by a strong upper class, they turn to the vast numbers of lower class people for help. They tell them that they wish to help them attain their rights and fight for equality and that they must unite to overthrow the upper class. The lower class are willing to follow any path or perceived path to a more equal society, yet as shown by the various members socialist revolutions of the past century, they end up no better or even worse than before. As soon as the middle class win and are in power, they continue to state that they are making moves toward equality, but they make moves that ensure they are allowed to stay in power and are given advantages others are not. There has never been anything close to a truly equal society, no matter what former revolutionaries state they have created. This has repeated throughout history and as of today there is no evidence of it changing.
I believe that, through a Marxist standpoint, Goldstein is correct in this summarization of history. Goldstein shares the idea that life is based on the class struggle, and regardless of the ruler or the subject, this class struggle will always shape society. However, along the lines of Marxism, Goldstein's theory disagrees with Marxism when discussing the "end". Marx's ideal society was actually an egalitarian one, where rule was unnecessary. However, Goldstein discusses the end as being a change between the Middle/High Class which stuck, and the rule did not allow for further class changes. While this sounds a lot like the game of "Shapeland" over a course of time, it contradicts the idea of the "Revolution" which Marx emphasizes.
I beleive that Goldstein is write in his statement which resemble Marx. The classes of Oceania have great tentions toward each other. In 1984, the Inner Party (Upper class) uses its power and influence to rule over the Outer Party and Proles (Middle Class and Proletariat). Orwell shows in 1984 that the upper classes try to maintain there grip on power and completely controlled the middle and lower classes. The inner party in 1984 has so much power that it convinces the lower classes that there lives are amazing (like the example when the party tells the masses it has increased food rationing but has actually decreased them and the people beleive them). This type of class never existed in Marx's days were a class had so much power it could control the thoughts of the people it ruled over.
(Gideon Gross)
I beleive that Goldstein is write in his statement which resemble Marx. The classes of Oceania have great tentions toward each other. In 1984, the Inner Party (Upper class) uses its power and influence to rule over the Outer Party and Proles (Middle Class and Proletariat). Orwell shows in 1984 that the upper classes try to maintain there grip on power and completely controlled the middle and lower classes. The inner party in 1984 has so much power that it convinces the lower classes that there lives are amazing (like the example when the party tells the masses it has increased food rationing but has actually decreased them and the people beleive them). This type of class never existed in Marx's days were a class had so much power it could control the thoughts of the people it ruled over.
Post a Comment