frequently, george orwell’s 1984, describes our society’s present state. mr. orwell’s vision was so brilliantly framed that “orwellian” is not only become a word, it is an essential staple describing how how the governments frequently operate in concert with the left for control. government and the left’s totalitarianism and brainwashing has led to greater controls. many government’s covid-19 responses exposed the public to a master class as to how idealogues take over society and impose their will for force. work restrictions, travel restrictions, financial restrictions, medical restrictions, and religious restrictions were all employed to destroy lives, restructure norms and transform day to day life. language, in a large part, made it happen. george orwell’s biblical prophetic-like vision of big brother and wordplay brings him to the level of an isaiah.
if mr. orwell is right about 1984, we must ask “who will be writing “1985”?” will it be freedom loving free thinking individuals crafting this next great novel? will the “1985” unshackle people’s minds?
to craft this great novel, i believe that we must start it with one simple word: “no”. the novel “1985” will start off with a simple sentence, “no”. right now, there is the existential need to reject the propaganda vomited out by those in power and their allies. justice and freedom requires good people to act. sometimes, it good people to simply being there. in harrison ford’s movie, “witness”, the amish community, en masse, stood as a witness to a criminal. the criminal, knowing he could not kill them all, conceded. change, sometimes, may simply require a collective standing up for what is right. “no” can be said in many ways. sometime, it does not even have to be said; it can be seen loud and clear.
presently, leftists use the “terrorists” to describe each and every individual who successfully oppose them. in essence, they people defeating their agenda- i.e. bud light and target boycotts- have a bullseye placed on their backs. “wordplay” is serious business.
“terrorism”, as a legal word, carries meaning within law and law enforcement. “terrorism”, in law, can lead to criminal charges. terrorism, in law enforcement, can lead to government surveillance and detention. given these consequences, the left slings out the word so that government agencies can catch it and run with it. those employing its do so with the intent on stoking the government to act against their adversaries. “hey fbi, you need to find out who isn’t shopping at target anymore?” “hey fbi, the guy at my bar used to order bud light, and now he is drinking a “heineken”, you need to check him out.” from the current history of the department of justice and the fbi is that concerned parents and religious organizations are capable to being under the law enforcement radar.
“1985” requires a “no”. television broadcasters need to be reminded of real “terrorism” that their networks ran footage of the twin towers being crashed into by “actual” terrorists. broadcasters need to be told that not buying diapers at target is not terrorism. rather, those comments are slanderous and defamatory. there are no “depends” in the argument. families impacted by 9-11, should be deeply offended. are you?
with this, i give you the prompt of perhaps a great novel: “no.”
by george, can we write this book?
be well!!
if you enjoyed this post, please “like”
if you would like to read more posts, click here
if you find this post meaningful, please share
The Ten Commandments Project 