"The primary aim of modern warfare...is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. Ever since the end of the nineteenth century, the problem of what to do with the surplus of consumption goods has been latent in industrial society...In the early twentieth century, the vision of a future society unbelievably rich, leisured, orderly, and efficient—a glittering antiseptic world of glass and steel and snow-white concrete—was part of the consciousness of nearly every literate person. Science and technology were developing at a prodigious speed, and it seemed natural to assume that they would go on developing. This failed to happen, partly because of the impoverishment caused by a long series of wars and revolutions, partly because scientific and technical progress depended on the empirical habit of thought, which could not survive in a strictly regimented society. ...
Nevertheless the dangers inherent in the machine are still there. From the moment when the machine first made its appearance it was clear to all thinking people that the need for human drudgery, and therefore to a great extent for human inequality, had disappeared. If the machine were used deliberately for that end, hunger, overwork, dirt, illiteracy, and disease could be eliminated within a few generations. And in fact, without being used for any such purpose, but by a sort of automatic process--by producing wealth which it was sometimes impossible not to distribute--the machine did raise the living standards of the average human being very greatly over a period of about fifty years at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries...
(Con't below)
"But it was also clear that an all-round increase in wealth threatened the destruction--indeed, in some sense was the destruction--of a hierarchical society. In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motor-car or even an aeroplane, the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction. It was possible, no doubt, to imagine a society in which WEALTH, in the sense of personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while POWER remained in the hands of a small privileged caste. But in practice such a society could not long remain stable. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away.
In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.
"To return to the agricultural past, as some thinkers about the beginning of the twentieth century dreamed of doing, was not a practicable solution. It conflicted with the tendency towards mechanization which had become quasi-instinctive throughout almost the whole world, and moreover, any country which remained industrially backward was helpless in a military sense and was bound to be dominated, directly or indirectly, by its more advanced rivals. Nor was it a satisfactory solution to keep the masses in poverty by restricting the output of goods. This happened to a great extent...roughly between 1920 and 1940. The economy of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation, capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were prevented from working and kept half alive by State charity. But this, too, entailed military weakness, and since the privations it inflicted were obviously unnecessary, it made opposition inevitable.
The problem was how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare."
-Orwell, 1984
>>70280706
tl'dr
>>70281926
OP is a dirty commie, disregard, bullshit thread
This is why my response to most conspiracy theories is that there is no grand scheme, just a nightmare cocktail of human nature and ungodly wealth.
MOSHI MOSHI NIPPON DESU :3
KABOOM!
>>70283321
Nihon*
>>70280382
That's not relevant in the 21st century. Modern warfare takes far less resources. It's possible for citizens to be completely unaware that their country is even at war.
>but capitalism and hierarchy are human nature
>>70283848
you missed the point, it doesn't matter if people notice they are at war, what matters is that they don't notice the resources spent on destruction and lost in destruction could have been used to increase the standard of living.
>>70284378
Orwell wrote about the total war era. That kind of war doesn't happen anymore.
>>70284726
the point is the massive resources spent on military equipment. trillions of dollars were sped in middle eastern wars, imagine if that money was used for civilian needs.
>>70283824
Gtfo weaboofag. Nippon is perfectly fine
i just read the book, the true horror lies how possible the scenario is
>>70286072
And let the poor keep being leeches?
>>70280382
Nonsense. The aim of all warfare is to reduce the population of young virile men so that those in power have more pussy to pick from.
>>70283223
That is partially correct, omitting the fact that humans are conspiratorial by nature.
>>70287283
and the fact that big organization are tend to be corrupt by their nature
>>70280706
FUCK
F U C K
WHOEVER MADE THAT IMAGE OR ANYTHING LIKE IT
GOD DAMN ITS SO SHITTY
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>70280519
>For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away.
nah
>>70287502
Leftists have believed that for well over a hundred years now. It's amusing.
>>70287056
But, as Orwell said, the poor people would eventually become more and more literate and think better.
There would eventually be no poor leeches because everyone would be educated and realize that you have to work for the good of your society.
>>70287627
yeah you can go watch animal planet and see the pack of 5 beta male walruses plotting together to try to kill the old as fuck alpha walrus who's fucking all the walrus QTs. shit doesn't change.
>War is peace
>Freedom is slavery
>Ignorance is strength
These tenets are objectively true.
Through war, we protect our national security and interests abroad. War is peace.
Cultural marxism and independent thought are the downfall of western civilization. Freedom is slavery.
The age of knowledge only has propagated satanic and dehumanizing ideals. Ignorance is strength.
prove me wrong faggots
>>70287502
>what is national socialism
>>70288010
>cultural marxism
>independent thought
>>70287502
>>70287627
>>70287969
I think what you see is more Orwell's hope in humanity there. It's not wrong to have hope.
>>70288019
1. the poor have bitched about how the rich have no function since we were amoebas floating around in a pond of primordial goop. having enough leisure and security to have time to think (???) has nothing to do with it
2. "they would sweep it away" how nigga lol
>>70288258
The poor bitch because they are too stupid to figure out how to make money or don't realize that work equals pay
Education should fix most of this problem.
How to sweep them away? Take a page out of Uncle Hitler's book. Put them to work in concentration camps.
>>70288196
his hope disgusts me. life isn't about getting fat, lazing about, and then dying. it's about overcoming struggles, succeed or fail. a man with a purpose who goes to bed hungry every night will be happier than a fat fuck who lies around playing nintendo and spends all day wondering why he exists. if you read more marcus aurelius than you did karl marx maybe you wouldn't be so limp dicked
>>70288420
Hitler didn't put the poor into the concentration camps.
He put the richest and most educated into camps.
Jews have an IQ which is a full standard deviation above that of the 'white man'.
An educated society is the exact opposite of what Hitler was going for. He wanted to rid himself of the educated upper class and rule over the weak.
>>70288420
there wasn't a rich jew who died in a concentration camp
>>70288594
the truly rich ones were in timbuktu by the time people were getting made into lampshades
>>70288520
There are people who want the challenge of finding the cure for aids or creating robot slaves or getting us to mars or colonizing space, but they are held back due to their lack of interest in participating in the don't get fat and lazy struggle you talk about.
Poverty holds ingenuity back, this you cannot deny.
>>70283848
Never read the book, huh?
>>70288594
The German Aristocrats were amazingly more intelligent than he was.
He, at the very least, wanted a strong fit german population. Just that alone would be fucking amazing to this pro fat fuck society we live in
>>70288703
if humanity is at a point where people need to be given free food because there's not enough jobs, then there's too many humans. if you don't contribute, you are by definition unnecessary. you're dead weight. the solution to this is the same as the default: don't give people free food
>>70288881
I'm not saying any of that.
Not everyone dreams of space
Some may dream of more menial dreams
Look at steam games, all these farm and truck simulators on there. Some people want to farm some want to drive truck some want to make food some want to garden, etc etc.
>>70288852
German Aristocracy is inherently Nationalistic and they embraced Hitler. Hitler had what most members of intellectual elite lacked at the time: articulate manner, oratory and leadership skills. Even those who ploted against Hitler, still disliked jews and foreign elements. They just wanted to have better chances in defeating Allies.
>>70283848
lo, yeah because a dozen aircraft carriers and their crews and support fleets are free,
dumb ass. if you we lowered our military budget by 10 percent and put that money into the country we would be beyond crazy comfortable. even if we lowed it by 30 percent, we would still be the highest spending military country in the world and 3 of the next 4 highest are allies.
>>70284726
actually in 1984 he wrote about a interior at peace and a never ending war going on overseas.......... ......
>>70283160
>>70287056
What kind of fucking logic are you using ??????
>let s spend trillions of dollars in wars so we don t use it for our citizens
