1984 Lore 👁️ Is Oceania Just Britain? 🌍 The Geopolitical Reality of 1984
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 09. 2024
- A popular question asked by fans since its publication is: does Oceania really control a vast empire or is the Party's control just confined to Britain?
In this video, we explore why people may think the Party's official reality on this subject is false and also the contrarian take that the world really is as described in the novel.
***
Additional Information (Watch the video first to understand the context): I forgot to mention that Winston does note in the novel that prisoner executions take place about once a month and given the changes of allegiance, this means it's very likely he recalls similar Eastasian prisoners in a similar manner to those Eurasian ones he actually witnesses in the novel.
***
This is 1984 Lore, the channel on CZcams for all things 1984.
If you enjoyed this content then consider dropping a comment and like for the algorithm, as well as subscribing and hitting the bell button for notifications on future videos. Thank you.
#1984 #georgeorwell #dystopia
Welcome to 1984 Lore! I hope you enjoyed this special video in celebration of the channel hitting the two thousand subscribers mark. Keep your eyes peeled for the regular Friday video at 3PM (GMT). Thanks. 👍
In the meantime, check out the 'All Named Characters' video if you want a recap on all the named characters of the book and their roles: czcams.com/video/KAVa9Ae_qkU/video.html&
What about North Korea makes K-Pop videos punishable by death. It is because if the North Korean population knew the outside world not under the Kim regime is better it would cause them to want to kill their Government and ask another country to rule over them.
Countries have killed their leadership to be part of a foreign Government. Like the Kingdom of Hawaii being a US State. Or Arktsan in Azerbaijan wanting to be part of Romania. East Germany and West Germany as a more peaceful example. Republic of Texas becoming an American State
I disagree about the war. I think there really is a war going on and its sapped the empire of most of its resources. Even totalitarian states have to keep the masses satiated. This is done with alcohol, tobacco, and chocolate - things that are in short supply in the book. That suggests that the totalitarian state is behaving the way it is because it knows its about to fall and the act of forging the records is done in order to spur on a future revolution or an insurrection in the event that the nation is taken over by enemy empires.
If the party was totalitarian just for fun, then it would have no problem unleashing unlimited hard liquor on the masses since that's the most effective way to keep them in check.
I like the idea of an isolated Britain, that makes its population believe they are against eastasia and eurasia, but in reality its just britain fighting irish rebels xd
Tiocfaidh ar la!
Or the Irish got a relative powerful force to make Oceania brainwash people into think theyre Eastasia or Eurasia to keep the fight.
@@andyboi8399 love Ireland from Spain!
Lol
@@andyboi8399 For God and Ulster!
I think something often overlooked in 1984 is that Winston, who is mostly pretty reasonable, either through education, temprament, or deliberate refusal, fails regularly to engage with clear evidence of the past that he claims to be so interested in. A great example is his conversation with the elderly prole in the bar, who provided detailed and vivid vignettes of what life was like before the revolution, but because of Winston’s self absorbed nature, he simply dismisses the stories as confused ramblings. For this reason, we can’t necessarily trust Winston’s ability to ask correct, relevant questions when he’s given the opportunity.
Well the thing is Winston was trying to figure out if life before was actually so horrible has the propaganda sayed but every time he asked the elderly prole would respond something about is own personal life like how one time he bumped in a rich person and got into a fight, winston tried multiple times to ask him how life was before the party and the elder would just respond with very personal anecdotes about his personal life that didn’t answer to Winston question
@@leonida5943that’s true, but even that anecdote holds information that clearly contradicts party history, and could have given Winston some grounding in true reality if he’d been less self absorbed and willing to engage with what he was given, instead of insisting he be answered on his own terms.
Not that I don’t sympathize with Winston, it’s very easy for people in much less difficult situations than his to fall into that kind of thinking, but I just wanted to demonstrate that his curiosity, even at the best of times, was often too narrow.
@@leonida5943 From the perspective of the Prole, nothing has ever changed ever in history. Factually speaking, no matter what kind of society came before the Party, as long as a system of hierarchical oligarchy (so all of human history) the Prole wouldn't have had a tangible change in condition to base the question off of: a Prole will always remain a Prole. In reality, it was Winston asking a nonsense question to the elder, "what was life like before the 1% hoarded all the wealth and held active contempt for the poor?"
My theory is that the elderly prole was too afraid to tell Winston the truth about the past because if he did, he would be unpersoned like Winston. I mean Ingsoc wouldn't want people walking around and contradicting party history all the time. Perhaps, there was a secret genocide that went on behind the scenes when Winston was a lad to get rid of people who would know "too much".
@@matthewpivarnik6358considering the authors extensive history under multiple regimes, this is the likely intended answer. From Animal Farm to 1984 the usual conclusion is “man governments just suck in general”
My main supports: We don't see any Americans/aussies/south africans/south americans in Air strip 1.
While hardly a multicultural state, IngSoc isnt yet old enough to erase things like accents or physical appearances.
Moving troops raised in one area to another of your empire to another, either for fighting the enemy or putting down locals is entirely normal... yet we don't see anyone not from airstrip 1.
And while it's reasonable to expect that military units would be isolated from the populace, as even the name says, "Airstrip 1" is the supposed staging ground for the inevitable conflict with Eurasia and gateway to Europe. Large numbers of transatlantic troops would be expected. I remember no mention of these.
Yeah, even in our own timeline the Americans that used Britain as a launching point for the bombing campaigns and later D-Day interacted with British civs. Heaven knows there were plenty of war brides and the Germans tried to use that to try to turn Brits and Aussies against GIs.
And unless there has been a massive genocide I find it hard to believe that Oceania wouldn't have some hispanic troops since Oceania controls all of the Americas according to the map. Which, as the Germans found out, means there's a lot of troops doing nothing but wasting their damn time. And given how many people live in that area it'd be too many dedicated to it when there's a world war going on.
As for tea, I'm not sure if it could be grown in South America, and I'm not sure if Oceania would even bother risking the shipment of tea from the east if the Suez, Red Sea, and Gibraltar aren't secure. Cause shipping it around Africa? They used to give out tattoos as a sort of medal for surviving that trip. It's possible they use estraz products but still that's a lot of risk to ships and material to make sure some people get their tea
@@Alpostpone Probably prepared for in the '50s, afterwards the name somehow overtook England or Britain as the area identifier. Makes one wonder what other names have been changed.
Airstrip 1 is in a low intensity aera, and the security services seem to have the place under control. Moreover, those troops are needed in the conflict zones.
@@kokofan50Even if Airstrip 1 is low intensity (which is weird since it being a airstrip for Oceania to launch attacks into Eurasia it would be a big target) there's gonna be interactions between the civs and the military. You're gonna need troops there to make sure Oceania doesn't lose its last hold in Europe.
And if you know soldiers you know they're gonna have needs. Needs that aren't gonna be met by the military.
I wrote my high school book report on this theory. I realized it while reading it in class, and my teacher said it blew his mind and that he'd never considered it before.
But it's literally in the book
@datadata-ux7pf
You've proved perfectly well how easy it is to brainwash. There is no "Uralic language". Several peoples with different languages lived in the Urals, but they were initially small in number and lived mainly in rural areas. Now they stop speaking them because they move to large cities where there is work but where everyone speaks Russian, they give up their languages not because the evil government is trying to oppress them, but because capitalism has made their existence impractical. In Soviet times, they could afford to live autonomously because the government artificially developed all regions of the country regardless of the benefits. With the advent of capitalism, this stopped and they began to move to cities in search of work. They give up their languages for the same reason why immigrants from the Netherlands in New York refused to use Dutch.
@datadata-ux7pf
You've proved perfectly well how easy it is to brainwash.
There is no "Uralic language" and there never was, it's like saying that the Indians had an "American language."
There were several peoples with different languages in the Urals, but initially they were small in number and lived mainly in rural areas. Now they stop speaking them because they move to big cities where there is work, but where everyone speaks Russian, they give up their languages not because the evil government is trying to oppress them, but because capitalism has made their existence impractical. On the contrary, the Russian government regularly subsidizes their cultural festivals, museums of national culture and language schools, but in the absence of developed industries and work in their regions, due to deindustrialization, no one needs them.
In Soviet times, they could afford
to live autonomously, because the government artificially developed industry and education in all regions of the country, regardless of economic expediency.
With the advent of capitalism, this stopped, and they began to move to cities in search of work. They give up their languages for the same reason that immigrants from the Netherlands in New York refused to use Dutch, according to your logic, this should also be considered "genocide".
@datadata-ux7pfbruh
@datadata-ux7pf You've proved perfectly well how easy it is to brainwash.
There is no "Uralic language" and there never was, it's like saying that the Indians had an "American language."
There were several peoples with different languages in the Urals, but initially they were small in number and lived mainly in rural areas. Now they stop speaking them because they move to big cities where there is work, but where everyone speaks Russian, they give up their languages not because the evil government is trying to oppress them, but because capitalism has made their existence impractical. On the contrary, the Russian government regularly subsidizes their cultural festivals, museums of national culture and language schools, but in the absence of developed industries and work in their regions, due to deindustrialization, no one needs them.
In Soviet times, they could afford
to live autonomously, because the government artificially developed industry and education in all regions of the country, regardless of economic expediency.
With the advent of capitalism, this stopped, and they began to move to cities in search of work. They give up their languages for the same reason that immigrants from the Netherlands in New York refused to use Dutch, according to your logic, this should also be considered "genocide".
Two points that came to my mind, which seem contrary to the theory that Oceania is as big as it says it is:
1) In "The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism", it is described how the party members are drawn from the local populace, so as to avoid making the people feel they are under foreign occupation. However, it is also known that newspeak is the official, state-wide language. Newspeak is derived from English, but Oceania's claimed territory includes many non-Anglophone regions. These two facts seem to me to be contradictory.
2) The name of the party is Ingsoc, which gives the impression that it is specifically an English political movement. How would such a movement have come to dominate half the globe? Of course, it is possible that the party lies about its own name too, but that seems unlikely.
I also thought of one point in favor of Oceania being a massive superstate:
1) We never see any definitive attempts of interference from the outside. If the rest of the world was 'normal', one could expect to see things like balloons or leaflets sent from mainland Europe, or contraband smuggled in. Winston would almost certainly know of these things, if they existed.
I think the ING could be the English language as when I think of Oceania I mainly think Britain America and Australia but if it says otherwise I apologize.
1) I think we both know that bilingual people exist
2) there could be literally any reason. "Soviet" is a Russian word, yet many non-Russian republics used it in their names
Also, we do not constantly send leaflets to North Korea. Hell, in South Korea there's a literal law that makes sending messages in bottles, leaflets or anything of the sort to North Korea illegal
@fra604 That law was removed last year
@@agoodname2455but it existed and fully enacted.
It’s possible that the utter devastation of the Cold War caused people to focus on their own nation
I imagined that the geopolitical landscape actually is as the party says, but the leaders of Oceania, Eurasia and Estasia actually work together, making calculated and agreed attacks on each other, "losing" battles to exchange prisoners etc., in order to keep their own position of power in each superstate.
Not too different from another scenario where the party actually controls the whole world and it just "localize" it's ideology in each district, and keep up a fake perpetual war.
I don't really have anything to back this up, but I feel like it could be in the range of possibilities.
I would argue that is half true, but IIRC Goldstein's book explains that while the leaders are aware that their wars between them are all just a scheme for mutual benefit, and the shifting alliances of who is fighting who is calculated for that purpose, at the same time, they also simultaneously genuinely believe that the wars are genuinely fought. They believe they can be won. Such is the nature of doublethink.
The wars are genuine efforts, but also complete shams. And the party leaders, victims of doublethink just as much as everyone else, believe both contradictory ideas at the same time.
Yes, you are right. Even if countries are governed by different parties and governments, they obviously coordinate their actions in the war through secret agreements and perhaps even arrange diplomatic meetings or gather on some island in the Virgin archipelago... If you choose from two theories about little oceania and a theory about the coordination of war, I would choose the second one. The first seems to me to be a stupid conspiracy theory no better than a flat earth, but the second seems self-evident in real life, opposing governments always exaggerate their hostility and make pacts with the enemy when they need to, moreover, it was mentioned in Goldstein's book
@@jogzyg2036 So even the leaders are fully absorbed in delusions of their own making. I must admit that I like this way of putting it.
@soldatox3019 Yes, and although I don't have the book immediately to hand so I can't quote it, I believe that O'brien pretty much says exactly that in the interrogation. He himself knows the truth, about the wars, the party and everything and explains it all to Winston. But he equally also completely believes the propaganda.
@soldatox3019 Also the leaders are not "fully" absorbed in their own delusions. That's what's so scary about doublethink. They fully believe both versions of the truth completely despite them being contradictory. They know that the wars are just a political sham, that victory is neither possible nor desirable. But they also "know" that they are real and as the propaganda describes them.
There’s also external evidence that Orwell based his description of both the geopolitical superstates of 1984 and the sociological basis of the Inner Party on concepts discussed by James Burnham in his “Managerial Revolution” which Orwell reviewed a number of times.
Yes, Burnham believed that there would be an endless unwinnable conflict between the US, Germany, and Japan, where even two allied couldn’t overtake the third.
This is primarily based from chapter 12 “The World Policy of The Managers”
Thank you for bringing this up Orwells ideological underpinnings for writing this book are often neglected
Yeah, Burnham was Orwell's handler in the Congress of Cultural Freedom which was a US programme to psychological re-wire Western European culture after WW2
@@nestormakhno9266
Goldstein's book is undiluted Burnham.
It's curious since Orwell was far from being a fan but he obviously found his ideas appealing.
@@alanpennie8013 a lot of burnham ideas on the managerial class is inspired impart by trotsky who Orwell had a much more positive relationship. Trotsky often accused the USSR of being a degraded workers state
I don’t have proof so much as the first instance where I thought this theory could be true. At the end of the book, Winston sees a war report on a screen that says the Oceanean army was pushed back and he thinks that the only way they could win this battle is if Oceania had a secret force stashed away somewhere nearby to attack the enemy. Sure enough, the announcer soon says that a secret Oceania army force has pushed the enemy back and gained the upper hand. In my mind this could only happen if the battle being described and the armies fighting in it were fictional.
In my opinion all batle reports are fake, but the war and other states are real. How else would you explain the POW they parade during Hate of (insert other superstate) week.
"Trust me bro, we actually summoned an entire force that turned the tide of war in our favor in the very last second i swear. They are secret so you cant notice them.👀"
Patriots winning the Super Bowl in 2002 vibes.
Also the weird inverted reality that is the end of the man in the high castle when the woman finds the author of basically her own alternate reality book creeps me out
One unmentioned problem with a hermit kingdom Oceania is that Great Britain has not been able to feed itself for over a century. It depends on massive imports of foodstuffs. Where would Oceania get the money to purchase food from the rest of the world, even if surreptitiously.
But, so far as the question of why the Inner Party would lie about insignificant and unimportant things, it is observed that chronic liars do just that, merely for amusement or to keep in practice.
Pretending to be at war, and constantly rewriting history would be good for a) keeping the proles and Outer Party too busy to think, b) removing the ability to compare the reality of today with yesterday, and c) smoking out those who remember the past.
About the Asiatic prisoners, I do not recall them ever being actually executed in public, as most of those killed were from the cellars of Miniluv.
Great Britain depends on massive imports because the current system wants it to happen. It is literally said that they destroy part of their produce in order to not give too much to the people, so that they'll be too hungry to think or protest
I mean, they can receive more money from not taking care of their population and black market trade. They could also recieve food in the form of aid from other ideological aligned nations. The Soviets and Chinese sent aid to North Korea, so sending it to another totalitarian "socialist" state is believable.
It also did say that Britain was nuked multiples times in a war with the Soviet Union, so I think that maybe a decent portion of the population was killed off from that
@@DrGrove this is not fascism this is english socialism
@@damienchall8297 aka fascism Nazism was called national socialism and yet it still was a form of fascism
Another argument for the 3 superstates scenario is when Julia brings the ingredients from the inner party shop with real coffe and tea. She mentions how there has been more tea present in the shops since Oceania apperantly conquered India. I think this is a huge argument for the 3 superstate scenario as why would more tea appear in the inner party shops? I find it very unlikely for someone to plan something like this when its just for the inner party that a vast majority of the population has no access to. Britain by itself can't really grow a lot of tea which is also a big reason why Britain historically needed colonies for tea.
Idk the party seems so put in controlling everything that i wouldn’t put past them to regulate the distribution of tea so that it becomes bigger just after their “conquest” of india
I would say it's more likely the tea was some sort of off the books purchase from India itself. International trade does exist even if the state refuses to acknowledge that it's doing such trade.
i mean just talk about chocolate rations, not even tea.
@@leonida5943 Exactly. Wouldn't put it past them to plant stories like this, and provide the materials to make them believable. Misdirection, misinformation, and distraction.
You know how they say that the first person that has to believe the lie is the liar? The Inner Party is basically the middle management of a cult, they are smug about the lesser ranks believing the normie stuff they peddle to them while they are "in the know" but are still drinking the KoolAid themselves.
Even with the Eurasian prisoners, I'd say an isolated Britain is still possible since Oceania likely still targets Eurasian cargo ships with submarines and takes survivors as POWs.
my assumption is that they were probably non-brits who were living in the UK when ingsoc took over
@@Rootiga exactly they just keep a few "Eurasians" and "Eastasians" around for just such occasions as they "cleanse" the non brits
I think it is, most likely, international forces fighting.
of course the war is real we always have been at war with euras.... i mean eastasia
Lol
Okey.
Room 101
Let's pull up the slider to 90
Nearly doubleplusungood, brother.
@@commandingjudgedredd1841 Comrade you meant.
😂 People in futuristic super advance Ireland:
Irishman 1: I say, ol boy, are those uncultured brits still telling their people that they rule half the world?
Irishman 2: Yes, i dare say, indubitably. Good thing we left when we did.
Well, futuristic and super advanced, relative to Britain, they'd probably look like modern day ireland
@@minestar2247well they probably ARE modern ireland
“I say, ye feck-shite, the black-and-tans sure are full o themselves ain’t they?”
“Ah sure Jay-sus”
I read that in my head with a very thick Irish accent. 😆
Have you ever actually heard how Irish people speak
I agree, there being 3 superstates is most likely, however it is likely that the disputed territory is actually a resistance movement, and the reason that the superstates stop fighting and form alliances from time to time is to quell the resistance movement when it becomes a threat to them. The reason I don't think that this resistance is mentioned is because it might make some people want to defect and escape from Oceania to join this resistance movement. So it is easier for them to say that their enemies are Eurasia and Eastasia, to stop people from defecting and to keep up the propaganda. This could also be how Oceania collapses, this resistance movement gains enough power to reconquer the lands that Oceania has, perhaps Oceania once did have all the territory they claimed, but it has slowly been liberated, and now Airstrip One is all the remains, but the Ministry of Truth has to keep this secret for fear of arousing resistance movements within their borders. Perhaps this is why there are explosions that are heard that do not make it into the news, because their are bombs or attacks from the resistance that The Party can't pin on Eurasia and Eastasia, so they keep it secret altogether.
Or perhaps I've been watching too many videos of the HOI4 1984 mod.
You've probably just been watching too much hoi4 let's play
true
This is just the plot of SwinceBall's, video on the HOI4 1984 mod.
What’s more likely is that it’s a fictional book in a fictional universe
The party wasn't merely trying to convince people of things that weren't true. It had succeeded in convincing people reality was a meaningless concept. And that's the actual point to Julia's speculation that the war was a hoax. It's not that that was a reasonable theory. It's that once you give up on trying to figure out what's true and what isn't, reasonable theories (for example: Oceania isn't as big and powerful as it claims to be) and ridiculous ones (the entire war is a hoax) are equally valid. It's how you end up with people thinking the Pope is a lizard man.
So, going down Kant's unfalsifiability-pipeline? No reason to reason, now that nothing can be known. You are just a brain in a jar, dreaming a life. The world, all people and their memories of the past were are created last thursday. Such "fun" concepts can really mess a person up, especially those who are already vulnerable (schizophreniacs, traumatised people, manic-depressed people).
Wait, the pope isn't a lizard man? Are you telling me that guy on reddit that told me he was, was lying to me? 🤣
This is the most important thing about the whole affair, yeah. The erosion of truth having any meaning is far more important than any lie IngSoc could be telling.
Part of me has always wished that Orwell wrote more about the universe of 1984 but the other part knows it would likely have just ruined the magic.
The ambiguety of most of it does provoke the imagination.
@nineteen-eighty-four-lore the genius of 1984 is that you simply don't know what to believe. By expanding on the world, he could only have made it worse, I think.
This uncertainty in the world-worldbuilding is one of the greatest strengths of the story, as it underlines the running theme of "what is truth?". Given how lies and propaganda are everywhere within the world of 1984, the reader cannot help but wonder if what they are told is actually true at all, or just Winston falling for some of the Party's falsehoods even as he recognises and contemplates others. Thus, the book remains open to interpretation, and therefore deeply thought-provoking, even after all these years.
And it also kinda poses a question about the current day; What if we aren't actually living in reality today, and we don't know what freedom really is (not in a conspiratorial sense but in like a genuine "everything you know and think about the world you live in is incorrect and false to the truth"). Plato's Cave essentially deals with it.
You can rule most of this out by Occam's Razor though, and just accept the reality you're in and try to advance your understanding of it as much as possible. But interesting thought experiment nonetheless. Don't go schizo with it
@@RMProjects785I like your outlook from a literary sense, but if you're a First World Westerner in the real world, you're free to go explore the planet yourself, and while you claim you can't afford it, you can.
@@teebob21 Ofc, I'm not saying we live in an totalitarian state in the west. Just that maybe we don't even know yet what true freedom is.
@@RMProjects785 Oh, of course you don't know what true freedom is. That would have required that you lived on the American frontier in 1795, somewhere like the Ohio Valley. You were not tracked and registered; you were not surveilled; you were free to do as you pleased so long as it did not result in harm to another person. You were responsible for ensuring your own survival.
Societies have been ceding more and more of their own personal liberty back to the federal governments basically ever since the establishment of governments. Never in the history of ever has a government grown incrementally less and less authoritarian over time, it is always the opposite that is true. Always.
My personal theory is that, yes, Airstrip One is isolated, but it's not really in a much worse place than the rest of the world, as simultaneous to it, _Mad Max_ is happening in Australia, _Fist of the North Star_ is going on in Japan, and _Logan's Run_ is happening in America, so everywhere is just different shades of horrible.
At the same time, I choose to subscribe to the theory that the appendix is an in-universe historical document written long after their society eventually collapses.
Kenshiro in Airstip one making party soldiers head pop 😂
*YOU WA SHOCK!*
Oh, and I think STALKER or Metro or one of those is what Russia is experiencing, I forgot to think of that sooner
I believe that this is meant to be ambiguous. The best point for the war not being all it seems is the rocket bombs falling on the proles and not the pyramids. On the other hand people must be volunteering for the army and going somewhere. Although to be fair with how quickly Winston creates a war hero it could just be they get told they are needed in a factory and shuffled about while the front line is manned by ghosts. That's why the lore is so interesting. There is evidence either way in the text it's just a matter of framing. Ultimately I think there is a loose hegemonic zone in East Asia and another around the old Soviet states but everything beyond that is just semantics. It comes from us being so frustratingly limited by Winston's lack of agency.
In the book it says that wars are no longer fought by large armies but by highly specialized units that engage in combat. This means that you wouldn't be recruiting out of the general population.
@@waltercommunitycollege1615 Well, you could, but then "acceptance" into those specialized units would require meeting standards so high very few of the new recruits could meet it. Almost none. Thus, it would be entirely normal for one group to go through training and not have anyone in their cohort become the best of the best. Everyone else either goes back to being a prole or goes into internal security or whatnot.
It's just that no one has noticed that none of the training groups have ever had anyone make it to these "elite units".
@@keith6706 This actually good be a strategy to obtain inner party members
@@waltercommunitycollege1615
It was quite foresighted of Orwell to realise that the days of mass armies were drawing to an end.
@@alanpennie8013 If anything the War in Ukraine seems to be a dark reminder for all our fancy modern tech, mass manpower is still a reality of War between parity nations.
I support the "Pariah State like NK" theory for Oceania. The elements let by the book are quite open to give us free interpretation about it. Sure if we assume that north koreans only know what happening outside nation from the state propaganda, they would not much oppose it than reflect more about internal issues, which are comprehensibly at the top of all days citizen priorities than some vague support from China or other african nations to North Korea government
How are you giong explain the POW they parade during Hate of (insert other superstate) week ?
@@thebrickcult6418 I think, by Winstom description, that they could be irish and voloonters by other world countries, who decides to partecipate for the defence of Ireland. If we think that Winstom himself lived when he was young, at the early stages of revolution; at that time (the 50s) London couldnt have so many asiatic faces as today, so he can only recognize what the state always said to him. If the state for all your life says that "their" ethnic group belong to China, you have only the state and no other means to compare the reality about this fact
@@thebrickcult6418 NK has had a hand full of US defectors join and all they did was act in movies as the bad guys and got shat on in public because of it.
It's one of those things where you can easily assume it's either dumbasses joining, them hiring actors or just kidnapping people off the streets to parade around.
They could also be ex-british troops from the colonies that they either kept around or joined up and get paraded as propaganda actors.
@@thebrickcult6418 If you subscribe to the "staged" theory, it's not at all complicated to have a small populations of foreigners sequestered to play the part of "PoWs" who get paraded around here and there. Because information is highly controlled and Outer Party and Prole citizens don't really travel, it's feasible to keep this charade going about as needed.
Also, every action taken by the other Superstates, like sending leaflets or at RadioFreeEngland underlines the MiniLuv propaganda and any "news" can be immediately declared Goldsteinian sedition. Add to that that the party might just offer to take some criminals off the hands of Eastasia or Eurasia and parade them through the streets as POWs while getting some trade goods in return.
I think the Oceania is just the British Empire just after WWII - no Northern or Southern America but Britain, South Africa, Australia and parts of India. I think it's at war but not with the superstates as they don't exist - maybe with India that tries to free itself (and Indian soliders are portrayed as "Eastasian"), maybe with communist China.
Maybe not Australia, but definitely some overseas islands for sure, Australia is too far away and if the population rebelled, the Party couldn’t control them anymore and maintain their power. Hell, maybe that even happened-
@@Cascada2009 Maybe that's east asia.
Oceania is the English speaking allies of World War II where the USA is dominant as it became during the course of World War II. Hence the relegation of the British Isles to being an airstrip.
Oceania = Anglo-American state
Eurasia = USSR that expanded westward
Eastasia = PRC that won the Korean war.
And probably they are at war with Ireland.
Which are probably resembled as people from western part of euroasia.
Another thing would have to be an elaborate "Potemkin's Village" on the part of INGSOC is the many Oceanian soldiers who regularly return home from the frontlines of the superstate forever war.
Then there was the coffee and other items Julia shows to Winston in their little love nest room:
Where does the real coffee, real sugar that Julia shows to Winston amongst other forbidden items come from? The jam and white bread could be made in Airstrip One, but coffee and cane sugar Coffee and sugarcane both thrive in tropical and subtropical climates. Here's a breakdown of their specific needs:
Coffee: Prefers warm temperatures (around 68-77°F on average), abundant rainfall (ideally 60-100 inches annually), and well-drained soil. It also benefits from some shade protection, especially during early growth. Many coffee-growing regions are located near the equator where these conditions prevail.
Sugarcane: Similar to coffee, sugarcane flourishes in warm temperatures (around 70-86°F) with ample rainfall (50-80 inches annually) and plenty of sunshine. It can tolerate drier conditions to some extent but irrigation is often used to ensure optimal growth.
While not absolute proof of Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia's existence, it does prove that there is still a world out there beyond Airstrip One (England).
There are two possibilities:
1. Great Britain is still in possession of a few overseas territories in Africa and the Caribbean.
2. Great Britain is allies with countries in Latin America, or at the very least is allowed to trade with them.
A third possibility is that these crops are grown in Britain in climate-controlled greenhouses.
Just because Oceania may only consist of Great Britain doesn't mean it is completely isolated from the rest of the world.
My personal theory is that Oceania sometimes tries to take ships and cargo that is supposed to arrive to mainland Europe and it's able to obtain things like coffee and sugar that and the existence of a black market/contraband present in the island
They might be importing small amounts of luxury goods like North Korea
To explain the prisoners of Eurasia and Eastasia, Oceania could easily have agents operating outside of their borders to perform various tasks, similar to how North Korea is able to assassinate political opponents and bypass some sanctions. Migrants, the homeless, or just anyone who won’t be missed could be kidnapped and brought in as “POWs” for execution. It may seem a ridiculous waste of resources to do such a thing, but the illusion of a nation under siege is crucial for the survival of INGSOC, and nothing cements that more than death.
To apply some Cold War to the mix, Britain under INGSOC may be something of a proxy state to the US, as the US did in South America IRL, and could serve as a useful naval base and channel to the USSR and China. It may also explain Oceania’s shifting relationship with Eurasia and Eastasia, the country shifting based on who they favor more. Or alternatively, Oceania’s may have at first been at war with Eastasia when China and its sphere of influence-ostensibly Eastasia in Oceania’s mind-was still under the nationalists, and the Soviet Union was seen as its ally in socialism. Following the more moderate rulers after Stalin, INGSOC switched against Eurasia, until the switch we see in the book happens. This is all speculation, but it explains why the entirety of the Americas, ostensibly under the US sphere of influence, is not contested territory, and instead entirely under the Oceania. In the party’s mind, there is no threat of concern with South America, because the USA can manage all of it.
In a way, the book can be seen as a portrayal of the spheres of influence drawn in the actual Cold War, only instead with much greater commonality of totalitarianism, and Western Europe being under the USSR stand-in.
Best opinion ive seen so far
The idea of a proxy state is genius.
I don't think the usa would support a state like ingsoc if that's what you're saying
@@PETRIXXXX there could be many more actors involved in keeping INGSOC propped up, but a big part could be the sheer information black-hole Oceania likely would be to the outside world. Every technology not devoted to the complete oppression of the people likely hasn’t moved beyond even the 1940s, and decades of decay and active dismantling by the party could set it back even further. People might know INGSOC is bad, but just how bad is unknown.
Additionally, the British-Isle’s strategic position would make any alliance with a country who is against the west a nightmare for the US and Western Europe, but a preexisting INGSOC may have had with the USSR would make a direct invasion the start of WWIII. So instead of abandoning Oceania out of moral qualms at the cost of the new existence of a European equivalent of Cuba, the US may have leveraged whatever already existing relation it may have had in order to stop Oceania from, at the minimum, being an enemy against the US. Airstrip One may lean more towards a satellite state to the US, but whatever version of the Cold War this timeline features would have increasing domestic sentiment in the US to do something about INGSOC be weighed against the threat of the party aligning to “Eurasia” (USSR) or “Eastasia” (communist China).
With this taken into greater consideration, the first alliance INGSOC may have had with Eurasia might have been the allied effort against Japanese at the end of the war, while the subsequent break between the allies and the Soviets, and the US occupation of Japan, may have led to the first shift in the party’s alliances that we know about from the book.
Also, the reason why INGSOC would stick to an allegiance with the US sphere is, IMO, that a US alliance and agenda would allow them to sit idly in their status quo, something necessary for the party to survive and a cornerstone of their philosophy. The more belligerent nature of Soviet foreign policy would have been to disruptive, and a constant allegiance to either Eastasia or Eurasia likely to put them in a position that would eventually cause a disruption they would rather avoid.
I think it simply unlikely that a society would be able to effectively control large territories/populations when their primary value is straight up ignorance.
Also, consider for a moment the oversimplicity of the tripolar situation 1984 describes; the hundreds of nations and thousands of cultures across Earth all just got gobbled up, no problem, by three basically identical ideologies/regimes, in a handful of decades?
It is much more likely that Oceania is a North Korean-tyle hermit kingdom, sitting in the middle of a post-nuclear Earth, where most of the other countries are too nuked or poor to intervene. The "war" between the "super powers" may have some grain of truth (i.e., fighting rival societies for resources), but i think the scale and situation is wildly exaggerated/simplified in order to enhance propaganda value to the Oceanic masses.
Some past empires have rivalled the scope of control that these super-states have, but I must admit it does seem unlikely thinking about history.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore Yeah I mean post-WWII it was unreasonable that the world would end up dominated by three states. Europe and the US were aligned as a bloc, and that plus European colonies covered like 2/3 of the world. Then there's really only China and the USSR-dominated bloc.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lorebut those past empires were never centralised. Look at the British Empire, it was a network of client states, protectorates and Dominions. Even the most centralised colonial empire (France) was still and extremely loose confederation of vastly different cultures
It's actually just England in the Fallout universe
Airstrip 1 is just England in the Fallout Universe.
My biggest clue that the vastness of Oceania is lie comes down to language. If Newspeak is to become the true language to replace all others, then why is it completely based on English? A true Newspeak of a country that is comprised of primarily of English, Spanish, Portuguese & French speakers would have to be something like Esperanto. Instead, all these English speakers simply have to abridge their existing vocabulary.
I think you underestimate how widespread English is and was
Maybe there are regional variations of newspeak? It's not like someone in Santiago is going to talk to someone in Liverpool without Inner Party sanction.
Or is the party just developing Spanish and Portuguese analogues of newspeak
Why no?
@@fra604 No you do. English wasn't widespread in Latin America in the 50s.
@@raymondcoventry1221 At that point one could assume Oceania doesn't exist as a real entity but is a loose collection of local lordships. You could assume that for the entire world. Each one having its own lies, deceptions and wars not known to the rest.
You made two significant mistakes - first, you assumed the party's motives are fully known. However, the beauty of 1984 is that we know enough to realize that most of our knowledge is lies. Second mistake was assuming the party's decision have to make sense. When a large group of people decide multiple things, the results are often confusing and even contradictory; moreover dictators often make decisions purely based on emotion. Some decisions are made because it seems to keep working, so there's no need to change it. Then there are stances and decisions made purely to humiliate people, like North Korea's claim that Kim Jong Il could walk and talk before six months old. Claims such as these are made for two reasons: those who believe them believe the state is in the right hands, and those who don't believe them have to spout nonsense under the threat of punishment. The final reason to lie about inconsequential things is control - people like O'Brien would certainly be pleased by making someone believe complete nonsense just because they can.
Except the party doesn't operate that way at all and doesn't make contradictory decisions the way you're describing
Assuming, of course, that the kimmy factoid is not in itself a lie told to us about NorK.
The Soviets used to keep power partly through humiliation rituals like that. Even if everyone knows the things they're saying are nonsense, being forced to tell obvious lies gradually erodes your willpower, self-respect, and ability to fight back. In the Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn describes an event in the early days of the Revolution (early 1920s I think) where the secret police tried to arrest someone but had to back off due to massive resistance from the local crowd. He remarks that such a thing could never happen anymore and laments that the people didn't love truth enough to fight back.
That's always been my fan theory too, and it makes the book scarier, imagine being told you're part of some great game and the rest of the world is in turmoil but in reality the rest of the world is just doing fine and dandy.
It would explain why the Party is so strict on movement, even within its own territory. It can't afford huge instances of cultural contamination. It does make me wonder about the nature of their military, however, and how they mitigate this problem when these men and women come home.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore well if my headcanon is correct they probably wouldn't even want to come back, they would go to whatever fictional war they were told was going on geared up ready for battle and... immediately get disarmed and granted refugee status. Realize that life without constant exposure to propaganda and threats of torture is good. Most of them probably wouldn't even need deprogramming.
Maybe I'm too much of an optimist though. Great channel and analysis.
It makes it less scary imo, similar to 28 days later, you found out that only Britain was infected with the zombie virus, which means the entire world still lives, which is quite hopeful.
Possibility:
Orwell just didn't write 1984 very well, worldbuilding-wise.
That's the most likely option, that man didn't have much grasp on international politics
If I recall correctly he was writing it as he was dying, so presumably he would have spent more time on it had he had a few more healthy years or even months. Shame really.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore I don't think it's such a shame, considering he was hilter sympathetic and very anti soviet, also very racist towards Asians in general
@@minestar2247 You say that as if being Anti-Soviet is a bad thing.
@@minestar2247 in his memoir book he always stated that racism in brittan will end british empire and he always made fun of racism in general he was an socialist tell me how he can be sympathetic towarts hilter when he wanted to destroy socialism he fought in spanish civil war against nationalists hilter supported nationalists he fought against that you are just not making any sense
I even heard theories Oceania doesn't even hold all of Britain proper.
Imagine how crazy it would be if it held just London and the Isle of Wight or something! Lol
😂 This is now my favorite theory.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore Or actually a huge stage, a-la Truman show and Winston is an unknowing protagonist for some hyperadvanced civilisation that is actually thriving on the planet
I think the idea is that it's all so ambiguous. You don't know, you'll never know, you'll always be stabbing in the dark. That's the power the party has. Maybe there is 1 war, 6 wars, or no war at all. That's for the party to know and for you to only dream of. Only with such a tight control on information could a state like this even exist. It's essentially north korea.
I think Orwell played with the idea of it only being Britain since it adds to the eeriness and doubt in the book.
But the name ‘Air Strip One’ itself refers to the idea that in the 1940s Britain had become little more than an ‘unsinkable air craft carrier’ of the United States. You learn of Churchill selling islands to the US, but the transformation people saw in that time was much deeper than that. I’ve heard of the UK becoming a ‘subordinate power’ to the US, some want more positive language such as ‘special relationship’, others call Britain a satellite state. But before the 1940s Britain was in fact an independent power. Since then culturally, politically internally and externally, the US has dictated the way of things in Britain. Orwell lived through this transformation period and the novel reflects that. However this is a controversial aspect of 1984 that has been spoken about less over the years, perhaps because there is truth to it
I just personally like the 3 superstates fighting better than the isolated Britain theory. The whole idea of people in power allowing a war to indefinitely continue fits the theme a little better I think.
I betcha it's just England. No Wales, Scotland, or even Cornwall. 1984 is just what happens when the English have no one left to colonize but themselves :D
The ultimate Brexit
cornwall is in england
Scots and the Welsh were integral parts of the Empire themselves.
Personally I think that Oceania WAS a super state at one point, and did manage to conquer most of the world but ended up overextending itself and has gotten beaten back to the point where it’s just Airstrip One and a few other holdings. Probably Ireland, Normandy, and Parts of Scandinavia. So there basically pulling a Baghdad Bob and trying to convince the population that the war is going better than it really is.
I'm gonna try to boil down my feelings to why I feel the NK theory makes the most sense. Such a massive span of territory could not be governed and controlled so well on such a scale without 100% competency and loyalty which is basically never a thing(The book is quite grounded so I have to assume this is the case) even with total surveillance(There is always a countermeasure/backdoor). The parties are not hiveminds and its doubtful they would not have, on some level, ambitions and drives of their own, so working together to ensure their rule would only work so long none of them realize that the artificial reality they made can't just be replicated in the territories they conquer.
The NK idea works cause islands are naturally defensible and prone to isolationist policies. Putting the population on edge through eternal war helps to enforce "The world is against us" mentality makes sense that none of the pyramids are hit. "They would not get hit cause all 3 factions are aligned," This is wishful thinking as I noted before. Why play ball if reality is so malleable to your populations? Why keep thinking everyone else is going to play ball when they may come to the same realization and betray you?
The ultimate reality is that the upper class/party elite maybe all powerful in their states, but they are human too and they will er like anyone else. Thus the NK theory makes the most sense. That or we are merely watching a temporary period of history that will pass when these states simply cannot keep up the facade forever.
Ever since I heard this theory it immediately became my head canon. The nations that supposedly exist during this universe simply don't make any sense and the borders sound incredibly unbelievable. It mirrors North Korea quite well.
Has it been released what North Koreans are taught the globe looks like? Arrangement of countries and what not. Curious.
Edit: Ok, I spent five minutes jogging my memory. And yeah, they are surprisingly taught an accurate map. I guess that helps with their military “industrial” complex…
@@cameron.t They're shown an accurate world map but with Korea in the centre of it and there being no North/South divide. Obviously North Korea's number one goal is annexing South Korea which in the 1984 universe would be the equivalent of Britain (Oceania) fighting for control of Ireland which is what I believe is happening.
@@cameron.t North Koreans would also be taught about how much better they have it compared to The West and how The West is actively plotting to invade North Korea which is how they justify so much going into their military.
This would explain the strange way that the British Empire seemed to take over the United States, at least ideologically.
Yeah.
Like come on!
Especially since the name Airstrip One pretty obviously alludes to USA using UK as a base during The Cold War.
I don't think it was meant to have taken over. Instead, the entire Anglosphere merged. The name of the Party and ideology was taken from England, the currency (dollars) from America, and the name of the state from the Australia/New Zealand region. It is explicitly stated that there is no capital, and each of the main zones is made to feel that it is the centre. That's why Airstrip One feels so much like imperial Britain.
@@kg8489But this video shows Oceania including all of North and South America, not just the Anglosphere. If that’s correct, the term Ingsoc makes no sense in that context.
@@bbartky The implication is that the USA conquered all of the Americas.
i thought the US was implied to have conquered the rest? by the time the book claims ingosc was created, it wouldve been impossible for the british empire to topple the US
I had never thought of it before your video, and I think you're right.
The rocket bomb attacks that avoid the Ministry buildings that would typically be high priority targets. The rubble everywhere that certainly doesn't reflect a 5 continent superstate The lack of any ethnicities/accents from Australia, the Americas, or Africa is also telling.
Lastly, Airstrip 1 should be the prime jumping off point for Oceania against Eurasia, it should be heavily militarized and built up. You should see and hear massive fighter/bomber wings overhead on a regular basis on their way to and from Eurasia.
I can't imagine what point it would have served for the party to change sides in the war, in the middle of a major speech no less, if it wasn't a real war in the first place.
How can you change wars in The middle of a speach though? That kinda proves there is no war, or that it was small enough to ally with Eurasia in an instant
have you never had a mixup of words while holding a speech?
It gets tyring fast. Your mouth gets dry. You dont really have memorized your text but somehow remember it anyway.
I for example once managed to mix up my companies name with the competitors once, simple because mentaly i was progressing faster through my text than verbaly. And yet the company im working for is real.
I imagined a future of Airstrip One. Inner party dies and outers get power and establish the same society because the world except for the Britain is dead
That doesn't need to happen, the inner party can just continue existing, just with different people,
Doesn't the book end with a memoir explaining how the Party collapsed?
@@swagmund_freud6669 No? It's doesn't
@@minestar2247 It literally does....
@@swagmund_freud6669 No, I've red the book(maybe it's not the same edition as you) but nowhere is it even implied the inner party ends up disapearing
I kinda had this idea that during our own cold war, sometimes in the 70s or so, it became a hot global war, that even went nuclear to a degree, and then for several decades we had warlords all over the world, including what was left of Britain. And the winning warlord faction there invented the entire scenario of the three super-states to stay in power over what was left of the British populace, who after decades of pure survival have no real knowledge left of what had happened in the past. The rest of the world has been slowly rebuilding, yet stil suffers from the nuclear exchange, so they have no real desire or maybe even ability to overthrow the Ingsoc government. After all they are isolated on the British isles, so they could stay, the rest of the world does not care. They might even have a few nuclear weapons left, so the other rebuilding nations are just content with letting them stay on the island.
As for the idea on how the Ingsoc party can get some commodities and luxury goods, like tea or chocolate for prole rations, I have a simple idea. Piracy. The Ingsoc regime every now and then sends out raiding fleets against coastal settlements in Africa or other places for these goods, or they simply capture trading ships between the rebuilding outside world. That is why such commodities only appear eveyr now and then, because they only manage to get such things every few months or even years by capturing a big enough cargo ship. This would also solve the idea on how Winston could see prisoners of war from East-Asia, these are the crews of such vessels. So if they capture a ship with goods like tea or rice and similar, they would show off POWs from there.
Wouldn't people like Winston know about nukes or warlords, especially if it was in the 70s while he was a child in the 50s.
@@minestar2247 Depends on how far in the future the plot actually takes place. Like, if it is the actual year 2084, so more than a century after the nukes went flying, Winston would have been born decades after the first nuclear exchange and warlord period, after which the Ingoc regime could have destroyed pretty much all of the written down knowledge and records, giving the people the impression that it is stil the 20th century, as nobody has any reference or memories to it anymore. That is kinda how I imagined a possible explanative scenario.
@@MTTT1234 the story is specifically happening in 1984 though
@@minestar2247 The story takes place in 1984 according to Winston's knowledge. After all, at the very start of the book he himself wonders if the date is actually true or not. As it is the date the Ingsoc government tells everybody. So we do not truly know if it is 1984, 2024 or 2084. It is just the date Winston assumes it is.
@@MTTT1234 no but, i'm pretty sure it is supposed to be in the 80's, maybe not exactly the year 1984, but still not more than half a century from ww2
This has always been my favourite theory
The atmosphere Orwell wanted to convey was one of ambiguity and uncertainty regarding the true nature of the world of 1984.
"Decades"? Absolutly, the book is around 70 something years old, that's insane
Another marvellous video mate and a very fascinating theory. It's amazing how the book 1984 has so many fascinating theories out there to explore and that people young and old to this day talk about it in great detail and debate. That's the power of a fantastic story that makes you think, also I'm glad that this channel exists. I've been fascinated by 1984 for a few years now and regrettably I haven't read the book, I've studied it online and people have told me about it. I plan to get the 1984 movie with John Hurt. It's sad that George Orwell died so soon after the novel was released, if he was alive today I would have so many questions especially in regards to the other super states. A question that have for you is if all of the super states were over thrown by the proles what would be the outcome of it? And would the world get better as time goes on? I know that in our world people on different political spectrums always say that the other is trying to establish something like Ingsoc or that we are living in a 1984. However I think that by saying such things do disservice and taking lightly the dangers of totalitarianism. I would advise people to look at things critically and objectively.
It is a great book, so much to explore. I hope you keep enjoying the content.
To answer your question: My instinct is that the proles revolting in all the states would almost certainly be de facto under the leadership of "Middle" figures (or perhaps even disgruntled members of "High"), to use the terms in Goldstein's Book. Generally, I think this aspect of the Book is true, ordinary folk never truly revolt like that with no leader or some kind.
Unfortunately, I think it's unlikely there would be a clean transition from totalitarian super-states to democratic states. It would likely be horrific: a geopolitical free-for-all and civil wars within former countries. Decades later you may see a few larger states coalesce to stabilise things. It could take a long time to get to anything resembling our world. That's just my two cents anyway. :D
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore I see, thank you.
The problem with this video is that it will confuse them. So let's be clear: Airstrip One is a key western node in a maritime, totalitarian state that was built on the wreckage of the British Empire fused with North America.
As the USSR fomented successful communist revolts in Greece, Italy, and France in the late 1940s, the Anglo-Saxons launched their own offensives south into Central and South America and north from South Africa into Namibia. The situation in Australia remained stable throughout.
When the communists overthrew Franco, Portugal's dictator fled and Iberia was fully incorporated into Eurasia.
Airstrip One, remained on Eurasia's north west flank, totally isolated from the European mainland, yet a very active part of Oceania. Although exposed to a Eurasian seaborne invasion, it's understood that any invasion of the British Isles would mean a return to nuclear war which all seek to avoid.
Oceania isn't isolated and it's a key building block within Oceania's global infrastructure. There's no evidence whatsoever that suggests there's any other interpretation of the novel other than the dead end of literary revisionism. People can do that, but it's their personal version of 1984, not Orwell's.
What do you know? You can barely speak English and use Chat GPT to write your posts.
thats your opinion, and its wrong
@@Rootiga No, not wrong in any way thanks. Btw, you told its but you should write it's.
Level 1 English mistake.
Wow! Your channel is really good, and I really think that this is a really interesting take on his novel! Have a good day sir.
Was England spared during the nuclear war that decimated the "known world" prior to our story?
Would much of Oceania (thinking mainly of America) have been flattened ~ uninhabitable, for some few centuries?
(I'm forgetting the status of Chernobyl today and Fukushima tomorrow)
We certainly see rubble and sections of London destroyed by the rocket-bomb attacks (whatever source), but all in all England exists throughout this tale, and we learn little of its role; forward outpost/HQ or true center of western civilization.
A post-nuclear war society (to me) remains a mystery I don't often choose to imagine.
Watch "On The Beach" with Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner, Fred Estaire and Anthony Perkins; a bizarre tale from the Australian viewpoint, of a cataclysmic "northern" nuclear war, and its delayed effects to the south.
😮🎉😮
Large portions of the Coast lines of the USA would be gone and uninhabitable for decades in the worst areas, but further inland where Nukes take longer to get and more time for counter measures to kick in would leave areas of the old USA completely habitable, and some areas would have never been struck
@@ssjjshawn hmmmmm ☮️😎☮️
"Further inland" are NORAD (140mi away east, near Colorado Springs), the vast arrays of missile silos (N. Dakota, Wyoming, Nebraska)... and yes both coasts would be attacked for DC, NYC, and California vineyards (small joke)...
And inland sites that get hit, would spread fallout across hundreds of miles downwind, while eastern coastal targets would send fallout across much of the Atlantic; some of which would probably land in the Gulf Stream, and find its way to the beaches of Torquay... if ever.
@@ZENmud I think you mean NORAD, and yes kinda my point, you're running into the heart of American Nuclear Retaliation and them being able to react and avert a nuclear strike
A nuclear strike despite what most people think wouldn't be aimed at mostly Civilian Centers instead Infrastructure that would be critical to the American Military.
The Largest Force Projection of the Military is the US Navy. Navy Bases, Dockyards and Ammo/Supply Depots would be the First and main target for a first strike. Nuclear cylos and Air Bases are also high Priority, but because of their locations across America and Alaska, a response time of half an hour is barely more than enough time to attempt an interception from a plethora of different ideas.
Not the least of which can infact just be:
Fighter Interception
Rocket/Missile Interception
detonating a High Altitude Nuclear Blast to cause any other bomb in the radius of the EMP to Fissile
Or especially for this time Fighter Interception or a Nuclear Bomb being used to Fissile out Strategic bombers payloads are the most Viable options.
Also any plane that launched from Europe or Asia would not at that time have enough fuel to reach the American Heartland with a Nuclear payload. Even the Coastal attacks would be one way trips.
I’m pretty sure they’re rocket bombing themselves
I was just looking for a video on this! Very interesting stuff
A big arguement for oceania not being a superstate is the lack of resources, youd think a global empire would have enough stuff to keep people not only fed but make them incredibly comfortable with luxory products
You would think so, but I don't believe it's a matter of not being capable of providing a decent standard of living. The Party deliberately burns up the excess resources that make this possible as they require this poverty to sustain the system they have. Goldstein's Book explains this. The state of the economy is deliberate policy.
I think their starving their population on purpose
My question would be how the Great Britain of 1948 - a worldwide empire still - became the Airstrip One of 1984 that cloistered themselves on the island. Surely there would still have been people in 1984 who remembered the Britain that ruled The Waves back in 1948.
Some might remember, but who to tell and to whom
Well, Winston seems to still remember the old times. It's possible the collapse of the British Empire was way harsher in that timeline
@@minestar2247
There's no doubt of that.
The UK was devastated in a nuclear war (presumably against Eurasia).
The Party may have come to power as a provisional government attempting to establish some kind of civilized life and becoming increasingly brutal as it found the task very difficult.
@@alanpennie8013 no. According to the history then the provisional has been overthrow by the Party under what they like to call as "The Revolution" as the Provisional government of Oceania are the former government of the USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. They form an union after the nuclear war
I'm going to argue both sides, for and against. For - in reality it's almost unthinkable that the US , post or during WW2, would have fallen to a commie-type revolution. North Korea is a peninsula and has almost total control over information, but compared to the Party they're rank amateurs. So it's within the bounds of reality for an island nation to go this far, imo. Also, the reference to "mongoloids" might have been meant in the sense of Akron, Ohio, silly hat-wearing odd rockers "Devo's" song of the same name. Against - the whole point of the book is a dire warning against totalitarianism. Orwell wanted to show a hypothetical future where totalitarianism it "total", and there's no light. Also the mongoloids, seeing as the Akron, Ohio rock band "Devo" only formed in 1973, a full 26 years after first publication of the novel.
So, Oceania was like "28 Days Later" The UK isolated from the rest of the world.
That's how they're headed! :D
We simply know nothing about what's happening even outside London.
This in my opinion kinda doesn’t work you can’t grow cacao beans or sugar in Britain yet they have chocolate which Winston doesn’t question if it is chocolate
Interesting observation.
It could be because of trade, food would still be traded to Britain, like NK still gets foreign aid and that’s what Britain in this theory is getting foreign aid from outsides countries.
We don’t know anything. It’s entirely possible the rest of the world experience a small nuclear exchange and Britain busy with its revolution stayed out of it. And maybe theirs still some small pockets of the empire.
I’ve never read this book or followed the lore only ever heard it obscurely referenced, i have to say i’ve been binging your theories and explainations about it though and i can’t get enough!
I'm glad you enjoyed them. If you do have time to take a look or listen, may I recommend the Blackstone audio version of the book, which should be available as an audio book on CZcams. The narration is first-class.
I feel that Britain is basically on its own. But the three state super war did happen. Basically WW3 happened and during it Britain was called 'Airstrip 1' either as a logistical reason or political joke. The war resulted in massive destruction across the globe and Britain is basically one of the few countries in existence. For the party to maintain power they use the illusion of forever war against two other great powers (which either don't exist or do at a diminished state). The pows are just captured European wastelanders that the party occasionally rounds up. But there is one interesting quote: " 'There's been a lot of tea about lately. They've captured India, or something,' she said vaguely."
You can take it at face value that India was captured and tea is now available. But what if limited trade does happen between other countries? It could very well be the North Korea situation where the population starves while the leader drinks Hennessy.
As for the massive explosions in the countryside. It could be weapons test, or just the party scaring people in London to not leave
I don't remember any of the characters in the novel mentioning that they knew a veteran. It's as if the war is something that happens outside of London, with people outside of London. I was left with the impression that Oceania is not actually at war and that the Party buys what Oceania needs with its surpluses, creating a narrative for its population by allowing certain products to appear and disappear, giving an illusion of movement. If the population thought that the war was stagnant or being lost, there could be rebellions. If they believed it was being won, they might demand the spoils of war. But if it's just a dance and the choreographers are the ones who run the Party, then it becomes another means of control.
This was always my personal favorite theory, that the reality of Air Strip One was an intensely inwardly-focused ideologically-dictated society absolutely obsessed with orthodoxy in action and thought - but that was actually totally isolated in the world. Sort of a recreation of the intensely paranoid terror of the 1930's in the USSR, and the monstrous apparatus that drove it, but was somehow driven by it, into a system that was only capable of grinding away humanity, and creating ugly apartment blocks and heavy industry. Something not so different from North Korea today.
I knew Orwell was a socialist, and that the USSR/Stalinism of the 1930's had really warped his views on the Revolution and what it could potentially become. The near total social, political, economic and diplomatic isolation of the nascent Soviet State certainly contributed to the relentless oppression of any potential threats to the power won at such high cost by the Bolshevik Party - any totalitarian system that perceives itself as threatened both from within and by outside forces will retrench and oppress at the maximum extent possible. I think 1984 was Orwell's version of the most grotesque ideological society he could think of, and then taken to its logical extreme.
I think a large component of the rogue state theory is that space filling empires are just bad writing and fundamentally implausible. Turns out people are different, had each other, often have fundamentally incompatible beliefs and its very hard to manage a large amount of that when they also all hate you.
A rogue state suddenly makes the space filling empires make a lot more sense and totally rip out a writing flaw in an otherwise impactful work of fiction.
I always just assumed that the military prisoners being executed were really political prisoners from Air strip 1. Abuse them, starve them, muddy their face up, and keep them for 5 to 7 years away from the public before taking any survivors to execute them in random mixed up batches. Whats going to happen? The survivors are too broken spirited to really speak up if they even have the ability to left in them. The crowd probably wont recognize them and even if one or two think they do, they cant say anything since the party will make them vanish too. Assuming the people in the crowd dont just call them crazy.
And It's not like the crowd has been traveling any time recently to really know what someone from east asia really looks like. Just dont let them get close enough to get a really good look and their already broken minds will just make of them what they will. I mean, if 2+2 can equal 5, then why wouldn't an east asian look like whatever the party wants them to look like? Including a slightly muddy British man?
Good points although it's not just the uneducated proles that have to be convinced beyond a raw use of doublethink. People like Winston will know such prisoners are not from Air Strip One or Oceania generally.
In our present world, people are much more travelled and different national and ethnic groups have mixed somewhat, however, at the time of writing the western nations and nations generally were more homogenous.
Winston does describe some Eurasian prisoners looking more Western European, probably Frenchmen, Germans, Dutch, etc, but goes on to describe those of a more "mongoloid" appearance too (Orwell's term, not mine), which indicates origins in the far east; perhaps in Siberian territory.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore I think you've missed the point of the 2 minutes hate and these executions. These displays each serve a purpose. And the purpose is to convince everyone of the same thing. That they are small and have no power. The expected reaction is well known and understood. And what happens if the desired reaction is not given is also well known and understood. Hate Goldstein, and if you don't then you die. Love the death of our enemies, and if you don't then you die. Everyone has to give off the illusion they agree with big brother, or they die. And by doing so, they create the illusion in the crowd that anyone who disagrees with these things is vastly outnumbered by those who agree. And to disagree, is to be alone and pointless and perhaps on the verge of being arrested for thought crime.
And while Winston maybe questioning things, he is only human and even his mind has limits. Just like it never occurred to him to question if the war might be fake, I would not be shocked if it never occurred to him to question if being mongoloid just meant being a bit brown and muddy, because it's easier to just accept this lie and not push against it despite knowing better. Especially when he has a big crowd around him cheering and telling him it's the truth. After all, he is alone, and pointless. Why hold on to that small truth that the prisoners don't exactly look like the asians from his childhood memories when there are much bigger things on his mind? Hell for all we know there's another character named Johnston pulling his hair out because he hates Goldstein and the lies he puts out and loves screaming his rage at the monster during the 2 minutes hate, but feels like he's going mad because he's watching Mr. Perry that he used to live next door to being marched to a prisoners execution and everyone is too brainwashed to realize it's him. Including that stupid bastard Winston that just watches on.
Looking back at World War Two and how England was essentially under siege during the early part of the war until the Normandy Invasion, if there was a serious war then Airstrip One would be under more attack than just with missiles fired at it. There would be more active attacks even invasion attempts that would possibly being made if a real war was going on. Granted "airstrip" hints that it might be used by the party for attacks in either Eurasia or Eastasia. Perhaps most of the parts of the world are little more than wastelands where small battles are being fought though with no real gain by either side.
We are told that the war isn't altogether real.
Hence Julia's very plausible theory that the rocket bombs are fired by The Party.
There's a tacit agreement by the world powers not to attack each other directly and to fight only in the *contested zone* of Africa and Asia.
It's a fun house mirror version of The Cold War.
I think that the three super states exist but the war is highly stage managed. The higher echelons of the inner party are probably in regular contact with the other two states to ensure no one gains a major advantage.
That's highly probable
This is like attack on titan where everybody in paradise thinks they are at war with titans and they are the last of mankind but the truth is its all a giant lie.
I like this idea.
All political systems have that 'human' weakness. Secondly - it is never easy to get superpowers to cooperate on anything. Our own Cold War was a balancing game with 'rational' actors, and we almost had a few mistakes. Now imagine three of them. That's just a game of Russian Roulette. Especially if it's done between three DIFFERENT ideologies as well. Getting a few people of a common town to work together is hard - now imagine a supposed three totalitarian states. All it takes, is one guy who drank too much kool-aid to attack 'seriously' to ruin this Masquerade.
Furthermore, despite Airstrip One being literally across Eurasia - thus likely subject to constant bombardment or the like; unless they have nuclear bombs; it just looks like a ruined mess. No constant bombing, or bombers or the like. Just the 'few' bombs going off, to keep nerves and appearance up.
Then enough, there is Winston' job. All the constant 'editing' does feel somewhat odd. As if SOMEONE high enough, wishes to ensure that nobody can put 2+2 together and realize there is no war. That or if anyone is considering overthrowing INGSOC, they wouldn't have any potential blueprints from the past to fix the mess. Thus ensuring their power.
(As for the idea of where Julia got her goods. It can be that INGSOC does 'trade', albeit through black market agents and smugglers. As North Korea has demonstrated, one CAN run a Hermit Kingdom and still maintain some access to 'foreign' goods)
Great video! I always wondered if Oceania only controles The Home Isles
Also is it really the year 1984? Winston himself is unsure about the date when he starts his diary. At the end of the book it is clearly spring the following year but there is no mention of 1985. Perhaps the world is in a permanent 1984 and the reality is that it takes place far in the future.
The "constant state of war" thing to control the population is ALIVE AND WELL in north Korea where they tell them American planes could bomb any minute and there's 1000 American nukes sitting on the south Korean border ready to fire at them. I think it was ALSO true under Naz! Germany but they had a concept of "when the war ends" that many people would talk about. "When the war ends, I'll become a movie star, do this thing or that with my life", was a common thing amongst people in their 20s there.
I genuinely love your video, your audio is just kinda quiet. Much love
Thank you for the feedback. I'll take a look... or ear at that. :D
I don’t believe that Winston actually knows what Eurasians and Eastasians actually look like. The Party could of quite easily made people think that’s what they look.
Hmmm, Julia managed to get some tea and coffee at some point in the book. She said that Oceania got it from India, saying they recently invaded India.
So it's reasonable to assume that Oceania got some colonies at least.
Very good point. Must admit I missed that one, Commander. :D
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore on the other hand, it could be that the inner party does indeed trade from time to time with the outer world to give the outer party and proles a few crumbs of luxury.
I like the ambiguity. No, I love it. The idea that they either control just the British Isles, or the entire planet.
I think if Ocenaia was just brittain, it's system was not sustainable. Any modern society needs goods like oil and food, both things it can't produce or not enough of it alone.
That's meaningless. Even NK trades. It's just about what they trade and with whom. If airstrip 1 manufacturers some random junk and trades it with some other regime for sugar, coffee and other items mentioned as available but rare. Orwell didn't spend much time on this because why should he? It's not that interesting. Whatever the truth was didn't matter. The party controlled information about everything.
@@radicallyrethinkingrailwaysina Good point
Ironically its entirely possible that the 3 superstates exists, would just be the USSR and China and their sphere of Influence when unchecked by the US, while Anglo areas rose in the revolution and took over everything.
The disputed areas being the decolonisation mouvements at work (which btw, Algeria mustve been a shitehole seeing as mainland France wouldve been captured before Algeria got its indepandance).
The biggest problem is justifying Oceania's existance, but everything we learn in the book about it may very well be lies spread by the party in earlier days to prevent truth from rising
The main argument, of Oceania being a superstate, is that Britain wouldn't be self sufficient
I've met theory that Oceania could be in fact just London. This could explain how the city itself is bombed by "enemy" while being far away from the front line. Anyway, it would be easier for the Party to keep people in check, by creating an illusion of war, foreign superpowers and so on.
What if, in the spirit of doublethink, both statements are correct. What if the correct question isnt where but when, and who sais there is only one Winston. What if we actually follow multiple Winstons across time. One after the revolution, one during the glory days of Oceania and one right before its fall. There in fact wouldn't be any difference of lifestyle, and time itselve would have little to no meaning.
I assume the broad geopolitical outlines described in the book are factually true, with the three super-states actually supporting each other’s existence via the forever war. But there’s one hole I see in there that I wonder if even Orwell had fully worked out: Since no single region of Oceania is supposed to have the feeling of being governed by a distant imperial capital, then the dominant ideology can’t be labeled “Ingsoc” (English Socialism) throughout the entire bloc. Yes, it is the same ideology everywhere, but perhaps it has different names in North America, South America, etc., with their own localized histories of how the Party rose to power, and even a different nationality for Big Brother.
The geographic continuity of Eurasia and Eastasia, even as vast as they each are, make a single national origin story and identity much easier to pin down. But Oceania would need to be structured somewhat differently in order to achieve the same end result.
East Asian pows could be ex British army Gurkha pows. Eurasians cpuld just be swarthier Englishmen maybe Welsh speakers New York conference could be a memory of something like Potsdam.
If the war was real, there would be veterans. As far as I remember, they’re never mentioned. Perhaps Oceania just separates or disposes of them, in which case they could just as easily do that with soldiers who are supposedly “going to war.” It does seem to me that some kind of war is real and that Oceania exaggerates its power to some extent. We don’t have to choose between the extremes of “Oceania controls half the globe and is in a state of massive war” and “Oceania is a hermit kingdom and the war is fake.” I imagine the real geopolitical situation is far more complex. Perhaps Oceanian troops are fighting for control of old British colonies in the wake of the nuclear war?
If the war was real, there would be conscription. It isn't even mentioned.
Orwell was not just writing a story he was writing an allegory about totalitarianism in particular it is a critique of Stalinism and the Soviet Union. What would a world governed by Stalinism look like. A Stalinist government needs an external enemy so having another state is important for the allegory. Having one or two would mean missing out on important aspects of totalitarianism. Specially the constantly shifting allegiances that are simultaneously claimed to be immutable. This is an important plot point in 1984 and it appears in animal farm as well. too many small powers competing would complicate the geopolitics of the story, Four powers would lead to blocks which for all intents and purposes would be equivalent to having two superpowers. Three then is the best number. It is also important that there is no other place for Winston to flee to, every where else is either the same or worse. Otherwise the story would be one of about escape and that’s not the story Orwell wanted to tell. That’s why Oceania is not just airstrip one.
I don't believe this theory because in the book we clearly see that Oceania is able to (barely) survive. This is possible because it is a super state with a lot of resources. This kind of a society just on an isolated island wouldn't be possible. Plus, we know there are soldiers who are being conscripted and shipped off to somewhere, and we know there are sometimes slanted-eyed people being publicly executed as "war criminals", either Eurasian or Eastasian people. So this means there really is a war going on, unless if there's a secret underground Asian people farm just to find people to execute when they reach maturity. This war can only be fought forever with endless supplies and resources, which we need a super state for.
New theory: Oceania exists as an entity but the different provinces are forbidden from interacting with each other aside from very senior leadership
Some that makes me believe in Oceania is the name Airstrip One. It strikes me as a very unglamorous name that suggests that the UK is a subservient part of Oceania, not the heart of Oceania. It suggests it's an arm, not the body and not the head.
I've always assumed that oceania was a superstate but that ingsoc was purely british.
I love this theory so much.
Winston: Do you believe the resistance is real?
Julia: No, none of it is real.
It may be somewhere in the middle. I can remember that only the Inner Party has access to, say, real sugar, chocolate and good quality coffee. I think it's possible Oceania belongs to an alliance, or even has territory outside Britain, though maybe not to the extent it claims
One case for Airstrip One being all Oceania is the german V-program. V-3 had the most potential for delivering destruction on an industrial scale, assembly line style. Of course *any* stationary target such as the V-3 cannons are suspectible to bombing. However, it lacked in range.
So a somewhat rational continental hegemon would have it relatively easy to shell England with ballistic missiles. Rail-based launching platforms would've turn any attempt to airstrike against the launching into a whack-a-mole.
And one explanation for the eurasian prisoners is that they are an ethnic minoirty that are used as slave labor and are "culled" for the executions. The scene where Winston writes in his diary about a newsreel from a war could been a staged film too. I mean, the state produces porn that's supposed to be some kind of "illicit" secret thrill for the proles. (And that aspect of having something totally legal presented as some illicit thing reminds me of bad marketing.)
At the end of the movie (which was published in 1984). They talking in the "bar" about the situation of the war, and they said about the enemy nation (Eurasia) that if they capture that territory(African front) then the enemy will be able to invade directly Oceania. Which not really adds up to me. I mean, if you look at the map, there was always in direct contact with Eurasia (yes a sea was between Airstrip one and Eurasia) but still. Also i know that a missile attack or a simple bombing not on the same level with an invasion. But i started to think, how the enemy could do that if they not that close. If not Oceania was the "attacker".
I have a darker theory after watching this. IngSoc itself is run by the governments of Eastasia, Eurasia, and/or Oceania to perpetuate the former UK as a prison colony in perpetuity.
Perhaps it was an initial compromise at the end of the real war with the superpowers. To keep the British identity… objectively speaking (and I mean no offense) outside of commercial industries and the former Empire, in such an assumed post-WW2 geopolitical stage, just Britain itself has little to offer. So isolate them, govern them, but they retain their British in active war identity… perhaps at the beginning, the reality was known, but then it was muddled and the former country was gaslit by the other world governments gallivanting within IngSoc
Edit: To add to this theory. Maybe the country directly in charge of IngSoc for the time is simply the country they are NOT against at the time. It doesn’t make sense, the switching whom they are at war with narrative. It seems trivial to change and, like the real North Korea, one enemy can be the forever and always. Why else would they change it? Boredom? No, I think it’s indicative of which superpower is “having their turn.”
Britain being called “Oceania” would actually be fitting with how the ministries are tasked with the opposite of their name, because on the antipole of the UK is within the Oceania region.
Hi, I have been informed about this channel. I answer questions about the novel regularly online. I consider myself an expert.
This theory is one I have to pour water on from time to time. It does not hold up.
The "book" Winston reads clearly tells us exactly how the whole of Oceania functions and its boundaries.
"The best books tell you what you already know."
Winston did not learn anything new from the book. The book is spot on regarding everything about the hierarchy, inner party, thought police, newspeak, doublethink etc. Why would it then 180 and lie about the geography? It just does not make any sense whatsoever.
The book was ostensibly given to Winston, but it was really for the reader. It was a device to shoehorn information that would have been too troublesome to furnish the reader with otherwise. There is NO reason to doubt anything in the book.
You may offer that the party wrote
the book and it cannot be trusted. Nonsense. People try to be too clever sometimes.
Orwell wrote the book, ultimately, and this was given to the reader through Goldsteins' book.
Think of the book as the inner party manual or bible.
There is no good reason - other than hollow theories and speculation - to doubt it.
As with all the videos you've made up to this point, and I'm sure I'll enjoy all the rest yet to come, this has been one of those questions I've often pondered. At times I've wondered if each nation state had its own government or if all fell under the purview of a single governmental entity, like a one world government masquerading as several entities "at war" with one another. As such, and regardless of individual governments or a single world order acting as many, it would make sense to portray each nation as their own, thus always keeping the war ongoing and maintaining the status quo in expected behaviors of each state's citizenry. The novel alludes to the nations being under different rule, which actually reminds me of the way the world was pre-World War I when most nations were still under monarchies, many of whom were related to monarchies of other countries that saw many such governments disappear entirely, such as Kaiser Wilhelm II and Czar Nicholas both abdicating and ending monarchy rule in both Germany and Russia. Of course, the Kaiser and Czar were forced to abdicate, both being replaced by, in the case of Germany, a short-lived democracy, and in Russia, Communism.
One thing that gets me is that Air Strip One is the only source of information for it's citizens. I would think then, that Mini True + Mini Peace would then have to speak for ALL of Oceania, which seems like a massive undertaking to me. Something so difficult, given that travel is very restricted and the Party's of each territory is run by people of that territory. I would think that could be difficult to maintain. But, this is a novel and and a very excellent on, at that.
I agree with your points. However, they do not prove that the world is exactly as described in Goldstein's book. Maybe the superpowers don't controll the entire world? For example: I find it extremely unlikely, that China would invade, let alone controll Japan. Besides: English-cultured Oceania trying to occupy South Anerica would be like Vietnam but 100 times worse. And finally: the party would have an interest in claiming that the whole world is as bad as Oceania. However: who knows? Maybe there are some islands of relative freedom in remote locations, which superpowers can't Reach?
I mostly agree that in all likelihood the situation is roughly as the part describes it. That said, I think one of the most fascinating things about the book is how Oceania could be just about anything from a parish state controlling only Britain to an actual world government that simply decided the illusion of a war is useful. True, some are more likely than others, but just about any scenario would be compatible with what precious little we actually know.
I always found it kinda odd how little focus there was on the military in a country which is supposedly in a non-stop global war with two other superpowers. The military is featured in parades and propaganda movies but you never actually see them on the street, never meet anybody who claims to have served, never meet any war widows or children, nor hear anybody mention conscription despite that almost certainly being required to fuel a war of this magnitude.
I don’t actually find that an issue since those reasons can be easily explained
It might not be an amazing argument but i think it's possible because it's not only convenient to have two other superpowers but also eastasia is relatively small making it difficult for them to have the necessary resources for living
The thought came to me that there is a core level to the three superatates that lies secretly above the inner parties of their respective governments. With the ultimate goal being eternal war (though always claiming victory is near), the core directorate sees to keeping the fighting active, but no one ever wins, lest one state actually becomes powerful enough to achieve an actual victory (and its inner party forgetting this is never to be).