The Three Super-states of 1984: Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 01. 2024
- In this video we take a look at the geopolitics of Orwell's 1984. Oceania is just one of three vast super-states that wage an endless war.
How did the world morph into such a nightmare scenario? Why is the war continually waged and how does this effectively cement these totalitarian states' hold on their respective populations?
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.
#1984 #bigbrother #georgeorwell - Zábava
I wish George Orwell had written more books I always wondered about Eurasia and East Asia.
I don't
There’s a recent book, Julia, by Sandra Newman, that was commissioned by Orwell’s estate to tell the story through Julia’s eyes. I found it interesting in that Julia’s point of view was so fundamentally different from Winston’s (different gender, generation, background, etc.) that more about Oceania’s history and system had to be created just to set the story.
Of course, I’m sure it will always be debatable whether or not it should be considered to be “canon,” but it was interesting nonetheless.
george orwell probably never went to asia so he didn't know 💀
Actually he was a cop in Burma which is now Myanmar.@@SonOfTheChinChin
@@SonOfTheChinChin He was born in India. Lived in erstwhile Burma...
What if Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia aren’t really real? What if the UK is just an isolated, North Korean style nation in a post-nuclear apocalyptic world.
It's probably worth adding that the concept of the unending war is also economic, because the factories of each power are constantly churning out weapons, they cannot produce goods for the civilian populace. This is intentional because the Party does not want it's people to become less poor because then they could challenge them.
It's likely based on the socialist idea that capital requires war to describe.
its less that being less poor in and of itself would cause rebellion, and more a higher standard of living would let the proles know that things could get better than they are now. in pychology, we base our worth and success not on any universal standard because there is no universe standard for wealth, we base it on people around us. its why someone living in a trailer park may feel poor even if they still have access to luxuries unimaginable 300 years ago.
a higher standard of living would not only give a sense of envy to any prole that couldn't attain that wealth for one reason or another (hence giving a reason to be angry at the system causing internal strife) but would also allow for higher ambition to achieve even greater wealth, not content to just have the luxuries they do have. both the haves and the have nots would now have a reason to be unhappy. this is why 1984 has people living in a pretty similar level of poverty across the board to avoid the envy emotion most of all
its also the fact that war has always been seen to bring unity to a population and to garner support. many dictatorships across time and history have done this
I always imagined that the inner party members of Oceania and the elites from Eurasia and East Asia would all meet up regularly to discuss who was at war with who for a few years/ months. Sort out some trade and then basically have a big party laughing at the oppressed peoples underneath them all.
I imagine it would be like some travesty of the Tehran Conference and Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact combined.
To add to that to always pictured that given the vast amount of war land and the size of army they could easily create a fake or very highly trusted unit to fight in a area that is instead converted into a space for the elites of insog Eurasia and East Asia to all live in together enjoying the fruits of the management
Probably not. Remember the true ideology of the party is that power is a goal in itself. To give in to hedonism would undermine that power
@@orionfreed6763 Don't the political 2% inner party have access to luxury food and able to turn off Big Brother propaganda? Hedonism is the result of unchecked power, something we see in all authoritarian regimes today right now. Check out the ostentatious lifestyles of Xi's family or Putler.
no. In the book it says that members of the internal party have to be extremely fanatical about the cause while at the same time recognizing their lie. That countless times Oceania's leaders have contemplated launching nuclear weapons against the other two powers but have never done so because they know that the state of the world is good for them that way.
One wonders just how intense the war really is. The "glorious battles" reported on the telescreen are plainly greatly exaggerated. What actually happens may typically only amount to dirty little squirmishes, at least outside the "disputed zone" in India and Africa. It is said in Goldstein's book that none of the states ever attempt to invade the heartland of its theoretical enemies, or any huge operation whatsoever that could lead to a serious defeat.
The rocketbombs falling on London are very likely fired by the government of Oceania itself (as Julia surmises -- even Winston never had such a dark thought before she said it). The population must be kept under the impression that the war is really fierce and a life-or-death struggle. Notice how the intensity of the bombardment very conveniently increases in the run-up to Hate Week, when the populace will really immerse themselves in their hatred of the enemy.
It could be worse. England could have been renamed to “Airstrip 2”.
Or is there only Airstrip One while the rest of the world is "normal"? Is Airstrip One just a super isolated version of North Korea?
Frankly, the rest of the world could be a desolate, nuclear hellscape. Or it could be a paradise of prosperity. Or it could be "normal," as you say. If there's one cause for hope in the book, it's that the total unreliability of both the state and the narrator means there's no way to be sure what the world is like or if there's a war at all.
Maybe
i doubt this theory because nothing hints at it
You can never truly know and that's the point.
What I like about 1984 is that it doesn’t matter what the rest of the world is like. The point is that you’re “here” and you’re oppressed. Much in the same way that Western Democracies’ freedom was irrelevant to those facing oppression in the Soviet Union
"Death Worship" is most likely a perversion of Buddhism. That was a nice touch on Orwell's part.
It's really hard to believe that Oceania could hold on to Airstrip One. I get why Orwell did it that way, but in the real world I have my doubts about Eurasia not annexing it for themselves.
it's an inheritance thing from the old world and to conquer it you'd have to do a mass D-day style landing. The Neo-Bolsheviks probably couldn't at that time in the past and it wouldn't be worth it.
I can see why they didn’t, Oceania’s Navy and Air Force would have been leagues ahead of Eurasia's just as the USA’s and UK’s were better than the USSR’s during and after WW2.
naval invasions are hard. even with complete air superiority, a better war economy, numerical advantage and the nazis being preoccupied with the russian advance, the D-day landing was still a 50-50 thing of succeeding or failing
Do you think Eurasia would want to deal with Brexit or AirstripOnexit as it probably would be known
There's a chapter which states the Oceanians could invade as far as Germany and hold it, and the Eurasians could take Airstrip 1, but don't because both states would have to choose between integrating or liquidating their populations (and it'll cost around the same amount of resources to do so). So they just let the front stay.
The interesting thing about Goldstein's book is that even though Orwell grants himself an exposition dump in the form of the book, he still never takes the opportunity to spell out exactly how we get from 1948 to 1984 with 3 superstates -- the counterfactual history is very very vague indeed -- indeed the vagueness of the first half of the 1984 book regarding the historical events during Winston's youth, persists into Goldstein's book as well. "The best books tell you what you already know", and by the end of it Winston is barely any the wiser -- it's just nice to hear someone give words to his point of view. Goldstein just speaks generalities about ideology, mass psychology etc etc etc. Never a timeline of global history. Just "yadayadayada and by the end of it all, three superstates had emerged" The lesson i take here is that the moral of the story lies in its timeless generalities , not in any particular geopolitical alignments etc etc etc. After all, if you're worried about the Soviet Union, you don't need an epic allegory to make that point. If however you're worried about creeping authoritarianism in England in 1948...
I remember watching the movie with someone who by the end of it simply asked "was was that supposed to be, did we lose to the soviet union or what?"
Goldstein is vague because it's literally an expy of Trotsky explaining how the RSFSR turned into the soviet union.
He's obfuscating to cope with the fact his bureaucratic socialist types got NKVD'd by Stalin.
It happened during the Spanish civil war, too.
Love this channel. Always wanted to know this stuff.
I’ve always been a subscriber to this channel.
4:23, men of war assault squad two, great game, great video
Its actually Gates of hell, but I hope someone makes 1984 mod in Mowas2
So wait. Way back in the late 40s, George Orwell thought that by 1984, Oceania could have made newspeak English the official language of all of Latin America?
I see what you mean, but it's more for the Party members, so you're talking about 15% of the population there and even so I have a sneaky suspicion this is one area that the Party pays lip-service too but isn't entirely serious about fully implimenting, which is something I will address in a future video.
Newspeak is the official language of Oceania, but perhpas the Party is quite fluid in its toleration of Spanish and Portugese as the de facto prole tongues of Brazil and the rest of the territory. I must admit though, this is a bit of a stretch. A good point.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-loremaybe they have their own newspeak versions for Spanish and Portuguese. Nothing about newspeak seems like the same general features couldnt be applied to romance languages too.
@@nineteen-eighty-four-lore adding this to my “reasons why the proles would be the group that eventually destroys Oceania” list.
@@generalgrievous2202 I remember hearing somewhere that Orwell was partially inspired by Esperanto.
reminder that this is information we are getting from the party itself so its entirely possible that 1. latin languages are accepted as 'prole' languages and only party members speak english 2. the entire thing is a complete lie and the party doesn't give a shit what language it is as long as its dumbed down to limit the ability to express discontent with newspeak
It would be fascinating to know what life is like in the disputed territories.
Likely barely anyone even lives there anymore because it’s all been destroyed from war however you probably could just chill out on an uninhabited island. I don’t think the big powers would care enough to enforce their will upon a silly little island in the middle of nowhere if they’re really in a constant war.
@@stargazer-elite My thoughts, as well. The Azores and much of the Pacific might be the places where something like regular civilization persists.
@@tienshan9819There might be some organised groups living in remote areas like in the various African rainforests and on relatively large and remote islands that are of little strategic importance, although few island nations today are self-sufficient in terms of food so they will have small populations.
@@NearQuasar Ooo it would be interesting to see the world from their perspective, although perhaps they might end up having as little insight into what's actually going on as Winston.
@@tienshan9819 They will almost certainly have a far greater knowledge of history.
It would be awesome if someone wrote an non-canon story set in the eternal war of 1984, it would be interesting to see how Oceania soldiers would perceive the war and how in contrasts with propaganda they see and hear.
well, i made chatgpg write me one, from the perspective of an Indian militia of bandits scavengers and smugglers , fighting guerilla war of survive against all superpowers. Eventually, that militia sent infiltrators among Oceania and Eurasia proles, evolve dominants in London's underworld, that according to Orwell thrives . More to follow. While in 3 superpowers prevails worst type of socialism, in disputed areas would prevail worst individualist, hedonist ,materialism capitalism
@@hersonissoswolf3699 interesting ideas, I always wondered how the people the dispute territories would live. I would think of all the locations in the world, They themselves would actually have a far better understanding of the true nature of the world they live in then the people in the super states.
@@cane6074 definitely better.
I’m an author so I’ve been thinking about writing my own little fanfiction because I can’t actually publish it until 2044 when it goes into the public domain so I wouldn’t be able to sell it till then. I would focus more on what’s going on in EastAsia. Those death worshipers sound interesting.
I think the way we're heading we might be lucky to have it as good as they had it in the 1984 fictional universe.
It would be interesting to know what life is like in the disputed territories in the 1984 universe. Life is probably more dangerous but probably the only places where you could be free
Still can't figure out why Oceania would be at war with erasure, they made some good songs though. 🤔🤣🤣
🔥🎸🔥
I wonder if there could be a possibility of a 100% replica of this.
The thing I feel makes 1984's world unrealistic is that there simply isn't a point to anything. The Parties holding absolute power through mass oppression is great and all, but if they don't intend to introduce any new policies or move towards certain goals, then what's the difference if they have political power or not? Just hand off control to some supercomputer and keep living in luxury. No state is evil for evil's sake, even Nazi Germany thought they were doing something meaningful by committing genocide.
You know before fallout the TV show came out I think 1984 was the most dystopian world ever read about or saw on the movie
Sounds like home!
0:11
I need to remind myself why an assembly on "Airstrip One" (a part of Oceania) which is fixated on a still image of their anonymous Big Brother, also displays on either side of BB the word
"INGSOC"
😮
"English Socialism" would be "ENGSOC' and if it's in the book, I'll catch up soon. I just cant see its purpose.
😅
It's been a long time since I read it, but I assume that spelling is undergoing the same kind of simplification as the words themselves are. That is to say, "Ing-" is more phonetic than "Eng-" so that's what they went with.
Because newspeak.
My 2 cents: IngSoc could be also "Ignorant Socialism", given that "the ignorance is strenght"
East Asia has almost no resources to work with and probably can never really go on the offensive. Eurasia has large borders that need defending. Oceania is mostly safe so long as it has a sufficiently powerful navy.
“Ingsoc” implies that the ideology originated in Airstrip One and spread outwards. This implies they conquered America after WW2 and spread Ingsoc out to colonial powers. But… I don’t think the invasion of the Americas would go well or be quick. It makes me think Oceania is a lot smaller than is claimed
Conquest may not have been how it happened. The spread of Marxism and facism wasn’t entirely based on physical conquest but often by inspiring revolution. Spain and Germany were influenced by Mussalini, Viet Nam and Cuba weren't conquered by a comunist state the just had their own revolutions supported by them. In an alternate universe I could see an ideology developed in England causing revolution in America.
It’s very easy to inference if you actually read the book that the three powers formed following a nuclear World War Three. Eurasia came into existence following the USSR swiftly occupying Europe and then moving to invade the European colonies in Africa. Oceania formed from the United States and British Empire merging and consolidating South America (which is mentioned in the book) and Eastasia likely formed from the PRC invading Japan, Indochina and Indonesia following the conclusion of the Third World War. This makes more sense considering Winston remembers nuclear attacks and mentions a civil war between INGSOC and another faction in his childhood, which again makes the WW3 origins even more likely seeing as the book was published in 1949 and the War in 1984 likely started in the early 1950s. It’s likely that Oceania was initially democratic, and formed as a response by the West to Soviet attacks on Europe, but later faced a seizure of power from INGSOC. The USSR and PRC meanwhile were already totalitarian and just evolved from that.
Pretty similar to today except Japan is part of Oceania, and Eurasia is quite small and on the back foot
There are (in most cases at least) other parties and the presence of consumer goods though. Also eurasia doesn't quite exist as a monolith
I have always wondered if there was no actual alliances. All three permanently at limited war, and the alliance "structure" just for propaganda purposes.
Considering the implications of that map portrayal of INGSOC in the southern African continent; certainly when Orwell wrote "1984" South Africa was run by the white minority via Apartheid. Yet its neighbors were either British or French colonies or about to become independent. Judging from the map, one guesses that South Africa had help from allies in America or "Airstrip One" (Australia?) to capture those dozen countries for "INGSOC".
Lastly, how humiliating for "England" or the United Kingdom, to be renamed "Airstrip One"? Our British friends wouldnt even give up the Pound when joining the EU. 😂🎉😅
It was always called Airstrip One
Actually, Dutch were the predominant colonists in South Africa . Moreover, according to Orwell, race doesn't matter at all so all South Africa ethinicities would omogenise
Good news from the Malabar front!
😆
This is the world our leaders want fyi
In modern day terms IngSoc would be known as "The Collective West" while Russia would refer to themselves along with China, Iran, North Korea, ect as "The Global South"
Opposing forces in the Middle East which ally themselves to The Global South have been described as "The Axis of Resistance" by "The Collective West"
Love China basically just the east asian prosperty shere
I miss when this was fiction and not a looming possibility
this is partially based on a book the managerial revolution writtewn in 1940. Oh this was predicted THEN
But France didn't have nukes yet if they invaded France nukes would been use,