George Orwells 1984 Unmasking Totalitarianism - 1749 Words

The outlook to the future is usually one filled with hope. When failures of the past and present problems collide together, the future is often seen as a place of hope. This mindset was no different in Britain during the mid 20th century, especially in the late 1940’s. World War II had finally ended, the days of fighting Nazi Germany was behind everyone but present circumstances were bleak. Britain was still recovering from the effects of World War II and handling the transition of a new socialist democratic government. From the east there loomed Stalin’s Soviet Union with its communism government and Totalitarian ruling mindset. Many were oblivious to the facts surrounding communism and looked hopefully to it. The reason for this†¦show more content†¦Syme begins to articulate the beauty of what they are doing, by stating â€Å"not in inventing new words†¦we’re destroying words†¦we’re cutting the language down to the bone† (Orwell 52). As the conversation continues Syme gives the whole purpose of the development of Newspeak by saying, â€Å"Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word†¦the Revolution will be complete when the language is complete†¦the whole literature of the past will have been destroyed† (Orwell 53-53). The goal of the party was to strip language down to its bare minimum. The effect of this is apparently taking its toll on Winston. Early on in the novel he is having a difficult time writing his thoughts in his journal and later on when he is reading Goldstein book, he thinks â€Å"It said what he would have said, if it have been possible for him to set his scattered thoughts in order† (205). Mitzi Brunsdale states that Win ston had to â€Å"overcome the effects of Big Brothers abuse sufficiently to put his thoughts in order,† and when he was able to write against the party he begins his â€Å"first forbidden step toward asserting his individuality† (143,147). The party knows that when language could be