Wednesday, December 22, 2004


The myth of a savior

One of the Party's greatest tools for preventing the sheeple from depriving them of power is the myth of a Savior -- a Luke Skywalker, a Neo, a John Connor, who shall come from (where?) and save them from the Mean and Vicious Party.

In reality, there is no savior. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. No sooner does a man gain power, but he then turns his hand towards furthering the Party agenda: the gaining of yet more power for himself and his cronies, which is, after all, the entire purpose of the Party. All that changes is which branch of the Party holds power, not the ultimate goal of dominion over others. All of human history since the invention of agriculture (and thus of agricultural surplusses) can be described as an effort to impose and extend the power of the elite over others. The faces change, the methods gain sophistication year by year as the methods change from brute force to those of deception and use of schools and subtle propaganda to control the very basis by which people think, but the Party is eternal.

The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?

There is no savior who shall take power and save the people. Never. Any one who desires to take power, who makes revolution to take power, inevitably is corrupted by said power and joins the Party in mind if not in body. Power molds, shapes, changes people into the very image of the Party. The faces change. The Party endures.

Why, then, does this myth of a savior, a strong man who shall save the people from the current meanies in power, continue to have strength? Why, that's simple: It is in the Party's best interests. For if the people are waiting for someone else to save them, then they shall not save themselves. And if the people who in turn strive for power are corrupted by said power into the Party's image... why, that's even better, since it allows the sheeple the illusion of change, when there really is none!

And so it goes in the American provinces of Oceania, where the few who recognize the nature of the Party wait for a savior that shall save them from the evil Party rather than taking action themselves... and shall wait forever.

Orwellianly Yours,
Karl Rove O'Brien, Bush's Brain

Thursday, December 16, 2004


Recent Posts at the Snarky Penguin's Lair

  1. What would Gary Webb want?
  2. Cutting off your leg to spite your dog
  3. National Conservative Union gives the Orwell Award to Zell and Swifties
  4. Charter schools are no better than public schools
  5. Man bites dog
  6. Gary Webb,R.I.P.

Sunday, December 12, 2004


How to deal with dissent in the "soft" police state

In case you have not noticed, we of the Party do not exhibit outright censorship upon the press. There are no government officials peering over the shoulders of reporters to make sure that they publish only articles that we wish them to publish. There are no black ops squads going out and killing reporters who report things that we of the Party do not like. Yet if you look at the headlines and stories in every newspaper in America, they show a surprising obedience to the Party's official line. How can this be? How can the Party control what the press is printing, without actually censoring them via the power of the State?!

Well, there's a few characteristics of the human animal that are interesting here, which allow the Party to suppress the truth without appearing to suppress the truth. For example:
  1. Human animals are HERD animals, basically hairless gorillas. Like hairless gorillas, they want to be part of the herd. They do not want to be out by themselves. Any human animal that does not think like the rest of the human animals is thus ostracized, expelled, ignored.
  2. Like all herd animals, human animals will, if left to their own devices, blindly follow the leader of the herd. If you attempt to tell the typical human animal that his herd leader is not fit to be leader, said herd animal will typically react with suspicion and anger -- against you, the entity that is challenging the supremecy of his herd leader. Thus in 1972, President Richard Nixon was re-elected by a landslide, despite the electorate knowing about Watergate. Knowledge that does not fit into the human animal's desire to follow his leader is ignored.
  3. Human animals want stability. They want to continue their pointless lives of masticating, fornicating, defecating, and consuming mass quantities without any disruptions caused by nasty little things like "truth".
  4. Human animals do not WANT to know the truth. What human animals want is lies, lies to justify the human animal's pointless life of masticating, fornicating, and defecating, lies that justify the human animal's sloth and mass consumption, bright and shining lives to give meaning to a meaningless life that will be forgotten within minutes of the dead animal's name being carved on a tombstone.
So with that in mind, let us give an example: The destruction of Gary Webb.

The first thing we did, when Gary published an expose' of CIA drug dealing, was ostracize him and his newspaper (principle #1: human animals are herd animals). We used our CIA asset(1) Walter Pincus in the Washington Post to start the task of ostracizing Webb and his newspaper. This took advantage of principle #2: Human animals blindly follow the leader of the herd. And the Washington Post is, for a great many journalists, the leader of the (journalistic) herd. Thus once Pincus published his "rebuttal" of Webb's story, a number of other media outlets blindly followed the leader of the herd (the Post) and similarly published "rebuttals" of Webb's story. Similarly, they did not want to believe ill of the overall leader of the herd (President Reagan's CIA), and thus were predisposed to follow Pincus's lead in the first place. Principle #3: Laziness. We provided a large number of Party officials to do damage control, calmly assuring reporters that Webb was lying. Rather than do their own reporting, these reporters could instead just let Pincus write their stories for them (basically), quote some "off the record" Party officials denying Webb's story, and get paid the same as if they'd actually done real work. This contributed to the herd effect. Other reporters, seeing that the majority of the herd was ostracizing Webb and his newspaper, jumped on the bandwagon. Finally, principle #4, a desire to be lied to. Really, these reporters literally BEGGED for us to lie to them. They wanted to be part of the herd, instead of an outcast like Webb. They wanted to believe the best of the CIA, rather than have to actually do work uncovering the CIA's drug smuggling past. Furthermore, the American public as a *whole* wanted to be lied to, and reporters are conditioned to give the public what they want -- lies, bright and shiny lies, lies to soothe the daily lives of misery and pointless mastication and defecation of human animals whose sole purpose for existing is as cogs in a vast and mighty machine that their pathetic little minds will never comprehend or even perceive.

Within a few short weeks, the editor of the San Jose Mercury News caved. He could not bear being ostracized from the herd. Gary Webb refused to cave, continued to insist upon that "truth" thing, and was ostracized, blacklisted from the journalistic herd. We took his career from him, his livelihood from him, and finally, we took his wife and kids from him. Eventually it was all too much for him, and on the day he was going to be kicked out of his long-time home in suburbia on to the streets, evicted to roam the streets as yet another of those homeless bums that we instinctually avoid looking at when we see them on the streets, he ate a shotgun.

That is what happens to truth-tellers who dare tell the people truths that they do not wish to hear. That, my friends, is why few journalists ever bother writing real stories. Not only are journalists herd animals by nature, but they do not wish to be ostracized from their herd, and examples like Gary Webb make sure that they keep that fear of ostracization deep within their pathetic little souls. Not that most journalists would ever dare go out in front of the pack like Gary Webb did, anyhow. They are, for the most part, a bunch of pathetic sheep, who view their job as being transcriptionists of the words of those in power, who will give equal time to a Garry Webb telling the truth and a CIA official lying, without ever stating in their story "we have evidence that Gary is telling the truth and we have evidence that the CIA official is lying." Why, that would require them to make a judgement! And surely you're asking too much of a poor reporter, whose job, after all, is to be the transcriptionist of those in power, rather than truth (which nobody wants to know anyhow)!

And so it goes in the American provinces of Oceania, which claim to have a "free press" -- yet where every newspaper in the country appears to have the same headlines and quote the same Party officials regarding the allocation of tea and sugar, day after day, year after year, in a lockstep conformity that the Communists could only aspire to... ah yes, the United States of Delusion, where even a free press is just an illusion...

Orwellianly Yours,
Karl Rove O'Brien, Bush's Brain

1. Walter Pincus, "How I Traveled Abroad On CIA Subsidy," San Jose Mercury, 18 February 1967, p. 14. wherin Mr. Pincus talks about his career as a CIA mole in student organizations

Wednesday, December 08, 2004


Perceived and received reality in an era of reality TV

So those who would oppose the Party's agenda of continuous war for the health and profit of the Party elite, still reeling from the failure of their plan to flood America with pictures of dead Iraqi children that our soldiers have killed, now appear to be planning to flood the nation with pictures of coffins and graves of American soldiers killed in Iraq, with the stated goal of "bringing the cost home to the American public". This effort is, of course, doomed to failure, because it ignores the nature of reality in an era of reality TV.

Perceived reality -- that which we see with our own eyes -- is the only reality we truly "know". Everything else is received reality -- reality as perceived by other people's eyes, and passed down to us via the imperfect tool of language. And in a world where received reality is filled with fictions and lies, finding any grain of truth -- any grain of what actual reality might have been in that wash of images and prose -- is an arduous task, indeed, is a task beyond the majority of the sheeple. Indeed, it is a task that most of them never even bother with, instead deciding to adopt whatever in this flood of lies most fills their need for lies to sooth their animal souls, and ignoring the rest.

In truth, the vast majority of the sheeple are incapable of telling the difference between reality and fiction. All that is real to them -- ALL that is real -- are their immediate family and friends. Everything else is just a "reality television" show, where, at the end of the hour, the corpses rise from their shallow graves and meet in the cast trailer for champaign and canapes. The people in this photo are no more real to them than the characters on the movie they watched last night.

You say that you are different. You say that you have imagination and empathy, that these pictures truly move you. But face it -- even you do not view Mr. Wood or Mr. Ware of this dKos story as human, but, rather, as fictional characters within a tragi-comedy called "The Iraq Disaster". You do not know Mr. Wood or Mr. Ware as people, other than as imagined people inside your head constructed from bits and pieces of other characters and other people that you have encountered in your life. You know this is a tragedy, but you know this is a tragedy not because you are somehow "better" than the sheeple who will never care about photos such as this, but, rather, because you are gifted with a better imagination and are capable of building a more realistic imaginary person in your head of what Mr. Wood or Mr. Ware MIGHT have been like.

Photos like this will never end war. Never. The human animal simply isn't wired that way. The only thing that will end war is if massive numbers of people are killed, and their family and friends who are directly impacted become the majority. That is why we of the Party deliberately have sent too few people to Iraq. By limiting the number of soldiers sent to Iraq, we limit the number of family and friends impacted by their deaths. And since we do not care whether decisive victory is possible -- indeed, victory would be a disaster for the Party, as proven in 1992 -- it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist. In that way, we of the Party give our subjects the bright and shiny lies that they want, the ones that hide the ugly truths from them, the lies that give them an enemy to hate, the lies that make them feel part of the Chosen People, God's people, Americans, the lies of patriotism and pride that give meaning to their pathetic lives of quiet desperation and misery. War is, indeed, the health of the Party.

Orwellianly Yours,
Karl Rove O'Brien, Bush's Brain

Monday, December 06, 2004


The illusion of choice in the "soft" police state

George Orwell was wrong. The Party need not create a harsh police state in order to gain and extend its power. Indeed, a harsh police state would be markedly incompatible with the Party's stated aim: To gain and hold power for the Party elite over the vast majority of sheeple for eternity.

The secret is that harsh police states work -- but only until an external force knocks them over. That external force may be as simple as the death of the founder of the state (e.g., the dissolution of the Spanish fascist police state after the death of Franco), or may be a result of technological innovations elsewhere (e.g., the economic disaster that was the Soviet Union in the 1980's when the Information Age rendered their centrally planned industrial economy obsolete, or the economic disaster that was the Ottomon Empire in the 1880's when the Industrial Age rendered their economy of small blacksmiths and workshops obsolete), or may even be the result of armed intervention of alarmed neighbors e.g. the fate of Germany in the 1940's, but the inevitable result is that the police state fails. It may take decades, but what are decades in the life of a Party that aims to be eternal?

In addition, repression tends to suppress innovation. The example of the Ottoman Empire shows what happens when innovation is suppressed: people who would otherwise innovate and create are instead repressed and the state falls behind. Thus on a long term basis, harsh police states do not, and cannot, keep up technologically with states which do not have such repression.

Thus this perfect police state that the Party is creating does not, and cannot, use widespread repression in order to obtain the allegience of sufficient sheeple in order to obtain and maintain power. But then, widespread repression is not necessary. All that is necessary is to create, maintain, and perpetuate the illusion of freedom and choice. After all, if a sheeple feels free, who will he revolt against? Who is his oppressor, if he feels free?

The growth of advertising and oligopolies in the 20th Century filled in the last of the equation. A few simple principles allow preserving the illusion of freedom, the illusion of choice:
  1. People want what they're told to want. The American advertising industry has been amazing at creating demand for products that no one in their right mind would ever conceive as desirable. The most ludicrous example of all this is the pet rock, a 1975 fad which epitomized the whole power of advertising and fads. Then take the Backstreet Boys, nSync, etc.... please. Yet more manufactured demand for product that no one in their right mind would ever actually wish to listen to if left to their own devices. By setting up our media to present to people what they should believe, we allow people to freely "choose" to believe what we tell them to believe -- meaning that they will never rebel because they will never conceive that the way things are is anything other than the way they "should" be. We of the Party are, indeed, blessed that the majority of sheeple are gullible fools who will believe whatever they're told they should believe.
  2. Control of shelf space. The successful oligopolist, such as Coca-Cola, knows that the best way to keep competitors out of the marketplace is to simply buy up the marketplace and make sure competitors' wares are never displayed to consumers. This works because there is only limited shelf space in a marketplace devoted to soft drinks. Thus if you go into a marketplace, the two soft drink oligopolists have purchased a good 80% of the shelf space to be used for their product, leaving any competitor's product in a small area that is often overlooked. Similarly, there are only a certain number of radio and television frequencies available. By purchasing the majority of these, we of the Party insure that our own ideas are the only ideas widely dessimated in the marketplace of ideas, and thus that people will only "choose" our ideas, since they will know no others.
  3. The illusion of choice. The successful oligopolist knows that it is not enough to simply buy the shelf space. One must also fill it with products that are superficially different, yet basically the same. A perfect example is the American beer market. Virtually all brands available on the shelf are minor variations of the same Milwaukee horse piss -- but with pseudo-differences to give the illusion of choice (e.g. "Budweiser" vs. "Michelob", which are made in the same factory using the same vats, but which have a different advertising campaign, different label, etc.). Similarly, in the American provinces of Oceania people go to the polls under the dlusion that they have a "choice" of candidates, when, in actuality, no one who is not owned by the Demopublican oligopoly has any chance of obtaining the "shelf space" in the marketplace of ideas necessary to win (when was the last time you heard of a third-party candidate gaining a significant share of the vote in any election of significance?).
The net result of all these actions is that in the marketplace of ideas, only those of the Party are represented, yet people believe they freely "chose" to believe what we of the Party wish them to believe. By controlling the marketplace of ideas, we of the Party control how people think. And by controlling how people think, we insure the health and prosperity of the Party. Our "soft" police state, where we focus on controlling how people think rather than on forcing people to physically be obedient, could only be overthrown if somehow the marketplace of ideas was overthrown -- which will never happen, because that would not be in the Party's best interests. Thus we shall continue to control how people think -- and continue to rule Oceania -- forever.

Orwellianly Yours,
Karl Rove O'Brien, Bush's Brain

Wednesday, December 01, 2004


The Conspiracy Theory Conspiracy

The human animals of the American provinces of Oceania do love their conspiracy theories. These theories range from the hilarious ( the UN-Amish One World Order conspiracy to the ludicrous ( The Bovine Illuminati by a large array of tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists out to hawk their latest conspiracy theory for profit, complete with books and videos about mysterious zig-zagging bullets, (fuzzy) photos of purported "alien invaders at Area 51", and various silly one world government conspiracies, all calculated to be, at their heart, unbelievable.

Calculated to be unbelievable by... who?

It takes only a few whispers to start a conspiracy theory, after all. Who does this plethora of conspiracy theories benefit, other than the Party? Finding a real conspiracy -- such as the Party's conspiracy to destroy democracy and control the counting of votes -- amongst all these various whacked-out conspiracy theories is like finding a needle in a haystack! And if someone DOES point out that, say, both of the major electronic voting machine companies are owned by Republican operatives and that electronic ballots cannot be recounted, why, all we of the Party must do is wave our hands dismissively, "Just another crazy Internet conspiracy theory", and everybody nods their head wisely and moves on.

If you cannot see the use of this plethora of conspiracy theories when it comes to covering the trail of the Party's own conspiracy to consolidate its power in the American provinces of Oceania, I congratulate you, for you are a typical sheeple product of the American "educational" system (which does not exist -- America now has a TRAINING system, which teaches human animals various rote skills needed to obtain and hold a job, not an EDUCATIONAL system, which teaches people how to think critically and logically about their world). Whether the Party has a hand in creating these conspiracy theories, or merely takes advantage of their existence, we of the Party are indeed blessed by this plethora of conspiracy theories amongst the two-legged vermin that we aim to rule, as is our rightful due!

Orwellianly Yours,
Karl Rove O'Brien, Bush's Brain

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

ObeyBigBrother: Documenting the rise of the Soft Police State
All contents copyright 1984-2004 by, other than exerpts copyrighted 1948 by George Orwell.