The novel takes place in London, which is the power base of the Party in Oceania. The Party is very corrupt and is in control of absolutely everything. The mysterious leader of the Party is Big Brother. The Party is oppressing the people, and even some thoughts are illegal to have. Individuality and freedom is nonexistent. Advanced technology makes freedom impossible. The main character, Winston Smith, does not like the Party and he secretly harbors very rebellious thoughts about it. He buys a diary to write his "criminal" ideas about the Party and how things should be down. This is the worst crime someone in the Party can commit. While working at his post in the Ministry of Truth, Winston becomes connected to O'Brien, a higher ranking Party member. Winston believes that O'Brien is a member of the Brotherhood that intends to destroy the Party. He also meets a girl named Julia and they have an illegal affair. Love is not allowed in the Party. The only people free of this are the proles, who are not closely watched by the Party. O'Brien pretends to be in the Brotherhood, and gives Winston and Julia a copy of Emmanuel Goldstein's book. This book shows a different way of life, and Winston longs to help make it exist. Unfortunately, O'Brien is a member of the thought police, and he just set them up. Both he and Julia are brainwashed. Winston betrays Julia to avoid torture; his will is gone, and he no longer feels love for Julia. He is released and loves the Party and Big Brother. He accepts the way things are and no longer has any real thoughts.
1. Why is it wrong for a government to use technology to spy on it's citizens? Are there times when it is acceptable?
2. If you were in Winston's position and about to be tortured, would you betray the person you loved?
3.
1984 is a political novel that aims to show readers the dangers that totalitarianism presents. What are some of these dangers, and is it important today to know them?
8 comments:
1. It is wrong for any government to spy on it's citizens because everyone should have a right to privacy. The government should not be able to spy through the use of technology because it allows for the government to have too much power. It should only be acceptable if a background check has been compiled about a person of suspicion and it shows that there is reason to monitor their activities.
1) The goverment should not spy on citizens because it invades the right to privacy. The only time it is acceptable (and legal)is when there is a threat to national security.
2. No, if I was about to be tortured I would not betray my loved one. I care too much about my family, friends, and loved ones to betray them.
I agree with Matt; allowing a government to have so much control and insight into individuals lives is wrong. Are freedoms allow us to fully express ourselves and to become unique individuals. If the government was constantly watching everyone, they would behave how the government wanted them to and not how they truly wanted to. And the government is far from flawless so a society strictly following government laws and regulations would easily become corrupt.
I think that it is acceptable for a government to spy on its citizens, but it's so hard to determine when it is appropriate. I am under the assumption that if I don't do anything wrong, then there isn't anything to fear. At the same time, circumstances change, and I wouldn't want to be in trouble for not having my rights protected.
I dont think it is ever acceptable for a government to spy on its citizens. Peoples rights to privacy should be protected from the government. Governments dont know when to stop and too much power could lead to a situation like the one in the book.
2)If I was about to be tortured I would not betray the person I love. Although going through the physical pain may seem unbearable, going through the emotional pain of betraying my true love would be far worse. I would much rather suffer myself than knowingly inflict suffering to another important person in my life.
1. A government should not be able to spy on its citizens unless it has reasonable suspicion that a particular person is going to cause harm to the public.
Post a Comment