Important quotes and big ideas from George Orwell’s “1984”

George Orwell’s novel 1984 was written as a warning about the dangers of an increasingly powerful government controlling people through propaganda and censorship. In particular, he feared that the new techniques being developed would allow governments to “turn off” individual minds and make them believe whatever they wanted.

The book was written as a response not only to what he saw as an increase in authoritarian and totalitarian thinking in society but also to the increasing amount of control over information during the 20th century. Orwell foresaw how such control would lead to a surveillance state where people were constantly monitored and controlled by constantly editing documents and photographs. To show his fears about this, he wrote a book that has forever changed our discussion of freedom, giving us terms like “thought crime” and “big brother is watching you.”

After seeing the book constantly mentioned on Twitter to describe how social media and big tech have gone out of their way to target and censor specific individuals and lines of thinking, I decided to give the book a read. to see how close things are in the year 2022 to the world the fictional world Orwell created in a book published in 1949.

I’ve collected the most impactful quotes and organized them according to their theme. I’ve given my interpretation and additions where I think I could add something, but I leave some of them without commentary for the reader to reach their own conclusions, I believe that George Orwell would have appreciated this approach.

1984 quotes about control 

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” “And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into history and became truth.”

In “1984,” the totalitarian government, known as “the Party,” manipulates and controls every aspect of its citizens’ lives, including their thoughts and perceptions. The Party’s ultimate goal is to make people believe their version of reality, even if it contradicts what they can see and hear with their own senses.

In essence, the Party wants to replace objective truth with its own version of the truth. We see a similar aim today with the idea of “manufactured consent.”

Manufactured consent is a term coined by Walter Lippmann and later elaborated by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman. It refers to the idea that in a mass democracy, the public’s consent for policies is not formed spontaneously, but is “manufactured” by elites (such as governments, media, and corporations) through propaganda and manipulation of information.

One example of manufactured consent benefiting elites is the lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War. The Bush administration and supportive media outlets promoted the narrative that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and had ties to Al-Qaeda terrorists. This propaganda campaign aimed to convince the American public and international community that invading Iraq was necessary for security.

However, the evidence for WMDs was flimsy and the supposed Iraq-Al Qaeda links dubious. Critics argue that the real motivations were geopolitical goals and oil interests that stood to benefit political and economic elites. The PR campaign sought to manufacture public consent for a war that many argue was launched under false pretenses.

Techniques used included:

• Constant repetition of the threat posed by Iraqi WMDs
• Presenting “expert” commentators who supported the official narrative
• Marginalizing voices questioning the evidence for war
• Appealing to post-9/11 fears and patriotic sentiment
• Selective intelligence leaks to shape media coverage

As a result, polls showed a majority of Americans came to believe Iraq had WMDs and was involved in 9/11, enabling the Bush administration to launch the invasion with broad public support. This not only demonstrates how the modern day “Party” is able to manipulate public perception by presenting them facts that they are compelled to accept, but how this technique can also effectively rewrite history.

Orwell depicts a regime that can alter the historical record at will so it always fits the current party line. Nowadays, authoritarian states selectively omit unflattering facts from textbooks, websites and archives

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

This quote highlights the power of controlling information and historical narratives to shape society’s understanding of reality. Let’s break it down and connect it to some contemporary examples and psychological concepts.

Those who have the power to shape how we remember and interpret history can influence the direction of society going forward. By selectively emphasizing, omitting, or distorting historical facts, those in power can mold public perception to support their agenda for the future.

For example, debates over how American history is taught often revolve around what narratives and perspectives are included or excluded in textbooks and curricula. Conservative efforts to ban “critical race theory” or liberal initiatives like the 1619 Project represent attempts to control which version of the past is transmitted to future generations in service of different political visions.

Psychologically, this connects to concepts like collective memory (how groups remember their past) and historical revisionism (reinterpreting past events). Research shows collective memories aren’t static records of fact, but are reconstructed over time as present concerns and power dynamics evolve. So the past is always filtered through the lens of the present.

“In Newspeak there is no word for ‘Science.’”

This quote highlights the novel’s theme of language control as a means of thought control. In the story, the totalitarian regime of Oceania is developing “Newspeak,” a language designed to limit freedom of thought.

The absence of a word for “science” in Newspeak suggests a society where empirical inquiry and objective truth have been erased in favor of blind obedience to authority.

Connecting this to the Covid-19 pandemic and the phrase “trust the science,” we can see some relevant parallels and contrasts. On one hand, “trust the science” can be a call for evidence-based policymaking guided by impartial research rather than ideology or misinformation. In this sense, it asserts the value of scientific inquiry in the face of denialism or conspiracy theories.

However, critics might argue that in practice, “trust the science” has at times been used as a rhetorical bludgeon to shut down legitimate debate and enforce conformity of opinion. When invoked by authorities or experts, it can serve as a conversation-stopper that delegitimizes dissent. This is reminiscent of Orwell’s depiction of a world where the very concept of objective truth is suppressed.

Moreover, the pandemic response has exposed that “the science” is not always a monolith. Experts can disagree and evidence can evolve over time. Public health messaging has sometimes been inconsistent or contradictory. In this context, “trust the science” may oversimplify a more complex and uncertain reality.

Psychologically, the quote relates to the concept of dogmatism - an inflexible, closed-minded adherence to doctrine. Dogmatism thrives in the absence of critical thinking and openness to evidence. It can lead to groupthink, where dissenting views are suppressed in favor of consensus.

The pandemic has also highlighted the role of cognitive biases such as confirmation bias (seeking out information that confirms our preexisting beliefs) and the illusion of explanatory depth (overestimating our understanding of complex issues). These biases can lead us to latch onto simplistic narratives and slogans rather than grappling with nuance.

So while “trust the science” can be a valid defense of empiricism, we must be cautious not to let it become a Newspeak-esque thought-terminating cliché. Truly trusting science means embracing its ethos of openness, questioning, and continuous refinement - not using it as a cudgel to enforce orthodoxy. Science is a process, not a set of unassailable decrees. As Orwell reminds us, a world where the pursuit of truth is restricted is a world diminished.

“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.”

“If the facts say otherwise, the facts must be altered.”

In today’s society, we can see parallels to this quote in the ongoing debate about gender and sex.

Some individuals and groups promote the idea that there is more than one gender or that one can change their sex, despite biological and scientific evidence to the contrary. They argue that gender is a social construct, separate from biological sex, and that an individual’s self-identification should be the determining factor in their gender identity.

This perspective often leads to the alteration of language and the suppression of dissenting opinions. For example, in some academic and professional settings, people are encouraged or even required to use gender-neutral pronouns, and those who refuse to do so may face social or professional consequences. This can be seen as an attempt to alter the “facts” about gender and sex to align with a particular ideology.

Moreover, some proponents of the idea that gender is fluid and can be changed argue that biological sex is also malleable, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that sex is determined by chromosomes and is immutable. And, if you don’t agree with this version of the “facts,” then you face ostracization by the portion of the population who has bought into this changed reality.

Orwell warned us that this situation would happen, so it is coming to pass.

1984 quotes about totalitarianism

“All beliefs, habits, tastes, emotions, mental attitudes that characterize our time are really designed to sustain the mystique of the Party and prevent the true nature of present-day society from being perceived.”

This quote from 1984 suggests that all aspects of society - from personal beliefs and habits to the overall cultural zeitgeist - are engineered to maintain the power structure and obscure the true workings of the system. In Orwell’s dystopia, the Party’s ideology permeates every facet of life, shaping people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in ways that ultimately serve to sustain its control.

We can see reflections of this in various aspects of contemporary culture and politics:

Media and Entertainment

The media we consume can subtly shape our perceptions and values. For example, Hollywood films often reinforce dominant cultural narratives and ideologies.

Blockbuster action movies might glorify militarism and individualistic heroism, while romantic comedies frequently reaffirm traditional gender roles and the primacy of coupledom.

Social Media Algorithms

The algorithms that curate our social media feeds are designed to maximize engagement and ad revenue, not to provide a balanced or truthful picture of the world.

They tend to show us content that aligns with our preexisting beliefs and interests, creating echo chambers that can reinforce polarization and make it harder to perceive alternative viewpoints.

This can be exploited by political actors to spread misinformation and sow division.

Consumer Culture

Our consumer habits and tastes are heavily influenced by marketing and branding, which often link products to aspirational lifestyles and identities. The fashion industry, for instance, promotes ever-changing trends that encourage continuous consumption.

This not only drives profits for corporations, but also reinforces materialistic values and distracts from deeper social or political concerns. The “mystique” of the brand eclipses the realities of labor exploitation, environmental damage, etc.

Political Spectacle

Modern political campaigns are often more about optics and emotional appeal than substantive policy debate. Rallies, slogans, and soundbites create a kind of political theater that can obscure the actual workings of power.

The focus on personalities and scandal can distract from underlying systemic issues. This spectacle can sustain the “mystique” of the party or candidate, preventing voters from perceiving the true nature and consequences of their policies.

Nationalism and Patriotism

Feelings of national pride and patriotism can be fostered to create a sense of unity and loyalty to the state. However, this can also be used to quell dissent and prevent critical examination of government actions.

Wrapping policies in the flag or appealing to national security can be a way to shut down debate and obscure the true motives or impacts of decisions. Anyone familiar with the Patriot Act understands how this works, and it’s the primary reason why 2nd Amendment supporters refuse to hand over their weapons, regardless of what happens.

Of course, this is not to suggest that all aspects of contemporary society are nothing more than tools of social control. People’s beliefs, habits, and emotions are shaped by a complex interplay of factors, and individuals have agency to resist and question dominant narratives.

However, Orwell’s quote reminds us to be critical consumers of the cultural and political messages we’re immersed in. It prompts us to ask what interests and power structures they may be serving to uphold, intentionally or not. By recognizing how our perceptions can be shaped, we’re better equipped to see through the “mystique” and confront the realities of our social systems. As Orwell wrote, “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.”

“We know that no one siezes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is a means; not 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 promise of revolution is used as a means to gain support and seize power, but once in power, the revolutionary leaders are often unwilling to relinquish it. Instead, they consolidate their power and create a dictatorship. This playbook is as old as the French Revolution.

1. The Russian Revolution (1917): The Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin, overthrew the Tsarist regime with promises of “peace, land, and bread” for the people. However, once in power, Lenin and later Joseph Stalin created a totalitarian state characterized by mass repression, forced labor camps, and the elimination of political opponents.
2. The Cuban Revolution (1959): Fidel Castro and his 26th of July Movement ousted the U.S.-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista, promising to restore democracy and address social inequalities. Instead, Castro established a one-party communist state, suppressed dissent, and maintained power for over five decades.
3. The Iranian Revolution (1979): Diverse opposition groups, including Islamists, leftists, and liberals, united to overthrow the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. However, the revolution was quickly co-opted by the Islamists led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who established an authoritarian theocracy that brutally suppressed opposition and imposed strict Islamic law.
4. The Cambodian Revolution (1975): The Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot, seized power after a civil war with the promise of creating a classless, agrarian society. Instead, they carried out a genocidal campaign, killing an estimated 1.5 to 2 million people through forced labor, starvation, and mass executions in their attempt to create a “pure” communist state.

You either die while you’re a revolutionary, or live long enough to see yourself become a despot.

“By comparison with that existing today, all the tyrannies of the past were half-hearted and inefficient. Even the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages was tolerant by modern standards.”

“The masses never revolt of their own accord, and they never revolt merely because they are oppressed. Indeed, so long as they are not permitted to have standards of comparison, they never even become aware that they are oppressed.”

“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”

“The weaker the opposition, the tighter the despotism.”

1984 quotes about propaganda

“If you kept to the small rules, you could break the big ones.”

“When you delude yourself into thinking that you see something, you assume that everyone else sees the same thing as you.”

”

“The worldview of The Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them.”

“To keep them in control was not difficult. All that was required of them was a primitive patriotism which could be appealed to whenever it was necessary to make them accept longer working hours or shorter rations.”

“They could only become dangerous if the advancement of industrial technique made it necessary to educate them more highly… but since military and commercial rivalry are no longer important, the level of popular education is declining.”

“What can you do, thought Winston, against the lunatic who is more intelligent than yourself; who gives your arguments a fair hearing and simply persists in his lunacy?”