MG, Scientologists believe their crusade against psychiatry is for the good of all mankind, including us. That doesn't mean we owe them anything. Whether or not they are actually helping is very relevant. What they are ACTUALLY DOING is more important than what they BELIEVE they're doing. Do you grok my analogic consistency check? I am appalled by the common obsession of glorifying the act of dying for one's country in an offensive war. It is not a great thing to die for Dick Cheney in an offensive war that has nothing to do with defending our freedom. "Support our troops" is nothing but an orwellian strawman fascist-enabler. The best thing we can do to help the troops is to bring them home.

This proposal from AT&T is not just Orwellian. It's Orwell.

i thought he had a valid point about how Hilary Clinton types want to shove their particular ideas about progression in everybody's faces all the time... just as dictators put giant statues of themselves everywhere and corporations put adverts everywhere. i see the parallel, that's all i'm saying.

but most of the interview seemed to just be unnecessarily twisting around semantics, and he didn't handle it very well, probably just trying to sell a "controversial" book with a catchy title (kinda like posting on videosift).

anyway, putting screens everywhere telling you how to bring up your child is like, sooo not a good idea, and I don't think he's out of line calling that idea orwellian. although i doubt he quoted her fairly.

In the book, Goldberg attempts to convince readers that six decades of conventional wisdom that have placed Italy's Benito Mussolini, Germany's Adolf Hitler and fascism on the right side of the ideological spectrum are wrong, and that fascism is really a phenomenon of the left. Goldberg also attributes fascist rhetoric and tactics to Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and describes the New Deal's descendants, modern American liberals, as carriers of this liberal-fascist DNA. In a sense, "We're All Fascists Now," as Goldberg puts it in one of his chapter titles.

The vapid stupidity of this argument is profound, Jonah cites what Mussolini said as fact, as if the usurpation of power in Germany and Italy were political campaigns run in democracies not simply two men saying and doing whatever would garner them power. The whole argument reads like an excuse to call liberals Nazis.

John Cole put it very well in saying that Goldberg basically twists words to make them mean whatever he wants them to mean.

The Salon.com interview from which I pulled the gist of the book is a hilarious read, and filled with miles of bullshit and quotable lines.

"I would argue that Nixon was not a particularly conservative guy. Measured by today's standards and today's issues, Nixon would be in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party."

[On Mussolini but could be self referential] "And he said a lot of stuff. He was sort of a buffoon in that sense; he was constantly changing his definitions of fascism and talking out of one side of the mouth, then out of the other side of his mouth, largely because of the sort of pragmatic idea he had about politics. But in terms of the policies he implemented and where he came to, once again, at the end of his life, he always clung to the policies that were associated with the left side of the political spectrum."

"But there's another dystopian understanding of the future, which we get from [Aldous] Huxley's "Brave New World." That was a fundamentally American vision ... [T]he vision of the Huxleyian "Brave New World" future is one where everyone's happy. No one's being oppressed, people are walking around chewing hormonal gum, they're having everything done for them, they're being nannied almost into nonexistence. That's the fascism in Hillary Clinton's vision. It's not the Orwellian stamping on a human face thing, it's hugs and kisses and taking care of boo-boos. It is the nanny state. That is a much more benign dystopia than "1984," but for me at least, it's still a dystopia. An unwanted hug is still as tyrannical or as oppressive -- not as oppressive, but an unwanted hug is still oppressive if you can't escape from it ... [O]ne of the biggest distinctions between what I'm calling liberal fascism ... and classical fascism, is that classical fascism was masculine and violently oppressive and today's liberalism is feminine and not oppressive but smothering with kindness."

The full interview is here at Salon.com.

vermeulen's right. ron paul's totally for greater trading with other countries, he just understands that a New World Order (/The Project For A New American Century) is not a good direction for us to go in.
I've tried telling people about the possibility of an Amero (like our Euro) and a North American Union, they won't believe me, probably because it sounds way too Orwellian from this perspective. But when it's finally squidgied into the public consciousness - the majority won't even think anything of it...

from the google description:
This is the mindblowing 5-part video documentary series Evidence of Revision whose purpose is to present the publicly unavailable and even suppressed historical audio, video and film recordings largely unseen by the American and world public relating to the assassination of the Kennedy brothers, the little known classified "Black Ops" actually used to intentionally create the massive war in Viet Nam, the CIA "mind control" programs and their involvement in the RFK assassination and the Jonestown massacre and other important truths of our post-modern time. The U.S. Government's Orwellian "Office of Public Diplomacy" has been in existence in various forms and under various names since World War ONE. The union of American governance and American corporate interests began in Abraham Lincoln's day and the massaging of "public truth" began even before the Roman Empire. The more you know about "real history" versus "official history", the better equipped you are to see behind the lies of our times, even as they are told to you. Evidence of Revision sweeps "official truth" into the dustbin of history as it may be revised even as it is being written. Each part cca 100 min. long, 8 hours all together. A must see for everyone

Part 1: The assassinations of Kennedy and Oswald as never seen before

Part 2: The "Why" of it all referenced to Viet Nam and LBJ

Part 3: LBJ, Hoover and others. What so few know even today.

Part 4: The RFK assassination as never seen before

Part 5: The RFK assassination continued, MK ULTRA and the Jonestown massacre... all related.

This is only $20 for 5 dvd's... if you dig it, you should buy it! http://www.wingtv.net/evidenceofrevision.html

so, your censorship request is not orwellian because you say so?

"btw, asking me not to use certain words is... well.. orwellian and creepy."

Ya think so? Not when the phrase is "freedom candidate". With that one I'm doing public frikkin service. Want some freedom fries with that? (Ron Paul: the freedom from Social Security candidate?)

Re the binary nature of "democracy" in the USofA: Well there's never a lot of space between the Rupugnocrats and Demagoglicans. Definitely this is not accidental.

i use "freedom candidate" tongue in cheek. But i didn't think the USA was the kind of place where they only allow 2 candidates to be on TV, constantly proclaimed as the only 2 that are "likely to win".

Can't you see the psychology here? Perhaps "fringe" candidates poll low because the TV says they are polling low. It's a feedback loop designed to keep out crazy constitutionalists with their "ideas" and "principles".

btw, asking me not to use certain words is... well.. orwellian and creepy.

1% of those polled.

I'm suggesting that although he has many supporters online, and even though he's raising a lot of money, this might just paint an inaccurate picture of his true level of support in terms of numbers of potential voters. At that site I linked to, because there's such a large number of polls, and the results are consistantly very low for Ron Paul across all regions of the USofA, this seems to support my hunch.

Did you look at that site? There's more polls than you can shake a stick at...hehe.

You're begging the question when you suggest the polls are flawed, btw.

Pleeeease don't use phrases like "freedom candidate". It's Orwellian and creepy.

Ron Paul is out of his mind if he thinks South Koreans want to be reunified with Orwellian North Korea by the military might of Kim Jong Il. Without U.S. forces stationed in South Korea, the North could conquer the South very quickly. Kim Jong Il has the 4th largest army in the world.

WTF smibbo, are you a paid "online marketing specialist"?? Are you furthering the green washing with your take on it being a "good" ad.

The ad bombards you with all the negative images, and it isn't a positive, alternative, like "this is what real people look like". It is a Rovian, F-You morans, here's what WE GOT IN STORE FOR YOUR KIDS.

This is paid for by Unilever. I know green washing is the wrong term, but it's equivalent concept for the "beauty industry". Evil f-ing corps polluting people's brains and culture with their sell-more crap marketing and psychology and then putting the orwellian opposite-ads, as if one right counters the last 100,000 wrongs.

there're a lot of mysteries surrounding 9/11, particularly that the U.S government will not release any information, photos or footage of a whole bunch of things surrounding the event.
a few things i have queries with: no footage of a plane hitting the pentagon, no photos of the wreckage of the other plane that just crashed into the ground. what's that molten metal stuff dripping out of the main buildings, why would all of the buildings fall identically to a controlled demolition?
wasnt there something on the bbc where they reported building 7 was going to fall - half an hour before it did. wasnt some firefighter or some guy in authority recorded sayng 'pull it'? some experts on controlled demolitions are shown the footage of these buildings collapsing and they give the verdict that they must have been 'pulled' with explosives. also no jets/interception was attempted at any point at the planes by the U.S government. there was an attempted bombing of the world trade center years before and there was something suspicious regarding the CIA to do with that. osama was trained by the CIA. there's more i cant think of right now, it might all mean nothing.

basically, i'm not convinced about anything to do with this. it doesnt matter that there's a bunch of people saying it was the U.S government, or even if they were saying it was aliens, what matters is that information is being withheld regarding many aspects of this - which is obviously very suspicious.
the government has that info and wont release it, even though it would result in millions of americans trusting them much more.

if you straight off think there's nothing in any part of this that sounds iffy then i cant help but think that you must be some brainwashed patriot. if you think there's something in 'all' of these conspiracies theories - then you're a nut. there's some middle ground where us 'thinking' people are.

dont you find it hard to trust your govenment when they straight out lie to you. we arent told what's really taking place in the middle east, it's not because they're run by mentalists, that is the number one trick in the orwellian book...
personally i suspect, and this is just a thought, that america and israel and a few other countries govenments are in allegiance and there's a long-term plan of take-over of most of the middle-east, partially for the oil, mostly for world power.

what they tell you 'is the truth' - 'isnt the truth', so what are you supposed to think? ...for yourself!

Anyone else horrified by the use of the word "homeland"??? WTF! This used to be a "country" and a "nation". In the most overtly Orwellian sick joke, Bush brazenly uses homeland over and over again. Does anyone know any history? You want to not be compared to Nazis, try not sounding like them, and following their game plan to the letter.

People used to find it outrageous to compare heir decider to Hitler, but you would be daft to not compare the two maniacs.

This video worth to be part of a Retro-futurist-Orwellian-Psychedelic artistic room montage (specially the part where he actually make the face).