Orwell Laid it Out for Us. And You're Still Falling for the Scheme.

This article contains some mild spoilers for George Orwell’s 1984. I know the book has been published since 1949, but still. If you ever plan on reading it, this is your first and only warning regarding the matter. 

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

These are the three core slogans of the Party in George Orwell’s 1949 masterpiece Nineteen Eighty-Four. At the time, Orwell wrote 1984 as a glaring critique on Fascism. Throughout the novel, Oceania is subjected to living during a constant war time, with the “enemy” changing on a dime. Party Members are subjected to non-stop surveillance, whilst being told they are the leaders. Non-Party Members (Proles) are given no information or advantage in the grander Oceania society. Sound familiar?

What was initially a critique, somehow became a warning, and has found a new life as a glimpse into the future. In the Orewellian world of 1984, Big Brother and the Party win by suppressing and changing information to fit their needs. One way of performing these changes is by converting language to what is called “Newspeak.” Newspeak is a controlled language that conforms to the Party’s ideals of “Ingsoc,” shorthand for “English Society.” 

Newspeak is what I’d like to discuss today. 

If you’ve never read 1984, please race to your public library and check out the first copy you can. It is a phenomenal book, and the last 4 words strike fear upon the reader like a literary lightning bolt. If you’re the kind of reader who reads the last paragraph first, (aka a psychopath) don’t do it this time. 

As previously mentioned, one of the ways the Party controls the citizens of Oceania is through the Ingsoc approved language of Newspeak. Newspeak is designed to reduce adjectives, simplify thought, and in general just make the average Party Member and Prole alike speak and think in a way that quells doubt in the government and its motives. 

Here’s the thing. When Orwell wrote this in 1949, it was meant to be seen as an exaggeration of how Totalitarianism works, to grab attention. But, and I hate to say it, I think if Orwell were alive today he’d be screaming from the rooftops that we fell for it anyways. Or, he’d be in some padded cell somewhere, “crazy” to the world.  

In brief, Newspeak follows most rules of English grammar, with the goal of continually diminishing vocabulary. Eventually, the Party wants entire thoughts to be expressed via single words. The purpose of limiting the vocabulary of both Party members and the Proles is to eliminate anti-Ingsoc thought entirely. The Party wants to use Newspeak as a means of controlling the thoughts of members and Proles. The Party literally eliminates words that could lead subjects to rebellious thoughts, and destroys what is referred to as “doublethink,” which is Newspeak for the acceptance of contradictory thoughts. In the book, a Linguist explains to Winston, the main character, that by 2050, all “Oldspeak,” (classic English) will be eliminated, followed by nonconformity. 

Many people think that 1984 is about censorship. While not incorrect, the broader message of the book actually centers around the importance of power. The Party seeks nothing else. Not riches, not fame, not sin, but pure, absolute power. As O’Brien puts it: 

“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.”

If or when the Party succeeds in fully implementing Newspeak into Ingsoc, their power will not be absolute, it will only be closer to perfected. Newspeak is one of their primary goals, and by eliminating expressive language, they can control the mind of the individual, and eliminate the needs of the public, hence making the party more powerful. It is a vicious cycle.

Okay, let me step back for a minute. You didn’t click this for a book report. What’s my point here? It’s simple. While Orwell wrote 1984 with a taste of satire, he wasn’t wrong about Newspeak. I mostly write this today to say I wouldn’t be surprised if “they” are using the Party that Orwell feared so much as a template for modern society. Who are “they?” I don’t know. If The Fed can reference an invisible hand, so can I. 

What leads me to believe Newspeak is already being implemented in our society? The internet, mostly. Modern lingo adapts and changes on a day to day basis. Everyday new slang arrives on my feed, in comment sections, and on people’s stories. More often than not it seems like it’s based around humor or memes, but if you weren’t aware, that is exactly what a meme is supposed to do. 

The term “meme” is used to describe an idea or behavior that quickly spreads from person to person. Think of it as a virus, but in the mind. They seem harmless enough, but memetics show that rapid, broad spread of information and ideas can genuinely be very harmful to society. Hence, if “they” wanted to introduce a new linguistic abbreviation into the public’s lexicon, the logical route would be to make new words follow a memetic introduction to modern society.  

An example of potential real world newspeak comes from my friend TJ, who floated the term “LARP” or “larping.” If you couldn’t tell, this word is actually an acronym. It stands for “Live Action Role Playing,” an activity where people dress up as a variety of niches and do just that, role play action scenes live. It’s that simple, and it honestly looks pretty fun. But the term has recently been negatively co-opted by the internet. After reading my last article, TJ pointed out to me that the term has become very common in the gaming atmosphere. He says gamers will quickly label anyone who says one wrong thing about a game, or someone who is new to a game, a larper. It is used to diminish people’s credibility, and essentially say “this guy is a poser, he’s just pretending to like this game.”

This reminds me of an older slang word, “noob.” This word actually comes directly from gaming, referring to new players, or “newbies,” who were noticeably not good at a game. What’s wrong with calling them a newbie? Why did the internet shorten a two syllable word? The term quickly became common lingo, and is now used across the board in different communities and jargons. 

While “larper” and “noob” are more based around slang, a recent trend really illustrates what would concern Orwell the most. Have you ever heard of "maxing?" I have, unfortunately. This is the newest trend I’ve noticed that I think is the main offender in terms of a possible "modern newspeak." I’m not entirely sure where the term comes from, but I am sure I hate it. I’ve heard it used in more ways than I can count, and it’s genuinely concerning. For the most part, I think this kind of terminology is supposed to be ironic, but my issue with that phrase is that I, of all people, now know what it means. Truthfully, I’m kind of your classic modern luddite. I refuse generative AI whenever I can, (none of these articles have ever had a drop of water wasted on them by the way) and I will occasionally step away from social media for a few weeks/months at a time. (Obviously this hasn’t happened for a while.) I first noticed this lingo, like most people learn of slang, through memes and reels. It was nonsense at first.

Until one day, it wasn’t. 

Suddenly, it was just something I understood. When someone like me understands everyday internet lingo without a second thought, it should be concerning. This dumb practice of putting “maxing/maxxing” (the double X REALLY pisses me off) after words, to effectively explain that someone is doing something as efficiently as possible, is exactly what Orwell feared when concepting Newspeak. 

This past weekend alone, a friend of mine dropped “___-maxing” in conversation at least 6 times. It wasn’t conscious, nor ironic, he genuinely used it in real discussions. What’s concerning to me about this potential for modern newspeak is the fact that it feels unnecessary. We’re not paying for ink by the word like the 1800s anymore. I believe we can and should use adjectives whenever possible. Descriptive language is beautiful. The only places I want tight, concise language is in the newspaper, a Hemingway novel, or ad copy. Otherwise, write everything out entirely. Use your words.  

I think the idea that we as society would want to shorten our vocabulary also speaks to a larger problem in today’s day and age. Because everything is so quick now, we’ve begun shutting ourselves down from strangers. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying to run up the dark alley and beam a big “Hello!” to the guy wearing an ominous hood in the shadows, but doesn’t it feel like we’re not talking to other people anymore? It feels like a lot of interactions that were done in person even 10 years ago are being done online now. Buying a movie ticket happens from a laptop, and you scan it with your phone. People order McDonald’s on screens, and use computers to check out at the grocery store. If “they” get their way, eventually no one will talk to their neighbors, stoops will be removed from houses like Bradbury describes in Fahrenheit 451, people will talk to their AI girlfriends and boyfriends before even thinking of talking to another human, and art will become meaningless. This was Orwell’s fear, and it's one of mine too. 

That’s pretty much all I have to say on this matter. I know I threw my tin foil hat on for this one, but I do believe we’ve become too reliant on the internet, and I’m genuinely concerned for this generation’s vocabulary. AI videos are becoming insanely realistic, and we’re way too

quick to use new language because it’s trendy or ironic. The issue with that is, where is that line drawn? That’s for you, the reader, to decide for yourself. Thanks for reading.