Brave New World and 1984 Revisited

I am currently rereading a book I first read about sixty years ago but which I have never forgotten.  In a few weeks I will be taking part in a discussion with fellow alumni of my college via Zoom.  Huxley wrote Brave New World in 1930 and George Orwell wrote 1984 in 1948.  This book came out in 1958.  Huxley here is writing about whether these dystopian novels describe our future.

Here is a passage that describes how democracy could fail and become something with elements of both books.  His thinking is very much in line with what Plato wrote on why democracies fail in The Republic.

“Democratic institutions are devices for reconciling social order with individual freedom and initiative, and for making the immediate power of a country’s rulers subject to the ultimate power of the ruled. The fact that, in Western Europe and America, these devices have worked, all things considered, not too badly is proof enough that the eighteenth-century optimists were not entirely wrong. Given a fair chance, human beings can govern themselves, and govern themselves better, though perhaps with less mechanical efficiency, than they can be governed by “authorities independent of their will.” Given a fair chance, I repeat; for the fair chance is an indispensable prerequisite. No people that passes abruptly from a state of subservience under the rule of a despot to the completely unfamiliar state of political independence can be said to have a fair chance of making democratic institutions work. Again, no people in a precarious economic condition has a fair chance of being able to govern itself democratically. Liberalism flourishes in an atmosphere of prosperity and declines as declining prosperity makes it necessary for the government to intervene ever more frequently and drastically in the affairs of its subjects. Over-population and over-organization are two conditions which, as I have already pointed out, deprive a society of a fair chance of making democratic institutions work effectively. We see, then, that there are certain historical, economic, demographic and technological conditions which make it very hard for Jefferson’s rational animals, endowed by nature with inalienable rights and an innate.than they can be governed by “authorities independent of their will.” Given a fair chance, I repeat; for the fair chance is an indispensable prerequisite. No people that passes abruptly from a state of subservience under the rule of a despot to the completely unfamiliar state of political independence can be said to have a fair chance of making democratic institutions work. Again, no people in a precarious economic condition has a fair chance of being able to govern itself democratically. Liberalism flourishes in an atmosphere of prosperity and declines as declining prosperity makes it necessary for the government to intervene ever more frequently and drastically in the affairs of its subjects. Over-population and over-organization are two conditions which, as I have already pointed out, deprive a society of a fair chance of making democratic institutions work effectively. We see, then, that there are certain historical, economic, demographic and technological conditions which make it very hard for Jefferson’s rational animals, endowed by nature with inalienable rights and an innate sense of justice, to exercise their reason, claim their rights and act justly within a democratically organized society. We in the West have been supremely fortunate in having been given our fair chance of making the great experiment in self-government. Unfortunately it now looks as though, owing to recent changes in our circumstances, this infinitely precious fair chance were being, little by little, taken away from us.” (Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World Revisited (p. 15). RosettaBooks. Kindle Edition. )

This reflects my own thinking, which may be why this book stuck with me for such a long time.  What I see right now in our country and also elsewhere is that fair chance being made unreachable.  I have said often enough that I understand why Trump has such a big following.  It is a symptom of the loss of any sense of a fair chance for too many people.  How much money someone makes is far from the whole picture, but not having enough for what one expects in life is part of that.  A sense of anomie is another.

Opinion polls show that a disturbingly large part of our people would favor or, at least accept, an authoritarian government in our country.

https://www.businessinsider.com/26-percent-of-americans-are-right-wing-authoritarian-new-poll-2021-6

When I say that I see our country (among others) following a path from democracy to authoritarianism, I base that on what political philosophy, history, and our current politics and social norms tell me.  I believe that our ideals are still present and that this makes our future redeemable, but not for certain.  Neither Huzley nor Orwell wrote trying to predict the future.  Both dystopias depicted were intended as comments on the world these authors observed in their own time.