Be who you are
and say what you feel,
because those who mind
don’t matter and those
who matter don’t mind.

In “1984,” George Orwell feared that Big Brother would use fear and force to gain control of society. In “Brave New World,” Aldous Huxley feared that force would not be necessary, and that government could gain control of the population by doing everything for them. The people wouldn’t think that they were oppressed, because they had lost interest in thinking for themselves. As Neil Postman put it in his foreword to “Amusing Ourselves to Death” (emphasis mine):

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.” In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.

For decades, the American left has been using Huxley’s “Brave New World” not as a form of literature, but rather as an instruction manual for gaining control of a previously free society. And it has been working just as well as Huxley feared. This is why every Democrat since FDR has fought against means-testing for Social Security – they want us all on the take. Just let government take care of everything. As George W. Bush said, “When someone is hurting, government has to act.” Once government takes responsibility for all our troubles, then we no longer need to take responsibility for ourselves. Which is nice. But Mr. Huxley knows where all this is going. And now that Democrats control the White House, Congress, and our elections, we’re starting to find out. Why are we just finding this out now? Because we didn’t listen to Mr. Huxley, who wrote “Brave New World” 90 years ago, in 1931.

Herewith, our own Dr. Jay Bhattacharya in a discussion with that uber liberal, Naomi Wolf. I note that, whereas during his most recent appearances with us here on Ricochet, Dr. Jay goes tieless–see, for example, this week’s Ricochet Podcast–here he wears both a tie and a jacket. But he’s so ineffably charming here that we’ll let that pass.

Truth be told, I have had no connections to Baltimore, Maryland since my ancestors landed there in 1703. (Although the city wasn’t officially founded until 1729, the initial settlement was established in 1661.) Eventually, those ancestors chose to move westward; at least as far as Ohio.

As I was growing up, it seemed that many of my sports heroes were located in Baltimore (Johnny U. and Raymond Berry for the Colts; Brooks Robinson and Boog Powell for the Orioles). Still, I knew very little about the City. That being said, I don’t think I’m interested in learning much more.

Under single-party rule, the internecine battles are generally more interesting than their debates with their opposition. Partially because corruption is so easy and rampant under single-party rule. But also because, with no meaningful opposition, the ruling party can do whatever it wants. So under these circumstances, you really find out who these people are and what motivates them.

This presents a problem for the modern Democratic Party since it has no obvious ideological underpinnings. It’s not based on Marxism, or Socialism, or Communism, or Libertarianism, or any other over-riding political philosophy. The only reason the Democratic Party has to exist is simply the acquisition of power. And the people who are attracted to that, the ones who end up in charge when Democrats gain power, struggle with their lack of ethical guidance and their tendency to abuse the power they just gained. Or worse, they don’t struggle with it – they revel in it, given the chance. Once they control the White House, Congress, and our electoral process, you get “Democrats gone wild.” There are no brakes.

Symptomatic of the left’s lack of intellectual framework is the nature of their public intellectuals and other thinkers and writers. The right has Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Bill Buckley, and so on and so forth. The left has Bill Maher, Charlamagne Tha God, Don Lemon, and so on and so forth. There was a fascinating exchange between two leftist thinkers yesterday. In a discussion about whether Andrew Cuomo needs to resign, Bill Maher stated that he did not need an investigation to prove Cuomo’s guilt of sexual harassment, and that “… it’s always on a case-by-case basis …” and that “… I believe these women completely …” Charlamagne Tha God, who apparently differs from Mr. Maher in that he is capable of independent thought, had a different take on the matter:

Place your bets: Will newly maskless (i.e. “Neanderthal”) states like Texas and Mississippi experience a surge in COVID-19 cases? Or will cases continue to decline into summer just like the rest of the country and the world? The real problem is that Texas, Mississippi, and Florida jeopardize the establishment plan (a) to take credit for ending the pandemic when it recedes largely on its own, chased by the vaccinations while (b) simultaneously asserting eternal authority such that “normal” activity can only be done from now on subject to revocable permission depending on the discovery/invention of new dangers. If cases in Texas and Mississippi don’t surge, it could threaten the plan.

We can’t drop the fear narrative too early. Saint Anthony Fauci increases the threshold for herd immunity every week–a clear indication that he is not ready to relinquish his role or inadvertently help Neanderthals roll back any newly invented governmental powers. He has gone from 60-70% to 80-90% as the threshold. If you graph it, and project forward, at this rate he will define herd immunity as a minimum of 106.5% sometime in May.

This series keeps coming back to the same themes. This one falls under this:

“[A] significant and growing portion of the American population is losing the virtues required to be functioning members of a free society.” – Charles Murray in Coming Apart (Page 289), 2012

I’m starting with an apology. Ninety-nine percent of the time I sit down to write something, the end turns out quite differently than my original intent. So if I stray a bit by the end, I blame it on too much Hugo-esque romanticist tangent. What I mean to express is my heartfelt gratitude for being part of the Ricochet community. It truly is a special group that is defined not by some platitude-riddled mission statement, an out-of-touch, heavy-handed cabal, nor an elitist clique demanding oaths of servitude. It is shaped and conditioned by its members. And the founders, editors, contributors, and moderators keep us ever striving for the best we can offer each other, and I am in awe at how the bar keeps rising.

Today the news media environment is unimaginative and condescending. The condensed national network news shows spend 30 seconds on a few breaking stories (a full minute if it’s on Republican voters and QAnon). They’re the Thin Oreos of news: Sure it’s called an Oreo, but without the good stuff in the middle, is it even worth it? They might as well run a ticker across the screen and save the money they pay their teleprompter readers who are so serious, so articulate, so unrelatable. Cable news is just as bad but in a whole different way. Most of it is the same stories from a decade ago, just with more gray hair. The hosts use their platforms to throw grenades at other news shows, pundits, or politicians. The ‘debates’ are either struggle sessions or yelling matches that leave viewers feeling like a kid watching his divorced parents fight.

But Ricochet is different. Posts come from people across the country and throughout the world. People with different perspectives and backgrounds that foster rich, smart, informed debates that might not come to any solid conclusion, but leave one feeling the investment was worth the time. They inform, they entertain, they inspire. On any given day, no matter what has happened in the world, I am always surprised by the treasures I find from fellow members, both in the posts, and the comments that follow. Rarely is there the brief flash of rudeness, usually a byproduct of the passionate voices represented here. Ricochet is the model for intelligent, thoughtful, civil discourse that seems to be badly lacking in today’s attention-deficit, hyperactive, politicized society.

We are losing the little guy. I feel trapped. I know a broken heart is waiting for me but I chose it a long time ago. There is no wishing it away.

He is just old, not as old as me but way older in the number of days God decided to give dogs. He is running out of days. I wish it weren’t so but it is. There’s a Hank Williams song “I’ll Never Get Out of This World Alive.” That’s true for me and you and for my little goofball puppy.