Happiness is not hope and freedom, it’s something you make for yourself

Today I finished watching a dramatization of a classic novel written by Aldous Huxley called Brave New World. It is a story that is in contrast to Orwell’s 1984 which is a story about totalitarianism. Both of these novels describe a world where people are enslaved to government. One through brutal thought control and torture, the other through a utopia of blissful happiness and conformity to avoid any form of hate and despair.

Huxley’s world is an indictment that has been compared to Orwell’s world through the comparisons of the east and west in modern society. By reading about these two books I have discovered something shocking that makes me feel uneasy about the society that I live in. Liberals talk of a form of freedom in which people should be collectively happy about the life they live with and work with. As if happiness is a necessity in order to maintain the basic order of society. Well I have seen similarities in that system to a Huxley indictment.

Just because were happy doesn’t mean you are free. The only person who is easily fooled is yourself. Modern liberalism seems to be all about destroying any traces of things that make you uncomfortable like destroying cultural identities and traditions as if they are the parasites of the older generation. Well you might want to think about what your really hoping to achieve out of a fight that might make you suffer even worse. Are you hoping to achieve happiness? Well that happiness is not a form of freedom. Is it really better to be happy than to be free?

Watching Brave New World I started to think about the freedoms and values that I have by comparison to my privileges and wealth in this country. In this story children are not born through intercourse but by hatcheries using biomechanical wombs and fertilised eggs. This science is represented in real life by the way doctors can get couples to have children through nature assisted techniques like IVF and sperm donation. Huxley believed that we would accept this in such a way that it would be disgusting to have parents.

These children are also taught through a schooling system in which they are made to feel hateful towards nature, learning and anything that can look grotesque in the face of politically correct indoctrination. Consider the snowflake generation.

The snowflake generation have a barrier to protect themselves from all forms of offensive things to them. The safe space at universities, the constant access to information and minute by minute updates of news, the civil laws of tolerance to diversity. These things combined with liberal academics have made them to soft to bear the brunt of criticism making them enslaved to their own happiness. I would encourage the snowflakes to read Brave New World and see what they resemble as a parallel to an Orwellian dictatorship.

In the book Huxley has a natural born human called John the Savage who is full of emotion and all sorts of feelings. By comparison to his mother and the other citizens they are all happy in a way that their minds take offence to any kind of thinking that does not agree with them. Like bewildered children who can’t grow up and better themselves there is no sense of sympathy towards John when his mother dies. They take death naturally as if they should accept death and destruction as something that can’t be helped.

In this day and age of law and disorder and the fight against terrorism we have criticisms from the liberals and the left who accuse those with morals to be racist, xenophobic, stupid, prejudiced and illiterate. Treating them like a species who are inferior or guilty that should be condemned. They believe that freedom fighters and democratic institutions are deplorable, regressive and expendable. But what makes the liberals wrong is that they expect everyone to collectively bear the brunt of a matter of loss and despair. They think death and destruction should be acceptable as a way of life and be happy in sorrow, not wallow in defeat or seek out revenge.

Remarkably in this day age of cyberspace where we generate sympathy on websites, social media and through the media as if it’s fashion statement. This kind of stupidity is annoying and it is crafted by lame brained clever people in all sorts of ways. When Paris was attacked by ISIS in November 2015 the websites of some the big tech companies like Facebook, Google, Apple and Twitter put sympathy notes and ribbons on their websites. These companies have got a history of tax avoidances and with their unpaid bills they could afford to help their governments pay for combating terrorism instead of making money out of poverty, injustice, death and destruction. If they really care about fighting crime and terrorism then they should pay their taxes not make novelties to generate revenue by taking money from empty headed consumers.

Western civilisation with all it’s liberties and conservative agendas do have something in common with Brave New World. They bear a Huxley Indictment. We use Orwell’s name to describe a situation of brutal oppression as in 1984 but what about Huxley? His name should be associated with a dystopia of addled brain acceptance of happiness. I refer to it as an indictment because it embraces happiness with the three laws of Brave New World that coerces mankind: community, identity, stability. There is no individual desire to achieve something better in this society. It’s a peaceful dictatorship in which we are made to love the liberal agenda to achieve a good life and excel in pleasure.

Just because you think that you can combat racism, ableism and other forms of hatred and prejudice by stopping people thinking them, doesn’t mean your going to achieve happiness and peaceful harmony. That utopia of racial harmony can also upset the minorities that it tries to protect and in turn it destroys the identity of the state. So if in Britain a Christian society gives up something to make room for Muslims in the name of a sharing society then that will lead to a ethical question of who is the most caring and who deserves better. Supposing the Muslim minority group thinks it is upsetting that it should have to share with a Christian group in the name of caring because of conservative views that contradict their beliefs. Who do you eliminate to maintain happiness and harmony? The Christian group removing the Muslims because they don’t feel comfortable together or for the Muslim group to be allowed to eliminate the Christian group so that they can be happy to keep the happiness agenda alive?

As an activist I encourage and promote issues that matter to me and to achieve those I don’t seek out to remove things that make me unhappy, I show people how to be better than what the current order of the day has to offer. I wouldn’t want to eliminate prejudice towards my autism through making people think happy all the time or dispel hatred within them. That is a very disturbing and corruptive twist that you can inflict on a person. Happiness is what you get by making something better for yourself that can also benefit others.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s