Top Five Books

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

I'd also recommend Brave New World. I first read it for Higher English, 23 years ago, and I've read 4/5 times since. I'm inclined to prefer 1984, but agree they certainly bear comparison.

And where, pray tell, have YOU been hiding yourself?!

By the way, 1984; one of my all time faves and the scariest book I ever read.

[saintnextlifetime]

And where, pray tell, have YOU been hiding yourself?!

By the way, 1984; one of my all time faves and the scariest book I ever read.

Yeh one of the scarriest things is how much of that book has became a reallity

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

Yeh one of the scarriest things is how much of that book has became a reallity

Correct.

[Crispian Crunchie]

Correct.

Yeah - like "virtually none of it".

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

Yeah - like "virtually none of it".

Spoken like a true New Labour man, comrade.

[Stoi]

Lanark seems a bit mental. Is it really that good? Also got Brave New World but just havenae got round to reading it yet. Have to say, though, that I haven't been impressed with Ben Elton's stuff. It's written well enough it just seems a bit wanky in parts. Each to their own, I suppose.

Lanark IS a bit mental! And to be honest i wouldnt really recommend it. Fairly hard going and tbh i wasnt entirely sure what was going on half the time. Glad i read it, but certainly wouldnt give it a second read. Saw Alasdair Gray recently at the opening of his art exhibition in the basement of the Russian restaurant in the Merchant City. A lot of which could have been used for the original 'joy of sex' manual.

Would currently recommend anything by Paul Auster, brilliant author.

[saintnextlifetime]

Yeah - like "virtually none of it".

Suppose you have a point , sir .The fact that Britain has more survielance cameras per head of population than any other state in the Western Hemisphere is irrellevant as far as that book is concerned , it just pure coincidence

Loss of personal liberty is an insidious thing , it doesn't happen overnight and may only concern you when it adversely affects you but greater control is being exerted.

[Crispian Crunchie]

The model for Nineteen Eighty Four was the Stalinist Soviet Union, not a modern mixed economy democracy such as the UK today. The statistic about the number of CCTV cameras is meaningless - all western democracies have them, the UK is slightly more advanced. Of course it's irrelevant. How much more of Nineteen Eighty four "has become a reality" apart from the fact that there are CCTV cameras around ? Zilch.

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

Suppose you have a point , sir .The fact that Britain has more survielance cameras per head of population than any other state in the Western Hemisphere is irrellevant as far as that book is concerned , it just pure coincidence

Loss of personal liberty is an insidious thing , it doesn't happen overnight and may only concern you when it adversely affects you but greater control is being exerted.

The model for Nineteen Eighty Four was the Stalinist Soviet Union, not a modern mixed economy democracy such as the UK today. The statistic about the number of CCTV cameras is meaningless - all western democracies have them, the UK is slightly more advanced. Of course it's irrelevant. How much more of Nineteen Eighty four "has become a reality" apart from the fact that there are CCTV cameras around ? Zilch.

Actually, I was thinking more that it was written in 1948 and he predicted working class punters arguing over what numbers would come up in the National Lottery, and the National Lottery didn't come into being until 1994. Fúckin' spooky, I'm tellin' you!

Edited February 5, 2008 by Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes

[saintnextlifetime]

The model for Nineteen Eighty Four was the Stalinist Soviet Union, not a modern mixed economy democracy such as the UK today. The statistic about the number of CCTV cameras is meaningless - all western democracies have them, the UK is slightly more advanced. Of course it's irrelevant. How much more of Nineteen Eighty four "has become a reality" apart from the fact that there are CCTV cameras around ? Zilch.

There are many points made by Orwells' book that have came to pass , including that one mentioned by Howard above . Have you read the book , CC ?

In the book there is the Party( which is the only one). If you compare the policies of New Labour against those of New Tory you will find that they are VERY similar. Both parties agree on most major issues. So the fact that there are two is an apparancy.

Stalinist ? Have you noticed how much money we pay into Europe , so that the poor(formally Warsaw pact countries) can be subsidised.

Yes , all Western "democracies" do have cctv , " the Uk is slightly more advanced" , what more advanced into the loss of liberty? If you honestly think you have as much liberty today as you had say, 20 yrs ago , all I would say is well good luck to you mate ...............

Edited February 5, 2008 by saintnextlifetime

[Crispian Crunchie]

There are many points made by Orwells' book that have came to pass , including that one mentioned by Howard above .

Right. So Orwell had lottery tickets in Nineteen Eighty-Four, and we've got them now. The UK may not have had a lottery in 1948, but the concept was hardly unheard of - in Spain, for example, where Orwell had spent time as part of the International Brigade. One superficial coincidence. Any more? CCTV, you say? Well, no. Although there are CCTV cameras throughout the UK for purposes of safety, security, and so on, there is no routine surveillance of every citizen - certainly not in private homes, in the way that Orwell described in his novel. Can you actually cite any more of these "many points that have come to pass"? I don't think you can, because they haven't. The UK is not a Totalitarian Police State.

Have you read the book , CC ?

Yes.

In the book there is the Party( which is the only one). If you compare the policies of New Labour against those of New Tory you will find that they are VERY similar. Both parties agree on most major issues.

This simply isn't true. If there is convergence in certain policy areas between the two main UK parties then it because Labour has set the agenda towards a national concensus. Take the National Minimum Wage, for example - before 1997, the Tories were fundamentally opposed to it and predicted dire economic consequences. Now they wouldn't dare to talk of abolishing it - which is actually a good thing. But I would always argue vociferously against the lazy notion that there is no difference between the Labour and Tory parties. There is. And because there is, and because there are two main political parties (and we've not even mentioned the LibDems, Nationalists,and all shades in between - and where does Scots devolved government fit into your "analysis", come to that?), that is why your comparison of the UK with Nineteen Eighty Four's Airstrip One is in my view utterly fanciful.

So the fact that there are two is an apparancy.

It's a what ?

Stalinist ? Have you noticed how much money we pay into Europe , so that the poor(formally Warsaw pact countries) can be subsidised.

I'm afraid I don't understand the point you are trying to make (or why it's relevant to this discussion).

Yes , all Western "democracies" do have cctv ,

Why the quotation marks? Do you seriously think that the UK (or Germany, France, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Italy, Spain, etc etc etc) are not democracies? You do understand the concept of democracy, don't you?

" the Uk is slightly more advanced" , what more advanced into the loss of liberty?

No, more advanced in having more CCTV cameras installed.

If you honestly think you have as much liberty today as you had say, 20 yrs ago , all I would say is well good luck to you mate ...............

I do. In fact, in economic and social terms, I have considerably more. I can travel much more and more widely, I can afford more luxuries. Technology has opened up all kinds of possibilities. I cannot think of one single thing I could do 20 years ago that I'm prevented from doing today(with the possible exception of smoking a fag in a public enclosed space, but I actually don't regard that as a restriction on my personal liberty - as a non-smoker, my liberty to be unaffected by others' smoke has actually been enhanced). Can you ?

Edited February 6, 2008 by Crispian Crunchie

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

The model for Nineteen Eighty Four was the Stalinist Soviet Union, not a modern mixed economy democracy such as the UK today.

That's a really interesting point of view. A book written in 1948 was modelled on a European country of that time and not a different European country 60 years into the future. Hmm. I'm trying to work that one out. Was Orwell a time traveller or what?

Edited February 6, 2008 by Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes

[Crispian Crunchie]

That's a really interesting point of view. A book written in 1948 was modelled on a European country of that time and not a different European country 60 years into the future. Hmm. I'm trying to work that one out. Was Orwell a time traveller or what?

What ?

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

What ?

I said:-

That's a really interesting point of view. A book written in 1948 was modelled on a European country of that time and not a different European country 60 years into the future. Hmm. I'm trying to work that one out. Was Orwell a time traveller or what?

[Crispian Crunchie]

I thought that was what you said. Still don't get it.

[saintnextlifetime]

Right. So Orwell had lottery tickets in Nineteen Eighty-Four, and we've got them now. The UK may not have had a lottery in 1948, but the concept was hardly unheard of - in Spain, for example, where Orwell had spent time as part of the International Brigade. One superficial coincidence. Any more? CCTV, you say? Well, no. Although there are CCTV cameras throughout the UK for purposes of safety, security, and so on, there is no routine surveillance of every citizen - certainly not in private homes, in the way that Orwell described in his novel. Can you actually cite any more of these "many points that have come to pass"? I don't think you can, because they haven't. The UK is not a Totalitarian Police State.

Yes.

This simply isn't true. If there is convergence in certain policy areas between the two main UK parties then it because Labour has set the agenda towards a national concensus. Take the National Minimum Wage, for example - before 1997, the Tories were fundamentally opposed to it and predicted dire economic consequences. Now they wouldn't dare to talk of abolishing it - which is actually a good thing. But I would always argue vociferously against the lazy notion that there is no difference between the Labour and Tory parties. There is. And because there is, and because there are two main political parties (and we've not even mentioned the LibDems, Nationalists,and all shades in between - and where does Scots devolved government fit into your "analysis", come to that?), that is why your comparison of the UK with Nineteen Eighty Four's Airstrip One is in my view utterly fanciful.

It's a what ?

I'm afraid I don't understand the point you are trying to make (or why it's relevant to this discussion).

Why the quotation marks? Do you seriously think that the UK (or Germany, France, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Italy, Spain, etc etc etc) are not democracies? You do understand the concept of democracy, don't you?

No, more advanced in having more CCTV cameras installed.

I do. In fact, in economic and social terms, I have considerably more. I can travel much more and more widely, I can afford more luxuries. Technology has opened up all kinds of possibilities. I cannot think of one single thing I could do 20 years ago that I'm prevented from doing today(with the possible exception of smoking a fag in a public enclosed space, but I actually don't regard that as a restriction on my personal liberty - as a non-smoker, my liberty to be unaffected by others' smoke has actually been enhanced). Can you ?

Do you work for the Home Office or are you Tony Blair

[Dave M]

4. Rangers ICF (sorry,but its actually quite a good book)

5.Casuals

You're a f**king walloper

[Crispian Crunchie]

Do you work for the Home Office or are you Tony Blair

So that's a "no" to the question I asked you, then? Thought so.

[saintnextlifetime]

So that's a "no" to the question I asked you, then? Thought so.

I would be more than happy to get into a list of the loss of liberty ,however I 'm convinced you are with the Home Office so you'll be well and truely P.R.ed . As far as I'm concerned the New Torries and New Labour offer absolutely no alternative whatsoever , both the upper echelons of both parties are member of the Bilderberger groups and so they follow what they want.

"Democracy" yeh "democracy" , the one you think you live in is a smoke screen. In any election , only around 40% of the total electorate vote due to appathy or perhaps an unwillingness to take part in condoning the "system" currently in place.

In any given election there will be seats that change hands that are marginals , other seats that are safe seats would vote Labour/Tory even if that party were to offer a monkey as a candidate , so they quite often do.

Once you have made your vote , the party goes into office and the manifesto invariably goes out the window.

I know you have a different way of looking at things CC and in this "democracy" you are entitled to YOUR opinion, material wealth is not a measure of Liberty .

Edited February 6, 2008 by saintnextlifetime

[Crispian Crunchie]

I would be more than happy to get into a list of the loss of liberty ,however I 'm convinced you are with the Home Office so you'll be well and truely P.R.ed

I don't work at the Home Office. Do you mean to say that you really can't think of a single thing you were free to do 20 years ago that you are restricted from doing today? Rather proves my point, I feel.

As far as I'm concerned the New Torries and New Labour offer absolutely no alternative whatsoever , both the upper echelons of both parties are member of the Bilderberger groups and so they follow what they want.

Have you met David Icke?

"Democracy" yeh "democracy" , the one you think you live in is a smoke screen. In any election , only around 40% of the total electorate vote due to appathy or perhaps an unwillingness to take part in condoning the "system" currently in place.

In any given election there will be seats that change hands that are marginals , other seats that are safe seats would vote Labour/Tory even if that party were to offer a monkey as a candidate , so they quite often do.

Once you have made your vote , the party goes into office and the manifesto invariably goes out the window.

Well, as Winston Churchill famously said, "Democracy is the worst possible system of government. Apart from all the others." Which alternative system of government would you prefer? One that really would live up to your fanciful notion that we're all living up to Orwell's descriptions of totalitarian police state in Nineteen Eighty Four?

I know you have a different way of looking at things CC and in this "democracy" you are entitled to YOUR opinion

That at least is is certainly true, if blatantly obvious. I obviously have a different way of looking at things than you, that's for sure, but really, I think you'll find that it's your rather skewed and strangely ill-informed view that is the minority one.

, material wealth is not a measure of Liberty .

I never said that it was.

[Bud the Baker]

Hoy Crispy!

Tony Blair - doublespeak personified

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

To be fair to Crispy he's only referring to the UK. Orwell placed the story within Great Britain but that didn't necessarily mean he was predicting these things to happen IN Great Britain; that it was a general reference to "A western nation".

1984 has the Government of said nation willing the populace to grass on their neighbours as they may be plotting against the country and they should be denounced as an "Enemy of the State". There are also incidents of the police turning up on doorsteps in the middle of the night, kicking their way into houses of these said subversives and dragging them off for interrogation and, perhaps, "re-adjustment". There need be no evidence, just a suspicion is enough to point the finger. Now, I'm not sure exactly which Western civilisation actually does indulge in this, as I haven't really lived in that many. However, there is no way on earth anyone could ever say it happens in THIS country.

So guys, go easy on CC; he ain't got his eyes closed.

Edited February 7, 2008 by Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes

[Crispian Crunchie]

Howard supports Crispian, shock, horror.

Now, I'm not sure exactly which Western civilisation actually does indulge in this, as I haven't really lived in that many. However, there is no way on earth anyone could ever say it happens in THIS country.

Thanks HH, you've explained rather well why the lazy, half-arsed, nonsensical notion that Nineteen Eighty Four has come true in today's UK sort of gets my goat.

[Howard Hughes in BlueSuedeShoes]

Further to that, there’s the argument to be made about censorship. In 1984 pretty much everything was censored & a lot of things in the Soviet Union were censored whereas there’s little of that here. Obviously offensive things are a no go but political stuff is okay. I’m sure YOU would be offended if you tried to make what you believed to be a salient political point - even including a witty remark of some sort - and someone wielding power clamped down on you.

[saintnextlifetime]

Further to that, there’s the argument to be made about censorship. In 1984 pretty much everything was censored & a lot of things in the Soviet Union were censored whereas there’s little of that here. Obviously offensive things are a no go but political stuff is okay. I’m sure YOU would be offended if you tried to make what you believed to be a salient political point - even including a witty remark of some sort - and someone wielding power clamped down on you.

Yeh good point . Because we know that this is still a country where CC has assured us our liberty is not at risk we KNOW that all that conspiracy rubbish surrounding Dr David Kelly and the McGilligan report is just codswallop.

At least we KNOW , that the UK government went into Eyerak to protect our lives , our liberty and the British way and not just go chasing after the worlds second largest oil reserves.

So yeh guys go easy on Mr Crispian Crunchie ,FFS