http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as there is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
.
|
|
| User: "jha_amin" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
13 Nov 2004 06:20:44 PM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as there is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city.. And at the same
time the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes
the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural,
unavoidable condition of survival."
"It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since
no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is
going badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist."
"In his capacity as an administrator, it is often necessary for a
member of the Inner Party to know that this or that item of war news
is untruthful, and he may be aware that the entire war is spurious and
is either not happening or is being waged for purposes quite other
than the declared ones: but such knowledge is easily neutralized by
the technique of doublethink. Meanwhile no Inner Party member wavers
for an instant in his mystical belief that the war is real, and that
it is bound to end victoriously, with Oceania the undisputed master of
the entire world."
---From 1984, George Orwell
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Leigh_Bee" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
11 Nov 2004 04:26:31 PM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as there is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
I have always enjoyed Orwell's work, he had a good turn of phrase, but
surely another maxim is; the slaves only ever get a deal, when they
have arms to counter their masters.
LB
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "jha_amin" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
11 Nov 2004 01:32:24 PM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as there is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
Thanks for the post. Orwell ahd Wells never claimed to be prophets,
but both have made some amazing predictions.
If, for some unknown reason, the US should loose ability to out-tech
the rest of the world or some unexpected force neutralizes our high
tech weapons, we will be in deep *****. There may be more ways to "fry
silicon" than we are aware of.
.
|
|
|
| User: "eric davis" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
11 Nov 2004 05:53:53 PM |
|
|
"jha_amin" <jha_amin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33b7880.0411111132.21bf06e0@posting.google.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the
history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of
gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out
over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that
ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend
to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and
simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships
and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as there
is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
Thanks for the post. Orwell ahd Wells never claimed to be prophets,
but both have made some amazing predictions.
If, for some unknown reason, the US should loose ability to out-tech
the rest of the world or some unexpected force neutralizes our high
tech weapons, we will be in deep *****. There may be more ways to "fry
silicon" than we are aware of.
Out tech? Who needs to out-tech? Haven't you heard that High-tech weapons
are no match for box-cutters. And as for an unexpected force, have you seen
the deficits those box cutters, and a fool named Bush have caused lately?
American currency is about to turn into Monopoly money. Try to maintain
high-tech weapons ten years from now, with a deficit as big as the entire
military budget.
When else in history could box cutters be used as weapon of mass
destruction? Those box cutters have virtually bankrupted the U.S. You
don't seem to have realized that America is on the verge of falling to her
knees. A handful of well educated engineers, or bio-chemists with a few
hundred thousand dollars can kill thousands, and bankrupt whole continents.
The world we live in now, is like a room full of explosives. Who cares who
owns them, when just about everyone has a box of matches. And from what
I've seen, there are millions with those boxes of matches who want to light
the whole thing up, and care not that it will kill them too.
eric.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jha_amin" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
12 Nov 2004 02:19:36 PM |
|
|
"eric davis" <ericdavis500@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<xmQkd.30036$Z7.997710@news20.bellglobal.com>...
"jha_amin" <jha_amin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33b7880.0411111132.21bf06e0@posting.google.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the
history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of
gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out
over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that
ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend
to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and
simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships
and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as there
is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
Thanks for the post. Orwell ahd Wells never claimed to be prophets,
but both have made some amazing predictions.
If, for some unknown reason, the US should loose ability to out-tech
the rest of the world or some unexpected force neutralizes our high
tech weapons, we will be in deep *****. There may be more ways to "fry
silicon" than we are aware of.
Out tech? Who needs to out-tech? Haven't you heard that High-tech weapons
are no match for box-cutters. And as for an unexpected force, have you seen
the deficits those box cutters, and a fool named Bush have caused lately?
American currency is about to turn into Monopoly money. Try to maintain
high-tech weapons ten years from now, with a deficit as big as the entire
military budget.
When else in history could box cutters be used as weapon of mass
destruction? Those box cutters have virtually bankrupted the U.S. You
don't seem to have realized that America is on the verge of falling to her
knees. A handful of well educated engineers, or bio-chemists with a few
hundred thousand dollars can kill thousands, and bankrupt whole continents.
The world we live in now, is like a room full of explosives. Who cares who
owns them, when just about everyone has a box of matches. And from what
I've seen, there are millions with those boxes of matches who want to light
the whole thing up, and care not that it will kill them too.
eric.
Do you really believe 9/11 was not a high tech operation?
I doubt if a few "true believers" would have the capacity to carry out
such a complex attack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "eric davis" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
12 Nov 2004 06:02:30 PM |
|
|
"jha_amin" <jha_amin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33b7880.0411121219.297bb4d7@posting.google.com...
"eric davis" <ericdavis500@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<xmQkd.30036$Z7.997710@news20.bellglobal.com>...
"jha_amin" <jha_amin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33b7880.0411111132.21bf06e0@posting.google.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the
history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of
gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed
out
over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true:
that
ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will
tend
to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and
simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks,
battleships
and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles,
muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A
complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as
there
is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
Thanks for the post. Orwell ahd Wells never claimed to be prophets,
but both have made some amazing predictions.
If, for some unknown reason, the US should loose ability to out-tech
the rest of the world or some unexpected force neutralizes our high
tech weapons, we will be in deep *****. There may be more ways to "fry
silicon" than we are aware of.
Out tech? Who needs to out-tech? Haven't you heard that High-tech
weapons
are no match for box-cutters. And as for an unexpected force, have you
seen
the deficits those box cutters, and a fool named Bush have caused
lately?
American currency is about to turn into Monopoly money. Try to maintain
high-tech weapons ten years from now, with a deficit as big as the
entire
military budget.
When else in history could box cutters be used as weapon of mass
destruction? Those box cutters have virtually bankrupted the U.S. You
don't seem to have realized that America is on the verge of falling to
her
knees. A handful of well educated engineers, or bio-chemists with a few
hundred thousand dollars can kill thousands, and bankrupt whole
continents.
The world we live in now, is like a room full of explosives. Who cares
who
owns them, when just about everyone has a box of matches. And from what
I've seen, there are millions with those boxes of matches who want to
light
the whole thing up, and care not that it will kill them too.
eric.
Do you really believe 9/11 was not a high tech operation?
I doubt if a few "true believers" would have the capacity to carry out
such a complex attack.
911 shows how high-tech is vulnerable to the low-tech. Do you really
believe otherwise? A simple shipment of liquid oxygen, nitrogen, or natural
gas can explode with the force of a nuclear bomb with a single bullet
piercing the hull, and this stuff is everywhere, on tankers, trucks,
shipments, even stored in facilities in very highly densely populated areas.
eric.
P.S. Here in downtown Toronto, almost in the centre, next to hospitals,
banks, and so on, are several huge tanks of highly pressurized liquide
oxygen, protected by nothing more than a chain-linked fence, and a padlock.
If some maniac, or terrorist lobbed a stick of tnt into that, several blocks
would be destroyed. That's a weapon of mass destruction, and very low tech.
Multiply that by thousands of cities worldwide, and you see the
vulnerability of just one tiny, tiny facet of our "High Tech" society.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jane" |
|
| Title: Re: Very interesting essay by Orwell.. |
12 Nov 2004 09:35:41 PM |
|
|
"eric davis" <ericdavis500@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8A9ld.54059$km5.2170463@news20.bellglobal.com...
"jha_amin" <jha_amin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33b7880.0411121219.297bb4d7@posting.google.com...
"eric davis" <ericdavis500@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<xmQkd.30036$Z7.997710@news20.bellglobal.com>...
"jha_amin" <jha_amin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33b7880.0411111132.21bf06e0@posting.google.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:<cmvnf3$lu6$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>...
http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/misc/at
omicbomb.html
Seems to me he could have been talking about suicide bombers in
this
extract..
"It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely
the
history
of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of
gunpowder
and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed
out
over
and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be
brought
forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true:
that
ages
in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make
will
tend
to
be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap
and
simple,
the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks,
battleships
and
bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles,
muskets,
long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A
complex
weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon-so long as
there
is
no answer to it-gives claws to the weak. "
Thanks for the post. Orwell ahd Wells never claimed to be
prophets,
but both have made some amazing predictions.
If, for some unknown reason, the US should loose ability to out-tech
the rest of the world or some unexpected force neutralizes our high
tech weapons, we will be in deep *****. There may be more ways to
"fry
silicon" than we are aware of.
Out tech? Who needs to out-tech? Haven't you heard that High-tech
weapons
are no match for box-cutters. And as for an unexpected force, have
you
seen
the deficits those box cutters, and a fool named Bush have caused
lately?
American currency is about to turn into Monopoly money. Try to
maintain
high-tech weapons ten years from now, with a deficit as big as the
entire
military budget.
When else in history could box cutters be used as weapon of mass
destruction? Those box cutters have virtually bankrupted the U.S.
You
don't seem to have realized that America is on the verge of falling to
her
knees. A handful of well educated engineers, or bio-chemists with a
few
hundred thousand dollars can kill thousands, and bankrupt whole
continents.
The world we live in now, is like a room full of explosives. Who
cares
who
owns them, when just about everyone has a box of matches. And from
what
I've seen, there are millions with those boxes of matches who want to
light
the whole thing up, and care not that it will kill them too.
eric.
Do you really believe 9/11 was not a high tech operation?
I doubt if a few "true believers" would have the capacity to carry out
such a complex attack.
911 shows how high-tech is vulnerable to the low-tech. Do you really
believe otherwise? A simple shipment of liquid oxygen, nitrogen, or
natural
gas can explode with the force of a nuclear bomb with a single bullet
piercing the hull, and this stuff is everywhere, on tankers, trucks,
shipments, even stored in facilities in very highly densely populated
areas.
eric.
P.S. Here in downtown Toronto, almost in the centre, next to hospitals,
banks, and so on, are several huge tanks of highly pressurized liquide
oxygen, protected by nothing more than a chain-linked fence, and a
padlock.
If some maniac, or terrorist lobbed a stick of tnt into that, several
blocks
would be destroyed. That's a weapon of mass destruction, and very low
tech.
Multiply that by thousands of cities worldwide, and you see the
vulnerability of just one tiny, tiny facet of our "High Tech" society.
I happened to see the propane explosion of a few days ago in Bowmanville.
Out where I live it is hilly and you can see right down to the lake from the
top of the hills. Was picking up my son from karate when they went off! An
awesome sight! At that point, the radio was reporting explosions but no one
knew what they were. The nuke plant is nearby, too. Could've taken out at
least 100 houses if it hadn't been controlled. No cause as yet; probably an
accident, but you can see the potential for disaster!
Jane
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
