Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!spar!ellis
From: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.politics
Subject: Who needs it?
Message-ID: <468@spar.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 15-Aug-85 14:00:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: spar.468
Posted: Thu Aug 15 14:00:07 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 19-Aug-85 21:00:47 EDT
References: <1195@umcp-cs.UUCP> <540@utastro.UUCP>
Reply-To: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Distribution: net
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA
Lines: 50
Keywords: liberty flibber dee boo
Xref: linus net.philosophy:2051 net.politics:9807

_   I hereby confess a repulsion to the idea, frequently expressed in
    this newsgroup, that the word `free' is meaningless. 
    
    After all, do we not read in Orwell's 1984 that:

       The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of
       expression for the worldview and mental habits proper to Ingsoc, but
       to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that
       when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak
       forgotten, a heretical thought -- that is, a thought diverging from
       the principles of Ingsoc -- should be literally unthinkable, at least
       so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was
       constructed as to give exact and often subtle expression to every
       meaning that a Party member could hope to express, while excluding
       all other meanings and also the possibility of expressing them by
       indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words,
       but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such
       words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of
       all secondary meanings whatever.

       To give a single example. The word FREE still existed in Newspeak,
       but it could only be used in such statements as "This dog is free
       from lice" or "This field is free from weeds". It could not be used
       in the old sense of "politically free" or "intellectually free",
       since political or intellectual freedom no longer existed as concepts.
       ...
       Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of
       thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the
       choice of words down to a minimum.

    On the other hand, there are excellent reasons for purging our so
    called `minds' forever of this idea. After all, was not the idea of
    `liberty' so horribly abused (with respect to blacks, women, native
    americans, latinos, &c) in this so called `land of opportunity' as
    below?

       We hold these rights to be self-evident, that all men are created
       equal that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
       rights, that among these are life, liberty, etc...

    And we must never forget Joseph's McCarthy's despicable Crusade for the
    `Free World' to stamp out those damn communists. The words `free' and
    `liberty' have been used to manipulate us for too long.

    Maybe Rosen's right. If we cannot rigorously define the Sacred Cow 
    (`free'), we oughta nuke it.

    SMASH FREEDOM!!!

-michael