A Utopian Fantasy In George Orwell's 1984

George Orwell’s fantasy is not merely a fantasy. His novel depicts the true nature of the communist utopia, a hypocritical fallacy conceived to give power to the few and destitution to the many. In the book 1984, many methods of instituting and maintaining a communist regime are described with the most prevalent and significant among those being the suppression of free thought, the moral denouncement of innate individuality, and the deceit of the populus making them perceive a perfect, utopian fantasy. These actions are utilized by the evil of this world for a reason. The concepts and beliefs they target are all necessary for a free and just society. Scrutiny and, therefore, self betterment could not be achieved without free speech and thought;

Visit any American college campus today and you’ll surely find hundreds of students being taught the dangers of microaggressions, hate speech, traditional gender roles, and capitalism, to name a few. The American college furthers these claims by blaming all of these imaginary problems on “whiteness”. Everything they target is a normal function or behavior of a free society and, by painting these things as problems, they promote a utopian society in which these “problems” no longer exist. Through their ingenious conception of imaginary problems that appear to harbour some legitimacy upon a superficial impression, colleges have near criminalized any observation, judgement, or thought that doesn’t discriminate in favor of the minority classes and the social justice warriors fight valiantly against these “deplorable” acts. Take, for example, the case of Milo Yiannopoulos, a flamboyantly homosexual conservative commentator. He often goes to colleges to give speeches regarding the fallacies of the modern feminist movement. He always cites statistics during his speeches, such as rates of black on black crime, actual sexual assault rates in campus, or statistics of police shootings. The left, often being incorrect, many times has contradicting views to the logical deductions that can be made from such statistics. As such, Milo has been greeted with physically violent protesters, unwarranted resistance from college administrations, and accusations of racism, sexism, and spreading “hate speech” (kew, “The Milo Yiannopoulos Show: The Aftermath of Milo’s DePaul University Visit”). In the left perspective, Milo and the reality he presents are the problems with our society, the result of an oppressive white dynasty that has put the victimized class in question at a disadvantage. All their problems are to be blamed on this “whiteness” and always