I still disagree with this statement. In the book, 1984, no one has "freedom" in that society. There are telescreens everywhere, watching your every move. They spy on people who have their own thoughts, and arrest them. The Party tortures people who has the desire for freedom. Winston tries every way to obtain freedom, even if he has to go against the Party. But when he gets caught trying to be "free," he get tortured. Winston gets tortured by his greatest fear in Room 101. This book and the Party contradicts the whole statement.
Even though they are a threat to our country's freedom, it doesn't mean it's okay for them to be tortured. It's inhumane. In the book, Winston is tortured, but he's basically dead in the inside. "Inner-Winston" is dead and its only remains are an empty shell. After he gets tortured, he has no feelings of his own, no point of view, and no thoughts. He is dead internally.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I agree with Melissa. From the book, it clearly showed that torture is worst than death itself. Like Melissa mentioned, Winston was tortured in the book. They didn't kill him in the end, but he was a completely different person. They tortured him so much that he could even betray Julia, someone he loved so much, and was the only thing that separated him from complete obedience to the Party. This level of torture was unacceptable. Although Winston did have thoughts about going against the Party, he never had the plans or the ability to. None of the people at the Ministry of Love did. I understand that the Party wants everyone to listen to them, but it's all morally wrong.
-Jessica
Whenever there are posts regarding the torture question, it is never disputed that Winston had not ability to go against the government. I feel that this is incorrect, especially from the point of view if the inner party.
Idealism is an extremely powerful force. One person with a message to spread can cause thought and rebellion. Once a thought is spread, it will continue spreading unless put down by force.
Especially in an oppressive government such as the one in 1984, a person who could arouse thoughts of freedom in the brains of the proles would be a force to be reckoned with. The idea of freedom is all the more powerful in minds which have not ever experienced it before.
Especially when newspeak is not yet perfected, it would be very hard to stop the spread of these thoughts in the populace.
Besides this however, I agree that torture is rarely permissible to the extent which it is used, unless the torture or death of one person could save many more lives.
Eric Lombardo
I also disagree, because freedom is something that is shown as evil, because if anyone even had any freedom it is shown by the party that you will be caught and brought to room 101 or thrown in labor camps. This torture should not be acceptable because the party already knows that they have complete control. But they still take people in and torture them just to express their power, although it is wrong the inner part still did it to the people and most of the time it was just thoughts against the party but as evil as they are they still did it
-David Bui
I totally disagree with this, because if someone is trying to do something right for the country why torture them for it, i mean yes it's better than killing them, but either way that is really cruel and inhumane to even think of. Why would wnyone want to hurt an idvisual for being helpful to the country?
-Keira Weldon
I defiantly see Melissa's point, and for the most part, I agree. However, I do believe in some situations that just the threat of torture or interrogation in appropriate, but for the most part I agree. By torturing a person, at least in 1984, their whole beings were destroyed. They looked at everyone differently, and completely lost their values but at the same time Winston was not a threat to the country, he was a threat to the Party, so it isn't necessarily the best situation to compare to. If we could go back to 9/11 and one of the terrorists was held, wouldn't have it been better to torture him and get information than have all those people die?
I do agree with the "trying to be 'free'" part of Melissa's comment. Obviously Winston isn't free and is trapped by his own lack of freedom.
-Lillian
Post a Comment