Comparison Of 1984 And The Man In The High Castle

In modern America more and more people are becoming aware of the issues within society and long to see a change. Both George Orwell’s 1984 and Philip K. Dick's The Man in the High Castle forewarn the dangers of totalitarianism. In an ever-changing society citizens are faced with the ability to reject the narrative that has been presented to them but they must first know what is true. Because history is entirely subjective it is liable to changes and the exact sciences are endangered due to elitism causing education disparities affecting the middle and lower class.
History falls subject to and causes changes in belief systems and shifts in authority. When a governmental power explicitly decides to alter history and diminish the value of a specific

For instance, most American history textbooks paint Andrew Jackson as “a champion of democracy” (Brinkley 14) and a believer in the power of the common man however most Native Americans will see him in a different light. A leader who ordered the slaughter of hundreds can never truly stand for the common man especially if the victims were not part of the ruling class. This ignorance of the atrocities committed is made more problematic when one considers the blatant cultural appropriation of Native Americans that exists within contemporary American society. When cultural insensitivity becomes the mainstream frame of mind, it further magnifies the power dynamic between the ruler and the ruled. In the satirical society of The Man in the High Castle Americans are the disadvantaged group; however, the Germans and Japanese have fetishized American culture and use “ American traditional ethnic art… to decorate” (Dick 4). The prevalence of appropriation is largely a product of historical alterations or rationalization of the negative events in history, but also presents a peculiar conundrum in which the oppressed are viewed as uncivilized because of their culture yet the ruling class is worthy of expressing the same cultural

Even if a government chooses to provide education to their people the quality of the instruction is altered when the government allows agenda to drive education. The objectiveness of the sciences can be diminished by perspective, significance, or total omission of facts that are oriented to drive a particular message. Prior to the world depicted in 1984 “science and technology were developing at a prodigious speed” but this stagnated due to “long series of wars” (Orwell 239). The Party willingly cast aside improvements that could have provided a better life for the citizens under the guise of diverting resources to military necessity. If the authorities are able to dictate when and what science is important then they turn their residents into mindless subjects able to only think as a collective organization. This is exactly what the government wanted. An increase in technological improvements or research encourages free thought and new ideas which ultimately poses a threat to a dictatorial regimes. The lack of scientific developments in the low and middle class does not tell the whole story. For Oceania to remain a hegemonic power the highest members of society, those who were fiercely loyal to The Party, consistently invented new technology to