The World State’s motto of “community, identity, and stability” is almost ironic as one would think those concepts are generated by individuals (Brave, 15). Contrary to this original thought, it is made clear that all the aspects of community, personal identity, and intellect are determined by the government, which in turn provides a comforting sense of artificial stability. The controlling nature of the leaders also makes one wonder if the opposition will ever rise to combat the invariable system of their lives. Has the government effectively killed the idea that thought is individual? What circumstances brought upon this society (in which the modern freedoms of today are overlooked for a possibly more stable life): technology, war, religion, …show more content…
He, and many others, seem to value a perceived notion of happiness over any other form of individual freedom. John, the savage, fails to understand how you can be happy if you don’t understand the full scope of the world. Helmholtz also feels this way: that until something as beautiful as Shakespeare is introduced to your life, there is always something missing. They do not mind if stability or happiness is present, because at least, they are individuals. Mond contradicts this, using his utopian society to explain that as long as people think their lives are perfect, everything will remain stable and feel complete. John and Helmholtz see the innate flaws in the ideology, but it can’t really be contradicted when looking at the wholeness and vitality of the state. Those who do realize the flaws are special in their ability to understand the world beyond what is set forth to them and act above their gilded lives. The world itself may set up a moral quandary, but Mond believes that if they are happy in their own little universe, how could one complain? And those that do develop a larger understanding are relocated to other islands, to live in prosper in their unique individualism. In the World State, freedom is necessary for those who want to go beyond the mundane and cyclic nature of their lives, but for the content majority, stability and happiness is the ultimate blessing. This thought process brings to question: is a truth-omitted version of happiness valid or okay? Is being “blissfully ignorant” something that is wanted (Brave, 199)? Within the limits of Brave New World, these questions cannot be truly answered because the people do not know anything but being “blissfully ignorant”, and it is impossible to compare their life with anything else if they have not lived ‘anything else’(Brave,