/lit/ - Literature

>>3820737
I think you might have missed the point

>>3820737
comfort's only relative to discomfort

>>3820737
Not if you're a gamma.

>>3820758
But they don't mind it.

It was pretty bad for some of the characters, like the shortish guy. There would be no literature either, not even Palanhiuk or BEE.

My understanding of the book was that without discomfort or thought, the 'perfect civilization' ceased to contain humans and instead was comprised of animals fulfilling destined roles?

If it wasn't for 'comfy' I would have called you a troller.

>>3820737
No, I don't think it would be because the people are conditioned from birth to think certain ways and feel certain things. Many of the concerns people have wouldn't exist in that world because they'd be purged out of it.

And yes, as you said, everybody is basically comfortable. We're already on a path to many of the things in the book anyway.

>>3820737
Did anyone else not understand the huge sadistic orgy at the end? what did it mean?

>>3820781
I don't know but I fapped to it.

>>3820781
Huh? I don't remember that. I thought it ended with [the suicide].

I would totally live in the Brave New World. Fuck cancer, fuck old age, fuck suffering. The internet is basically soma, so I like to believe I already do live in the book.

>>3820788
You're right. I have no idea what the other guy is on about.

Brave New World basically just asks the question, 'If everyone was happy all the time, and suffering eliminated, would they *really* be happy?'

Well yes, they are happy. He illustrates that quite well. The only time when people aren't happy is when the system fucks up and produces extraordinary people like Bernard and Helmholtz, and they just get sent to and island to do whatever they like anyway.

Brave New World is a paradise.

Brave New World was only possible because they could mass produce humans in an orderly fashion. I don't think it's possible today, and the rest of the book would be impractical without that huge labour reserve.

The book also doesn't address any environmental concerns we have today, though that's excusable for when it was written and I might be forgetting when it did address them.

>>3820737
This quote comes to my mind:

“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question.”
― John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism

Which always makes me laugh because of Mill's butthurt.

Of course everyone would enjoy being _produced and living_ in the Brave New World.

>>3820899

wait, isn't that quote somewhat incompatible with Utilitarianism?

>>3820812
>>3820788
The crowd gets wild when they see John whipping Lenina and starts hitting each other, which becomes an orgy after a while.

>>3820907

Mill talks about higher and lower pleasures. It's pretty much a cop out.

>>3820737
Only if I can go to an Edgy Island of Literary Life. I'd sign up for that right now.

>>3820968
Edgy has lost all meaning thanks to that comment
I hope you're happy

i always have this argument with my high school teacher.

last time, he said "would you trade your life for the life of one of the mindless people in BNW?" i said "no i dont think so, but would they trade for mine?" i think that sufficiently takes care of his point. correct me if i'm wrong.

another objection i commonly hear is that the system is not perfect there and people do suffer (john, helmholtz watson, linda). i usually dismiss those cases as anomalies written in for the sake of literature, preferring to talk about "theoretical brave new world" where people cant get accidentally too smart and where soma works absolutely perfectly. after all, john and helmholtz have the opportunity to leave. john stays for some reason that i never fully understood.

what the conversation usually degrades into is something in the spirit of the mill quote (>>3820899). "those people arent fully human," "theyre not human because theyre not thinkers and sufferers." but i see no reason to romanticize the concept of humanity like that. and its a romanticization of thought and learning as well. "thinking and learning are ends in themselves. they are what makes us human." but isnt the end of thinking and learning a reduction of suffering? whats more human than the desire to suffer less? so whats so bad about not suffering?

the people in BNW dont suffer. they love what they are forced to do (theyre not brainwashed to love it, they actually love it. theyre built to love it). they aspire to have nothing that they dont have. they have a drug that eliminates for them the torture of facing the essential, existential questions of life. in short, they do not suffer. what do they sacrifice? freedom, self-determination, thought, varied emotions, and the "heroic" and "human" existential contemplation. the questions i pose are, who cares about being "human"? and, doesnt the effort to eliminate suffering eclipse all of those values? arent those sacrifices means to eliminate suffering themselves?

>>3820978
It's actually one of the few instances where it's used correctly, since it's an island full of people ahead of the curve with daring different opinions etc.

>>3821020

>>3820911
Hmm... Wonder how the crowd would react if someone attacked them with a sword?

>be born into a society with a strict divisions and highly regulated social conditioning that relies on luring and coaxing rather than forcing
>be relatively happy, have friends and do as people of my society do
>have fun with sex and mind altering substances
>after a while I become suspicious of the whole game
>destined for alpha life but start self-sabotage and protest
>stop education
>can't adapt to epsilon life of labour either
>become unhinged
>authorities reel me in and test me
>i've broken the game
>they arrange an alternative life for me where i live of the productivity of the workers and read the forgotten books and loaf around

I already live in a primitive, early version of BNW. I'll gladly take better technology, housing and living on an island of choice with like-minded people.

>>3821020
pls overdose on heroin

>>3821020
I haven't read BNW but this seems reasonable to me. Why are people making fun of it?

>>3821020
except for when
>i always have this argument with my high school teacher
>with my high school teacher
>high school
where you prove yourself wrong, you see?

>>3821020
I agree. In short, people are too vain to consider themselves living like that. But as stated in the book regarding this matter:

"My dear young friend," said Mustapha Mond, "civilization has absolutely no need of nobility or heroism. These things are symptoms of political inefficiency. In a properly organized society like ours, nobody has any opportunities for being noble or heroic. Conditions have got to be thoroughly unstable before the occasion can arise.

i am not a happy or exceptional person so i would probably prefer it. assuming i was born into it knowing no alternative.

>>3821082
im not in high school, i have simply maintained communication with my teacher. /lit/ pollution fag

>the year 149 after Ford
>still doubting utopia

Feel how the Greater Being comes!
Rejoice and, in rejoicing die!
Melt in the music of the drums!
For I am you and you are I.

>>3821073
>strict divisions
>strict
what's it like in a country that can't possibly be anything other than Germany, anon? (except you're probably not in Germany because you're probably just a faggot idiot faggot-faggot idiot.)

>>3821085
Your post was the first actually interesting one since a long time on this board, so don't get disturbed by summerfags, please.

>>3821087
>implying class differences aren't secretly more real than we admit them to be
>implying well off university fags and factory workers generally don't differ to such a degree that they can be regarded as from different cultures

>>3821091
Indeed. I found it interesting too, which is why I was wondering what was upsetting the other faggots so much.

>Everyone belongs to everyone else.
>Except you.

>>3821020
>who cares about being "human"?

Who care about typing a long post on an internet board?
Well, seem like some persons care.

>>3821137
y u so buttmaad

>>3821020
The main thing that comes to mind when I think of your response to your past teacher is the subjectivity of happiness, and how what they find great I wouldnt, as you pointed out, so it would be important to try out their lifestyle, and likewise they try mine.

I agree with you on the human point, who cares about titles. However, there might be something inherently in us as biological humans that enjoys tragedy, sadness, and the relief of overcoming these obstacles.

They might have their non-suffering happiness, but theyll never know the feeling of improving one's self on one's own terms, the relief that comes from overcoming a tragedy.

You might reply that their happiness overrides my kind of happiness, but again who knows.

>>3821117
>tfw no QT 3.14 bokanovsky girl to take soma with and pretend to care about her alpha job as my epsilon mind only takes in things at the slow speed of a vynil record in comparison to her laser disc.

>>3821142
That was a refutation. Now refute me.

>>3821150
>Implying CD's are better than vinyl

>>3821145
You seem to follow the idea that happiness is somehow an objective measurement of the greatness of a society, but it's not. It can be such measurement, but there not any necessity for it.

brave New World doesn't attack utilitarianism on its capacity to attain its objective, it attacks its objective itself.

>>3821145
your assumption is correct--i wouldve been tempted just to say "if you have soma, then there's no need for the experiences of tragedy and redemption."

and keep in mind tragedy doesnt always end in redemption.

you could of course say that people in BNW miss out on certain experiences and pleasures (redemption), but likewise we miss out on some things, like the freedom from suffering and sustainable laziness. it's tricky to weigh the pros and cons against each other, i suppose, but i maintain that theres no reason being more human and heroic should be a part of it, and after all, the relativistic nature of happiness defeats the purpose of comparison--i might not voluntarily become a BNW automaton, but they wouldnt exchange their freedoms for mine.

>>3821179
don't* always end

>>3821176
I didnt say anything about an objective measurement, dont get me wrong.

>>3821174
They're faster and hold more information, can be copy-pasted easier and are shiny. Those attributes are good in a persons thinker.

>>3821179
>i might not voluntarily become a BNW automaton, but they wouldnt exchange their freedoms for mine.

>And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question.”

>>3821179
I dont think the relativity of it defeats the purpose of comparison, on the contrary it begs for it. Having options allows for self progress. What I mean here is that I disagree that they wouldnt exchange their freedom for yours. You cant know that. They might try the way we live and realize how much they are missing out on and switch.

Likewise anyone here saying how degrading it would be to live like BNW might actually really enjoy their way of living if they got to try it out.

I will say I have a bias that a BNW world wouldnt work out. You can look at a lot of people who take drugs and realize that it isnt just the drugs that lead to a good life, you need other things as well.

>>3821198
As the one who posted that Mill quote earlier your post makes me happy.

>>3821200
i see your point. however, you seem to be saying that neither life is objectively more valuable than the other. you say that people should decide for themselves which they prefer, whereas huxley implies that the life of the sufferer is superior to that of the automaton. in other words, im not sure huxley would agree with you, and your proposition itself is based on relativistic assumptions.

>>3821227
Youre right, I dont agree wtih Huxley, and youre right, I have relativistic assumptions, but theyre only assumptions in this thread since I didnt think I would have to unpack my whole philosophy.

>>3821198
>>3821217
but "fool" and "pig" are terms designated by non-fools and non-pigs.

>>3821227
Huxley does not defend any point "objectively", he uses the savage to defend his pov, but he doesn't implies the pov of the savage is inherently superior to Mustapha Mond's one, in fact he shows well that the savage is unable to convince him that his position is better.

Though the island for genius at the end could lead us to think he embraced the idea that there is some sort of utopia possible, inherently better than the brave new world so I'm not sure.

Anyway the main thing we can take from this is that happiness as a goal for a society can be dangerous if you accept the idea that there are others things that can be important to men and that it is not particularly "irrational" to think this (like all the arguments beginning by "who care about this or this", surely a fool, or some weird -not normal- individual)
And if you accept this idea, then you can accept the idea that adopting the teleology of happiness as a political project is dangerous and can lead to a disaster (from one subjective perception of things, not objectively)

>>3821020

If reducing suffering is our greatest aim, should we not just sterilize all humans? If there were no humans there would be no suffering. The humans you want to create are barely human anyway, so let's just go one last step and end humanity.

I admit BNW terrifies me. It is, to me, more or less, the worst possible thing that could happen to humans. Without suffering we're doomed.

>>3821187
Not the guy you're talking to but that notion is implicit in your argument.

>>3821283

>Oh, wretched ephemeral race … why do you compel me to tell you what it would be most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is utterly beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. But the second best for you is—to die soon.”

>>3821262
>>3821283
what exactly is dangerous about happiness being society's main goal?

do we like suffering or the happiness/satisfaction that follows it, if and only if redemption is achieved? (which, again, is not at all promised).

in a world such as ours--rife as it is with war, violence, rape, sadness, dissatisfaction, economic inequality, social unrest, etc.--im offended that you want people to continue suffering.

>>3821294
>im offended that you want people to continue suffering

Why would we care?

>>3821283
>If reducing suffering is our greatest aim, should we not just sterilize all humans? If there were no humans there would be no suffering.
>if ur tryin 2 lose weight y not incinerate urself???/ if ur burned up u hav no fat
Because that would be stupid. Obviously when people talk about eliminating suffering, they mean doing so while continuing the human race.

Happiness =/= complacency

>>3821299
What about continuing liberty/any way of living that involve the possibility of suffering?

The problem with hedonism is that if you live with just pleasure you'll never challenge yourself and you'll lose your wits and vigor, ultimately your vitality. The point of living is a continual striving and competition - that's what really makes us content.

>>3821307
but soma gets rid of that drive. and many people in BNW are biologically engineered so that they dont desire striving and competition. they miss out on that experience, but are they thus less happy than us sufferers?

>>3821300
For me complacency is a pleasure.

>>3821316

Well that's only a book of fiction. However, I think this is pretty easily answered with the fact that the 1st world has the most suicides.

>>3821303
What about it? Answers such as "Let's all kill/sterilise ourselves" or "lets spend all our lives on a morphine drip" are just reductio ad absurdum: everyone has their own line to draw.
It's not as though continuing to challenge ourselves and live lives of strife on the grounds that that is what truly makes us happy - it's still done with the intent of being happy. Why not get all your limbs cut off, destroy all your belongings and go live in the desert? That'd be a real challenge, wouldn't that make us happy?
Obviously not. We have to strike a balance.

>>3821318
this thread is about the work of fiction and the theoretical world it presents, not the 1st world, in which we dont have a foolproof form of soma yet.

>>3820737
>Would living in the brave new world really be that bad? You'd be comfy 24/7.

it's kinda like the western world already is.
as long as you are being entertained and work hard you wont care what's going on in the world.
the western governments are fucking everybody's shit up but people wont stand up against it because this would mean that their life wouldnt be comfy anymore.
seriously fuck that.
fuck the time we live in.

people should finally stand up against their corrupt governments and make things better.
stop stupid shit like the war on drugs, or just wars in general.
we live in a democracy but all i seee is fucking lobbyists deciding what is good for the people and the governments just do what they say because money.

i wish there was a law that said if a politician wants to start a war he has to participate in it.
this will very likely have an affect on how easy they are just gonna send a country's people to death for oil and drugs.

and this was my today's rant.
i really do love me some rants.

>>3821294

Be as offended as you like. All these things are part of our humanity, and I wouldn't trade them for your Brave New World. Once you eradicate suffering you'll also eradicate a special joy that knows suffering and has triumphed (if even just temporarily) over it. There are kinds of happiness you don't seem to be even considering if you really seek to end all suffering.

Kind of related; I think it was Goethe who said, 'Man can tolerate anything except a succession of fine days.' Nietzsche has lots of pertinent comments to make on this subject, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.

>>3821324

It's the closest insight into what the world of soma would be, though. Without the vitality gained from striving depression will follow; from there at best you could lived drugged up only to the point of numbness to avoid your depression.

>>3821327
>people should continue to pointlessly suffer at the merciless hands of the universe so that i can have the pleasure of reading books, thinking, and overcoming my comparatively miniscule life crises.

>>3821325
no one is going to take you seriously unless you can contribute something original. good for you for recognizing corruption, but youre not gonna change anything unless you try way harder than that angsty liberal pseudo-philosophizing

>>3821285
Care to point this out?

>>3821327

>If you, who adhere to this religion, have the same attitude toward yourselves that
you have toward your fellow men; if you refuse to let your own suffering lie upon
you for an hour and if you constantly try to prevent and forestall all possible stress
way ahead of time; if you experience suffering and displeasure as evil, hateful,
worthy of annihilation, and as a defect of existence, then it is clear that besides
your religion of pity you also harbor another religion in your heart that is perhaps
the mother of the religion of pity: the religion of comfortableness. How little you
know of human happiness, you comfortable and benevolent people, for happiness
and unhappiness are sisters and even twins that either grow up together or, as in
your case, remain small together.

>>3821348
Those African child soldiers sure are nurturing their happiness.

>>3821338
>>3821350
You cant eliminate "evil", stop making such extravagant notions. Even if we have a perfect drug that doesnt guarantee a happy life. For all you know some people may actually be happy that they have gone through some shitty parts of their lives because they now know how bad life can be, and the simple pleasures becomes that much better. That doesnt mean we say, all "evil" is good, and it certainly doesnt mean we say eradicate all "evil".

>>3821345
>unless you can contribute something original

like what?
you are also implying something original is needed but in the end it's all the same old shit anyway.

>gonna change anything unless you try way harder than that angsty liberal pseudo-philosophizing

*philosopher

what do you think makes someone a pseudo-philosopher?

anyway, i never said i was trying to achieve anything.
it's more of a " i hate the western world for what it is, but nothing is gonna change anyway unless more than a bunch of people start doing something" thing.
my plan as of now is to fuck the world, have a chill and happy job and (social) life and die.

i don't like politicians at all.
i hate political movements wether they are left or right winged(though i would argue that left winged politicians are better than right winged ones).
but i would never join a political party or some shit.
if anything i would see anarchism as the perfect kind of government but i guess that's a pretty hard thing to achieve.
i don't think there has ever been an anarchistic state. it would be interesting though.
i guess this requires everyone to have an interest in politics though and this will never happen anyway.

>>3821350
Savages gonna savage! A gramme in time saves nine.

>>3821356
you complain about the world on behalf of people who suffer, but you dont care about them at all. you only complain because you have the time and comfort to, because youre spoiled and cant appreciate your rare fortune. you say "all wars should end" but you dont actually care if they do or dont. otherwise you would get off your ass, read a book, and say something more intelligent.

>>3821355
OP wants us to talk about a theoretical world. we're talking about a theoretical world that has the perfect drug.

>>3821365
i asked you 2 questions that you didn't answer...

you try very hard to sound like you figured it all out.
in the end you are projecting your insecurities onto me.
you are at least as much as a hypocrite as i am.

>you complain about the world on behalf of people who suffer

i did not.
i don't know where you got this from.

>but you dont care about them at all

that's a really stupid point you are trying to make here and it's based on something that you are wrongly implying.

>you only complain because you have the time and comfort to

nope.jpeg
you dont need time or comfort to complain about something.
you think that the starving people in third world countries are not complaining about the circumstances?
i complain because i have a reason to do so.

>because youre spoiled and cant appreciate your rare fortune

the same thing could be said about you complaining about me.

>but you dont actually care if they do or dont.

implying implications

>otherwise you would get off your ass, read a book, and say something more intelligent.

more intelligent than you just did?
yeah read what i said again.
obviously you didn't understand any of it.
you pretty much ignored everything i said and went on by complaining about some kind of stereotype you think i am.
all you do is trying to tell me what a hypocrite i am, while not having an actual point, while not being able to answer my simple questions, while being a complete hypocrite yourself.

nect time you should try less to sound intelligent and write something of value.

>>3821383

>>3820737
It would, but you wouldn't know it.

>>3821394
maybe living in an illusion is better than realizing how shit everything is?

>>3821350

You don't understand the relativity of happiness. We in the developed west are not any happier than those in poor countries. Yet their societies are ordered by what we would consider primitive or unenlightened values and principles, and ours are ordered by utilitarian principles designed to maximize happiness and minimize suffering; we also esteem freedom and equality and consider these necessary for happiness.

Check out the world's suicide rates. If we're happier than all these tradition-oriented, materially disadvantaged people, why do so many wealthy countries constantly top the suicide charts? And why do so many materially privileged people make up the greater part of all these suicides?

It's almost like all our 'progress' is for nothing...

>>3821407
work does not make you happy.
that's the problem.
our society is build around using people to make money.
work hard, earn a lot of money, have a happy life.
that's the premise.
if you asked me, working hard is not worth the fucking money.
it's better to have a job that you like, that does not stress you, where you don't earn a lot of money than hating your job, earning lots of money, constantly being stressed out and too exhausted to do anything.

money isnt what makes people happy in the long term.
social interactions are.

>>3821397
Sometimes the illusion, in its conscious attempt to be real, is more real than the very reality which it is imitating.

deep

>>3821423

i wasnt speaking of an illusion that is trying to be real though.
i was speaking of an illusion that tries to make the world look better than it actually is.

>>3821423
>>3821428
philosophizing 101: look at my shitty ontology and how it makes no sense

delete the thread
delete yourself
save the world

>>3821431
>delete yourself

philosophizing 101: look at my shitty ontology and how it makes no sense

delete the thread
delete yourself
save the world

>>3821383
since i didnt get a reply i think it's save to assume that i won

>>3821438
>>delete yourself
>philosophizing 101: look at my shitty ontology and how it makes no sense
>delete the thread
>delete yourself
>save the world

>>3821431
edginess 101: look at my shitty nihilism and how it's not meant to make sense

delete the thread
delete yourself
burn the world

>>3821441
could this be an epic new meme, guise?

>>3821372
>Even if we had a perfect drug...

Yes, I know. Thats why I said that.

>>3821428
I know, I just wanted to say that cause I thought it was interesting.

As for Brave New World, it's just reality = perception. So yeah, when you're immersed in it it is better, but in posterity it isn't.

I'd choose a worse-off, but real existence to a better, but ultimately illusory existence. Because in the end, there wouldn't be much difference apart from not being lied to, and not having that would allow the possibility of improvement.

>>3821438
>>3821441
>>3821442
>>3821443

unadulterated teenage lisp
kill your whiny selves immediately

>>3821452
>kill your whiny selves immediately
>keeps saging and crying about what is being said in the thread

>>3821452
>all this anal frustration

more like aldouche huxley

>>3821467
More like Nineteen Eighty-Bore by George OrSmell amirite huehuheuheuheuehuheuehueheuheuheue

>>3821472
that book was boring i agree

>>3821472
>>3821467
More like Atlas Smugged by Aint I Grand

>>3821472
>>3821467
Still better than Gay Badbury's Fahrenshite 451.

see you guys in 3 months

It really astounds me that people would actually like the intellectual servitude imposed on the people in the book. Do you have no desire for independence?

>>3821507
it astounds me too!.

and thats the difference between those "humans" and us, they have this thing that covers they eyes, they are just automatas that fullfill their lives with drugs and sex, whitout asking anything.

>>3821507
you mean people like me?(>>3821356)

>>3820737

>muh cave of illusions!

Of course, eliminating suffering is a seductive idea, but I would rather work and strive for my happiness, at the risk of some unhappiness and suffering, to achieve it. Dreams, goals, aspirations, what do the people of BNW know of these things? They live their dreams, they have no goals because they were engineered that way. Everything they could ever want is given to them, and they have no drive towards anything else. The drive to achieve one's dreams, the drive to succeed, to overcome challenges and trials, and, finally, to be rewarded, is a satisfaction more weighty than any drought of soma or the warmth of a mindless doll's body. Individuality, identity, thought, expression, yearning; these things are more beautiful than any Solidarity Service. Though people suffer, though there is pain and death and war and estrangement, though these things are horrible, they are necessary. They drive humanity forward, they give us the impulse to challenge, to innovate, to reach new heights, upon the shoulders of the millions that have come before, a collective foundation of hopes and dreams and thoughts and ideas both requited and unrequited. To strip that of us, to give us everything we may ever want, is to render our civilization static, sterile, unmoving. The people of the World State live and die unconscious, formless, shapeless, numb, having achieved nothing but the obligations of their birth. They do not even fear death, because they have never clung to life, never have had to scrape and dig in and grasp to hold on, to hope for something even in the bleakest of hours, never having wished for something breaking under a ceaseless yoke, holding on to life and the contentment of achievement, and, despite everything, overcoming the most insurmountable of obstacles. That is what makes human beings, human beings: our tenacity.

>>3820812
>>3820788
>>3820781
The guy snapped and left behind his morality. He participated in the orgy and then committed suicide after he realized what he did the morning after.Did you guys really forget it?

>>3821507
Independence is a silly myth that false apart the moment you truly inquire into it.

>>3822851
>that false apart
Beautiful. Time for bed now.

>>3822853
Mistakes like those are diamond dozen, anon.

it really astounds me how fanatically people self-impose ideological servitude to sacred cows like "independence"

Protip: We are living in Brave New World.

>>3820758
Are you anymore than a Gamma now?

>>3820737
No, in fact its paradise.
Question though: what if all of a sudden, all the comfort in BNW were to somehow cease? What do you think would happen? Would humanity still survive, after all that thoughtlessness?
Nothing is permanent.

>>3821423
See: Jean Baudrillard.

>>3821397
Living in an illusion while not knowing it is an illusion is reality.
Living in an illusion knowing that it is, is called deception (BRRMMM BRRMMM BRRMM BRMMM)
Living in an illusion with the hopes that it maybe reality is called faith.

The answer is no. too many people look at it from their current real world perspective which would be kind of unpleasant but given the conditioning from birth everything would be cash. And if you fuck up your conditioning then you get sent to a place suited for your kind. John The Savage is the villain of this book, he should have killed himself sooner so everyone could have been happy.

>>3823477
Every hundred years or so every controller meets and together activate a purge function which activates a gene in every living citizen. The new controllers are created first followed by the new civilians. They're raised in a completely automized environment until they're old enough to take control. As they press the button the controllers all hope that something will go wrong in the purge and either every new citizen will die and wipe out the world state forever, or the computer will fail and the humans will grow in a slightly more natural, non-brainwashed way, even though it will never happen.

I'd much rather live in Pala. Island is a great counterpoint to BNW and Huxley's final book.

>>3823510
interesting