@@mitchelmodine9197I remember the movie as having short parts where Winston is going over his articles for his job rewriting history in Newspeak as official writings are in it. I think there were also announcements over an intercom in it.
I never write anything like this; but I am astounded that what seems like a niche channel, can continue to offer interesting, thought-provoking, content over such a long time. You have reminded me of details of the book that I had long-forgotten, and rekindled my desire to read “1984”, again. Doubleplus good!
Thanks. I've probably read it more than most, but I still enjoy reading it and especially listening to the audio versions. I always find interesting things to think about.
I think Goldstein used alot of Newspeak words in his speeches because he assumed the future would use increasingly more Newspeak words, and he wanted his ideas to last as long as understandably possible. Although around Winston's time, Goldsteins overuse of Newspeak words is laughable, but still understandable.
@@EdwardHaas-e8x Maybe, but Goldstein was arrested for counterrevolutionary actions, and his 2 Min Hate video could possibly have been one of those things. But interesting to note as O'Brien says "Goldstein and his heresies will live forever". This either means Newspeak will continue to be used as far as he knows or the Party invented Goldstein as a means of identifying heretics. I like to think Goldstein is real, but has essentially been outplayed by the Party in every aspect...
Another doubleplusgood analysis. It is fair to say O'Brien would be completely incapable of expressing such characteristic eloquence within the confines of Newspeak. Perhaps the development of Newspeak is simply more busy work to keep the Party machine at task and in motion
Wouldn't surprise me. Also, it's entirely possible that Newspeak will be forced on the members of the Outer Party exclusively, while members of the Inner Party retain their right to speak the old language. The more I think about it, the more sense it makes and the more devilish it becomes. Newspeak will make it much easier to see who's properly indoctrinated or not amongst the Outer Party, their mere speech patterns will betray them. Newspeak will allow the Inner Party to tailor every message to perfection to those that are indoctrinated. It will also allow political communication/propaganda without imprecision or unwanted allusions or implications. A properly Newspeak-indoctrinated Outer Party won't have the ability to properly challenge or question the Inner Party or formulate proper criticism, they might not even understand the nature of their own existence, how unfree they are and so on. And then you get the added bonus that it makes it much harder for Outer Party Members to talk to and connect with Proles. 1984 explains past revolutions this way: The middle class mobilizes the lower class against the ruling class. The ruling class will be wiped out, replaced by parts of the middle class and nothing really changes for the lower class. Newspeak might thus be a tool by the Inner Party (ruling class) to protect themselves from any ambition of the Outer Party (middle class) to mobilize the lower class (Proles). And much like the Telescreens, that the members of the Inner Party can just switch off for a time, they will have the freedome to not use Newspeak udner certain conditions, I bet.
Newspeak is a fool's errand because human thought is too creative to be held back in the way the Party seeks via newspeak; Toki Pona, a similarly artificial language, has far fewer words than Orwell conceived of Newspeak as containing, and yet Toki Pona does not restrict thought, rather speakers think creatively to convey meanings through its rather limited core vocabulary - in essence the exact opposite of what Newspeak is supposed to do.
One thing that often happens in linguistics is that, where a word to express an idea is not present, one is assembled as a compound word formed from existing words. German has a particularly rich vocabulary of compound words, as does Chinese ('penguin' in Chinese is literally 'business-suit-duck').
I would never have believed that in Britain people would ever be arrested for expressing their opinions on social media, but it has begun. The situation is dire.
@@hallojava2458 There is a lot more going on than that. I agree, inciting people to do crime, or even just general aggression, should be addressed by the justice system.
@@hallojava2458 Your bellyfeel for party doctrine is double-plus good, comrade. Down with the thought criminals who rebel against Starmer.. I mean Big Brother.
@@URProductions Starmer's too centrist to actually create his "change". I just align with him that people on social media shouldn't escape consequences for telling people to burn down mosques.
It seems to me that at some point there will be no further additions to Newspeak. Each "new addition" will be the only version of Newspeak that had ever existed.
worth noting that in the real world Newspeak would be classified as what's called an agglutinative language, which are an entirely ordinary thing, and native speakers of these have been shown to not in fact have any reduced complexity in thought at all. If the theory that the appendix is an in-universe document written after the fall of Oceania is true, such people would probably look at Newspeak in a similar way to how we look at the ideas of Trofim Lysenko (a Soviet geneticist who pushed Lamarckian ideas like that you can make grain resistant to cold simply by exposing the seeds to snow, for no other reason than because such ideas contradicted the ones the nazis were using).
O'Brian's quote is interesting and i had forgotten it since reading the book quite a while ago now. I interpret it as the standard for what constitutes "thought crime" to be harsher and harsher with time since newspeak will make everyone more compliant, if you will. The most fanatic outer party members will become the norm many years from now but there is always a heretic to be caught. The world needs their outsiders and heretics.
The thing is...newspeak would make heresy impossible, since it would make even conceiving heresy impossible. It would essentially reprogram everybody's brains, including those of the people of the inner party.
@@juimymary9951Theoretically but languages with fewer words end up developing more figures of speech and composite words. This process would be difficult to control from the top down.
Really love your videos, comrade. The editing, voice etc is high quality and well spoken. A couple requests if I may 1. Can we get a propaganda video from you in newspeak? Would be really cool. Like as if you were working for Big Brother. 2. Can we get some "what if?" Videos. I love those and you are an expert and would make great ones. 3. Any chance we can get some Fahrenheit 451 or other dystopian world videos? Mostly want them because of your quality.
Thank for the compliments. I’ve tried to improve the quality of the audio going forward. I unfortunately have to use my own voice as 1984 Lore is not a big channel and my resources are limited at the moment. Some great suggestions. I would certainly like to do a couple of propaganda videos (1) in future, so that may be something you’ll see. (2) I’m flattered but I would not consider myself an “expert” on 1984 or George Orwell in general. I’ve never claimed that; I am merely an enthusiastic 1984 fan; however, I would be open to doing a few ‘what if’ videos. The general reception of “theory” type videos is mixed in my experience, however, ‘what if’ videos may be cool to do. Or perhaps speculative ‘How To...’ videos too, for example, ‘How To Destroy Oceania.’ On the third request: this is something I have considered doing, however, since 1984 Lore is dedicated to all things 1984 I must be true to the purpose of my setting up the channel and stick to related content. This is not to say that references and comparisons to and with other dystopian worlds is off the table. In fact, look out for such a video around Christmas time this year. This channel’s content will, however, always be related in some fashion to Nineteen Eighty-Four. It's possible in the medium to long-term that a separate channel will emerge that more broadly discusses other dystopian worlds, however, if so, this may not be for some time. If it happens, however, I will announce it and link to it here as a brother-channel. Thank you for the comment and all the great suggestions. :D
While Newspeak is useful the dream of its ultimate triumph will probably be the linguistic equivalent of military projects like the land submarine and the weapon that focuses the rays of the sun. Always just around the corner and will always be so.
Excellent analysis, as always, This channel has inspired me to start listening to my audio recording of Nineteen Eighty-four again, once I finished the latest from Robert Harris.
I like the idea that the anti-sex league, and newspeak were both introduced knowing full well that people are naturally going to have sexual urges, and create new words for things they have no words for, and that way, the party has a steady supply of criminals. I also think that about the rationing to a certain extent.
Quite Honestly, seems like the Party’s “Rules” are strictly for the outer party or middle class. The Proles or lower class are so insignificant to the party, other than possible cannon fodder, that the rules don’t apply to them. Even in the book, Orwell acknowledges that it’s always been the middle class who that has started revolutions and the inner party knows and fears this. Ergo, the inner party creates an extremely controlled system that watches the outer party. Those that are technically a threat, BUT can be either controlled or coerced become inner party members. Those that pose a threat, but cannot be controlled or coerced are dealt with
I think human (verbal) expression is much like sexuality, so deeply ingrained that it would not be possible or at the very least not be feasible to entirely destroy and rework it. You previously touched on the distinct possibility of Ingsoc ultimately falling and it probably has to do with the fact that there is too much artifice, as O'Brian himself states. I would wager that this is one of the cornerstones of the eventual failure.
If they ever eliminate Thought Crime then the only certainty is anyone unpersoned is definitely innocent. I'm certain the cells at the ministry of love will still be nice and full either way.
'The proles can be allowed intellectual freedom because they have no intellect' sneers Syme. However, the TOTAL implementation of the final iteration of Newspeak will leave the proles superior to the Outer Party in their range of thought. ''If there is hope, it lies with the proles' muses Winston.
One thing I have always wondered is, just like the original party ingsoc came, was newspeak originally designed to be malicious or was it initially just viewed as a way of standardizing, modernizing and maybe sanitizing the English language?
It was about control. Control of how a comrade thought. At the same time, it was about promoting crime thought. That is setting a citizen up to always fail to control one's thoughts carefully. No matter how brainwashed that citizen is. His/her thoughts are going to stray away from newspeak.
I'm going to honest: I get the idea behind Newspeak but I don't get how the application would actually work when it comes to technology. I.e. If everyone's so dumbed down and incapable of complex thought- how are they going to build and maintain the telescreens, the microphones, all the machinery that pumps out music and songs? It would all just be a black box blur to your average party member.
Building things that already exist isn't to hard. You can include everything in newspeak to make sure that it works on a manufacturing level. You can't do science anymore with that, but I don't think the party is interested in any further progress anyways. They want to keep the exact status quo as is. Basically the "end of history" like in Marxism: Communism = End of history
I think it is always a manner of doublethink. Of course the Inner Party loves and generates and propagates newspeak. But of course it is necessary to keep oldspeak implemented. In the future even If newspeak exists thoughtcrime wont be eliminated, it will always Change its form. It could be a Modulation in the speech, a use of an unpleasent or nonfitting Word or Something like that.
The rules don't really apply to the inner party and they all probably know it. Everything in 1984 is all about oppressing the lower ranks and devising new ways to oppress the inevitable changes that result.
What exactly is “Power for powers sake”? The power to do what, just to inflict pain, achieve a thousand on was to pluck the wings from a butterfly! What exactaly is being a hone in this philosophy? Seems a world void of progress and stuck in perpetual stagnation we’re the worlds resources on the planet are being burned away at the whims of total mad men absent of all humanity. Nothings getting build in this world no great works in architecture, literature, art, music, or technology is being developed. It’s just world wide bullies play ground were they somehow got the upper hand that their they haven’t collapse by incompetence, mismanage or contagion like plague.
MILD SPOILER It seems to me that the constant gaslighting the Party engages in would be so prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. Like when Eastasia becomes/always was the enemy during Hate Week, then Eurasia again after Winston’s time in Miniluv.
Good point, and I'm just playing devils' advocate here, but you could counter that 1. the outer party stiffs who implement the rewriting work pretty much for free; 2.the reprinting etc goes towards using up excess production; and 3. doublethink (hopefully) deals with any philosophical quandaries that may arise amongst the outer party stiff involved in the constant historical editing. The CCP/PRC have been doing this since the 90's and it's proved to be no big drain on resources for them, or strain on their credibility within China.
It seems again to me that Newspeak tries for euphonics as well as limiting thought. The former is much more easily successuful than the latter as others have pointed out. For example: I should think 😂 that “crimethink” is a bit easier to say than “thinkcrime,” as the equivalent of Oldspeak thoughtcrime or heresy. This would also produce some inconsistencies: minhate for the Two Minutes’ Hate, but hateweek for Hate Week
Clickbait? More likely you're honey potting thought criminals for the thought police, aren't you, brother? Double plus good! I look forward to my arrest for the good of the party. 👍👍
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Imagine having a video essay only in newspeak
I saw one a few years back. Probably couldn’t find it again, but dude told a story of a car wreck in Newspeak
@@mitchelmodine9197I remember the movie as having short parts where Winston is going over his articles for his job rewriting history in Newspeak as official writings are in it.
I think there were also announcements over an intercom in it.
Double plus good that.
we already have that widespread
Just watch the news
I never write anything like this; but I am astounded that what seems like a niche channel, can continue to offer interesting, thought-provoking, content over such a long time. You have reminded me of details of the book that I had long-forgotten, and rekindled my desire to read “1984”, again. Doubleplus good!
Thanks. I've probably read it more than most, but I still enjoy reading it and especially listening to the audio versions. I always find interesting things to think about.
I think Goldstein used alot of Newspeak words in his speeches because he assumed the future would use increasingly more Newspeak words, and he wanted his ideas to last as long as understandably possible. Although around Winston's time, Goldsteins overuse of Newspeak words is laughable, but still understandable.
That's interesting. Maybe he got purged for taking it too far for his day.
@@EdwardHaas-e8x Maybe, but Goldstein was arrested for counterrevolutionary actions, and his 2 Min Hate video could possibly have been one of those things. But interesting to note as O'Brien says "Goldstein and his heresies will live forever". This either means Newspeak will continue to be used as far as he knows or the Party invented Goldstein as a means of identifying heretics. I like to think Goldstein is real, but has essentially been outplayed by the Party in every aspect...
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
Another doubleplusgood analysis. It is fair to say O'Brien would be completely incapable of expressing such characteristic eloquence within the confines of Newspeak. Perhaps the development of Newspeak is simply more busy work to keep the Party machine at task and in motion
Wouldn't surprise me. Also, it's entirely possible that Newspeak will be forced on the members of the Outer Party exclusively, while members of the Inner Party retain their right to speak the old language. The more I think about it, the more sense it makes and the more devilish it becomes.
Newspeak will make it much easier to see who's properly indoctrinated or not amongst the Outer Party, their mere speech patterns will betray them. Newspeak will allow the Inner Party to tailor every message to perfection to those that are indoctrinated. It will also allow political communication/propaganda without imprecision or unwanted allusions or implications. A properly Newspeak-indoctrinated Outer Party won't have the ability to properly challenge or question the Inner Party or formulate proper criticism, they might not even understand the nature of their own existence, how unfree they are and so on. And then you get the added bonus that it makes it much harder for Outer Party Members to talk to and connect with Proles.
1984 explains past revolutions this way: The middle class mobilizes the lower class against the ruling class. The ruling class will be wiped out, replaced by parts of the middle class and nothing really changes for the lower class. Newspeak might thus be a tool by the Inner Party (ruling class) to protect themselves from any ambition of the Outer Party (middle class) to mobilize the lower class (Proles).
And much like the Telescreens, that the members of the Inner Party can just switch off for a time, they will have the freedome to not use Newspeak udner certain conditions, I bet.
It's a tool to control the outer party, not the inner party.
@@NIL0S How then is the inner party controlled?
@@prof.badfellow9868 They are the controllers, if any of them step out of line they get purged.
@@generaltom6850 But by whom are they purged? Their peers? Their rivals? By BB himself?
Newspeak is a fool's errand because human thought is too creative to be held back in the way the Party seeks via newspeak; Toki Pona, a similarly artificial language, has far fewer words than Orwell conceived of Newspeak as containing, and yet Toki Pona does not restrict thought, rather speakers think creatively to convey meanings through its rather limited core vocabulary - in essence the exact opposite of what Newspeak is supposed to do.
One thing that often happens in linguistics is that, where a word to express an idea is not present, one is assembled as a compound word formed from existing words. German has a particularly rich vocabulary of compound words, as does Chinese ('penguin' in Chinese is literally 'business-suit-duck').
@@stephenwood6663Very true. Also, if the Party's linguistic theories were valid, minimalist literature wouldn't be expressive.
I would never have believed that in Britain people would ever be arrested for expressing their opinions on social media, but it has begun. The situation is dire.
You can express whatever opinion you want. If you incite people to do crime, that is itself a crime.
@@hallojava2458 There is a lot more going on than that.
I agree, inciting people to do crime, or even just general aggression, should be addressed by the justice system.
@@hallojava2458 Your bellyfeel for party doctrine is double-plus good, comrade.
Down with the thought criminals who rebel against Starmer.. I mean Big Brother.
@@URProductions Starmer's too centrist to actually create his "change". I just align with him that people on social media shouldn't escape consequences for telling people to burn down mosques.
It seems to me that at some point there will be no further additions to Newspeak. Each "new addition" will be the only version of Newspeak that had ever existed.
Do you mean edition?
Best part of waking up on a friday morning is a new 1984 lore video dropping
Big facts
worth noting that in the real world Newspeak would be classified as what's called an agglutinative language, which are an entirely ordinary thing, and native speakers of these have been shown to not in fact have any reduced complexity in thought at all. If the theory that the appendix is an in-universe document written after the fall of Oceania is true, such people would probably look at Newspeak in a similar way to how we look at the ideas of Trofim Lysenko (a Soviet geneticist who pushed Lamarckian ideas like that you can make grain resistant to cold simply by exposing the seeds to snow, for no other reason than because such ideas contradicted the ones the nazis were using).
Indeed! Toki Pona currently has only 137 core words, but in combination can be used to construct complex texts.
It's just more long-winded.
Syme, is that you?
O'Brian's quote is interesting and i had forgotten it since reading the book quite a while ago now.
I interpret it as the standard for what constitutes "thought crime" to be harsher and harsher with time since newspeak will make everyone more compliant, if you will.
The most fanatic outer party members will become the norm many years from now but there is always a heretic to be caught.
The world needs their outsiders and heretics.
The thing is...newspeak would make heresy impossible, since it would make even conceiving heresy impossible. It would essentially reprogram everybody's brains, including those of the people of the inner party.
@@juimymary9951Theoretically but languages with fewer words end up developing more figures of speech and composite words. This process would be difficult to control from the top down.
Really love your videos, comrade. The editing, voice etc is high quality and well spoken. A couple requests if I may
1. Can we get a propaganda video from you in newspeak? Would be really cool. Like as if you were working for Big Brother.
2. Can we get some "what if?" Videos. I love those and you are an expert and would make great ones.
3. Any chance we can get some Fahrenheit 451 or other dystopian world videos? Mostly want them because of your quality.
Thank for the compliments. I’ve tried to improve the quality of the audio going forward. I unfortunately have to use my own voice as 1984 Lore is not a big channel and my resources are limited at the moment.
Some great suggestions. I would certainly like to do a couple of propaganda videos (1) in future, so that may be something you’ll see.
(2) I’m flattered but I would not consider myself an “expert” on 1984 or George Orwell in general. I’ve never claimed that; I am merely an enthusiastic 1984 fan; however, I would be open to doing a few ‘what if’ videos.
The general reception of “theory” type videos is mixed in my experience, however, ‘what if’ videos may be cool to do. Or perhaps speculative ‘How To...’ videos too, for example, ‘How To Destroy Oceania.’
On the third request: this is something I have considered doing, however, since 1984 Lore is dedicated to all things 1984 I must be true to the purpose of my setting up the channel and stick to related content. This is not to say that references and comparisons to and with other dystopian worlds is off the table. In fact, look out for such a video around Christmas time this year. This channel’s content will, however, always be related in some fashion to Nineteen Eighty-Four.
It's possible in the medium to long-term that a separate channel will emerge that more broadly discusses other dystopian worlds, however, if so, this may not be for some time. If it happens, however, I will announce it and link to it here as a brother-channel.
Thank you for the comment and all the great suggestions. :D
While Newspeak is useful the dream of its ultimate triumph will probably be the linguistic equivalent of military projects like the land submarine and the weapon that focuses the rays of the sun.
Always just around the corner and will always be so.
The oppressor always needs an enemy
Starmer's got loads.
Excellent analysis, as always, This channel has inspired me to start listening to my audio recording of Nineteen Eighty-four again, once I finished the latest from Robert Harris.
I like the idea that the anti-sex league, and newspeak were both introduced knowing full well that people are naturally going to have sexual urges, and create new words for things they have no words for, and that way, the party has a steady supply of criminals.
I also think that about the rationing to a certain extent.
I am simple man i see *1984 Lore* released new video i press like
I can easily see why Newspeak is so hated.
Not by Keir Starmer.
@@marcokite politicians all alike.
Vid doubleplusgood, love mintruth
Quite Honestly, seems like the Party’s “Rules” are strictly for the outer party or middle class. The Proles or lower class are so insignificant to the party, other than possible cannon fodder, that the rules don’t apply to them.
Even in the book, Orwell acknowledges that it’s always been the middle class who that has started revolutions and the inner party knows and fears this.
Ergo, the inner party creates an extremely controlled system that watches the outer party.
Those that are technically a threat, BUT can be either controlled or coerced become inner party members. Those that pose a threat, but cannot be controlled or coerced are dealt with
I think human (verbal) expression is much like sexuality, so deeply ingrained that it would not be possible or at the very least not be feasible to entirely destroy and rework it. You previously touched on the distinct possibility of Ingsoc ultimately falling and it probably has to do with the fact that there is too much artifice, as O'Brian himself states. I would wager that this is one of the cornerstones of the eventual failure.
If they ever eliminate Thought Crime then the only certainty is anyone unpersoned is definitely innocent. I'm certain the cells at the ministry of love will still be nice and full either way.
'The proles can be allowed intellectual freedom because they have no intellect' sneers Syme. However, the TOTAL implementation of the final iteration of Newspeak will leave the proles superior to the Outer Party in their range of thought. ''If there is hope, it lies with the proles' muses Winston.
blackface - double bad
womanface - double good
One thing I have always wondered is, just like the original party ingsoc came, was newspeak originally designed to be malicious or was it initially just viewed as a way of standardizing, modernizing and maybe sanitizing the English language?
It was about control. Control of how a comrade thought. At the same time, it was about promoting crime thought. That is setting a citizen up to always fail to control one's thoughts carefully. No matter how brainwashed that citizen is. His/her thoughts are going to stray away from newspeak.
It reminds me of china during mao,mao replace the old Chinese language and with a more simifiled one,i can imagine one is enfoced in oceania
Well Burton certainly found Newspeak very, very inadequate.
Newsspeak is the language of the authortarian. No matter which side of the political divide.
But mostly Starmer's Labour party.
@@marcokite I am not British. But it is how the republicans and most especially trump and his maga..ts.
I'm going to honest: I get the idea behind Newspeak but I don't get how the application would actually work when it comes to technology. I.e. If everyone's so dumbed down and incapable of complex thought- how are they going to build and maintain the telescreens, the microphones, all the machinery that pumps out music and songs? It would all just be a black box blur to your average party member.
You got a point. As I said in my comment, Newspeak conflicts with Doublethink.
Building things that already exist isn't to hard. You can include everything in newspeak to make sure that it works on a manufacturing level.
You can't do science anymore with that, but I don't think the party is interested in any further progress anyways. They want to keep the exact status quo as is. Basically the "end of history" like in Marxism: Communism = End of history
a picture is worth a thousand words but the ministry of truth edits those too.
Suddenly, all the war and sickness begin to make sense. This movie can't be a reality until more people are gone.
Arms.
Free Speech.
Cashless.
..Game over.
because theyre smart enough to know its restrictive, and will eventually dumb them down as well.
I think it is always a manner of doublethink. Of course the Inner Party loves and generates and propagates newspeak. But of course it is necessary to keep oldspeak implemented. In the future even If newspeak exists thoughtcrime wont be eliminated, it will always Change its form. It could be a Modulation in the speech, a use of an unpleasent or nonfitting Word or Something like that.
The rules don't really apply to the inner party and they all probably know it. Everything in 1984 is all about oppressing the lower ranks and devising new ways to oppress the inevitable changes that result.
What exactly is “Power for powers sake”? The power to do what, just to inflict pain, achieve a thousand on was to pluck the wings from a butterfly! What exactaly is being a hone in this philosophy? Seems a world void of progress and stuck in perpetual stagnation we’re the worlds resources on the planet are being burned away at the whims of total mad men absent of all humanity. Nothings getting build in this world no great works in architecture, literature, art, music, or technology is being developed. It’s just world wide bullies play ground were they somehow got the upper hand that their they haven’t collapse by incompetence, mismanage or contagion like plague.
What year is it really in 1984? Are we sure it isn't 2000s? 1960s? Please make a video on that topic
What if the Inner party made their own private language? There are historic presidence for this.
MILD SPOILER It seems to me that the constant gaslighting the Party engages in would be so prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. Like when Eastasia becomes/always was the enemy during Hate Week, then Eurasia again after Winston’s time in Miniluv.
Good point, and I'm just playing devils' advocate here, but you could counter that 1. the outer party stiffs who implement the rewriting work pretty much for free; 2.the reprinting etc goes towards using up excess production; and 3. doublethink (hopefully) deals with any philosophical quandaries that may arise amongst the outer party stiff involved in the constant historical editing. The CCP/PRC have been doing this since the 90's and it's proved to be no big drain on resources for them, or strain on their credibility within China.
It seems again to me that Newspeak tries for euphonics as well as limiting thought. The former is much more easily successuful than the latter as others have pointed out.
For example: I should think 😂 that “crimethink” is a bit easier to say than “thinkcrime,” as the equivalent of Oldspeak thoughtcrime or heresy.
This would also produce some inconsistencies: minhate for the Two Minutes’ Hate, but hateweek for Hate Week
"Pride", "Gender", "Race", "Bigotry", etc, all rewritten by now.
Clickbait? More likely you're honey potting thought criminals for the thought police, aren't you, brother? Double plus good! I look forward to my arrest for the good of the party. 👍👍
The bastardization of the word “hate” about 20 years ago was the beginning of the end for the English language.
🤷
The upper class always gets to re-direct its self-loathing toward the less-privileged, whatever the ideology.