“But do you have faith in the system that selects our leaders? Do you vote hoping you can gather enough on your side to overpower your opponent? Do you start playing that violent game, knowing all the rules in advance, and then complain when you lose?”

“People break laws all the time. We break them without even knowing because there are millions of words of laws on the books and we can’t possibly know them all. Have you ever secretly broken a law because you knew you weren’t harming anyone? Do you then publicly proclaim that we must comply with the law until we work through the system to have it changed? We all have our varying ideas of acceptable boundaries for the roles of governments. Some are guided by ancient documents; others by heart-felt principles of individual sovereignty. There is the appearance of lines in the sand and yet we remain complicit when our lines are repeatedly crossed. How serious of a transgression would it take before people insist that a certain law should be disobeyed immediately?”

Yep. And someone tells me laws are derived from reasoning.. Sure, but whose reasoning? Whose reasoning is it that should be accepted as universally correct and why?

No, keep that reasoning for yourself and your own life and let me reason for my own. Is that so much to ask?

No it’s not. And if you disagree all you can is pull up a gun against me, ultimately, really.. coercion. That’s the only weapon you have against free individuals. And it’s lame, pathetic and silly. If that’s your argument “oooh we must force people to be GOOD for the common GOOD by my definition of GOOD cause I’m GOOD”, you can literally shove it up your ass.. and pull the trigger, alright?

Cheerio statists. The beginning of your end has passed.

My advice to those kids would be to resist. They don’t have to pay. If I were a parent I’d comfort them with the idea that we will find a way to resist. Nobody will pay any of THEIR debt. Taxes are theft. Gun is in the room. One should defend self from the thiefs not justify their actions and give in.

Besides, speaking of federal government it probably wont exist by the time these kids are adults. An increasing secessionist activity in USA is already testifying to that. About 8 states have “secession friendly” resolution.

The world is changing. This crisis is a free market finally reacting to the decades of delusion and resulting unsound economic practices. This crisis marks the biggest shift in centuries. Bail outs and stimulus packages are only gonna make this fall more profound. It may get worse before it gets better as certain governments let out a dieing scream and trashing, but then it can get better.

So in short, if you would say to me that government must be there to provide ANYTHING you will essentially be saying that you want to force me, by the threat of incarceration or death or any other kind of violence, to buy the service that you want.

At this point any statement which calls in the need for government to do something is equally disgusting to me as a statement like “I would like to rape you or hire someone to rape you every day”.

Now think about that before you go on to march for your pet “cause” like “free government healthcare for all” or “net neutrality legislation” or “proprietary software should be illegal” (yes, that’s for you Richard Stallman).

Statists disgust me.

Good night

Statism is dead. I killed it. Did you?

Watch this and then tell me.

Are you awake now?

Go and read this article and then tell me your answer: The Demise of Conscience.

I for one don’t support theft and murder and I am threatened by violence because of that, by a democratic government no less. The threat is ongoing and one I have to deal with and will have to deal with in the future. People who actually have a conscience really are unpopular in this day and age.

Which makes me utterly despise all those “intellectual” apologists for theft and murder. These hypocrits walk around freely preaching about freedom while defending the grossest kinds of its violation in existence.

All those people, professing to be in a movement for freedom, including the free software movement, should really rethink what they’re doing, this supposed exercise of higher morality while at the same time pissing right all over it.

No movement and no advocacy by those who believe it is OK to kill and steal is to be taken seriously. And I wont. No movement and no advocacy trumps one for most fundamental human liberties.

You have to read the book and if you don’t understand, try the Hidden Secret book I mentioned as well, since it clarifies a lot of the core ideas in “Think and Grow Rich”. The book is so deep and so profound that it is hard to just classify it as a “success” book or let alone “how to get rich” book. The ideas it presents are like a recipe for succesful happy living not just in a material, but even in a spiritual sense, but WITHOUT what is commonly know as religion, yet also WITHOUT contradicting those who do believe in some religion.

It is therefore entirely universal and universally applicable. To give you just a peak into how powerful it is, I will say that the book made me actually believe in the possibility of humans having telepathic abilities, in the legitimacy of prayer that involves no gods and in the power of thought as more than mere imagination – as a creative power which can truly be transformed into real matter. I think and therefore I am. I think and therefore I create. I think and therefore I make reality around me bow to my desire, my burning desire.

I would say that the ideas presented form more than a religion, because it spans religions, being more fundamental, more open ended and more logical and scientific.

I can do anything I set my mind to. I can because now I know I can, because I know how is it that I can set my mind to something, because I know more about thinking, feeling, imagining. I can almost understand fully what is meant by this verse from the bible:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The Word. What is it but an outcome of an idea, a thought? What bible further describes is that it is with his word that god created everything. Indeed. Perhaps it may come as a surprise to some to realize, however, that you too can create with words. But it is not enough to just spell out “create me a second moon orbiting Earth”.

You first have to have a genuine burning desire for something, not just a shallow “wish”. Then you have to have absolute and utter confidence, that is faith in your ability to realize what you desire, then decide that you WILL indeed realize it just as you decide to go and get something to eat and then without thinking and doubting your ability to eat, just do it. You have to write your desire in words where you can read them in order to inject yourself with the same kind of exactness and feeling you had when you first uttered the words. You’re essentially renewing your vow with yourself and your power to do it.

The subsequent steps will come naturally – the creation of a plan of action, of how to achieve it, the total persistence even through so called (by others) “failures” (failure doesn’t exist, it’s merely a piece of information that helps you succeed). In the end you WILL create what you desired.

So you might say this is an ardous process and how can I possibly compare that with the instantaneous creation by word of god. But bible doesn’t quite specify that he created everything instantaneously. Maybe it was indeed an ardous process, or maybe he could do all of the above in a fraction of the time we need because he was of such an advanced species. Or maybe christians are just taking the verses too literally.

Napoleon Hill talks about something he terms “Infinite Intelligence” which is essentially a common pool of all intelligence in the universe, I presume. Because right down to it thoughs are actually nothing more than streams of energy and the whole universe is consisted of nothing but space, time, matter and energy. Energy is the one which uses matter and time to create. If thoughts are energy you can see how thoughts can create. And you might also begin to see the logic behind the proposition of “infinite intelligence”. If thoughts are energy and energy is everywhere then our thoughts are essentially binded to the thoughts of all other thinking beings on this planet, but also of thoughts of all other thinking beings in the universe.

We’re just not as evolved mentally to practice the ability of receiving from this stream of thought, but such thing has and does happen. Napoleon Hill calls such things as “hunches” and flashes of incredibly brilliant creative ideas as possibly having come from this “infinite intelligence”. Incidentally, such hunches and flashes come when the mind is in a rather peculiar state (extremely active, energized by special emotional mixtures etc.) which suggests that in those states the mind actually “switches on” the receptor of information from the inifinite intelligence or “tunes in”.

Perhaps it is this “infinite intelligence” that people call “god”, but obviously being still under-evolved and therefore unable to understand it they personify it and they treat such great men, great thinkers indeed, who managed to evolve to a point of using this power (Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha etc.) as prophets and emmisaries of “god”.

Yet they may simply be humans who have come to learn how to use their minds better than anyone else, and “tune in” to the universal streams of thought. It’s a darn intriguing thought!

I wont say I fully believe all this. At this point I merely take it as a plausible theory. I know one thing however, one thing Napoleon Hill managed to convinced me pretty strongly off – thoughts are much much much more powerful than most people believe. We might just have seemingly “godly” power beneath our skulls, yet just seldom learn how to use it.

So you can imagine the thrill I feel as I am discovering all this. I feel like I’m beginning to revive this incredibly powerful tool beneath my skull, like the energy is building up, the fire is starting to burn and my personal power rises.

It feels so good that I could scream of happiness.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

–> In the beginning there is a thought, and the thought is from infinite intelligence, and the thought IS a part of infinite intelligence.

You can’t. I am a geek yet I am not a nerd who doesn’t know how to have a good time. I am a geek yet I am also a music producer and a fan of trance music, the party music. I am a geek yet I don’t wear any freaking glasses! I am a thinker yet I don’t have a god damn sweeper in my ass. I am a serious guy yet I don’t make everyone depressed by my presence.

And at this night out I had both a philosophical discussion session, getting drunk session and a dancing session, all in one night. Impossible? Apparently not.

So stereotypes and categories be damned. I am I. I am unique. I am an individual. I destroy stereotypes. I destroy myths. I destroy conformism. I am the one, among the few, that are many, who are the individualist revolution.

Thank you.

I actually feel that I’ve been slowly travelling towards this point of my life for quite a while, the recent months in which I dedicated quite a bit of time towards introspection, self-discovery, truly open minded debating and exploration being a sort of a catalyst that just accelerated my coming to this point. You can even see from my blog posts that I have been increasingly gravitating towards individualist humanist ideas of full individual liberty and responsibility and I have recently participated in a rather large and heated Libervis.com debate where I found myself defending libertarian / anarcho-capitalist ideas quite adamantly.

In other words I didn’t really need much by now to just tip me over into a full conviction. And a book I’ve just read (and simultaneously listened to, as the audio book is available), has provided much more than just a tip over. It blew my mind too. It is an incredible,detailed, logically sound description of a Laissez-Faire Free Market society and how it could really work and in fact work far better than any of the current government led societies. It literally has an answer to all of the major questions or objections I or most people would have against a society so radically different so as not to have or need a government.

The book is called “The Market for Liberty and that’s where you can download it in both PDF and audiobook format (torrent with high quality mp3s is high-speed). You can’t believe how much I recommend you read it.

One of the fundamental reasons for which I find it so convincing is the fact that the authors base their reasoning on what is essentially a logical scientific theory which a back up in reality can easily be accounted for. We simply have to observe ourselves as human beings and how we naturally interact. It takes no genius to conclude that self-interest has a great deal to do with it. The book, in my mind, successfully and completely dismantles the ideas such as altruism and even pacifism which ultimately result in contradicting and even immoral and self destructive behaviour. Yes, I am no longer a supporter of altruism and pacifism. I might sympathize with the intention of those who associate themselves with these ideologies, but the ideologies themselves I find fundamentally flawed.

The scientific “theory” is a Natural Law which is as objectively real as the law of gravity. You can believe with all your heart and mind that gravity does not exist and then throw yourself off of a skyscraper – regardless of your beliefs you will suffer the consequences of the fall.

Similarly, there is a Natural Law to human behaviour, which if not followed must lead to adverse consequences to the society and its economy. Here is a nice quote about that from the book:

“Natural law does apply to human relationships, and it is just as objective, universal, and inescapable in this area as in any other. The proof of this is that actions have consequences . . . in the area of human interaction as surely as in the area of human medicine. A man who swallows poison will become ill (even if he has complete confidence that the poison is nothing more than vitamin pills). A man who aggresses against others will be distrusted, avoided, and probably made to repay his victims (if some government doesn’t interfere). A
man who cheats his customers will be driven out of business by his more reputable competitors. The consequences of “breaking” natural law cannot be avoided. No matter how cleverly a man schemes, he will suffer if he insists on acting in a manner which contradicts the nature of human existence. The consequences may not be immediate, and they may not be readily apparent, but they are inescapable.

The free market is a product of the working of natural law in the area of human relationships, specifically economic relationships. Because man’s survival and well-being are not given to him, but must be achieved, men act to maximize their welfare (if they didn’t they couldn’t keep on living).. To maximize their welfare, they trade with other men, and when they trade, each man tries to get the best possible “deal.” Buyers bid against each other and push prices up. Sellers bid against each other and push prices down. At the point where the two forces meet, the market price is set, and everyone who wants to trade at that price can do so without creating surpluses or shortages. Thus, the law of supply and demand, and all other market laws, are really natural laws, directly derived from the nature and needs of that specific entity, man. The fact that market laws are natural laws explains why the free market works so well without any outside regulation. Natural law is always practical—it always “works.”"

Obviously, once a human recognizes that all actions have consequences it will be in his self interest to pursue activities which would result in maximum good for him or her, and in a society in which everyone is free to pursue anything (without the government to forbid certain kinds of pursuits or attempt to meddle in all of the other pursuits) coercion actually represents an undesirable means towards achieving maximum good for oneself. And it is therefore, as initiated by the market forces (powered by the law of supply and demand) enforcing the principle of non-coercion naturally.

This very notion undermines the criticism which somehow equates a society of fully free individuals to chaos (essentially, a lot more violence). Yet it is exactly the government, as a coercive monopoly, which has violence as an integral part of its way of “doing business”. As the book says, it “institutionalizes violence”. As such, the way government offers its services to people in what is consistent with the definition of a “protection racket”. They will protect us from poverty, for instance, by making us pay for welfare services under threat of theft of property (fines), incarceration or outright violence should we actively resist them.

Furthermore, by forbidding certain kinds of pursuits the government is actually creating “black markets” itself. And while you may already be aware of this, something that most people doublethink away, is that the very fact these pursuits are forbidden is what creates ecosystems of crime. This is because only people who are not afraid of government brute force are willing to enter markets which the government prohibits, because they themselves are not afraid to use brute force against the government as well. This gives way to organized crime or what we know as “Mafia”. So much for a government led society preventing the culture of violence that is usually associated with “chaos”.

And I no longer buy the argument that if the government doesn’t work this is just because there is corruption within it, but it would work if we got rid of that corruption. The thing is, government is fundamentally corrupt in itself, by its very nature as a coercive monopoly that concentrates power under the guise of protecting those which it coerces. It thrives on a moral contradiction.

Black market is just one of the actually more obvious ways in which the government harms the well being of individuals in a society, ALL individuals including the poor. The book describes ways which are much more subtle and much more easily escape the critics. Every single, even most seemingly insignificant regulation, can have tremendous consequences – all of which ultimately lead to MORE poverty and LESS economic growth.

The book even deals with such hard questions as how would a free market society deal with the few who would exercise aggression on other people and how would it defend itself from foreign attacks, and does this in a quite capable and convincing way. It further even poses that an effect that establishing a free market society in a particular part of the world would actually start the process which would lead to a world in which wars would not be fought. Because as people in the world see that government is an unnecessary evil whose impositions they don’t actually need to submit to, they will demand freedom, weakening their own governments while strengthening the economy of this single government-less free market country even further (by migrating there, investing there etc.).

And once all governments and their war machines collapse, who would be left to wage war? Aggression and trade are mutually incompatible. A Free Market is inherently anti-war, which can’t be said for governments the power of which is actually strengthened by the existence of an additional powerful enemy from which it needs to “protect” its citizens from (as we well see in the USA today.)

The prospects of establishing even just ONE Laissez-Faire Free Market society in the world are simply staggering. If it proves that it can work, and I am fully convinced that it would – because it respects the laws of nature governing human relations (without the need of artificial government) – it would mark an Earth shattering paradigm shift.

And I will be working towards establishing such a society. The book gives quite a sound and powerful method of doing it. It actually advocates against such methods as violent revolution, infiltration of government by other anarcho-capitalists, libertarians and alike or even total separation from the current government system (going off the grid or escaping into an unpopulated island). Instead it approaches a simple yet very powerful method: the spread of an idea.

And the idea that government is not actually a necessary evil, that taxes ARE actually theft and that paying taxes and other protection fees DOES NOT actually help the poor – are incredibly powerful ideas – might be the most powerful ideas you may ever convey to another person.

Therefore I would upgrade the statement of my purpose in life, my ultimate desire for the world from “a world where technology is used in a socially, ethically and ecologically responsible way” into “a world where governments no longer exist and technology is used and developed in a socially, ethically and ecologically responsible way”. I do feel now that the existence of a society without a government is a precursor to a society that is responsible in the way it manages technological use and development – because such a society is consisted of people who don’t just follow the leader and train dependence, but actually lead their own life and affairs and train personal responsibility.

And the only way we can hope for humanity to learn to use and develop technology responsibly is to make human individuals responsible and free themselves.

I would also note, as a result of this change in thinking, that I no longer assume as much distrust towards “Big Business” and corporations as I used to, and instead divert more of such distrust towards government itself. In fact, big business or small business or any business is doing exactly what we would expect them to do – follow their self interest (in which sense they’re actually most trustworthy). The fact that government has polluted the free market within which they operate and corrupted the balance it thrives on hence leading the business world in an awry direction is less of a fault of business and more of a fault of government meddling.

In their attempt to save the market from itself, they actually broke it, bluntly said. And I don’t take kindly to that, considering that I AM within that market and I SUFFER the consequences of their sleazy fingers in my affairs.

Nobody will stop this idea from spreading. I will dedicate DoublePlusHuman.com as a hopefully innovative and effective platform for spreading the idea of liberty, as it can fully be achieved.

I have to say it is quite interesting that there was someone willing to invest into making such a movie, because it is quite timely. It is an irony that it didn’t gain much attention. In my opinion it should have been a “blockbuster”. I think it is quite obvious that idiocracy already exists in our societies. It is among the prime reasons why our governments suck and our societies deteriorate. I talked about it before.

When there is a special and often derogatory term for “geeks” in our high schools as outcasts who deserve to be tortured just because they don’t fit in with the usual crowd – the crowd who finds their ultimate daily achievements somewhere between things like “getting laid” and “getting wasted” – you know Idiocracy is well on its way.

I will no longer be afraid to use the word “Idiot” to describe such people.

They are a movement of sub-humanism – an anti-philosophy based purely on hedonism, ignorance and meaninglessness rather than on pursuing ones fullest potential. In a sub-humanist culture ignorance is power and wisdom is weakness. It is only ironic how those who profess to be intelligent freedom loving people can’t let themselves openly wage war on this culture, in the name of “tolerance” – because no matter how evil we may consider it to be, it is still a “culture”, right?

Indeed. They have the right to exist…

And I have the right to oppose and shun them on my every step. Mere tolerance is one thing, acceptance is another and I will not exercise it.

Sub-humanists, ignorant people, the “mainstream” masses who tell scientists and technologists to “get a life” – carry the cash that supports corrupt industries we oppose and vote for governments which we are trying to change. As such, they are not even neutral bystanders. By choosing ignorance you choose opposition to change and betterment of the world. You are hence my enemy. You will either be changed or get out of the way.

Thank you very much.

Disclaimer: When I say “subhuman” I do not mean that I condone treating humans as not worthy of human beings. It rather denotes my view of their life style and culture as deliberately unworthy of them as human beings. Therefore, I do not believe humans who lead a sub-human life are necessarily intrinsically subhuman themselves, although they do deliberately devolve.

Stay tuned for DoublePlusHuman.com

Of course, I’m still under a bit of an influence of that book, 1984, and a same named movie I just watched. And yes, out of curiosity and due to knowing how popular this George Orwell’s book seems to be lately, I searched for “Is 1984 coming?”. It seemed like a logical search query and indeed it returned some relevant results, among which is a YouTube video. As I’ve been watching on the trail of these videos I have these two to point to as a good sample of what I’m talking about. They should be quite easy to grasp.

“H.R. 1955 – THOUGHT CRIMES IN THE U.S.”

Countdown: Bush Dissolves The U.S. Constitution Today

The first one is from who seems to be one of the fairly popular video bloggers on YouTube, who says it quite bluntly. The H.R. 1955 bill is law in USA. Correction: It isn’t law yet, but it passed the house and is waiting on senate vote and sign by the president. So there’s still chance to oppose it. The bill, of course, does not specifically mention thought crime, as you would expect, but it does contain just a sufficient amount of ambiguity and relation to what thought crime is, as described in “1984″, for it to definitely apply as a law that can get you lawfully arrested for thinking in radical ways against the state, or at least expressing such anti-state views anyhow publicly.

It might not be surprising that what this law parades as is as a law against what it calls a “homegrown terrorism”. Ah, of course, terrorism the continuous war that America has placed themselves in which can now justify pretty much any violation against its own constitution and its own people – all in the name of defeating the common enemy of the state – terrorists. And who are terrorists exactly? To the current law of USA a terrorist, the enemy, is an increasingly broad number of people – or with this new law, just about anyone!

The second video is even older, and about a bill that essentially puts an end to “Habeas corpus”, or accused “right to petition”, from US law. The title of the YouTube post is obviously quite right. This is against US constitution, the defining document of the USA. But somehow.. that doesn’t feel like “news”. I urge you to watch through the whole video. There are some statements in the conversation it presents which make it quite clear what this means for USA.

And everyone who has been paying even a little bit of attention probably knows by now that these are not the first laws being passed which essentially take the US citizen’s essential rights, one by one, little by little, just slow enough not to be noticed too much and under the guise of the ongoing war against terrorism.

I have to note that in the book “1984″, it is exactly the continuous, essentially never ending war which has and continues (in book’s time frame) to serve as means of intimidating people into accepting even the worst possible de-humanizations (and what else is taking away human rights than essentially de-humanization?)

In very simple terms, what is happening is exactly this. The enemy is terrorism and therefore all who are deemed to be terrorists. They are a constant threat to the safety of the people. It is enough for you to be shown the pictures of 9/11 attacks for you to start feeling anger and perhaps even hate towards this enemy. In such a state you are more likely to accept any solution that is claimed to be anti-terrorist and hence presumably hurtful to this enemy and protective towards you. This is why essentially all laws that decrease human rights, not only in US, but increasingly EU as well, are branded as anti-terrorism laws.

When you realize this, it isn’t difficult to conclude that the anti-terrorism laws are not just against terrorism, but against you as well. In fact, it becomes extremely doubtful whether terrorism has anything to do with it, especially when the law begins to imply its own citizens as potential terrorists. I would dare to say, within this context, that most if not all anti-terrorism laws are ANTI-YOU laws. ANTI-FREEDOM laws.

And those who are not caught supporting such laws due to anger incited in them by the emotional scenes of terror are those who essentially sit and do nothing about it – the ignorant ones, and sadly the ones who are in great majority. They are, as a matter of fact, the fertile ground from which to find real supporters of such anti-freedom laws. Since they are ignorant, they are easily deceived.

But hey.. the good Party says: FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, WAR IS PEACE, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

When all that is in your mind is the terrorist threat, than the only freedom you will care about is freedom from the terrorist. No matter that this will make you a slave, you will have “freedom”. When war is continuous and constant, meant to preserve this state in which you will only care of freedom from The Terrorist Threat, there will be no resistance and hence peace. Or when you simply don’t know, don’t care and don’t want to meddle with this “politics stuff”, you will be cherished as the concrete of the state which you, as such form. They can most strongly rely on you, the ignorant one, to not resist, to not disrupt the new structure of things – the new norm.

“1984″ describes a state in which the revolution that led to such a state is already pretty much done, putting the reader in a rather unpleasant conundrum. The people, being so dehumanized as they have by the above system of brainwashing, become essentially uncapable of opposing the state and in fact grateful that the state is taking care of them so well (even as it objectively isn’t). They are essentially so satisfied with the sore state of things they are in, that they do not want what the reader would call “freedom” and that it would become an invasion, even an unfair invasion, to try to stir their pot and create an opposition.

But we are still here. You are still here. You are still human and you can still feel for your rights and care, or at least I hope you can. All the while there is hope that there is enough people out there who will not frown upon the thought of discussing ideals, politics and freedom as if they were some boring, irrelevant “hippie” topics, we can prevent our states from becoming increasingly and even ultimately Orwellian.

It is just a matter of caring, of putting aside the prejudice towards this topic, of getting off of that drug we call “the norm”, that has efficiently kept you too busy to think of these things (you know, working for mere survival rather than achievement, entertainment for entertainment’s sake, socializing for socializing, being who you aren’t simply because “everyone is” because you “must fit in” – all those things which make you too busy to be nothing but unknowing and unsuspecting and ultimately uncaring for events that essentially strip your rights away).

Everyone who thinks talking about this is “boring politics” or whatever other term you may like to apply to it just to avoid the topic is already putting those who do want to discuss this with you in a conundrum mentioned before.. How can you save someone who doesn’t care to be saved? How can you free someone who doesn’t care to even talk about freedom in a serious manner? You can’t… You even shouldn’t, because it would be against their free will.

I hope it wont be against your free will.

Or else… I’m afraid we’ll just end up in a state where there will be no such luxury as “free will” or “free speech” or even “free thought”.

Or else.. we shall leave you to your slavery and escape to form a free land of our own, if we only could.

Note: You might note I’m mostly citing US cases of increased number of anti-freedom legislations whereas I never even been to USA. The reason is that it will not and already isn’t limited to US. As an influential super power that it still seems to be (at least culturally) it has already influenced other countries in the world to follow the similar foot steps. Indeed, European Union has its fair share of anti-freedom legislation, and it is one union which is devouring an increasing number of states, my own, Croatia, soon to be one of them. And when you have an union there is a danger of further centralization and much greater ease of converting all EU laws into laws of its member states. It essentially becomes quite conceivable for EU to once get where US is today, and transcend, helped by its people’s ignorance, into a type of an Orwellian state.

More:

- “1984 Is Coming To Town” (October 2007)